ZIP code
01921
in Boxford, MassachusettsPopulation 8,250
69.20/ 100
Ranked #730 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 2.3%)
Ranked #52 of 527 Massachusetts ZIPs (top 9.9%)
Ranked #48 of 281 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH ZIPs (top 17%)
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
$200,672
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Mammography
86.8%
in the top 0.08% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
5.9%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
5.8%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.3%
in the bottom 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.1%
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST11thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
11.0%
in the bottom 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
75.4%
in the top 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST84thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Obesity
26.2%
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST41stUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
5.1%
in the bottom 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Boxford, Massachusetts (ZIP 01921) ranks in the top 2.3% healthiest ZIPs nationally (730th) and the top 9.9% of Massachusetts (52nd).
The measures split the difference for this area: household income lies in the top 1.1% nationally, and modeled mammography resides in the top 0.08% nationally. Modeled food insecurity lands in the bottom 1.3% nationally, and housing insecurity registers in the bottom 2.1% nationally. Modeled transportation sits in the bottom 2.6% nationally, utility shutoff rests in the bottom 4.4% nationally, and fair or poor health is in the bottom 1.7% nationally. Modeled colon screening stands in the top 2.5% nationally, obesity settles in the bottom 7.6% nationally, and independent living disability lies in the bottom 3.1% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 01810, about 3.4 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 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 84%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 94%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
healthier than 96%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 69%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 89%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 91%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 84%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 39%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 33%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 83%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 77%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 88%
8%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 57%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 40%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 51%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 38%
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 27.3; chronic-disease standing 84.4 — 57 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,115 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
01833
Massachusettsshares a border
Score 66.18
Closest healthier
01810
Massachusettsabout 3.4 mi away
Score 69.22
Similar health profile
02874
Rhode Island100% similar profile
Score 68.16
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 | 25.4% | 22.9–27.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.2% | 27.4–33.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.4% | 9.5–11.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.3% | 10.0–12.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.6–5.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.7% | 3.8–5.6 |
| Depression among adults | 21.9% | 19.3–24.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.1% | 6.9–9.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.2% | 33.0–39.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 26.2% | 22.4–30.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.5% | 2.2–2.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.6% | 4.5–6.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 2.4% | 1.8–3.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.2% | 74.1–79.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.1% | 80.7–85.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 92.8% | 91.6–93.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 75.4% | 72.1–78.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 82.6% | 80.5–84.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 86.8% | 82.8–90.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.8% | 14.5–19.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.8% | 6.0–9.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 16.0% | 13.3–18.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.8% | 27.1–34.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 11.0% | 9.2–12.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 12.9% | 11.2–14.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.4% | 8.9–11.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.8% | 8.4–11.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 21.2% | 18.4–24.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.8–6.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.3–6.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.4–10.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.2% | 1.9–2.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.6% | 2.2–3.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.5% | 16.0–21.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 4.6–7.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 4.7–8.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.8% | 4.7–7.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.3% | 3.6–5.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.9% | 24.7–31.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.1% | 3.4–4.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 6.4% (2.6–16.9%) n=524 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 0.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 2.4% (0.0–6.3%) n=525 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.7% (1.1–15.2%) n=526 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 70.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 45.7% (23.6–77.5%) n=526 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (1.6–7.9%) n=523 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.6% (0.4–20.2%) n=522 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 94.1% (87.2–98.4%) n=522 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 30.5% (21.2–43.7%) n=522 |
| Homeownership rate | 95.0% | 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 | 6.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.7% (1.9–28.4%) n=527 |
| Single-parent households | 53.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.5% (40.0–68.7%) n=520 |
| Population 65+ | 21.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.4% (12.1–33.8%) n=527 |
| Median age | 49.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.5 yr (34.3–57.2) n=524 |
| Median household income | $200,672 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $110,450 ($68,196–$177,335) n=505 |
| Median home value | $904,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $519,200 ($297,220–$949,670) n=508 |
| Median gross rent | $776 | $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 | 84.5 yr ± 1.18 | 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 1.18 years of 84.5, 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