ZIP code
94580
in San Lorenzo, CaliforniaPopulation 29,420
57.23/ 100
Ranked #7,039 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 22%)
Ranked #660 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 38%)
Ranked #145 of 174 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA ZIPs (bottom 17%)
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.
Transportation noise
35.3%
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
5.4%
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Outer-floodplain exposure
17.1%
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Obesity
24.1%
in the bottom 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST22ndUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
40.2%
in the top 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
9.6%
in the top 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, San Lorenzo, California (ZIP 94580) lands in the top 22% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,039th) and the top 38% of California (660th).
The signals balance out across the profile, strengths against concerns: modeled obesity rests in the bottom 4.3% nationally, and lead in tap water stands at the national minimum. Set against that, modeled transportation noise lies in the top 0.9% nationally, and loud transportation noise lands in the top 1.1% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure sits in the top 2.3% nationally, modeled expected annual loss is in the top 2.9% nationally, and modeled loneliness settles in the top 3.8% nationally. Modeled tree cover resides at the national minimum, PFAS in drinking water registers at the national maximum, and crowded housing rests in the top 5.0% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. PFAS in drinking water is the family of man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 94545, just across the boundary, 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 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%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 72%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
Disability
healthier than 67%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 54%
16%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 14%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 78%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 76%
8%
Disability
healthier than 63%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 42%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 40%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 56%
21%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 16%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 20%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 40%
8%
Disability
healthier than 18%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 24%
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 13.5; chronic-disease standing 92.6 (top 10%) — 79 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,122 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
94541
Californiashares a border
Score 56.38
Closest healthier
94545
Californiashares a border
Score 58.78
Similar health profile
30341
Georgia99% similar profile
Score 57.48
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 | 19.8% | 17.6–22.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.0% | 26.1–32.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.5% | 5.0–6.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.0% | 8.0–10.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.7–5.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.8% | 4.3–5.3 |
| Depression among adults | 18.8% | 16.4–21.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.4% | 10.9–14.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.3% | 31.1–37.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 24.1% | 20.3–28.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.8–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.9% | 8.1–12.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.5% | 9.1–12.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.5% | 67.2–73.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.3% | 68.0–74.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.9% | 84.3–87.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 56.9% | 52.5–61.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.0% | 59.0–65.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 73.6% | 66.9–79.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.1% | 12.9–17.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.3% | 9.8–12.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.1% | 21.8–28.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.8% | 31.8–40.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.1% | 19.7–24.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.4% | 14.7–18.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.4% | 11.9–14.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.2% | 12.8–15.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.6% | 27.3–34.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.4% | 11.8–15.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.5% | 5.1–6.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 31.2% | 27.7–34.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.7% | 16.5–21.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 15.2% | 13.4–17.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.0% | 13.2–17.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.3% | 8.3–10.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 40.2% | 35.9–44.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.2% | 6.3–8.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 16.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 26.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 36.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 71.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 9.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 39.9% | 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+ | 16.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 41.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $110,729 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $846,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,274 | $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 | 81.6 yr ± 0.67 | 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 0.67 years of 81.6, 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