67.6%
of records are in Chico
Chico accounts for more than two-thirds of the records shown. Oroville's smaller population produces a higher rate, while Gridley has the lowest nonzero rate.
Butte County · provider records and access indicators
Chico contains most of the provider records in this five-community view, but Oroville has the highest population-adjusted rate. Biggs has no matching practice-location record in the snapshot.
Key findings
67.6%
Chico accounts for more than two-thirds of the records shown. Oroville's smaller population produces a higher rate, while Gridley has the lowest nonzero rate.
71.2%
The five tracked communities represent about seven in ten county residents. The rate does not account for people living elsewhere in Butte County.
15
Orthodontics is the most common specialist taxonomy in the county data. No pediatric-dentistry or prosthodontics record appears in the tracked communities.
Population scope
The five tracked communities represent about seven in ten county residents. The rate does not account for people living elsewhere in Butte County.
The numerator and denominator cover the same named communities. Using the full county population with this partial location count would understate the rate.
The calculation does not measure appointment capacity, patient travel, office hours, insurance participation, or dentists who serve county residents from another city.
Specialty record
Orthodontics is the most common specialist taxonomy in the county data. No pediatric-dentistry or prosthodontics record appears in the tracked communities.
These categories come from provider-selected NPPES taxonomies. They are not a count of specialists accepting patients.
Federal shortage context
8
HRSA shortage designations use federal criteria and can apply to an area, a population group, or a facility. They complement the city-level NPI count but do not use the same denominator.
Review the HRSA source ↗Regional context
Butte County ranks 3 of 18 current county reports by combined provider-record rate.
This is context, not a quality ranking. Each county rate covers only the named communities shown in its report, and population coverage varies.
| County report | Records | Per 10k | Population covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tehama County | 41 | 17.8 | 35.6% |
| Placer County | 415 | 13.0 | 73.4% |
| Butte County | 176 | 11.8 | 71.2% |
| Sacramento County | 1,206 | 11.8 | 63.0% |
| Shasta County | 131 | 11.3 | 63.5% |
Community comparison
Counts use active individual NPI records with a dental taxonomy and a matching California practice-location city. Directory practices are shown separately for navigation.
Incorporated city · Population 1,970
Incorporated city · Population 108,113
Incorporated city · Population 7,384
Incorporated city · Population 20,664
Incorporated city · Population 10,581
Method
Use CMS NPPES NPI-1 records with a California practice location.
Retain active records whose taxonomy code begins with 1223.
Match each practice-location city to one of the 5 places in this report.
Divide each record count by that community's published population.
Show directory office profiles as a distinct navigation count.
Primary sources
Provider and taxonomy snapshot collected September 15, 2026.
January 1, 2026 city and county estimates; 2020 Census populations for census-designated places.
Dental shortage designations dated September 1, 2026.
Find an office
Practice profiles include locations, contact details, services, and other sourced information where available.
Questions about the report