ZIP code
95401
in Santa Rosa, CaliforniaPopulation 36,861
53.15/ 100
Ranked #11,852 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 37%)
Ranked #875 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 49%)
Ranked #33 of 34 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA ZIPs (bottom 3.0%)
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
$1
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
95 µg/L
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
2.5%
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST70thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
372 units
in the top 6.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST83rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST16thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
7.1%
in the top 8.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST64thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
58.7%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
9.6%
in the top 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Grocery access
0.16 per 1,000 residents
in the top 10.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS90thDefinition & 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 ›The read
By the composite measure, ZIP 95401, one of several in Santa Rosa, California sits in the top 37% healthiest ZIPs nationally (11,852nd) and the bottom 49% of California (875th).
The profile cuts both ways, and the readings bear that out: subsidized affordable housing sits in the top 6.4% nationally, modeled industrial-pollution burden registers in the bottom 7.7% nationally, and modeled obesity lands in the bottom 11.2% nationally. Working the other way, modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 0.6% nationally, lithium in drinking water lies in the top 2.7% nationally, and modeled disaster risk settles in the top 3.7% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise stands in the top 5.1% nationally, and crowded housing is in the top 8.2% nationally. Modeled pfas rests in the top 8.5% nationally, and transportation noise sits in the top 9.2% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs that surround it, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain language, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. ZIP 95403, just across the boundary, ranks healthier 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 60%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 62%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 42%
14%
Disability
healthier than 49%
7%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 15%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 33%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 69%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 56%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 57%
16%
Disability
healthier than 46%
7%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 37%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 37%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 23%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 32%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 72%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 3%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 6%
8%
Disability
healthier than 3%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 6%
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
95403
Californiashares a border
Score 56.78
Closest healthier
95404
Californiashares a border
Score 61.39
Similar health profile
93101
California97% similar profile
Score 54.53
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 | 22.2% | 19.6–24.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.8% | 26.4–33.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.2% | 6.5–7.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.1% | 5.5–6.8 |
| Depression among adults | 24.1% | 20.7–27.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.7% | 9.3–12.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 32.9% | 29.1–36.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.9% | 22.3–34.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.2% | 3.0–3.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.1% | 9.8–14.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.9% | 10.3–13.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.0% | 66.4–73.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 69.9% | 65.8–73.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.8% | 81.9–85.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.8% | 56.0–65.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 60.4% | 57.0–64.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.4% | 71.7–84.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.2% | 13.4–19.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.1% | 11.3–15.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.4% | 20.8–28.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.9% | 30.7–42.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.3% | 19.8–25.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.0% | 16.1–20.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.4% | 12.8–16.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.3% | 14.6–18.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.9% | 28.1–35.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.6–7.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–10.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.7% | 12.9–16.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.8–4.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.7% | 5.3–6.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.6% | 23.1–30.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.3% | 15.9–20.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.6% | 14.6–18.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.5% | 13.5–17.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.3% | 29.6–39.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 7.0–9.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 12.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 21.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 39.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 53.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 7.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 25.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 49.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 17.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $93,615 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $630,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,081 | $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 | 79.3 yr ± 0.65 | 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 0.65 years of 79.3, 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