ZIP code
51334
in Estherville, IowaPopulation 6,960
48.76/ 100
Ranked #17,974 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 44%)
Ranked #748 of 922 Iowa ZIPs (bottom 19%)
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.
Radon
4.1 pCi/L
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
32.2%
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
77 µg/L
in the top 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST79thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
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 ›Elder-services access
0.28 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
19.6%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST47thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
56.3 mi
in the top 9.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 10.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Obesity
42.5%
in the top 10.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS89thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Cross-source signals
Combined exposures in this ZIP
More than one environmental exposure stands out in this ZIP. Each is established independently and shown on its own above; they are grouped here for context — not because one causes the other.
USGS models a high likelihood that groundwater arsenic here exceeds 10 µg/L — the level EPA sets as the limit for public water systems — and this area's modeled radon runs above EPA's 4 pCi/L action level.
See the full radon & arsenic analysis →
The read
Estherville, Iowa (ZIP 51334), by its overall standing, sits in the bottom 44% nationally (17,974th) and the bottom 19% of Iowa (748th).
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: elder services is in the top 5.0% nationally. Distance to an emergency room resides at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Distance to a Superfund site rests in the top 9.8% nationally. Set against that, modeled radon lies in the top 1.5% nationally, and arsenic sits in the top 2.7% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss settles in the top 4.6% nationally, and lithium in drinking water registers in the top 4.9% nationally. Modeled disaster risk stands in the top 7.9% nationally, and binge drinking lands in the top 7.9% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden is in the top 10.2% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 50514, 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
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 73%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 46%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 56%
13%
Disability
healthier than 43%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 23%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 24%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 93%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 40%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 22%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 19%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 15%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 19%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 28%
8%
Disability
healthier than 15%
7%
“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 77.7 ± 1.8 years. The 50 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 81.0 years — 3.4 years below them.
Ranked #2,616 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
50514
Iowashares a border
Score 50.76
Closest healthier
50531
Iowashares a border
Score 53.83
Similar health profile
17240
Pennsylvania95% similar profile
Score 47.02
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 | 29.1% | 25.9–32.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.6% | 33.4–41.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.6% | 8.7–10.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.5% | 7.5–9.8 |
| Depression among adults | 20.2% | 17.1–23.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.5% | 10.8–14.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.8% | 32.7–41.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.5% | 34.7–51.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.6% | 9.4–14.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.4% | 7.8–11.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.0% | 76.4–81.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.6% | 74.2–81.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.1% | 81.1–85.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.3% | 64.6–73.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 63.6% | 59.9–67.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.8% | 71.6–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.6% | 16.4–23.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.6% | 14.2–19.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.6% | 24.0–33.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.8% | 27.5–40.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.9% | 18.1–23.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 15.1–19.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.5% | 12.8–16.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.3% | 13.4–17.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.1% | 27.9–36.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.0% | 8.0–10.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.8–10.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.5% | 13.5–17.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–6.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.0% | 20.6–27.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.2% | 12.1–16.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 12.0% | 10.0–14.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 9.0–12.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.8–8.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.9% | 28.0–38.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.0% | 6.1–8.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (2.7–19.1%) n=931 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.4% (0.7–14.7%) n=931 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 11.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.1% (1.6–12.9%) n=932 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 15.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.9% (9.8–36.8%) n=932 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.2% (0.0–6.7%) n=932 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.4% (0.0–7.9%) n=931 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.5% (77.9–95.1%) n=931 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 21.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 18.2% (9.0–28.8%) n=931 |
| Homeownership rate | 77.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 82.1% (66.8–93.5%) n=931 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.4% (0.0–3.3%) n=931 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.0% (0.0–7.2%) n=932 |
| Single-parent households | 52.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.8% (43.7–75.5%) n=928 |
| Population 65+ | 22.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–31.0%) n=932 |
| Median age | 41.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.7 yr (34.1–54.7) n=931 |
| Median household income | $57,482 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $73,848 ($55,055–$102,762) n=911 |
| Median home value | $112,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $161,100 ($93,820–$278,170) n=892 |
| Median gross rent | $755 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $825 ($614–$1,113) n=771 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 77.7 yr ± 0.92 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.0 yr (77.2–83.4) n=917 |
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 0.92 years of 77.7, 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