ZIP code
54861
in Odanah, WisconsinPopulation 122
34.50/ 100
Ranked #29,560 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 7.9%)
Ranked #760 of 763 Wisconsin ZIPs (bottom 0.4%)
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.
Diabetes
21.5%
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
45.5 mi
in the top 0.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
49.6%
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
38.3%
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
17%
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
10.2%
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
10 per million
in the bottom 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Mobility disability
24.7%
in the top 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›The read
Odanah, Wisconsin (ZIP 54861), overall, ranks in the bottom 7.9% nationally (29,560th) and the bottom 0.4% of Wisconsin (760th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
This area's pressures are easy to read across the measures: modeled diabetes settles in the top 2.1% nationally, modeled obesity is in the top 0.8% nationally, and households without a vehicle sits in the top 1.6% nationally. Crowded housing lands in the top 1.7% nationally, modeled vision disability lies in the top 4.5% nationally, and modeled mobility disability stands in the top 3.9% nationally. Home broadband subscription rests in the bottom 3.2% nationally. On the brighter side, distance to a hazardous-chemical facility registers in the top 0.9% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the bottom 2.6% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk settles in the bottom 2.8% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, households without a vehicle runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. ZIP 54806, 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 94%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.2%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 8%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 3%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 32%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 21%
8%
Disability
healthier than 5%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 13%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 97%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 1%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the bottom 0.9%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the bottom 0.4%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 2%
8%
Disability
in the bottom 0.5%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 10%
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.
Nearby
54806
Wisconsinshares a border
Score 50.16
Closest healthier
54559
Wisconsinabout 2.2 mi away
Score 49.98
Similar health profile
13614
New York98% similar profile
Score 31.86
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 | 32.6% | 29.2–36.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 41.3% | 37.2–45.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.7% | 6.9–8.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 15.1% | 13.4–16.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.3% | 8.1–10.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.0% | 8.4–11.8 |
| Depression among adults | 24.7% | 21.4–28.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 21.5% | 18.8–24.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.3% | 30.3–38.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 49.6% | 42.7–56.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.9% | 5.1–6.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 21.9% | 18.1–26.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.5% | 7.4–12.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.4% | 77.4–83.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.7% | 76.0–82.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.2% | 83.8–88.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.4% | 54.7–65.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 55.8% | 51.9–59.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.7% | 62.2–78.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.7% | 12.0–17.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 26.7% | 22.4–31.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 39.0% | 33.4–45.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.8% | 32.6–45.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.7% | 26.4–35.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.4% | 17.2–21.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 20.9% | 18.2–23.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.4% | 14.9–20.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 42.7% | 37.7–48.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.7–12.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.6% | 11.6–15.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 24.7% | 21.3–28.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 10.2% | 8.8–11.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.1% | 23.1–31.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 29.7% | 24.4–35.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 30.0% | 24.5–35.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 21.5% | 17.9–25.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 16.0% | 13.5–18.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.3% | 30.3–40.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 13.9% | 11.7–16.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 32.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (3.6–16.0%) n=765 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 47.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.7% (2.4–14.9%) n=764 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.9% (2.3–12.6%) n=768 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 6.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.5% (12.7–44.0%) n=768 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.6% (0.9–5.6%) n=763 |
| Households without a vehicle | 38.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.8–9.0%) n=764 |
| Broadband subscription | 61.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (80.0–94.8%) n=764 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 17.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.8% (14.7–29.1%) n=764 |
| Homeownership rate | 27.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.3% (62.1–91.8%) n=764 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 17.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.7%) n=764 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.3–6.8%) n=768 |
| Single-parent households | 34.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 59.0% (47.7–72.8%) n=762 |
| Population 65+ | 15.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.4% (13.9–32.2%) n=768 |
| Median age | 30.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.2 yr (36.2–56.1) n=765 |
| Median household income | — | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $75,147 ($57,542–$101,625) n=755 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $231,900 ($160,140–$367,300) n=755 |
| Median gross rent | — | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $914 ($696–$1,261) n=706 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 75.1 yr ± 1.81 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.4 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 1.81 years of 75.1, 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