ZIP code
55354
in Lester Prairie, MinnesotaPopulation 3,159
52.76/ 100
Ranked #12,437 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 39%)
Ranked #513 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 41%)
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.
Distance to a community health center
22.8 mi
in the top 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST58thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest federally funded community health center, which serves patients regardless of ability to pay.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
19.4%
in the top 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
19.9%
in the top 6.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3 pCi/L
in the top 9.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST66thUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
43%
in the top 9.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Physician access
1.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 12.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS87thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
33%
in the bottom 9.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST21stUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
0.27%
in the bottom 16% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS16thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
0.36%
in the bottom 22% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST8thUS22ndDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
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.
This area ranks among the highest 10% of US ZIP codes for both modeled radon and modeled groundwater arsenic.
See the full radon & arsenic analysis →
The read
Overall, Lester Prairie, Minnesota (ZIP 55354) lands in the top 39% healthiest ZIPs nationally (12,437th) and the bottom 41% of Minnesota (513th).
The measures that set this area apart are worth putting up front: physicians resides in the top 12.8% nationally, and poverty registers in the bottom 12.8% nationally. Modeled high cholesterol rests in the bottom 9.4% nationally, and disaster risk stands in the bottom 14.3% nationally. Set against that, distance to a community health center lies in the top 6.7% nationally, modeled arsenic lands in the top 6.7% nationally, and modeled binge drinking sits in the top 6.6% nationally. Modeled radon is in the top 9.9% nationally, obesity settles in the top 9.0% nationally, and fine-particle resides in the top 12.9% nationally.
A note on the terms: arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 55367, just across the boundary, ranks better 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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 76%
21%
Disability
healthier than 74%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 61%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 45%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 35%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 30%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 32%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 7%
5%
Lifting this score
Disability
healthier than 60%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 59%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 55%
14%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 26%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 19%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 5%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 36%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 27%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 37%
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
55336
Minnesotashares a border
Score 51.12
Closest healthier
55367
Minnesotashares a border
Score 58.79
Similar health profile
55371
Minnesota96% similar profile
Score 53.76
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 | 24.0% | 21.1–26.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.2% | 27.5–35.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.3% | 7.5–9.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.1–6.7 |
| Depression among adults | 24.0% | 20.7–27.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.6% | 9.1–12.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.0% | 29.1–37.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.0% | 35.9–50.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.4% | 8.2–12.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.7% | 7.2–10.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.4% | 72.1–78.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.8% | 68.8–76.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.4% | 82.4–86.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.0% | 64.1–73.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.2% | 63.6–70.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.2% | 71.0–84.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.9% | 16.6–23.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.9% | 13.4–18.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.1% | 21.0–29.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.2% | 28.5–40.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.7% | 14.3–19.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.0% | 14.1–17.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.2% | 10.6–13.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.8% | 12.2–15.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.8% | 24.0–31.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.2–7.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.4–8.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.6% | 9.9–13.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.3% | 2.9–3.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.6–4.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.6% | 18.5–24.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.5% | 9.6–13.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 6.6–9.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.4–11.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 6.1–8.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.9% | 25.6–34.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 5.1–6.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 17.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 15.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 88.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 49.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 12.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 33.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $97,941 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $268,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $725 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $925 ($650–$1,588) n=759 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 83.4 yr ± 1.32 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 81.1 yr (78.3–84.8) n=864 |
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 1.32 years of 83.4, 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