Skip to main content
ZipVitals

Menu

ZIP code

54447

in Lublin, WisconsinPopulation 546

ZipVitals Score
How is the ZipVitals Score calculated? →

45.68/ 100

Ranked #21,676 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 32%)

Ranked #718 of 763 Wisconsin ZIPs (bottom 5.9%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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.

Obesity

46.3%

in the top 2.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST99th
US97th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.

Full methodology ›

Natural-disaster risk

in the bottom 6.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST8th
US7th
Definition & 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 ›

Walkability

2.3 intersections/sq mi

in the bottom 9.0% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST6th
US9th
Definition & source ›

The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.

Full methodology ›

Energy-cost burden

5.2%

in the top 7.2% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST97th
US93rd
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 ›

Park land

12.2%

in the top 10.3% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST91st
US90th
Definition & source ›

The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.

Full methodology ›

Loud transportation noise

1.4%

in the top 12.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST91st
US88th
Definition & source ›

The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.

Full methodology ›

Crowded housing

5.4%

in the top 12.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US88th
Definition & source ›

The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.

Full methodology ›

Home broadband subscription

77.5%

in the bottom 12.8% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST6th
US13th
Definition & source ›

The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.

Full methodology ›

Households without a vehicle

10.8%

in the top 13.2% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST94th
US87th
Definition & source ›

The share of households with no vehicle available.

Full methodology ›

Industrial-pollution burden

in the bottom 13.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST5th
US14th
Definition & 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 ›

The read

In overall standing, Lublin, Wisconsin (ZIP 54447) comes out in the bottom 32% nationally (21,676th) and the bottom 5.9% of Wisconsin (718th).

continue reading

The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: modeled disaster risk stands in the bottom 6.7% nationally, park land lands in the top 10.3% nationally, and modeled humid heat is in the bottom 11.1% nationally. Set against that, modeled obesity resides in the top 2.8% nationally, walkability rests in the bottom 9.0% nationally, and modeled energy burden lies in the top 7.2% nationally. Fiber broadband sits at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled fine-particle settles in the top 11.7% nationally, and loud transportation noise registers in the top 12.4% nationally. Crowded housing stands in the top 12.5% nationally.

Relative to the ZIPs around it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 54433, 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.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 87%

5%

About typical

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 53%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 58%

13%

Mental Health

healthier than 43%

8%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 31%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 11%

16%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 19%

11%

Disability

healthier than 29%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 12%

5%

Lifting this score

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 81%

5%

About typical

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 47%

14%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 19%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 3%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 23%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 14%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 18%

8%

Disability

healthier than 7%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 9%

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 ›

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 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults30.9%27.8–34.1
High blood pressure among adults37.9%34.2–41.7
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults9.3%8.3–10.2
Current asthma among adults11.2%9.9–12.6
Coronary heart disease among adults8.8%7.8–9.9
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults9.5%8.1–11.0
Depression among adults23.0%19.8–26.5
Diagnosed diabetes among adults13.5%11.7–15.5
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened37.5%33.6–41.4
Obesity among adults46.3%39.8–52.9
Stroke among adults4.4%3.9–4.9
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years10.1%8.1–12.4
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years9.6%7.5–12.2
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure80.2%77.6–82.6
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults78.2%74.7–81.4
Cholesterol screening among adults84.4%82.1–86.5
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years69.2%64.4–73.5
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults62.3%58.8–65.7
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years77.8%70.7–83.8
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults17.4%14.6–20.5
Current cigarette smoking among adults18.9%15.8–22.0
No leisure-time physical activity among adults34.7%29.7–39.8
Short sleep duration among adults32.8%27.4–38.5
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults23.1%19.7–26.5
Frequent mental distress among adults17.6%15.6–19.8
Frequent physical distress among adults16.2%14.2–18.4
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults15.8%13.6–18.1
Any disability among adults36.6%32.1–41.3
Hearing disability among adults9.2%8.2–10.3
Independent living disability among adults10.3%8.9–11.8
Mobility disability among adults18.1%15.5–20.7
Self-care disability among adults4.9%4.2–5.7
Vision disability among adults5.8%5.1–6.7
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults20.5%17.3–24.1
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults15.0%12.1–18.4
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults17.9%14.7–21.7
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults11.0%9.2–13.3
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults8.2%6.9–9.6
Loneliness among adults31.8%27.2–36.9
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults6.7%5.6–7.9
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)WI median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate13.9%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,3648.5% (3.6–16.0%) n=765
Uninsured 18–6424.8%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2866.7% (2.4–14.9%) n=764
No HS diploma (25+)15.6%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5055.9% (2.3–12.6%) n=768
Bachelor's or higher (25+)12.5%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50523.5% (12.7–44.0%) n=768
Unemployment rate (16+)1.1%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2742.6% (0.9–5.6%) n=763
Households without a vehicle10.8%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3223.6% (0.8–9.0%) n=764
Broadband subscription77.5%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32288.8% (80.0–94.8%) n=764
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)26.0%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32221.8% (14.7–29.1%) n=764
Homeownership rate85.8%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32281.3% (62.1–91.8%) n=764
Crowded housing (>1 per room)5.4%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3221.1% (0.0–3.7%) n=764
Foreign-born population1.3%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5531.9% (0.3–6.8%) n=768
Single-parent households56.6%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08759.0% (47.7–72.8%) n=762
Population 65+16.8%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55320.4% (13.9–32.2%) n=768
Median age39.6 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29244.2 yr (36.2–56.1) n=765
Median household income$73,214$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$75,147 ($57,542–$101,625) n=755
Median home value$176,600$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$231,900 ($160,140–$367,300) n=755
Median gross rent$820$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$914 ($696–$1,261) n=706
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)WI median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth85.4 yr ± 2.3378.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30880.4 yr (77.7–83.6) n=712

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 2.33 years of 85.4, 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