ZIP code
95922
in Camptonville, CaliforniaPopulation 425
33.40/ 100
Ranked #29,929 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 6.7%)
Ranked #1,641 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 4.6%)
Ranked #19 of 19 Yuba City, CA ZIPs (bottom 5.3%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
What defines this ZIP
Metrics where this ZIP sits in the tails of the national distribution — the ones that most set it apart. Select any tile for its definition and methodology.
Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
8.0%
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Park land
65.3%
in the top 1.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
4.1%
in the top 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
11.8%
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
25.4%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Stroke
6.2%
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
14.1%
in the top 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
32.9%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
83%
in the top 3.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›The read
Camptonville, California (ZIP 95922), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 6.7% nationally (29,929th) and the bottom 4.6% of California (1,641st).
What the numbers press hardest on defines much of the story here: modeled self-care disability settles in the top 2.8% nationally, fine-particle stands in the top 1.4% nationally, and coronary heart disease is in the top 2.1% nationally. Modeled mobility disability rests in the top 3.0% nationally, stroke sits in the top 3.2% nationally, and independent living disability registers in the top 3.9% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health lands in the top 4.4% nationally. On the encouraging side, modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the bottom 0.8% nationally, and park land lies in the top 1.4% nationally. Modeled tree cover settles in the top 3.8% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 95925, just across the boundary.
What’s driving this score
Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts. Compare it against the US, this state and the Yuba City, CA metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 87%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 15%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 16%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 24%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 11%
8%
Disability
healthier than 3%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 29%
5%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 47%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 1%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 22%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 11%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 4%
8%
Disability
healthier than 3%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 92%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 77%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
in the bottom 0.00%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 23%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 31%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the bottom 0.00%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 15%
8%
Disability
healthier than 8%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 38%
5%
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
95925
Californiashares a border
Score 33.72
Closest healthier
95935
Californiashares a border
Score 41.12
Similar health profile
96024
California99% similar profile
Score 37.29
How these were chosen: only ZIPs with a published Score appear — a nearby ZIP with too little data to score won’t. Nearby means closest by distance between ZIP boundaries, which can cross state lines. A similar health profile is a close match across the nine Score domains, not similar demographics. Distances are measured between ZIP boundaries — ZIPs that touch share a border. How distance is measured
Evidence
Every measure this page draws on, by source. Collapsed by default — the full data stays in the page for search engines either way.
Health OutcomesCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Arthritis among adults | 36.3% | 32.4–40.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.1% | 40.6–49.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–12.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.9% | 10.5–13.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 11.8% | 10.2–13.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 14.4% | 11.9–16.9 |
| Depression among adults | 26.4% | 22.8–30.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.7% | 15.2–20.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 42.8% | 38.3–47.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.0% | 28.4–44.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.2% | 5.4–7.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 16.7% | 13.6–20.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.1% | 7.2–11.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.5% | 74.2–80.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.9% | 71.2–78.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.2% | 83.0–87.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 59.1% | 53.5–64.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 51.6% | 47.9–55.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 69.5% | 60.9–77.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.5% | 11.2–16.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.9% | 18.9–26.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 32.0% | 26.3–37.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.3% | 29.0–42.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 32.9% | 28.0–37.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.3% | 17.9–22.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 21.5% | 18.6–24.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.8% | 17.2–22.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 43.4% | 37.6–49.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.6–12.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 14.1% | 12.1–16.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 25.4% | 21.6–29.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 8.0% | 6.8–9.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.0% | 7.7–10.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.0% | 21.9–30.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 23.5% | 19.5–27.9 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 29.4% | 24.7–34.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.2% | 13.8–19.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.5% | 10.8–14.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.5% | 28.1–39.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.2% | 9.6–12.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 18.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 26.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 15.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 78.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 39.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 70.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 53.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 65.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $36,528 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $277,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $775 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,912 ($1,113–$2,923) n=1,461 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 77.9 yr ± 1.31 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.5 yr (76.7–83.8) n=1,665 |
About the ± — it’s this estimate’s give-or-take (statisticians call it the standard error). The true life expectancy for this ZIP most likely falls within 1.31 years of 77.9, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured