ZIP code
96003
in Redding, CaliforniaPopulation 44,923
46.85/ 100
Ranked #20,337 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 37%)
Ranked #1,240 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 28%)
Ranked #17 of 26 Redding, CA ZIPs (bottom 35%)
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.
Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
6.4%
in the top 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40.5 per million
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST77thUS95thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
71.7 days/year
in the top 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Park land
16.6%
in the top 8.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST77thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
105.5 days/year
in the top 20% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS80thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 96003, one of several in Redding, California, by its composite score, sits in the bottom 37% nationally (20,337th) and the bottom 28% of California (1,240th).
The data opens on real and measurable burdens: modeled fine-particle registers in the top 0.7% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk settles in the top 2.1% nationally. Modeled disaster risk sits in the top 5.4% nationally, and extreme heat lies in the top 5.8% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise rests in the top 10.5% nationally, and housing-cost burden resides in the top 13.3% nationally. More encouragingly, park land is in the top 8.2% nationally. Distance to a community health center lands at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Subsidized affordable housing stands in the top 11.4% nationally, and modeled obesity registers in the bottom 14.2% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 96001, 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 Redding, CA metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 55%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 40%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 59%
11%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 24%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 42%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 22%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 35%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Disability
healthier than 39%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 15%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 84%
21%
Disability
healthier than 64%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 44%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 40%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 16%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 16%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 12%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 8%
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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
2 of our published findings list this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 76.9 ± 0.9 years. A median household income of $72,445 predicts 78.8 years — 1.9 years below.
Ranked #2,530 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 40.5 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 76.9 ± 0.9 years.
Ranked #418 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
96001
Californiashares a border
Score 48.34
Closest healthier
96002
Californiashares a border
Score 46.85
Similar health profile
72903
Arkansas98% similar profile
Score 48.15
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 | 28.4% | 25.4–31.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.2% | 32.5–40.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.8% | 9.0–10.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.0% | 9.8–12.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.6% | 6.8–8.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.8% | 7.0–8.7 |
| Depression among adults | 24.7% | 21.4–28.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.8% | 10.3–13.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.2% | 35.1–43.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 29.0% | 23.0–35.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.0% | 3.7–4.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.8% | 9.5–14.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.7% | 5.8–7.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.1% | 71.1–76.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.3% | 70.7–77.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.9% | 84.3–87.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.4% | 59.0–69.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 63.3% | 59.6–66.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.7% | 66.6–81.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.8% | 14.1–19.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.5% | 11.8–15.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.0% | 18.6–25.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.8% | 30.4–43.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.0% | 19.5–24.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.8% | 16.8–20.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.1% | 13.4–16.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.6% | 14.0–17.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.8% | 29.9–37.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.6–10.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.4% | 14.5–18.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.3% | 3.9–4.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.6% | 21.0–28.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.1% | 12.1–16.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.9% | 13.0–16.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.4% | 9.9–13.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.5% | 7.5–9.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.9% | 29.7–40.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 6.0–7.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 28.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 37.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 58.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 6.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 53.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 20.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $72,445 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $402,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,480 | $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 | 76.9 yr ± 0.44 | 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 0.44 years of 76.9, 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