Skip to main content
ZipVitals

Menu

ZIP code

96034

in Gazelle, CaliforniaPopulation 332

ZipVitals Score
How is the ZipVitals Score calculated? →

50.75/ 100

Ranked #15,209 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 47%)

Ranked #1,020 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 41%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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

8.3%

in the top 0.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST97th
US99th
Definition & 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 ›

Industrial-pollution burden

in the bottom 1.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST4th
US1st
Definition & 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 ›

Natural-disaster risk

in the top 3.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST87th
US97th
Definition & 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 ›

Walkability

1.3 intersections/sq mi

in the bottom 3.9% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST4th
US4th
Definition & source ›

The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.

Full methodology ›

Poverty rate

0.90%

in the bottom 5.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST5th
US5th
Definition & source ›

The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

Full methodology ›

Park land

21.2%

in the top 6.6% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST81st
US93rd
Definition & source ›

The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.

Full methodology ›

Crowded housing

7.4%

in the top 7.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST66th
US92nd
Definition & source ›

The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.

Full methodology ›

Housing-cost burden

11.5%

in the bottom 11.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST4th
US11th
Definition & source ›

The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.

Full methodology ›

Arsenic in groundwater

1.6%

in the bottom 16% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST3rd
US16th
Definition & source ›

The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.

A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.

Full methodology ›

Home broadband subscription

81.1%

in the bottom 19% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST9th
US19th
Definition & source ›

The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.

Full methodology ›

The read

By the composite health measure, Gazelle, California (ZIP 96034) ranks in the top 47% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,209th) and the bottom 41% of California (1,020th).

continue reading

The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: modeled industrial-pollution burden registers in the bottom 1.5% nationally, and poverty rests in the bottom 5.1% nationally. Park land stands in the top 6.6% nationally. Households without a vehicle lies at the national minimum, shared with about 16% of ZIPs. Housing-cost burden lands in the bottom 11.5% nationally, and distance to a hazardous-chemical facility sits in the top 11.7% nationally. On the other side, modeled fine-particle is in the top 0.3% nationally, modeled disaster risk settles in the top 3.3% nationally, and walkability resides in the bottom 3.9% nationally. Crowded housing registers in the top 7.7% nationally.

Read against the ZIPs closest to it, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Close by, ZIP 96067, about 7.6 miles away, ranks healthier overall.

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.

Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 61%

16%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 73%

11%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 86%

5%

About typical

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 47%

21%

Preventive Care

healthier than 41%

13%

Holding it back

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 39%

14%

Mental Health

healthier than 34%

8%

Disability

healthier than 37%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 29%

5%

Lifting this score

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 67%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 62%

13%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 70%

5%

About typical

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 58%

16%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 49%

11%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 18%

21%

Mental Health

healthier than 24%

8%

Disability

healthier than 34%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 18%

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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults30.5%26.9–34.0
High blood pressure among adults37.2%32.7–41.4
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults10.6%9.6–11.7
Current asthma among adults11.1%9.8–12.5
Coronary heart disease among adults8.2%7.2–9.2
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults8.1%6.9–9.4
Depression among adults24.2%20.4–28.0
Diagnosed diabetes among adults12.5%10.7–14.4
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened38.9%34.2–43.3
Obesity among adults30.4%23.0–38.1
Stroke among adults4.3%3.8–4.9
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years10.4%8.3–12.8
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years6.4%5.2–7.7
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure76.4%72.9–79.3
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults75.3%71.2–78.7
Cholesterol screening among adults87.5%85.8–89.0
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years63.9%58.2–69.2
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults61.5%57.7–65.2
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years73.6%65.1–81.1
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults15.6%12.7–18.5
Current cigarette smoking among adults13.2%10.9–15.6
No leisure-time physical activity among adults23.6%19.1–28.1
Short sleep duration among adults33.8%27.2–41.0
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults22.3%19.1–25.7
Frequent mental distress among adults17.8%15.6–19.9
Frequent physical distress among adults15.8%13.7–17.9
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults15.4%13.4–17.6
Any disability among adults35.4%30.3–40.2
Hearing disability among adults8.5%7.4–9.5
Independent living disability among adults9.5%8.2–10.9
Mobility disability among adults17.5%14.9–20.2
Self-care disability among adults4.5%4.0–5.1
Vision disability among adults5.5%4.8–6.3
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults24.3%20.8–28.5
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults13.5%11.2–16.4
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults13.8%11.4–16.6
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults11.1%9.4–13.1
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults8.0%6.9–9.3
Loneliness among adults33.3%28.3–39.1
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults6.5%5.5–7.6
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)CA median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate0.9%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,36410.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714
Uninsured 18–644.2%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2867.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704
No HS diploma (25+)1.2%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5059.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729
Bachelor's or higher (25+)24.2%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50531.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729
Unemployment rate (16+)2.3%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2746.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714
Households without a vehicle0.0%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3224.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708
Broadband subscription81.1%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32293.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)11.5%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32238.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708
Homeownership rate83.1%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32264.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708
Crowded housing (>1 per room)7.4%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3224.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708
Foreign-born population0.0%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,55318.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730
Single-parent households36.5%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08748.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692
Population 65+31.3%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55317.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730
Median age44.1 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29240.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712
Median household income$73,750$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584
Median home value$341,900$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593
Median gross rent$873$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$1,912 ($1,113–$2,923) n=1,461
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)CA median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth78.5 yr ± 0.8178.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30880.5 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 0.81 years of 78.5, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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