ZIP code
18249
in Sugarloaf, PennsylvaniaPopulation 4,191
58.56/ 100
Ranked #5,938 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 19%)
Ranked #266 of 1,748 Pennsylvania ZIPs (top 15%)
Ranked #9 of 73 Scranton--Wilkes-Barre, PA ZIPs (top 12.4%)
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
0.24 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Pharmacy access
0.48 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
2.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3.1 pCi/L
in the top 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
0.96 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
1.1 mi
in the bottom 7.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Poverty rate
2.9%
in the bottom 9.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST13thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
10.0%
in the top 17% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS83rdDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
20 per million
in the bottom 25% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS25thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›The read
Given the gaps in coverage here, Sugarloaf, Pennsylvania (ZIP 18249) lands in the top 19% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,938th) and the top 15% of Pennsylvania (266th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
On the partial data in hand, the profile shows what it can: grocery sits in the top 5.3% nationally, pharmacy settles in the top 5.5% nationally, and physicians registers in the top 6.3% nationally. Dental providers stands in the top 7.4% nationally, and poverty lands in the bottom 9.4% nationally. Modeled extreme heat is at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Childcare resides in the top 11.5% nationally, and modeled tree cover rests in the top 13.0% nationally. Set against that, modeled radon lies in the top 9.6% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site sits in the bottom 7.4% nationally.
Defined in plain terms, radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 18219, 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 93%
15%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 83%
6%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 64%
6%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 57%
19%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
16%
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
17815
Pennsylvaniashares a border
Score 49.43
Closest healthier
18219
Pennsylvaniashares a border
Score 60.52
Similar health profile
02136
Massachusetts99% similar profile
Score 57.18
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 | 10.3% | 8.2–12.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.0% | 66.3–75.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.6% | 67.2–73.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.7% | 71.7–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.0% | 30.2–42.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | PA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 2.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.3% (2.1–21.6%) n=1,759 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.3% (0.0–16.6%) n=1,753 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.0% (1.5–16.1%) n=1,762 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 37.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (8.9–50.4%) n=1,762 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.9% (0.0–9.6%) n=1,755 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.6%) n=1,758 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.2% (75.7–97.3%) n=1,758 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 23.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.9% (9.9–35.3%) n=1,758 |
| Homeownership rate | 85.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.1% (57.1–94.5%) n=1,758 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.6% (0.0–3.3%) n=1,758 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.4% (0.0–10.2%) n=1,763 |
| Single-parent households | 67.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.3% (38.5–72.8%) n=1,744 |
| Population 65+ | 26.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 21.1% (12.3–31.4%) n=1,763 |
| Median age | 49.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.2 yr (33.9–55.5) n=1,752 |
| Median household income | $97,593 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $71,250 ($50,880–$112,747) n=1,642 |
| Median home value | $298,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $197,200 ($99,000–$382,120) n=1,649 |
| Median gross rent | $1,414 | $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 | 80.5 yr ± 0.87 | 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 0.87 years of 80.5, 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