ZIP code
96140
in Carnelian Bay, CaliforniaPopulation 1,171
68.71/ 100
Ranked #830 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 2.6%)
Ranked #128 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 7.5%)
Ranked #1 of 122 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA ZIPs (top 0.9%)
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.
Median household income
$181,875
in the top 1.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
4.9%
in the bottom 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
3.1%
in the bottom 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
6.3%
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 ›Lack of transportation
3.7%
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
5.3%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Park land
68.7%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
4.9 days/year
in the bottom 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Short sleep
27.5%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
83.1%
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
Overall, Carnelian Bay, California (ZIP 96140) lands in the top 2.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (830th) and the top 7.5% of California (128th).
A number of measures pull each way for this area: household income sits in the top 1.6% nationally, and modeled food insecurity is in the bottom 0.3% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff settles in the bottom 0.7% nationally, and transportation resides in the bottom 0.8% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity registers in the bottom 1.1% nationally, park land rests in the top 1.2% nationally, and modeled humid heat stands in the bottom 3.0% nationally. Modeled short sleep lies in the bottom 2.2% nationally, and tree cover lands in the top 3.8% nationally. Set against that, modeled fine-particle sits in the top 0.7% 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. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 89402, about 3.2 miles away, 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 87%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 97%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 23%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 68%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 88%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 96%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 94%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 88%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 55%
14%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 81%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 88%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.9%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.9%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 97%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 31%
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
One of our published findings lists 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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 23.7; chronic-disease standing 89.3 — 66 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,980 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
96143
Californiashares a border
Score 46.82
Closest healthier
89402
Nevadaabout 3.2 mi away
Score 70.90
Similar health profile
95033
California100% similar profile
Score 67.19
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 | 24.3% | 21.5–27.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.4% | 27.8–35.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.6% | 9.6–11.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.4% | 8.4–10.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–6.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.4–4.7 |
| Depression among adults | 21.0% | 18.0–24.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.0% | 6.9–9.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.8% | 32.8–41.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.8% | 20.4–32.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.5% | 2.2–2.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 4.5% | 3.5–5.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 2.9% | 2.4–3.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.3% | 69.9–76.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.7% | 72.0–79.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.2% | 89.9–92.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.1% | 66.5–75.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 78.2% | 75.5–80.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.4% | 74.0–85.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.4% | 15.4–21.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.8% | 5.4–8.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 12.9% | 10.5–15.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 27.5% | 22.7–32.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 11.6% | 9.9–13.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.1% | 11.5–15.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.1% | 8.8–11.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.8–10.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 21.1% | 17.9–24.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.0–5.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.6–10.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.1% | 1.9–2.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.2–2.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.7% | 15.7–21.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 4.9% | 3.9–6.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.3% | 3.3–5.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.3% | 4.2–6.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 3.7% | 3.1–4.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.8% | 23.4–32.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.1% | 2.6–3.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 2.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 64.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.2% | 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 | 12.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 45.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 26.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 45.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $181,875 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $932,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,397 | $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 | 82.3 yr ± 2.95 | 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 2.95 years of 82.3, 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