ZIP code
97062
in Tualatin, OregonPopulation 28,930
58.15/ 100
Ranked #6,274 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 20%)
Ranked #32 of 407 Oregon ZIPs (top 7.9%)
Ranked #31 of 120 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA ZIPs (top 26%)
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.
Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
504 units
in the top 4.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Physician access
2.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
2.3%
in the top 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.5%
in the bottom 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
10.6%
in the top 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Transit access
3.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST80thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
15.9%
in the top 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›The read
Tualatin, Oregon (ZIP 97062), by its composite score, sits in the top 20% healthiest ZIPs nationally (6,274th) and the top 7.9% of Oregon (32nd).
The data opens on a genuinely even set of readings: subsidized affordable housing lands in the top 4.4% nationally, and physicians stands in the top 4.6% nationally. Dental providers registers in the top 5.9% nationally, and modeled energy burden settles in the bottom 4.5% nationally. Transit sits in the top 8.6% nationally. On the other side, modeled air-toxics cancer risk lies in the top 2.4% nationally, industrial-pollution burden rests in the top 5.6% nationally, and loud transportation noise resides in the top 5.8% nationally. Modeled transportation noise is in the top 7.7% nationally, and arsenic lands in the top 9.2% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, industrial-pollution burden runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 97034, 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 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 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 83%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 93%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Disability
healthier than 84%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 75%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 76%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 10%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 29%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 25%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 61%
8%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 74%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 37%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 76%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 80%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 74%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 64%
8%
Disability
healthier than 71%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 42%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 47%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
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 9.7 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 82.5 — 73 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,638 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
97034
Oregonshares a border
Score 65.59
Closest healthier
97035
Oregonshares a border
Score 66.22
Similar health profile
84103
Utah98% similar profile
Score 61.46
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 | 23.4% | 21.2–25.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.8% | 27.1–32.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.0% | 7.4–8.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.8% | 10.6–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–6.0 |
| Depression among adults | 26.9% | 24.1–29.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.6% | 8.4–10.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.2% | 30.3–36.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.8% | 29.8–37.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.6% | 2.4–2.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.6% | 7.2–10.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.0% | 6.9–9.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 67.7% | 64.5–70.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 70.4% | 67.3–73.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.8% | 82.2–85.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.8% | 62.4–69.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.8% | 64.9–70.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.2% | 75.4–84.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.3% | 13.2–17.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.2% | 8.8–11.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.5% | 15.1–20.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.6% | 27.2–34.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.6% | 15.6–19.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.1% | 15.4–18.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.9% | 11.5–14.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.6% | 12.2–15.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 26.3% | 23.5–29.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.6–3.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.6–4.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OR median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 11.7% (4.7–26.4%) n=411 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.9% (0.9–19.7%) n=411 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.5% (1.2–16.6%) n=412 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 47.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.7% (11.1–49.6%) n=412 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.8% (0.0–10.0%) n=409 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.3% (0.0–10.0%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.4% (76.7–96.9%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 29.9% (14.6–42.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 58.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 73.5% (52.8–90.2%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.1% (0.0–6.7%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 14.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.0% (0.0–13.0%) n=412 |
| Single-parent households | 50.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 57.5% (43.5–77.1%) n=407 |
| Population 65+ | 16.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 22.5% (12.7–42.1%) n=412 |
| Median age | 38.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 45.1 yr (36.3–62.2) n=410 |
| Median household income | $105,407 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $72,301 ($49,007–$109,558) n=378 |
| Median home value | $640,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $413,900 ($238,120–$653,360) n=374 |
| Median gross rent | $1,809 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,252 ($807–$1,772) n=327 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OR median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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