Skip to main content
ZipVitals

ZIP code

06475

in Old Saybrook, ConnecticutPopulation 10,575

66.60/ 100

Ranked #1,403 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 4.4%)

Ranked #57 of 277 Connecticut ZIPs (top 21%)

Ranked #16 of 95 Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown, CT ZIPs (top 17%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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

ST1st
US1st
Definition & 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 ›

Loneliness

25.6%

in the bottom 0.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST1st
US1st
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.

Full methodology ›

Dental provider access

1.9 per 1,000 residents

in the top 1.4% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST97th
US99th
Definition & 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 ›

Transit access

9.1 per 1,000 residents

in the top 1.5% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST95th
US99th
Definition & 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 ›

Food insecurity

6.1%

in the bottom 1.6% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST7th
US2nd
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.

Full methodology ›

Housing insecurity

5.8%

in the bottom 2.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST8th
US2nd
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.

Full methodology ›

Grocery access

0.38 per 1,000 residents

in the top 2.6% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST97th
US97th
Definition & 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 ›

Lack of transportation

4.3%

in the bottom 2.6% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST12th
US3rd
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.

Full methodology ›

Colon-cancer screening

76.9%

in the top 1.2% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST89th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.

Full methodology ›

PFAS in drinking water

74.8%

in the top 3.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST67th
US97th
Definition & 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

Old Saybrook, Connecticut (ZIP 06475), on the composite measure, lands in the top 4.4% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,403rd) and the top 21% of Connecticut (57th).

continue reading

Where the data leans one way, another reading answers it: modeled expected annual loss resides at the national minimum, modeled loneliness lies in the bottom 0.8% nationally, and dental providers settles in the top 1.4% nationally. Transit stands in the top 1.5% nationally, modeled food insecurity is in the bottom 1.6% nationally, and modeled housing insecurity rests in the bottom 2.1% nationally. Grocery sits in the top 2.6% nationally, and modeled transportation registers in the bottom 2.6% nationally. Modeled colon screening lands in the top 1.2% nationally. On the other hand, modeled pfas resides in the top 3.1% nationally.

Set against the neighboring ZIPs, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, 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. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 06371, just across the boundary. Across the board, 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.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 64%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 95%

16%

Preventive Care

in the top 0.7%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 97%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 91%

8%

Disability

healthier than 91%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 69%

5%

About typical

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 53%

14%

Holding it back

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 22%

5%

Lifting this score

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 98%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 80%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 94%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 98%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 85%

8%

Disability

healthier than 65%

7%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 27%

21%

Climate / Disaster Risk

in the bottom 0.6%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 39%

5%

Lifting this score

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 96%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 88%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 91%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 99%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 97%

8%

Disability

healthier than 62%

7%

About typical

Healthcare Access

healthier than 45%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 26%

21%

Climate / Disaster Risk

in the bottom 0.00%

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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults31.6%28.8–34.7
High blood pressure among adults36.3%33.1–39.7
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults12.6%11.5–13.7
Current asthma among adults10.1%9.0–11.4
Coronary heart disease among adults6.9%6.1–7.8
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults5.6%4.8–6.5
Depression among adults20.8%18.2–23.7
Diagnosed diabetes among adults9.8%8.5–11.3
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened42.6%39.2–46.1
Obesity among adults26.8%22.7–31.5
Stroke among adults3.4%3.0–3.8
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years5.6%4.5–6.9
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years4.8%3.9–5.8
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure81.4%78.8–83.9
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults85.4%83.2–87.4
Cholesterol screening among adults93.5%92.5–94.4
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years76.9%73.6–80.3
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults79.7%77.5–82.1
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years80.3%75.4–85.1
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults14.3%12.2–16.5
Current cigarette smoking among adults7.8%6.4–9.3
No leisure-time physical activity among adults19.2%16.2–22.4
Short sleep duration among adults28.4%24.7–32.7
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults12.1%10.3–14.1
Frequent mental distress among adults12.2%10.8–13.7
Frequent physical distress among adults11.3%9.9–12.8
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults8.9%7.8–10.2
Any disability among adults21.6%18.7–24.6
Hearing disability among adults7.2%6.3–8.1
Independent living disability among adults5.5%4.8–6.4
Mobility disability among adults10.2%8.7–11.9
Self-care disability among adults2.7%2.4–3.1
Vision disability among adults3.4%3.0–3.9
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults18.8%16.2–21.6
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults6.1%5.0–7.4
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults4.8%3.8–5.9
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults5.8%4.8–6.9
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults4.3%3.7–4.9
Loneliness among adults25.6%22.4–29.1
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults4.0%3.4–4.7
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)CT median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate5.0%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,3645.8% (2.3–20.8%) n=278
Uninsured 18–6411.0%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2864.5% (1.2–12.9%) n=277
No HS diploma (25+)3.8%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5054.6% (1.1–14.3%) n=278
Bachelor's or higher (25+)57.8%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50543.6% (19.2–70.7%) n=278
Unemployment rate (16+)2.9%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2744.4% (1.6–9.1%) n=277
Households without a vehicle3.2%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3224.1% (0.0–13.7%) n=278
Broadband subscription93.0%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32293.7% (86.9–98.8%) n=278
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)25.4%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32229.3% (18.2–44.9%) n=278
Homeownership rate85.3%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32280.1% (41.3–93.1%) n=278
Crowded housing (>1 per room)0.0%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3220.7% (0.0–3.8%) n=278
Foreign-born population6.7%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5539.3% (2.1–22.3%) n=278
Single-parent households68.8%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08751.1% (36.0–68.7%) n=277
Population 65+30.8%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55319.8% (13.4–30.2%) n=278
Median age57.4 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29244.1 yr (34.7–53.2) n=278
Median household income$114,333$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$107,247 ($63,371–$163,278) n=270
Median home value$538,200$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$365,900 ($239,080–$622,060) n=268
Median gross rent$1,846$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$1,450 ($1,128–$2,175) n=247
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)CT median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth80.2 yr ± 0.8078.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30881.2 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 0.80 years of 80.2, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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