ZIP code
03052
in Litchfield, New HampshirePopulation 8,499
62.64/ 100
Ranked #3,160 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 9.9%)
Ranked #54 of 243 New Hampshire ZIPs (top 22%)
Ranked #10 of 34 Manchester-Nashua, NH ZIPs (top 29%)
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
$162,036
in the top 2.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.6%
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
0.2 mi
in the bottom 4.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST10thUS4thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›Food insecurity
7.3%
in the bottom 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST16thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
0.99%
in the bottom 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
7.0%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
21.1%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
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 ›Housing insecurity
6.9%
in the bottom 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST30thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.5%
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST19thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Litchfield, New Hampshire (ZIP 03052) ranks in the top 9.9% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,160th) and the top 22% of New Hampshire (54th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: household income stands in the top 2.8% nationally, and modeled transportation settles in the bottom 4.4% nationally. Lead in tap water lies at the national minimum, and modeled food insecurity resides in the bottom 4.7% nationally. Poverty lands in the bottom 5.2% nationally, modeled housing insecurity registers in the bottom 6.7% nationally, and modeled utility shutoff sits in the bottom 7.6% nationally. Against that, distance to a Superfund site rests in the bottom 4.5% nationally, outer-floodplain exposure is in the top 5.5% nationally, and modeled arsenic stands in the top 5.9% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, 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. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 03054, just across the boundary.
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 Manchester-Nashua, 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 83%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 74%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 91%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 84%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 76%
8%
Disability
healthier than 91%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 73%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 44%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 64%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 82%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 79%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 70%
8%
Disability
healthier than 82%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
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
2 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 79.7 ± 1.9 years. A median household income of $162,036 predicts 82.0 years — 2.3 years below.
Ranked #3,121 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 18.1; chronic-disease standing 82.7 — 65 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,867 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
03051
New Hampshireshares a border
Score 59.76
Closest healthier
03054
New Hampshireshares a border
Score 63.58
Similar health profile
15237
Pennsylvania100% similar profile
Score 66.00
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 | 26.0% | 23.7–28.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.5% | 27.9–33.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.5% | 8.8–10.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.3–6.2 |
| Depression among adults | 21.7% | 19.2–24.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.4% | 7.3–9.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.7% | 32.0–37.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.8% | 27.6–35.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.3–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.1% | 6.7–9.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.5% | 4.2–6.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.1% | 74.3–79.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.3% | 75.6–80.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.7% | 87.9–91.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 72.8% | 69.3–76.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 72.6% | 69.8–75.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.4% | 76.5–85.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.9% | 14.6–19.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.6% | 7.7–11.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 19.0% | 16.1–22.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.5% | 29.5–37.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.7% | 10.8–14.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.7% | 12.8–16.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.7% | 9.4–12.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.4–12.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 23.4% | 20.5–26.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–6.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.8% | 4.9–6.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.2–11.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.1–3.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.6–3.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.2% | 19.3–25.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 5.8–9.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.5% | 3.4–5.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 5.6–8.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.6% | 3.8–5.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.8% | 28.3–35.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.5% | 3.7–5.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NH median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 1.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 6.7% (2.0–13.3%) n=243 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.1% (2.2–14.5%) n=242 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.5% (1.3–9.8%) n=243 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 46.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 38.8% (21.4–60.3%) n=243 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.8% (0.0–6.0%) n=243 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.5% (0.0–8.4%) n=243 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 92.9% (85.7–99.0%) n=243 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 22.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 27.1% (17.2–36.4%) n=243 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 86.0% (62.6–96.9%) n=243 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–3.1%) n=243 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.1% (0.5–7.1%) n=243 |
| Single-parent households | 46.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 60.9% (46.9–76.5%) n=243 |
| Population 65+ | 14.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 22.1% (15.1–37.1%) n=243 |
| Median age | 43.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 47.1 yr (38.4–58.4) n=243 |
| Median household income | $162,036 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $98,684 ($67,733–$147,723) n=235 |
| Median home value | $485,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $371,500 ($252,560–$570,440) n=237 |
| Median gross rent | $2,138 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,360 ($1,037–$1,893) n=197 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NH median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 79.7 yr ± 0.99 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 81.2 yr (78.0–85.7) n=242 |
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 0.99 years of 79.7, 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