ZIP code
10579
in Putnam Valley, New YorkPopulation 9,019
66.61/ 100
Ranked #1,402 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 4.4%)
Ranked #204 of 1,730 New York ZIPs (top 11.8%)
Ranked #355 of 853 New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ ZIPs (top 42%)
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.
Median household income
$132,500
in the top 6.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST86thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
9.5%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
77%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Obesity
26.6%
in the bottom 8.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
12.3%
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
5.0%
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST11thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
60.2%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
5.0%
in the bottom 6.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST15thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Park land
17%
in the top 8.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
5.4%
in the bottom 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, Putnam Valley, New York (ZIP 10579) lands in the top 4.4% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,402nd) and the top 11.8% of New York (204th).
The measures that set this area apart are worth putting up front: household income sits in the top 6.5% nationally, and modeled cognitive disability is in the bottom 3.3% nationally. Modeled tree cover settles in the top 6.1% nationally, and obesity resides in the bottom 8.4% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health registers in the bottom 4.0% nationally, transportation rests in the bottom 7.6% nationally, and hearing disability stands in the bottom 6.4% nationally. Park land lies in the top 8.0% nationally, and modeled independent living disability lands in the bottom 4.8% nationally. Set against that, modeled pfas sits in the top 7.9% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: 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. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 10516, just across the boundary, ranks better overall. The ZIP 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 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 86%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 81%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 94%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 79%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 93%
8%
Disability
healthier than 95%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 38%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 79%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 78%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 74%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 77%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 72%
8%
Disability
healthier than 89%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 59%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 29%
14%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Disability
healthier than 70%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 48%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 49%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 55%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 56%
11%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 34%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 23%
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
10512
New Yorkshares a border
Score 63.52
Closest healthier
10516
New Yorkshares a border
Score 67.65
Similar health profile
10973
New York100% similar profile
Score 63.61
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 | 25.0% | 22.1–28.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.0% | 25.5–33.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.4% | 8.4–10.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.8% | 4.1–5.7 |
| Depression among adults | 18.1% | 15.4–21.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.7% | 7.5–10.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.4% | 33.2–41.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 26.6% | 20.9–33.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.6% | 2.3–2.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.2% | 6.6–10.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 4.7% | 3.8–5.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.4% | 74.2–80.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.1% | 77.9–84.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.7% | 90.4–92.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.6% | 66.0–74.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 72.9% | 69.9–75.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.0% | 73.5–85.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.1% | 15.0–21.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.0% | 7.4–10.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 18.9% | 15.6–23.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.8% | 29.0–40.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.3% | 10.5–14.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.5% | 11.9–15.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.8% | 9.4–12.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.2–11.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 20.7% | 17.6–24.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.7–6.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.0–11.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.2–2.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.7% | 17.6–24.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 6.9–10.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 5.0–7.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 7.0–9.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.3–5.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.2% | 25.6–35.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 4.0–5.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NY median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.5% (2.5–22.6%) n=1,734 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.0% (0.0–13.1%) n=1,734 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.1% (1.2–17.5%) n=1,743 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 49.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.8% (13.9–62.1%) n=1,743 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (0.0–9.7%) n=1,730 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 5.7% (0.0–28.9%) n=1,730 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 91.5% (81.1–98.3%) n=1,730 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 27.2% (14.2–45.5%) n=1,730 |
| Homeownership rate | 90.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.2% (40.9–94.8%) n=1,730 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.0% (0.0–6.6%) n=1,730 |
| Foreign-born population | 13.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.8% (0.0–28.7%) n=1,746 |
| Single-parent households | 42.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 54.0% (36.7–74.5%) n=1,716 |
| Population 65+ | 19.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.0% (12.0–33.2%) n=1,746 |
| Median age | 45.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.5 yr (34.6–56.1) n=1,733 |
| Median household income | $132,500 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $81,837 ($55,470–$145,610) n=1,626 |
| Median home value | $548,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $247,700 ($121,180–$801,380) n=1,629 |
| Median gross rent | $2,638 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,162 ($782–$2,359) n=1,367 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NY median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 83.4 yr ± 1.39 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.9 yr (78.0–84.5) n=1,692 |
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 1.39 years of 83.4, 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