ZIP code
06517
in Hamden, ConnecticutPopulation 14,221
61.23/ 100
Ranked #3,987 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 12.5%)
Ranked #154 of 277 Connecticut ZIPs (bottom 44%)
Ranked #21 of 41 New Haven-Milford, CT ZIPs (bottom 49%)
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
14 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were 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 ›Elder-services access
0.27 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Colon-cancer screening
75%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST66thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Mammography
82.3%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.67 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, ZIP 06517, one of several in Hamden, Connecticut ranks in the top 12.5% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,987th) and the bottom 44% of Connecticut (154th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: modeled expected annual loss settles at the national minimum, and transit lies in the top 0.7% nationally. Lead in tap water resides at the national minimum, and elder services lands in the top 5.3% nationally. Modeled colon screening registers in the top 3.0% nationally, modeled mammography sits in the top 3.4% nationally, and childcare rests in the top 5.7% nationally. Against that, PFOA in drinking water is at the national maximum, PFOS in drinking water stands at the national maximum, and PFAS in drinking water settles at the national maximum.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, 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 nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 06473, 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 New Haven-Milford, 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 66%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 62%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 91%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 83%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 32%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 66%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 84%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 73%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 60%
11%
Disability
healthier than 44%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 32%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 36%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 4%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 75%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 67%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 61%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 44%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 58%
14%
Disability
healthier than 47%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 28%
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.
Nearby
06473
Connecticutshares a border
Score 63.14
Closest healthier
06518
Connecticutshares a border
Score 63.22
Similar health profile
51561
Iowa98% similar profile
Score 59.18
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 | 27.0% | 24.9–29.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.9% | 33.2–38.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.5% | 8.8–10.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.6% | 9.6–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.7–7.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–6.1 |
| Depression among adults | 18.5% | 16.4–20.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.8% | 9.7–12.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.2% | 37.3–43.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.5% | 28.5–36.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.8% | 9.1–12.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.5% | 6.5–8.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.7% | 76.3–80.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.9% | 80.6–84.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.8% | 90.7–92.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 75.0% | 72.2–78.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 72.3% | 69.9–74.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 82.3% | 78.2–86.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.2% | 11.4–15.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.1% | 7.9–10.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.7% | 22.0–27.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.1% | 32.4–40.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.6% | 13.0–16.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.9% | 12.5–15.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.8% | 10.6–13.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.3% | 9.3–11.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.6% | 22.3–27.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.6–7.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.8% | 10.5–13.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.4% | 4.0–4.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.2% | 21.5–27.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.3% | 10.7–14.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.5–11.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.5% | 10.0–13.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 6.2–8.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.5% | 29.2–35.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 6.9–9.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 5.8% (2.3–20.8%) n=278 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 4.5% (1.2–12.9%) n=277 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.6% (1.1–14.3%) n=278 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 55.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 43.6% (19.2–70.7%) n=278 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (1.6–9.1%) n=277 |
| Households without a vehicle | 11.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–13.7%) n=278 |
| Broadband subscription | 86.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.7% (86.9–98.8%) n=278 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 29.3% (18.2–44.9%) n=278 |
| Homeownership rate | 66.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.1% (41.3–93.1%) n=278 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–3.8%) n=278 |
| Foreign-born population | 13.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 9.3% (2.1–22.3%) n=278 |
| Single-parent households | 46.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.1% (36.0–68.7%) n=277 |
| Population 65+ | 23.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.8% (13.4–30.2%) n=278 |
| Median age | 44.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.1 yr (34.7–53.2) n=278 |
| Median household income | $104,550 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $107,247 ($63,371–$163,278) n=270 |
| Median home value | $339,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $365,900 ($239,080–$622,060) n=268 |
| Median gross rent | $1,378 | $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 | 80.0 yr ± 0.63 | 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 0.63 years of 80.0, 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