ZIP code
94952
in Petaluma, CaliforniaPopulation 33,785
63.42/ 100
Ranked #2,747 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 8.6%)
Ranked #338 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 20%)
Ranked #8 of 34 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA ZIPs (top 24%)
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 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
25.3%
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST28thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
440 units
in the top 5.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST86thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
0.83 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
1.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.12 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Tooth loss
6.2%
in the bottom 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.8%
in the bottom 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST32ndUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
0.8 pCi/L
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, ZIP 94952, one of several in Petaluma, California lands in the top 8.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,747th) and the top 20% of California (338th).
A number of measures place this area on solid footing: modeled obesity lands in the bottom 6.0% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing sits in the top 5.2% nationally. Civic is in the top 5.8% nationally, and recreation settles in the top 6.1% nationally. Mental-health providers resides in the top 8.9% nationally, and modeled tooth loss registers in the bottom 5.3% nationally. Distance to a community health center rests at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Modeled energy burden stands in the bottom 9.1% nationally. By contrast, modeled expected annual loss lies in the top 2.7% nationally, and disaster risk lands in the top 4.8% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, expected annual loss 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. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Subsidized affordable housing is the main federal tax-credit program (HUD) funding affordable rental housing, counted as local units it supports. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 94929, 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 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, 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 91%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 84%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 66%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 85%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 59%
8%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 87%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 90%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 82%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 79%
11%
Disability
healthier than 75%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 68%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 57%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 52%
8%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 75%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 91%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 72%
14%
Disability
healthier than 91%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 81%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 59%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 34%
8%
“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
94923
Californiashares a border
Score 62.00
Closest healthier
94929
Californiashares a border
Score 65.29
Similar health profile
92673
California99% similar profile
Score 66.95
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 | 24.8% | 22.0–27.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.0% | 27.4–34.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.6% | 8.8–10.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.5% | 4.8–6.2 |
| Depression among adults | 23.7% | 20.4–27.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.7% | 8.4–11.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.9% | 30.9–39.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.3% | 19.9–31.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.2% | 5.0–7.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.0% | 5.2–7.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.7% | 70.3–76.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.0% | 70.3–77.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.6% | 87.1–89.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.5% | 63.0–72.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.4% | 67.5–73.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.7% | 73.5–85.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.1% | 13.4–19.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.9% | 8.5–11.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 18.3% | 15.2–21.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.0% | 27.0–37.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.6% | 14.4–18.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.6–17.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.4% | 10.9–13.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.8–13.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.0% | 23.5–30.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.6–7.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.2–7.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.7% | 11.0–14.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.9–3.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.6% | 18.6–24.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.4–11.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 7.9–10.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 7.8–10.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 5.4–6.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.1% | 25.8–34.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.3–5.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 46.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 60.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 13.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 52.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 22.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 43.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $117,343 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,041,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,278 | $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 | 81.3 yr ± 0.50 | 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 0.50 years of 81.3, 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