ZIP code
06088
in East Windsor, ConnecticutPopulation 4,254
59.49/ 100
Ranked #5,214 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 16%)
Ranked #180 of 277 Connecticut ZIPs (bottom 35%)
Ranked #67 of 95 Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown, CT ZIPs (bottom 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.
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 ›Colon-cancer screening
77%
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Mammography
83.1%
in the top 2.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
65.2%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST46thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Dental provider access
1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST86thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices located 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 ›Elder-services access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Grocery access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Pharmacy access
0.41 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies located 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 ›Recreation access
1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST76thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Home broadband subscription
97.3%
in the top 9.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST81stUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›The read
By its overall health score, East Windsor, Connecticut (ZIP 06088) lands in the top 16% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,214th) and the bottom 35% of Connecticut (180th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: modeled expected annual loss sits at the national minimum, and colon screening rests in the top 1.1% nationally. Modeled mammography is in the top 2.3% nationally, and dental providers stands in the top 6.5% nationally. Elder services settles in the top 7.0% nationally, grocery lies in the top 7.1% nationally, and pharmacy resides in the top 7.9% nationally. Recreation lands in the top 8.6% nationally, and home broadband subscription registers in the top 9.3% nationally. Against that, modeled pfas sits in the top 6.0% nationally.
Weighed against the ZIPs nearby, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To translate a couple of terms, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. 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. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 06016, just across the boundary. On a broader view, the area 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 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 64%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 63%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 77%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 73%
8%
Disability
healthier than 84%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 77%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 15%
14%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 72%
13%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 44%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Disability
healthier than 42%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 54%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 26%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 38%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 20%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 61%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 56%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 53%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 25%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 27%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 38%
11%
Disability
healthier than 32%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
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
06016
Connecticutshares a border
Score 59.63
Closest healthier
06074
Connecticutshares a border
Score 65.64
Similar health profile
13088
New York99% similar profile
Score 57.24
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 | 27.7% | 25.3–30.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.0% | 31.2–36.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.0% | 9.1–11.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.4–12.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.5–7.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.0% | 4.8–7.2 |
| Depression among adults | 21.3% | 18.9–23.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.8% | 9.4–12.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.6% | 38.7–44.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 29.4% | 25.4–33.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 2.9–3.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.5% | 8.7–12.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.1% | 5.7–8.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.6% | 76.2–81.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.9% | 80.6–85.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.3% | 89.9–92.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 77.0% | 74.1–79.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 74.2% | 71.8–76.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 83.1% | 78.9–86.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.2% | 13.2–17.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.7% | 8.5–13.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.9% | 20.1–27.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.1% | 31.5–39.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.8% | 12.3–17.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.6–17.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.2% | 10.5–13.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.5% | 9.9–13.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 25.5% | 22.1–29.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.3–7.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.4% | 9.5–13.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.5–3.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.3–4.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.7% | 22.7–29.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 9.5–14.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.1–9.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 7.8–10.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.3–7.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.6% | 29.3–36.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 5.0–7.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 5.8% (2.3–20.8%) n=278 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 4.5% (1.2–12.9%) n=277 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.6% (1.1–14.3%) n=278 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 32.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 43.6% (19.2–70.7%) n=278 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (1.6–9.1%) n=277 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–13.7%) n=278 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.7% (86.9–98.8%) n=278 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 36.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 29.3% (18.2–44.9%) n=278 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.1% (41.3–93.1%) n=278 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–3.8%) n=278 |
| Foreign-born population | 9.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 9.3% (2.1–22.3%) n=278 |
| Single-parent households | 65.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.1% (36.0–68.7%) n=277 |
| Population 65+ | 24.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.8% (13.4–30.2%) n=278 |
| Median age | 48.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.1 yr (34.7–53.2) n=278 |
| Median household income | $79,375 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $107,247 ($63,371–$163,278) n=270 |
| Median home value | $193,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $365,900 ($239,080–$622,060) n=268 |
| Median gross rent | $1,386 | $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 | 77.8 yr ± 1.34 | 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 1.34 years of 77.8, 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