ZIP code
15954
in Seward, PennsylvaniaPopulation 2,279
49.25/ 100
Ranked #17,318 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 46%)
Ranked #973 of 1,748 Pennsylvania ZIPs (bottom 44%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
Some domains have limited local data — read this Score as directional
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.
Grocery access
0.93 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Tree cover
78.6%
in the top 5.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
12.6%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Pharmacy access
0.46 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & 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
6.4 ppb
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
US93rdDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
5.1%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS92ndDefinition & 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
1.4%
in the bottom 11.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS11thDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$43,958
in the bottom 8.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
32.5 mi
in the top 25% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS75thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Working from the partial data available, Seward, Pennsylvania (ZIP 15954) lands in the bottom 46% nationally (17,318th) and the bottom 44% of Pennsylvania (973rd), based on limited data; treat as directional.
On the measures in hand, a few readings come through: grocery sits in the top 0.4% nationally, modeled tree cover stands in the top 5.4% nationally, and pharmacy resides in the top 6.0% nationally. Modeled extreme heat sits at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled arsenic stands in the bottom 11.4% nationally. Against that, modeled transportation noise resides in the top 5.9% nationally, and lead in tap water sits in the top 7.1% nationally. Fiber broadband stands at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Home broadband subscription resides in the bottom 10.9% nationally, and modeled energy burden sits in the top 8.5% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, grocery runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 15748, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Preventive CarePartial
healthier than 80%
15%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 75%
6%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 43%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
6%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 12%
19%
Not placed: Chronic Disease Burden and Risk Behavior — too little of each is measured here to compare reliably. They still count toward the score (together 38% of it); we just will not publish a standing we cannot stand behind.
No data: Mental Health and Disability — not measured in this ZIP, so it is left out of the score entirely rather than estimated.
“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
15748
Pennsylvaniashares a border
Score 52.37
Closest healthier
15905
Pennsylvaniashares a border
Score 55.72
Similar health profile
17985
Pennsylvania99% similar profile
Score 49.49
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 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 14.5% | 12.2–17.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.4% | 66.6–74.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.6% | 58.6–64.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.2% | 72.6–83.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.6% | 34.0–43.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | PA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 21.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.3% (2.1–21.6%) n=1,759 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 1.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.3% (0.0–16.6%) n=1,753 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.0% (1.5–16.1%) n=1,762 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 14.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (8.9–50.4%) n=1,762 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.9% (0.0–9.6%) n=1,755 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.6%) n=1,758 |
| Broadband subscription | 75.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.2% (75.7–97.3%) n=1,758 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 20.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.9% (9.9–35.3%) n=1,758 |
| Homeownership rate | 80.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.1% (57.1–94.5%) n=1,758 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.6% (0.0–3.3%) n=1,758 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.4% (0.0–10.2%) n=1,763 |
| Single-parent households | 63.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.3% (38.5–72.8%) n=1,744 |
| Population 65+ | 28.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 21.1% (12.3–31.4%) n=1,763 |
| Median age | 52.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.2 yr (33.9–55.5) n=1,752 |
| Median household income | $43,958 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $71,250 ($50,880–$112,747) n=1,642 |
| Median home value | $81,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $197,200 ($99,000–$382,120) n=1,649 |
| Median gross rent | $733 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $983 ($701–$1,527) n=1,367 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | PA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 78.6 yr ± 1.54 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 79.2 yr (76.0–82.0) n=1,730 |
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 1.54 years of 78.6, 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