ZIP code
13440
in Rome, New YorkPopulation 41,555
48.55/ 100
Ranked #18,243 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 43%)
Ranked #1,529 of 1,730 New York ZIPs (bottom 11.7%)
Ranked #59 of 64 Utica-Rome, NY ZIPs (bottom 7.9%)
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.
Transit access
7.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
0.6 mi
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST7thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
366 units
in the top 6.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
14.4%
in the top 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 14.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS86thDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 16% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS84thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 13440, one of several in Rome, New York, by its composite score, sits in the bottom 43% nationally (18,243rd) and the bottom 11.7% of New York (1,529th).
The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: transit stands in the top 2.2% nationally. Distance to an emergency room registers at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Subsidized affordable housing settles in the top 6.5% nationally. Modeled extreme heat sits at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Distance to a nursing home lies at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Pulling the other way, distance to a Superfund site rests in the bottom 5.7% nationally, households without a vehicle resides in the top 7.8% nationally, and modeled pfas is in the top 10.5% nationally. Lead in tap water lands in the top 11.7% nationally, and modeled expected annual loss stands in the top 14.1% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. 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. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 13054, 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 Utica-Rome, NY metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 42%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 54%
8%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 26%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 17%
11%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 16%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 22%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 26%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 11%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Disability
healthier than 13%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 34%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 73%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 18%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 18%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 15%
8%
Disability
healthier than 9%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 24%
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.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 77.9 ± 1.1 years. The 41 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 80.4 years — 2.4 years below them.
Ranked #1,865 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
13054
New Yorkshares a border
Score 56.60
Closest healthier
13303
New Yorkshares a border
Score 53.26
Similar health profile
18211
Pennsylvania98% similar profile
Score 46.87
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 | 30.3% | 27.2–33.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.6% | 33.9–41.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.4% | 8.5–10.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.4% | 10.1–12.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.6% | 6.9–8.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.9 |
| Depression among adults | 21.2% | 18.2–24.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.1% | 10.6–13.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.3% | 34.3–42.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.9% | 31.8–44.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.0% | 3.7–4.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.5% | 11.3–16.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.1% | 7.0–9.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.6% | 74.7–80.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.1% | 76.9–83.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.5% | 86.0–88.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.6% | 64.4–72.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 59.3% | 56.1–62.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.5% | 72.2–84.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.2% | 14.3–20.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.6% | 14.6–18.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.6% | 25.8–33.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.7% | 34.7–45.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.6% | 18.3–23.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.8–19.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.1% | 13.5–16.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.5% | 13.0–16.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.2% | 27.6–35.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.4–8.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.7–10.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.6% | 13.8–17.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.7% | 20.6–27.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.9% | 15.9–20.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 18.3% | 16.5–20.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.8% | 13.0–16.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.7% | 28.3–37.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NY median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.5% (2.5–22.6%) n=1,734 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.0% (0.0–13.1%) n=1,734 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.1% (1.2–17.5%) n=1,743 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 22.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.8% (13.9–62.1%) n=1,743 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.4% (0.0–9.7%) n=1,730 |
| Households without a vehicle | 14.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 5.7% (0.0–28.9%) n=1,730 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 91.5% (81.1–98.3%) n=1,730 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 27.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 27.2% (14.2–45.5%) n=1,730 |
| Homeownership rate | 64.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.2% (40.9–94.8%) n=1,730 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.0% (0.0–6.6%) n=1,730 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.8% (0.0–28.7%) n=1,746 |
| Single-parent households | 52.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 54.0% (36.7–74.5%) n=1,716 |
| Population 65+ | 20.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.0% (12.0–33.2%) n=1,746 |
| Median age | 42.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.5 yr (34.6–56.1) n=1,733 |
| Median household income | $68,207 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $81,837 ($55,470–$145,610) n=1,626 |
| Median home value | $169,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $247,700 ($121,180–$801,380) n=1,629 |
| Median gross rent | $906 | $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 | 77.9 yr ± 0.56 | 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 0.56 years of 77.9, 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