ZIP code
94945
in Novato, CaliforniaPopulation 17,635
63.44/ 100
Ranked #2,740 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 8.6%)
Ranked #336 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 20%)
Ranked #108 of 174 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA ZIPs (bottom 38%)
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
21.9%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
1.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST88thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Floodplain exposure
44.6%
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
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 ›Grocery access
0.22 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Park land
21.9%
in the top 6.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST81stUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Physician access
2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Transit access
3.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
1.5%
in the bottom 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST22ndUS5thDefinition & 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 ›Housing-cost burden
42%
in the top 8.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST68thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 94945, one of several in Novato, California, by its composite score, sits in the top 8.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,740th) and the top 20% of California (336th).
The data opens on a genuinely even set of readings: modeled obesity sits in the bottom 2.0% nationally, and dental providers lies in the top 4.6% nationally. Recreation rests in the top 5.0% nationally. Distance to an emergency room resides at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Grocery is in the top 6.0% nationally, park land lands in the top 6.4% nationally, and physicians stands in the top 7.5% nationally. Transit registers in the top 8.0% nationally, and modeled energy burden settles in the bottom 4.9% nationally. On the other side, floodplain exposure sits in the top 5.1% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 94903, about 2.0 miles away.
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 85%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 71%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 82%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 87%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 85%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 88%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 86%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 78%
8%
Disability
healthier than 77%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 57%
21%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 16%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 76%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 73%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 64%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 49%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 58%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 47%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 25%
21%
Disability
healthier than 36%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 8%
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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 82.5 ± 1.8 years. A median household income of $107,790 predicts 80.4 years — 2.2 years above.
Ranked #838 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
94947
Californiashares a border
Score 62.68
Closest healthier
94903
Californiaabout 2.0 mi away
Score 64.40
Similar health profile
78746
Texas98% similar profile
Score 71.43
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 | 25.0% | 22.0–28.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.0% | 28.1–35.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.9% | 9.0–10.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.6% | 8.4–10.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–6.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.6–6.0 |
| Depression among adults | 20.9% | 17.8–24.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.2% | 8.8–11.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.9% | 32.7–41.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 21.9% | 16.8–27.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.9–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.1% | 4.8–7.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.5% | 5.4–7.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.4% | 71.9–78.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.7% | 69.8–77.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.5% | 88.2–90.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.6% | 63.7–72.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 71.7% | 68.4–74.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.2% | 72.1–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.7% | 13.0–18.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.9% | 7.5–10.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 19.0% | 15.7–22.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.5% | 24.9–36.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.3% | 15.0–19.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.6% | 12.9–16.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.4% | 10.9–13.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.7% | 10.3–13.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.8% | 24.0–31.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.5% | 10.9–14.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.5% | 19.4–26.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.4–11.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.5–10.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 7.8–10.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.1% | 25.7–34.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.8% | 4.1–5.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 52.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 42.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 70.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 6.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 23.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 58.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 24.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 49.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $107,790 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,124,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,326 | $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 | 82.5 yr ± 0.92 | 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 0.92 years of 82.5, 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