ZIP code
94559
in Napa, CaliforniaPopulation 27,714
54.97/ 100
Ranked #9,484 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 30%)
Ranked #777 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 45%)
Ranked #9 of 10 Napa, CA ZIPs (bottom 10.0%)
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.
Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
3.3%
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST79thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Child-care access
0.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST88thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Homeownership rate
49%
in the bottom 8.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST25thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
41.1%
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST63rdUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
6.8%
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST63rdUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Transit access
3.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST62ndUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
0.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST79thUS90thDefinition & 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 ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, ZIP 94559, one of several in Napa, California ranks in the top 30% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,484th) and the top 45% of California (777th).
Taken together, the profile's clearest strengths surface right away: childcare resides in the top 7.1% nationally, and recreation lands in the top 7.7% nationally. Transit registers in the top 9.4% nationally, and civic sits in the top 9.7% nationally. Against that, modeled expected annual loss rests in the top 2.6% nationally, modeled loud transportation noise is in the top 3.2% nationally, and homeownership stands in the bottom 8.6% nationally. Housing-cost burden settles in the top 8.9% nationally, crowded housing lies in the top 8.9% nationally, and modeled disaster risk resides in the top 9.6% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 94503, 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 Napa, 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 84%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 69%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 71%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 47%
8%
Disability
healthier than 58%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 33%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 19%
13%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 63%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 54%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 47%
11%
Disability
healthier than 55%
7%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 39%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 35%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 67%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 56%
14%
Disability
healthier than 44%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 33%
16%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 11%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 22%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 22%
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 33.4; chronic-disease standing 83.5 — 50 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #14,384 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
94503
Californiashares a border
Score 61.70
Closest healthier
94534
Californiashares a border
Score 61.19
Similar health profile
72758
Arkansas96% similar profile
Score 55.52
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 | 22.8% | 20.0–25.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.1% | 27.4–34.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.6 |
| Depression among adults | 22.9% | 19.6–26.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.6% | 9.2–12.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.4% | 30.3–38.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.3% | 23.5–37.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.9–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.6% | 7.7–11.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.7% | 9.3–12.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.7% | 67.4–74.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.8% | 67.7–75.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.5% | 83.8–87.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.8% | 55.4–65.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 63.7% | 60.1–67.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.6% | 66.5–81.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.5% | 14.5–20.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.9% | 10.4–13.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.7% | 20.0–27.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.4% | 26.1–39.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.6% | 19.2–24.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.2% | 15.4–19.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.9% | 12.4–15.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.1% | 13.6–16.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.3% | 27.5–35.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.6–7.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.5–9.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.0% | 12.4–16.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.6–4.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 5.0–5.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.1% | 21.5–29.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.2% | 14.0–18.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.9% | 13.0–17.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.2% | 12.3–16.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.7% | 28.7–39.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.5% | 6.4–8.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 16.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 39.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 41.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 49.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 6.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 21.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 51.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 16.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $105,188 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $898,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,079 | $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 | 81.0 yr ± 0.71 | 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 0.71 years of 81.0, 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