ZIP code
55428
in Brooklyn Park, MinnesotaPopulation 32,499
53.13/ 100
Ranked #11,885 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 37%)
Ranked #487 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 44%)
Ranked #194 of 224 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI ZIPs (bottom 13.4%)
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.
Subsidized affordable housing
728 units
in the top 2.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Transit access
6.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
9.8 µg/L
in the bottom 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST15thUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Child-care access
0.63 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
1.3 mi
in the bottom 8.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST7thUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.13 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Outpatient-care access
0.44 per 1,000 residents
in the top 10.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›The read
ZIP 55428, one of several in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota ranks in the top 37% healthiest ZIPs nationally (11,885th) and the bottom 44% of Minnesota (487th).
The bright spots in the data define much of the story here: subsidized affordable housing rests in the top 2.6% nationally, and transit lands in the top 3.2% nationally. Lithium in drinking water settles in the bottom 5.8% nationally, and childcare rests in the top 6.6% nationally. Mental-health providers lands in the top 8.3% nationally, outpatient settles in the top 10.0% nationally, and walkability rests in the top 10.7% nationally. On the other side, modeled tree cover lands at the national minimum, modeled expected annual loss settles in the top 6.7% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site rests in the bottom 8.3% nationally.
Against its neighbors, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 55369, 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI metro area.
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 80%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 68%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 59%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 34%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 68%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 62%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 59%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 8%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 7%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 10%
8%
Disability
healthier than 22%
7%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 75%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 43%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 31%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 22%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 13%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
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
2 of our published findings list 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 78.0 ± 1.4 years. The 45 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 80.6 years — 2.6 years below them.
Ranked #1,996 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 5.6 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 80.3 — 75 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,803 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
55369
Minnesotashares a border
Score 64.31
Closest healthier
55422
Minnesotashares a border
Score 59.82
Similar health profile
55420
Minnesota99% similar profile
Score 53.20
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 | 20.8% | 19.2–22.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.6% | 30.7–34.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.4% | 6.8–8.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.5–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.1% | 5.5–6.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.6 |
| Depression among adults | 26.0% | 24.0–28.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.1% | 9.1–11.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.1% | 31.2–35.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.8% | 28.2–33.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.9% | 11.9–16.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.8% | 9.5–12.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.5% | 71.2–75.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.8% | 72.6–76.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.0% | 82.4–85.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.2% | 62.6–67.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 60.7% | 58.6–62.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.8% | 72.1–79.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.5% | 14.9–18.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.1% | 13.6–16.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.2% | 23.0–27.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.9% | 28.7–33.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.8% | 18.0–21.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.6% | 15.3–18.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.1% | 10.9–13.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.6% | 14.2–17.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.2% | 29.0–33.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.9–9.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.2% | 11.9–14.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.7–4.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.6% | 23.6–27.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.5% | 16.6–20.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.0% | 12.4–15.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.1% | 13.6–16.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 9.4–11.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.0% | 33.6–38.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 8.1–10.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 14.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 28.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 10.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 33.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 56.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 21.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 36.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 16.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 37.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $74,860 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $299,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $1,336 | $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 | 78.0 yr ± 0.72 | 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 0.72 years of 78.0, 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