ZIP code
94925
in Corte Madera, CaliforniaPopulation 10,077
68.66/ 100
Ranked #841 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 2.7%)
Ranked #129 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 7.6%)
Ranked #59 of 174 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA ZIPs (top 34%)
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
$232,763
in the top 0.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Obesity
20.7%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
2.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
3.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Utility shut-off threat
3.9%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
6.9%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
0.92%
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Humid extreme heat
6.3 days/year
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›Outpatient-care access
0.69 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health 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 ›The read
Corte Madera, California (ZIP 94925), by its overall standing, sits in the top 2.7% healthiest ZIPs nationally (841st) and the top 7.6% of California (129th).
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: household income sits in the top 0.6% nationally, modeled obesity settles in the bottom 1.2% nationally, and recreation registers in the top 1.2% nationally. Physicians stands in the top 2.7% nationally, modeled utility shutoff lands in the bottom 3.3% nationally, and modeled food insecurity is in the bottom 3.3% nationally. Modeled energy burden resides in the bottom 0.8% nationally, and humid heat rests in the bottom 4.0% nationally. Outpatient lies in the top 4.1% nationally, and mental-health providers sits in the top 4.4% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 94904, just across the boundary. Looking wider, the ZIP also sits on the healthier half of the national range on at least seven of the ten good-life measures tracked here, from quiet and green space to nearby care, a combination reached by about one in twenty-five US ZIP codes.
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 92%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.4%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 89%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 81%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 22%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 75%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.4%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 92%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 80%
8%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 61%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.6%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 84%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 77%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 71%
11%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 50%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
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
94904
Californiashares a border
Score 70.00
Closest healthier
94920
Californiashares a border
Score 71.78
Similar health profile
20165
Virginia99% similar profile
Score 69.82
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 | 23.8% | 20.9–26.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.8% | 26.1–33.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.8% | 8.9–10.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.6% | 8.5–10.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–6.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.4% | 3.7–5.2 |
| Depression among adults | 21.5% | 18.3–24.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.8% | 7.6–10.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.8% | 31.6–40.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 20.7% | 15.7–26.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.4–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 3.6% | 2.8–4.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 3.7% | 3.0–4.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.3% | 70.6–77.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.2% | 70.3–77.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.8% | 89.5–92.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.4% | 61.5–70.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 75.5% | 72.4–78.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.8% | 72.9–85.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.5% | 13.6–19.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.5% | 6.0–9.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.5% | 12.6–18.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.0% | 24.5–35.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.0% | 12.0–16.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.9% | 12.2–15.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.9% | 9.5–12.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.1% | 8.7–11.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.1% | 20.6–27.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.6% | 4.9–6.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.6% | 4.8–6.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.5% | 8.9–12.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.6% | 2.2–2.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.8–3.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.2% | 17.2–23.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 5.7–8.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 4.9–7.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 5.7–8.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 4.0–5.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.5% | 24.2–33.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.9% | 3.3–4.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 79.3% | 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 | 1.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 98.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 68.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 10.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 46.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 18.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 45.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $232,763 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,755,200 | $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 | 82.0 yr ± 0.97 | 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 0.97 years of 82.0, 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