ZIP code
56001
in Mankato, MinnesotaPopulation 51,585
53.62/ 100
Ranked #11,209 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 35%)
Ranked #441 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 49%)
Ranked #15 of 17 Mankato, MN ZIPs (bottom 11.8%)
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.
Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
28.9%
in the bottom 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
605 units
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
22.1%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3 pCi/L
in the top 9.8% 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 ›High blood pressure
28.1%
in the bottom 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.16 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST85thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Homeownership rate
54.1%
in the bottom 11.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST5thUS11thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
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
On the composite measure, Mankato, Minnesota (ZIP 56001) stands in the top 35% healthiest ZIPs nationally (11,209th) and the bottom 49% of Minnesota (441st).
A balanced set of signals defines this area, not any single one: modeled high cholesterol resides in the bottom 2.5% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing stands in the top 3.5% nationally. Distance to an emergency room sits at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Modeled high blood pressure resides in the bottom 6.3% nationally, and elder services stands in the top 9.5% nationally. By contrast, modeled expected annual loss sits in the top 1.3% nationally, modeled disaster risk resides in the top 1.7% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site stands at the national minimum. Modeled arsenic sits in the top 5.5% nationally, and radon resides in the top 9.8% nationally.
Set beside the wider area around it, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For clarity, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. ZIP 56003, just across the boundary, ranks better overall among the ZIPs nearby.
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 Mankato, MN 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 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 63%
11%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 18%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 16%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 83%
21%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 54%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 47%
11%
Disability
healthier than 43%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 19%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 2%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 86%
21%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 43%
16%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 43%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 7%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 14%
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 79.5 ± 1.1 years. The 50 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 81.9 years — 2.5 years below them.
Ranked #1,914 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 13.0; chronic-disease standing 89.6 — 77 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,949 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
56003
Minnesotashares a border
Score 60.29
Closest healthier
56024
Minnesotashares a border
Score 60.50
Similar health profile
59801
Montana99% similar profile
Score 54.33
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 | 19.2% | 17.1–21.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 28.1% | 25.2–31.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.6% | 6.0–7.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.7–5.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–6.0 |
| Depression among adults | 27.1% | 23.8–30.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 28.9% | 25.8–32.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.2% | 28.7–40.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.8% | 2.6–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.8% | 8.7–13.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.7% | 7.5–10.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.7% | 68.2–73.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.5% | 68.7–76.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 77.5% | 75.1–79.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.5% | 61.6–70.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.4% | 57.7–64.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.2% | 70.2–83.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.1% | 16.0–22.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.8% | 12.1–15.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.0% | 20.6–27.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.2% | 25.0–35.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.6% | 14.6–18.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.6% | 16.7–20.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.3% | 10.1–12.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.7% | 14.9–18.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.2% | 26.7–34.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 3.0–3.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.3–5.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.2% | 18.2–24.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.6% | 13.5–18.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 12.1% | 10.5–14.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.0% | 9.4–12.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.9% | 28.4–37.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.4% | 6.5–8.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 19.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 35.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 8.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 54.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.2% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 6.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 51.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 13.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 28.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $69,531 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $276,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $1,134 | $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 | 79.5 yr ± 0.57 | 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 0.57 years of 79.5, 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