ZIP code
01944
in Manchester, MassachusettsPopulation 5,403
72.41/ 100
Ranked #226 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 0.8%)
Ranked #11 of 527 Massachusetts ZIPs (top 2.1%)
Ranked #11 of 281 Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH ZIPs (top 4.0%)
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
$206,389
in the top 0.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
4.4%
in the bottom 0.09% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
4.4%
in the bottom 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
3.5%
in the bottom 0.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Mammography
87.3%
in the top 0.03% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
25.8%
in the bottom 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
3.3%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
76.7%
in the top 1.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
8.5%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
74.4%
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS97thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›The read
Manchester, Massachusetts (ZIP 01944), in overall standing, comes out in the top 0.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (226th) and the top 2.1% of Massachusetts (11th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
A few readings each way define this mixed profile: household income resides in the top 0.9% nationally, modeled food insecurity sits in the bottom 0.09% nationally, and modeled housing insecurity stands in the bottom 0.3% nationally. Modeled transportation resides in the bottom 0.4% nationally, mammography sits in the top 0.03% nationally, and loneliness stands in the bottom 0.9% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff resides in the bottom 1.1% nationally, and colon screening sits in the top 1.3% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability stands in the bottom 1.2% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled pfas resides in the top 3.2% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Locally, no neighbor ranks healthier overall than this ZIP. Beyond that, the ZIP also sits on the healthier half of the national range on at least seven of the ten good-life measures tracked here, from quiet and green space to nearby care, a combination reached by about one in twenty-five US ZIP codes.
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 77%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 98%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.09%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 99%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 93%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 97%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 37%
14%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 1.0%
8%
Disability
healthier than 87%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 54%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 56%
14%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 21%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 99%
8%
Disability
healthier than 83%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 38%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 24%
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
01915
Massachusettsshares a border
Score 61.74
Similar health profile
06419
Connecticut100% similar profile
Score 66.81
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 | 28.1% | 25.4–30.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.7% | 29.6–35.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 12.5% | 11.3–13.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.0% | 9.8–12.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.6% | 3.7–5.8 |
| Depression among adults | 21.0% | 18.4–23.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.5% | 7.3–10.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.6% | 35.4–41.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.3% | 21.5–29.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.3–3.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.1% | 4.1–6.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 1.8% | 1.4–2.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.3% | 77.5–82.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 85.1% | 82.9–87.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 94.1% | 92.9–95.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 76.7% | 73.5–79.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 84.1% | 82.2–85.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 87.3% | 83.3–90.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.2% | 13.1–17.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.0% | 4.5–8.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 14.9% | 12.3–18.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 28.7% | 25.2–32.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 10.3% | 8.5–12.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 11.3% | 9.8–13.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.0% | 8.6–11.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 8.5% | 7.1–10.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 21.0% | 18.1–24.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.4–7.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.7% | 3.9–5.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.1% | 7.5–11.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.1% | 1.8–2.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.1–3.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 16.0% | 13.9–18.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 4.4% | 3.3–6.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 3.3–6.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 4.4% | 3.4–5.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 3.5% | 2.9–4.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 25.8% | 22.9–29.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.3% | 2.7–4.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 2.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 6.4% (2.6–16.9%) n=524 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 2.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 2.4% (0.0–6.3%) n=525 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.7% (1.1–15.2%) n=526 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 78.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 45.7% (23.6–77.5%) n=526 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 8.4% | 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 | 99.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 94.1% (87.2–98.4%) n=522 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 21.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 30.5% (21.2–43.7%) n=522 |
| Homeownership rate | 74.7% | 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 | 4.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.7% (1.9–28.4%) n=527 |
| Single-parent households | 49.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.5% (40.0–68.7%) n=520 |
| Population 65+ | 28.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.4% (12.1–33.8%) n=527 |
| Median age | 48.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.5 yr (34.3–57.2) n=524 |
| Median household income | $206,389 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $110,450 ($68,196–$177,335) n=505 |
| Median home value | $942,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $519,200 ($297,220–$949,670) n=508 |
| Median gross rent | $1,811 | $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 | 87.3 yr ± 2.61 | 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 2.61 years of 87.3, 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