ZIP code
94506
in Danville, CaliforniaPopulation 27,055
72.00/ 100
Ranked #281 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 0.9%)
Ranked #44 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 2.6%)
Ranked #20 of 174 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA ZIPs (top 11.5%)
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
$250,001
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
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 ›Obesity
23.1%
in the bottom 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
5.8%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
6.4%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.2%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
8.4%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.2%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›Independent-living disability
4.8%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
1.5 per 100,000 residents per year
in the bottom 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, ZIP 94506, one of several in Danville, California ranks in the top 0.9% healthiest ZIPs nationally (281st) and the top 2.6% of California (44th).
Strengths and concerns sit side by side across the measures here: household income resides at the national maximum, and modeled utility shutoff lands in the bottom 0.7% nationally. Modeled obesity registers in the bottom 3.1% nationally, and housing insecurity sits in the bottom 2.1% nationally. Modeled food insecurity rests in the bottom 2.2% nationally, transportation is in the bottom 2.2% nationally, and cognitive disability stands in the bottom 1.1% nationally. Modeled energy burden settles in the bottom 1.9% nationally, modeled independent living disability lies in the bottom 1.9% nationally, and fatal road crashes resides in the bottom 5.4% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 94582, 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 93%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 68%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 96%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 80%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 92%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 97%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 77%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 34%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 77%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 67%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 80%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 93%
8%
Disability
healthier than 88%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 59%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 16%
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.
Nearby
94507
Californiashares a border
Score 71.08
Closest healthier
94582
Californiashares a border
Score 75.45
Similar health profile
60043
Illinois99% similar profile
Score 75.29
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 | 21.9% | 19.4–24.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.9% | 26.8–32.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.3% | 7.5–9.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.7% | 7.7–9.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.8% | 4.3–5.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.6% | 3.1–4.1 |
| Depression among adults | 17.9% | 15.4–20.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.8% | 8.5–11.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.2% | 34.5–41.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 23.1% | 19.2–27.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.5% | 2.3–2.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.0% | 4.0–6.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 3.1% | 2.6–3.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.9% | 71.3–78.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.8% | 72.6–78.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.3% | 90.2–92.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.1% | 61.7–70.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 76.7% | 74.0–79.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.2% | 71.7–83.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.5% | 12.2–17.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.3% | 5.3–7.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.2% | 14.6–19.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.3% | 27.0–35.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.6% | 11.0–14.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 12.3% | 10.9–13.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.7% | 8.5–10.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.4–9.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 20.6% | 17.9–23.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.2–5.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.1% | 7.9–10.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.3% | 18.5–24.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.4% | 5.4–7.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.8% | 4.0–5.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.8% | 4.9–6.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.2% | 3.6–4.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.2% | 27.3–35.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.1% | 2.7–3.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 1.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 75.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 99.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 88.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 29.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 47.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 19.8% | 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 | $250,001 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,956,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $3,501 | $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 | 83.0 yr ± 0.94 | 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 0.94 years of 83.0, 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