ZIP code
08887
in Three Bridges, New JerseyPopulation 1,380
61.70/ 100
Ranked #3,693 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 11.6%)
Ranked #338 of 583 New Jersey ZIPs (bottom 42%)
Ranked #568 of 853 New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 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.
Mental-health provider access
0.96 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Pharmacy access
0.96 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
5.3%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Outpatient-care access
0.96 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Child-care access
0.96 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the bottom 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS8thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
10.2%
in the top 8.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the bottom 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS10thDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
1.7%
in the bottom 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST39thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
9.6%
in the top 18% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS82ndDefinition & 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 ›The read
By its overall health score, Three Bridges, New Jersey (ZIP 08887) lands in the top 11.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,693rd) and the bottom 42% of New Jersey (338th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: mental-health providers rests in the top 0.3% nationally, and pharmacy is in the top 1.2% nationally. Outpatient stands in the top 2.1% nationally, and childcare settles in the top 2.6% nationally. Modeled disaster risk lies in the bottom 7.8% nationally, obesity resides in the bottom 11.0% nationally, and expected annual loss lands in the bottom 9.6% nationally. Modeled energy burden registers in the bottom 8.1% nationally. Against that, modeled loud transportation noise sits in the top 1.2% nationally, and transportation noise rests in the top 8.2% nationally.
Weighed against the ZIPs nearby, mental-health providers runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To translate a couple of terms, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 08822, 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 York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 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 81%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 91%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 72%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 49%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 36%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 34%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 22%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 22%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 67%
16%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 30%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 22%
8%
Disability
healthier than 38%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 16%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 12%
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 ›
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 13.5; chronic-disease standing 81.4 — 68 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,208 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
08822
New Jerseyshares a border
Score 68.25
Closest healthier
08853
New Jerseyshares a border
Score 72.73
Similar health profile
68124
Nebraska100% similar profile
Score 64.64
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 | 24.6% | 21.5–27.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.1% | 28.2–35.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–10.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.1% | 8.0–10.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.2–7.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.7% | 4.5–7.1 |
| Depression among adults | 17.6% | 14.7–20.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.9% | 8.4–11.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.1% | 35.1–43.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.8% | 22.3–33.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.6–3.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.4% | 8.3–13.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.7% | 5.9–9.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.4% | 74.4–80.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.7% | 74.3–80.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.7% | 87.9–91.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.8% | 64.3–73.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.1% | 64.9–71.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.1% | 68.6–83.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.6% | 14.0–19.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.9% | 8.4–13.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.5% | 17.3–26.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.3% | 27.8–39.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.9% | 12.9–19.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.7% | 12.6–16.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.3% | 10.4–14.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.2–13.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.8% | 20.6–29.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.3–7.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.3–7.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.1% | 8.9–13.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.6–3.7 |
| 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 | 21.1% | 17.7–24.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.3% | 7.9–12.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 4.4–7.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 6.9–10.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 4.8–7.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.2% | 27.6–36.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.3% | 4.4–6.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NJ median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 5.8% (1.8–16.1%) n=588 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 16.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.6% (1.2–16.1%) n=585 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 19.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.3% (1.4–15.4%) n=589 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 39.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 44.2% (20.0–72.5%) n=589 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 5.3% (2.5–9.7%) n=583 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.8–17.6%) n=585 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 94.4% (88.0–98.5%) n=585 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 31.7% (22.1–46.5%) n=585 |
| Homeownership rate | 58.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.5% (39.3–94.9%) n=585 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–7.4%) n=585 |
| Foreign-born population | 14.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 13.7% (3.3–39.5%) n=590 |
| Single-parent households | 37.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 49.6% (35.2–64.9%) n=581 |
| Population 65+ | 14.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.8% (11.7–27.5%) n=590 |
| Median age | 40.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.0 yr (35.6–51.8) n=582 |
| Median household income | $109,333 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $111,711 ($68,311–$188,075) n=565 |
| Median home value | $283,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $449,450 ($250,890–$845,440) n=564 |
| Median gross rent | $1,806 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,781 ($1,267–$2,530) n=516 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NJ median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 80.4 yr ± 1.16 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.4 yr (76.6–83.7) n=571 |
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 1.16 years of 80.4, 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