ZIP code
94111
in San Francisco, CaliforniaPopulation 4,579
67.26/ 100
Ranked #1,204 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 3.8%)
Ranked #174 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 10.2%)
Ranked #68 of 174 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA ZIPs (top 39%)
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.
Obesity
15.7%
in the bottom 0.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
6.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.07% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
7.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.09% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Recreation access
5.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Outpatient-care access
1.9 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Pharmacy access
1.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies 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 ›Walkability
290 intersections/sq mi
in the top 0.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Transit access
13 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Physician access
5.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 94111, one of several in San Francisco, California, in overall standing, comes out in the top 3.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,204th) and the top 10.2% of California (174th).
An even profile, with readings pulling both ways: modeled obesity lands in the bottom 0.2% nationally, dental providers rests in the top 0.07% nationally, and civic settles in the top 0.09% nationally. Recreation lands in the top 0.2% nationally, outpatient rests in the top 0.4% nationally, and pharmacy settles in the top 0.7% nationally. Walkability lands in the top 0.8% nationally, and transit rests in the top 0.8% nationally. Physicians settles in the top 1.1% nationally. Against that, modeled expected annual loss lands in the top 0.9% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, dental providers runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 94105, 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 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, 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 91%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.6%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 89%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 94%
8%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 90%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 59%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 73%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.8%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 62%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 77%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 78%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 94%
8%
Disability
healthier than 75%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 78%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 61%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 49%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Disability
healthier than 32%
7%
“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 31.8; chronic-disease standing 91.2 (top 10%) — 59 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,347 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
94104
Californiashares a border
Score 59.13
Closest healthier
94105
Californiashares a border
Score 72.17
Similar health profile
94530
California97% similar profile
Score 67.76
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 | 20.2% | 17.8–22.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.5% | 26.4–32.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.5% | 6.8–8.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.2% | 7.3–9.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.1% | 4.3–6.1 |
| Depression among adults | 18.6% | 16.2–21.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.4% | 10.0–13.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.2% | 33.7–40.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 15.7% | 12.6–19.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.8% | 9.1–12.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.8% | 4.7–7.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.7% | 72.6–78.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.1% | 70.7–77.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.6% | 85.7–89.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.0% | 59.4–68.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.0% | 66.2–71.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.6% | 73.2–85.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.7% | 14.4–19.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.2% | 7.6–11.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.7% | 17.6–24.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.2% | 25.9–34.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.1% | 15.7–20.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 12.9% | 11.4–14.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.1% | 9.7–12.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.6–12.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 26.3% | 23.0–29.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.7% | 5.8–7.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.4% | 10.6–14.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.8–3.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.2–5.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.6% | 23.9–31.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.9% | 10.7–15.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.7% | 8.9–12.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.5% | 7.1–10.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 5.6–7.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 37.4% | 32.7–42.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.6% | 3.9–5.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 11.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 13.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 63.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 39.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 21.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 10.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 54.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 56.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 24.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 45.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $152,697 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,248,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,587 | $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 | 87.1 yr ± 2.36 | 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 2.36 years of 87.1, 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