82.9%
of records are in Red Bluff
The comparison is strongly centered on Red Bluff. Corning has seven records, while the city of Tehama has none in the NPPES location snapshot.
Tehama County · provider records and access indicators
Red Bluff contains 34 of the 41 provider records and has the highest recorded rate. Tehama has no matching record, and only 35.6% of the county population is represented.
Key findings
82.9%
The comparison is strongly centered on Red Bluff. Corning has seven records, while the city of Tehama has none in the NPPES location snapshot.
35.6%
This is the narrowest population denominator after Yuba County. Most county residents live outside the three tracked communities, so the 17.8 combined rate requires particular caution.
2
Only two specialist records appear: one orthodontics record and one endodontics record. HRSA lists 16 dental shortage designations, including 13 facilities.
Population scope
This is the narrowest population denominator after Yuba County. Most county residents live outside the three tracked communities, so the 17.8 combined rate requires particular caution.
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
Only two specialist records appear: one orthodontics record and one endodontics record. HRSA lists 16 dental shortage designations, including 13 facilities.
These categories come from provider-selected NPPES taxonomies. They are not a count of specialists accepting patients.
Federal shortage context
16
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
Tehama County ranks 1 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.
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 3 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