Skip to main content
ZipVitals

ZIP code

17009

in Burnham, PennsylvaniaPopulation 1,765

43.06/ 100

Ranked #24,322 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 24%)

Ranked #1,481 of 1,748 Pennsylvania ZIPs (bottom 15%)

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.

Distance to an emergency room

24.2 mi

in the top 3.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST99th
US97th
Definition & source ›

The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.

Full methodology ›

Recreation access

1 per 1,000 residents

in the top 8.1% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST91st
US92nd
Definition & source ›

The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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

0.52 per 1,000 residents

in the top 9.8% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST90th
US90th
Definition & 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 ›

Energy-cost burden

5.0%

in the top 9.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST85th
US91st
Definition & 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 ›

Floodplain exposure

22.4%

in the top 15% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST94th
US85th
Definition & source ›

The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.

Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.

Full methodology ›

The read

With coverage still partial across the sources, Burnham, Pennsylvania (ZIP 17009) lands in the bottom 24% nationally (24,322nd) and the bottom 15% of Pennsylvania (1,481st), based on limited data; treat as directional.

continue reading

Reading what data there is, a few things can be said: recreation rests in the top 8.1% nationally, childcare registers in the top 9.8% nationally, and physicians resides in the top 10.8% nationally. Modeled disaster risk settles in the bottom 13.3% nationally, and walkability is in the top 18% nationally. Working the other way, distance to an emergency room sits in the top 3.4% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden lands in the top 11.6% nationally. Modeled energy burden lies in the top 9.0% nationally, and floodplain exposure stands in the top 15% nationally. Distance to a Superfund site rests in the bottom 17% nationally.

Measured against the nearby ZIPs, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. ZIP 17099, just across the boundary, comes out healthier overall.

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 67%

15%

About typical

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 41%

16%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 57%

6%

Holding it back

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 16%

19%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 34%

6%

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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years18.9%15.4–22.7
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years68.6%63.5–73.3
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults62.6%58.9–66.3
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years76.3%68.5–83.1
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Short sleep duration among adults39.3%32.4–46.5
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)PA median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate8.5%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,3649.3% (2.1–21.6%) n=1,759
Uninsured 18–644.7%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2866.3% (0.0–16.6%) n=1,753
No HS diploma (25+)4.1%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5057.0% (1.5–16.1%) n=1,762
Bachelor's or higher (25+)14.4%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50521.9% (8.9–50.4%) n=1,762
Unemployment rate (16+)1.8%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2743.9% (0.0–9.6%) n=1,755
Households without a vehicle3.6%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3224.8% (0.0–15.6%) n=1,758
Broadband subscription90.8%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32288.2% (75.7–97.3%) n=1,758
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)16.5%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32221.9% (9.9–35.3%) n=1,758
Homeownership rate75.6%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32280.1% (57.1–94.5%) n=1,758
Crowded housing (>1 per room)1.2%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3220.6% (0.0–3.3%) n=1,758
Foreign-born population0.6%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5531.4% (0.0–10.2%) n=1,763
Single-parent households54.5%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08756.3% (38.5–72.8%) n=1,744
Population 65+15.7%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55321.1% (12.3–31.4%) n=1,763
Median age38.3 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29244.2 yr (33.9–55.5) n=1,752
Median household income$73,088$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$71,250 ($50,880–$112,747) n=1,642
Median home value$145,700$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$197,200 ($99,000–$382,120) n=1,649
Median gross rent$785$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$983 ($701–$1,527) n=1,367
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)PA median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth78.0 yr ± 2.1278.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30879.2 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 2.12 years of 78.0, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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