ZIP code
01835
in Haverhill, MassachusettsPopulation 14,782
59.24/ 100
Ranked #5,412 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 17%)
Ranked #310 of 527 Massachusetts ZIPs (bottom 41%)
Ranked #202 of 281 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH ZIPs (bottom 28%)
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.
Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Mammography
84.4%
in the top 1.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST63rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
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 ›Transportation noise
10.8%
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
1.7%
in the top 9.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Diabetes
8.9%
in the bottom 8.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST31stUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
4.7%
in the bottom 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›The read
In its overall standing, ZIP 01835, one of several in Haverhill, Massachusetts lands in the top 17% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,412th) and the bottom 41% of Massachusetts (310th).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: modeled mammography is in the top 1.0% nationally, and lead in tap water sits at the national minimum. Modeled extreme heat lands at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Childcare lies in the top 11.6% nationally, and modeled diabetes stands in the bottom 8.2% nationally. Fatal road crashes rests in the bottom 12.2% nationally. Set against that, distance to a Superfund site registers at the national minimum, and modeled transportation noise resides in the top 7.5% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise settles in the top 9.5% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure is in the top 12.3% nationally.
Against the wider neighborhood, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put simply, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. On the overall standing, ZIP 01834, just across the boundary, ranks healthier.
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 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH 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 80%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 62%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 93%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 67%
11%
Disability
healthier than 82%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 81%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 47%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 61%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 47%
8%
Disability
healthier than 47%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 35%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 30%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 35%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 46%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 24%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 17%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 35%
8%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 22.3; chronic-disease standing 80.3 — 58 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,220 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
01830
Massachusettsshares a border
Score 51.56
Closest healthier
01834
Massachusettsshares a border
Score 63.24
Similar health profile
02917
Rhode Island99% similar profile
Score 62.30
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 | 24.5% | 22.2–26.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.0% | 27.2–32.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.5% | 7.7–9.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.2% | 10.9–13.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–5.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.1–6.8 |
| Depression among adults | 24.2% | 21.4–26.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.9% | 7.8–10.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.2% | 31.3–37.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 29.9% | 25.7–34.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.5–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.3% | 7.6–11.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 4.7% | 3.9–5.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.3% | 71.4–76.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.6% | 78.0–82.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.8% | 88.3–91.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.9% | 66.4–73.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 74.0% | 71.2–76.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 84.4% | 79.9–88.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.2% | 14.9–19.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.8% | 9.9–13.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.5% | 18.5–24.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.0% | 32.0–40.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.1% | 13.1–17.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.3% | 14.5–18.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.5% | 11.0–13.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.8% | 12.1–15.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 25.9% | 22.8–28.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.6% | 4.9–6.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.2–8.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.4–12.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.6–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.7% | 19.9–25.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 9.8–13.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.0% | 10.9–15.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.6% | 9.1–12.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 6.2–8.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.8% | 28.4–35.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.0% | 6.0–8.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 6.4% (2.6–16.9%) n=524 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 2.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 2.4% (0.0–6.3%) n=525 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.7% (1.1–15.2%) n=526 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 41.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 45.7% (23.6–77.5%) n=526 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (1.6–7.9%) n=523 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.6% (0.4–20.2%) n=522 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 94.1% (87.2–98.4%) n=522 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 30.5% (21.2–43.7%) n=522 |
| Homeownership rate | 75.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.1% (39.6–93.5%) n=522 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.8%) n=522 |
| Foreign-born population | 10.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.7% (1.9–28.4%) n=527 |
| Single-parent households | 49.2% | 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 | 39.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.5 yr (34.3–57.2) n=524 |
| Median household income | $113,578 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $110,450 ($68,196–$177,335) n=505 |
| Median home value | $468,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $519,200 ($297,220–$949,670) n=508 |
| Median gross rent | $1,852 | $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 | 81.1 yr ± 1.11 | 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 1.11 years of 81.1, 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