ZIP code
04429
in Holden, MainePopulation 5,008
55.27/ 100
Ranked #9,136 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 28%)
Ranked #91 of 408 Maine ZIPs (top 22%)
Ranked #4 of 45 Bangor, ME ZIPs (top 8.9%)
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.
Civic-institution access
1.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Mammography
81.8%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST83rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
73.7%
in the top 7.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
95.2%
in the top 8.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
16.8%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST61stUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Food insecurity
8.5%
in the bottom 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST20thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
72.8%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST73rdUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›The read
Holden, Maine (ZIP 04429) ranks in the top 28% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,136th) and the top 22% of Maine (91st).
The bright spots in the data define much of the story here: civic stands in the top 2.9% nationally, and modeled mammography sits in the top 4.4% nationally. Modeled tree cover resides in the top 7.4% nationally, and homeownership stands in the top 8.4% nationally. Modeled extreme heat sits at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled food insecurity resides in the bottom 9.8% nationally, colon screening stands in the top 7.9% nationally, and humid heat sits in the bottom 12.5% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the bottom 17% nationally. On the other side, modeled arsenic stands in the top 8.5% nationally.
For context, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 04472, 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 Bangor, ME metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 64%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 92%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Disability
healthier than 71%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 72%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 64%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 46%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 58%
16%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 26%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 67%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 77%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 74%
13%
Disability
healthier than 75%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 45%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 59%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 63%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 58%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 16%
14%
“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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 77.4 ± 1.8 years. A median household income of $97,244 predicts 80.0 years — 2.5 years below.
Ranked #3,484 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
04412
Maineshares a border
Score 46.85
Closest healthier
04472
Maineshares a border
Score 56.09
Similar health profile
48631
Michigan97% similar profile
Score 55.03
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 | 32.2% | 30.0–34.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.2% | 33.7–38.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.4% | 9.7–11.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.7% | 11.7–13.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.2% | 6.4–8.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.6% | 6.4–8.8 |
| Depression among adults | 26.8% | 24.6–29.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.8% | 36.5–41.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.2% | 30.8–37.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 2.9–3.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.2% | 10.5–14.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.7% | 5.4–8.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.3% | 74.0–78.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.0% | 81.1–84.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.0% | 87.5–90.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 72.8% | 69.9–75.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.2% | 64.7–69.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.8% | 78.0–85.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.9% | 14.2–17.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.3% | 11.0–15.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.5% | 18.6–24.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.0% | 28.8–35.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.3% | 15.1–19.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 15.4–18.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.0% | 12.5–15.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.2% | 12.5–16.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.1% | 27.0–33.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 7.0–8.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.1–8.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.1% | 11.4–15.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.7–3.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.3–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.8% | 19.4–24.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.5% | 6.9–10.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.9% | 8.8–13.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.2% | 6.8–9.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.6% | 5.6–7.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.8% | 29.0–34.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 5.2–7.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ME median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.3% (3.2–19.5%) n=416 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 9.8% (3.0–20.9%) n=413 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.2% (0.8–11.7%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 46.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 29.4% (14.9–57.3%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.1% (0.0–8.3%) n=415 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–11.5%) n=416 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.9% (79.7–97.2%) n=416 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 19.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.4% (13.9–35.0%) n=416 |
| Homeownership rate | 95.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 84.7% (68.7–95.5%) n=416 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.8% (0.0–3.4%) n=416 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.1% (0.1–5.9%) n=417 |
| Single-parent households | 55.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 61.5% (48.8–80.6%) n=414 |
| Population 65+ | 16.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 24.6% (16.3–42.1%) n=417 |
| Median age | 45.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 49.0 yr (39.3–60.7) n=413 |
| Median household income | $97,244 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,485 ($50,225–$100,018) n=396 |
| Median home value | $313,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $246,500 ($130,660–$484,830) n=402 |
| Median gross rent | $1,348 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,014 ($618–$1,501) n=320 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ME median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 77.4 yr ± 0.94 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 79.0 yr (76.1–82.5) n=363 |
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 0.94 years of 77.4, 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