ZIP code
96080
in Red Bluff, CaliforniaPopulation 31,554
42.54/ 100
Ranked #24,779 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 23%)
Ranked #1,408 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 18%)
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
5.4%
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS99thDefinition & 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
46.6 per million
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS99thDefinition & 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 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS96thDefinition & 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
83.8 days/year
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS5thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
410 units
in the top 5.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST84thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
9.8 µg/L
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Nitrate in drinking water
0.57%
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of this area’s domestic-well groundwater at or above the federal nitrate limit of 10 milligrams 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 ›Distance to an emergency room
16.4 mi
in the top 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS91stDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
102 days/year
in the top 22% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS78thDefinition & 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
Overall, Red Bluff, California (ZIP 96080) lands in the bottom 23% nationally (24,779th) and the bottom 18% of California (1,408th).
A number of measures mark where this area is under strain: modeled fine-particle resides in the top 1.0% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk registers in the top 1.3% nationally. Modeled disaster risk rests in the top 4.2% nationally, and extreme heat stands in the top 4.5% nationally. Modeled nitrate lies in the top 7.1% nationally, and distance to an emergency room lands in the top 9.1% nationally. Fiber broadband sits at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. On the brighter side, modeled industrial-pollution burden is in the bottom 5.0% nationally, subsidized affordable housing settles in the top 5.7% nationally, and lithium in drinking water resides in the bottom 6.0% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: 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 nearby comparison, ZIP 96007, just across the boundary, ranks better 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.
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 65%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 45%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 52%
11%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 26%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 7%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 19%
8%
Disability
healthier than 22%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 16%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 42%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 43%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 18%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 31%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 30%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 10%
8%
Disability
healthier than 22%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
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 77.3 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $66,076 predicts 78.4 years — 1.2 years below.
Ranked #1,524 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 46.6 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 77.3 ± 1.1 years.
Ranked #260 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
96007
Californiashares a border
Score 43.02
Closest healthier
96022
Californiashares a border
Score 46.29
Similar health profile
95965
California96% similar profile
Score 37.89
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 | 29.1% | 25.8–32.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.4% | 32.3–40.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.5% | 8.6–10.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.3% | 7.5–9.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.0% | 8.1–10.0 |
| Depression among adults | 25.1% | 21.6–29.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.0% | 11.3–14.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.8% | 32.6–41.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.5% | 24.3–39.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–4.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 15.0% | 12.1–18.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.5% | 8.2–10.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.2% | 71.0–77.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.9% | 68.8–76.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.9% | 83.1–86.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.4% | 55.8–66.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.4% | 54.4–62.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 73.6% | 65.0–81.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.4% | 12.6–18.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.8% | 13.8–18.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.0% | 22.7–31.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.3% | 28.6–42.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.8% | 23.1–29.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.4% | 17.4–21.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.9% | 15.1–19.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.6% | 15.8–19.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.5% | 32.2–41.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.6% | 7.7–9.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.0% | 9.9–12.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 18.6% | 16.5–21.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–5.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.2–7.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.2% | 21.6–29.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.6% | 16.2–21.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 20.1% | 17.7–22.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.6% | 12.7–16.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.8% | 29.6–40.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.5–10.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 13.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 19.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.3% | 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 | 88.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 63.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.5% | 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 | 46.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 21.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $66,076 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $343,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,188 | $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 | 77.3 yr ± 0.57 | 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 0.57 years of 77.3, 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