ZIP code
01745
in Fayville, MassachusettsPopulation 586
70.48/ 100
Ranked #510 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 1.6%)
Ranked #31 of 527 Massachusetts ZIPs (top 5.9%)
Ranked #1 of 112 Worcester, MA-CT ZIPs (top 0.9%)
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.
Median household income
$185,994
in the top 1.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS99thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Mammography
88.7%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
5.6%
in the bottom 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
2.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
5.3%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Housing insecurity
5.5%
in the bottom 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Physician access
4.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Lack of transportation
4.0%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
3.7%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›The read
Fayville, Massachusetts (ZIP 01745) ranks in the top 1.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (510th) and the top 5.9% of Massachusetts (31st).
Several signals sit on each side of the ledger here: household income stands in the top 1.5% nationally, and modeled mammography sits at the national maximum. Modeled food insecurity resides in the bottom 0.9% nationally, and recreation stands in the top 1.1% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity sits in the bottom 1.4% nationally, physicians resides in the top 1.5% nationally, and modeled transportation stands in the bottom 1.6% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff sits in the bottom 2.3% nationally, and homeownership resides at the national maximum. Working the other way, modeled loud transportation noise stands in the top 1.2% nationally.
Against its neighbors, loud transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 01776, about 3.9 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 Worcester, MA-CT 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 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 77%
8%
Disability
healthier than 99%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 93%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 15%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 82%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 92%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 89%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
Disability
healthier than 96%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 98%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 16%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 99%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.00%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 95%
8%
Disability
healthier than 99%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 97%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 21%
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
01702
Massachusettsshares a border
Score 51.41
Closest healthier
01776
Massachusettsabout 3.9 mi away
Score 72.83
Similar health profile
03046
New Hampshire100% similar profile
Score 63.06
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% | 22.5–27.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 28.9% | 26.2–31.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.8% | 8.9–10.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.3% | 10.0–12.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.0–5.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.8% | 3.0–4.7 |
| Depression among adults | 23.5% | 20.8–26.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 7.7% | 6.6–8.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.9% | 31.9–37.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.9% | 22.2–29.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.2% | 1.9–2.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 3.8% | 3.0–4.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 2.3% | 1.7–3.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.7% | 74.0–79.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.7% | 81.5–85.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 93.1% | 91.9–94.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 72.5% | 69.3–75.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 82.3% | 80.3–84.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 88.7% | 85.0–91.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.9% | 14.8–19.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.3% | 4.8–8.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.4% | 12.9–18.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 28.7% | 25.2–32.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 10.2% | 8.6–12.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.3% | 11.5–15.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.6% | 8.3–11.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.1% | 7.7–10.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 20.2% | 17.5–23.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.2–5.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.5% | 3.8–5.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 7.9% | 6.6–9.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 1.9% | 1.6–2.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.4% | 2.1–2.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.7% | 17.2–22.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.6% | 4.4–7.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 5.4% | 4.1–7.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.4–6.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.0% | 3.4–4.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.7% | 27.6–34.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.7% | 3.1–4.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 1.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 6.4% (2.6–16.9%) n=524 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 0.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 2.4% (0.0–6.3%) n=525 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.7% (1.1–15.2%) n=526 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 79.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 45.7% (23.6–77.5%) n=526 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (1.6–7.9%) n=523 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.6% (0.4–20.2%) n=522 |
| Broadband subscription | 81.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 94.1% (87.2–98.4%) n=522 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 33.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 30.5% (21.2–43.7%) n=522 |
| Homeownership rate | 100.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.1% (39.6–93.5%) n=522 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.8%) n=522 |
| Foreign-born population | 28.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.7% (1.9–28.4%) n=527 |
| Single-parent households | 26.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.5% (40.0–68.7%) n=520 |
| Population 65+ | 12.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.4% (12.1–33.8%) n=527 |
| Median age | 35.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.5 yr (34.3–57.2) n=524 |
| Median household income | $185,994 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $110,450 ($68,196–$177,335) n=505 |
| Median home value | $650,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $519,200 ($297,220–$949,670) n=508 |
| Median gross rent | — | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,659 ($1,104–$2,452) n=461 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 85.4 yr ± 2.12 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 81.3 yr (78.1–84.4) n=514 |
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 2.12 years of 85.4, 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