ZIP code
11375
in Forest Hills, New YorkPopulation 76,839
68.77/ 100
Ranked #813 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 2.6%)
Ranked #123 of 1,730 New York ZIPs (top 7.2%)
Ranked #247 of 853 New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ ZIPs (top 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.
Obesity
20%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
28.6%
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Households without a vehicle
42.7%
in the top 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Walkability
230 intersections/sq mi
in the top 1.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
4.0%
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
3.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ 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 ›Pharmacy access
0.63 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Lead in tap water
10 ppb
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
US97thDefinition & 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 ›Cognitive disability
9.0%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Forest Hills, New York (ZIP 11375) ranks in the top 2.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (813th) and the top 7.2% of New York (123rd).
Strengths and concerns sit side by side across the measures here: modeled obesity lands in the bottom 1.0% nationally, and walkability registers in the top 1.8% nationally. Dental providers sits in the top 1.9% nationally, and physicians rests in the top 2.8% nationally. Pharmacy is in the top 3.1% nationally, and modeled cognitive disability stands in the bottom 2.1% nationally. On the other hand, modeled transportation noise settles in the top 1.3% nationally, households without a vehicle lies in the top 1.4% nationally, and modeled loud transportation noise resides in the top 2.2% nationally. Lead in tap water lands in the top 3.2% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. 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. This ZIP stands out as the strongest overall among its immediate neighbors.
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 92%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 93%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.7%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 36%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 82%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 72%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 97%
8%
Disability
healthier than 82%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 83%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 71%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 77%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 79%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 55%
16%
Disability
healthier than 58%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
3 of our published findings list 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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 84.0 ± 1.0 years. A median household income of $105,904 predicts 80.3 years — 3.7 years above.
Ranked #252 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 84.0 ± 1.0 years. The 46 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 81.5 years — 2.5 years above them.
Ranked #1,153 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 13.5; chronic-disease standing 91.6 (top 10%) — 78 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,055 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
11367
New Yorkshares a border
Score 62.10
Similar health profile
07648
New Jersey99% similar profile
Score 71.78
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 | 20.3% | 18.2–22.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.0% | 27.5–32.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.4% | 7.4–9.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–5.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–4.9 |
| Depression among adults | 14.2% | 12.4–16.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.9% | 9.6–12.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.2% | 38.3–44.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 20.0% | 17.3–22.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.7% | 6.7–8.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.0% | 5.2–6.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.5% | 75.8–81.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.9% | 79.6–84.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.8% | 90.7–92.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.0% | 66.6–71.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.2% | 67.2–71.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.3% | 77.9–84.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.5% | 12.6–16.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.0% | 6.9–9.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.0% | 20.6–25.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.8% | 30.6–34.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.4% | 12.8–16.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 11.7% | 10.5–13.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.0% | 8.0–10.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 23.3% | 20.9–25.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.6% | 4.9–6.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.7% | 2.4–2.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.1% | 23.6–28.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.4% | 11.0–13.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 7.0–9.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 5.4–6.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.3% | 31.2–37.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NY median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.5% (2.5–22.6%) n=1,734 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.0% (0.0–13.1%) n=1,734 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.1% (1.2–17.5%) n=1,743 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 61.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.8% (13.9–62.1%) n=1,743 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (0.0–9.7%) n=1,730 |
| Households without a vehicle | 42.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 5.7% (0.0–28.9%) n=1,730 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 91.5% (81.1–98.3%) n=1,730 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 27.2% (14.2–45.5%) n=1,730 |
| Homeownership rate | 50.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.2% (40.9–94.8%) n=1,730 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.0% (0.0–6.6%) n=1,730 |
| Foreign-born population | 43.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.8% (0.0–28.7%) n=1,746 |
| Single-parent households | 51.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 54.0% (36.7–74.5%) n=1,716 |
| Population 65+ | 20.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.0% (12.0–33.2%) n=1,746 |
| Median age | 44.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.5 yr (34.6–56.1) n=1,733 |
| Median household income | $105,904 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $81,837 ($55,470–$145,610) n=1,626 |
| Median home value | $552,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $247,700 ($121,180–$801,380) n=1,629 |
| Median gross rent | $2,175 | $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 | 84.0 yr ± 0.52 | 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 0.52 years of 84.0, 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