ZIP code
06042
in Manchester, ConnecticutPopulation 23,822
60.06/ 100
Ranked #4,817 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 15%)
Ranked #173 of 277 Connecticut ZIPs (bottom 38%)
Ranked #64 of 95 Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown, CT ZIPs (bottom 33%)
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.
Expected annual disaster loss
$0
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Transit access
6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST85thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›PFOA in drinking water
95.8%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOA, one of the man-made “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
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 ›PFOS in drinking water
95.8%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
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 ›Mammography
82%
in the top 4.0% 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
5.1%
in the bottom 7.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
4.9%
in the bottom 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
10.0%
in the bottom 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST34thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
72.7%
in the top 8.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST38thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 06042, one of several in Manchester, Connecticut, by its composite score, sits in the top 15% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,817th) and the bottom 38% of Connecticut (173rd).
The data opens on a genuinely even set of readings: modeled expected annual loss is at the national minimum, and transit lands in the top 3.6% nationally. Modeled mammography stands in the top 4.0% nationally, and hearing disability registers in the bottom 7.2% nationally. Modeled extreme heat settles at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled coronary heart disease sits in the bottom 8.7% nationally, and mobility disability lies in the bottom 9.1% nationally. On the other side, PFOA in drinking water rests in the top 6.1% nationally, PFOS in drinking water resides in the top 6.3% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden is in the top 7.5% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. PFOA in drinking water is one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. PFOS in drinking water is a common one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 06074, 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 Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown, CT 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%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 68%
11%
Disability
healthier than 87%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 75%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 44%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 59%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 77%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 68%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 49%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 23%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 36%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 34%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 35%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 90%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 79%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 44%
14%
Disability
healthier than 40%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 17%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 23%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 23%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
“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 24.2; chronic-disease standing 83.3 — 59 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,320 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
06040
Connecticutshares a border
Score 55.82
Closest healthier
06074
Connecticutshares a border
Score 65.64
Similar health profile
18055
Pennsylvania99% similar profile
Score 59.60
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 | 22.5% | 20.6–24.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.9% | 27.4–32.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.2% | 6.6–7.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.8% | 10.6–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.6 |
| Depression among adults | 21.8% | 19.5–24.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.0% | 34.2–39.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.6% | 26.6–34.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.5% | 6.2–9.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.4% | 7.3–9.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.2% | 71.5–76.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.2% | 78.7–83.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.4% | 88.0–90.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 72.7% | 69.5–75.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 71.7% | 69.3–74.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 82.0% | 77.7–85.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.9% | 13.8–17.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.7% | 9.4–12.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.1% | 21.4–26.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.2% | 33.5–41.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.0% | 13.4–16.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.7% | 15.2–18.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.4% | 10.2–12.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.4% | 11.2–13.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.0% | 21.6–26.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.0% | 24.1–29.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.2% | 13.4–17.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.3–12.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 10.7–13.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 7.0–9.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.4% | 31.0–37.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 7.1–9.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 5.8% (2.3–20.8%) n=278 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 4.5% (1.2–12.9%) n=277 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.6% (1.1–14.3%) n=278 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 44.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 43.6% (19.2–70.7%) n=278 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (1.6–9.1%) n=277 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–13.7%) n=278 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.7% (86.9–98.8%) n=278 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 29.3% (18.2–44.9%) n=278 |
| Homeownership rate | 60.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.1% (41.3–93.1%) n=278 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–3.8%) n=278 |
| Foreign-born population | 19.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 9.3% (2.1–22.3%) n=278 |
| Single-parent households | 49.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.1% (36.0–68.7%) n=277 |
| Population 65+ | 15.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.8% (13.4–30.2%) n=278 |
| Median age | 37.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.1 yr (34.7–53.2) n=278 |
| Median household income | $91,892 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $107,247 ($63,371–$163,278) n=270 |
| Median home value | $237,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $365,900 ($239,080–$622,060) n=268 |
| Median gross rent | $1,736 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,450 ($1,128–$2,175) n=247 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 80.6 yr ± 0.74 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 81.2 yr (77.7–83.5) n=266 |
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 0.74 years of 80.6, 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