ZIP code
56009
in Alden, MinnesotaPopulation 1,527
53.84/ 100
Ranked #10,905 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 34%)
Ranked #422 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (top 49%)
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.
Fiber broadband
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
5.5%
in the bottom 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›Elder-services access
0.66 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a community health center
32 mi
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3.3 pCi/L
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST79thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Loneliness
28.4%
in the bottom 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST25thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Physician access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 13.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS86thDefinition & 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 ›The read
By the composite health measure, Alden, Minnesota (ZIP 56009) ranks in the top 34% healthiest ZIPs nationally (10,905th) and the top 49% of Minnesota (422nd).
A number of measures pull each way for this area: fiber broadband lands at the national maximum, and modeled pfas sits in the bottom 1.5% nationally. Elder services is in the top 1.6% nationally, and recreation settles in the top 4.7% nationally. Modeled loneliness resides in the bottom 9.6% nationally, and floodplain exposure registers in the bottom 11.2% nationally. Set against that, distance to a community health center rests in the top 3.7% nationally, modeled radon stands in the top 7.0% nationally, and modeled arsenic lies in the top 12.7% nationally. Modeled fine-particle lands in the top 12.9% nationally.
Read against the ZIPs closest to it, elder services runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Close by, ZIP 56020, just across the boundary, ranks 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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 61%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 71%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 62%
8%
Disability
healthier than 67%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 47%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 35%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 3%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 64%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 64%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 54%
16%
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 33%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 15%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 22%
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
56007
Minnesotashares a border
Score 49.22
Closest healthier
56020
Minnesotashares a border
Score 55.12
Similar health profile
55381
Minnesota98% similar profile
Score 52.07
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 | 27.4% | 24.3–30.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.2% | 31.4–39.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.2% | 9.3–11.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.6–8.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.7% | 5.9–7.6 |
| Depression among adults | 23.5% | 20.0–26.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.0% | 10.4–13.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.6% | 31.6–39.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.2% | 29.7–43.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.2% | 10.0–14.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.0% | 5.8–8.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.0% | 77.0–82.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.5% | 72.8–79.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.2% | 85.6–88.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.6% | 65.2–73.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 66.9% | 63.6–70.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.4% | 70.6–83.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.7% | 15.6–22.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.4% | 13.2–17.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.5% | 22.6–30.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.8% | 26.5–37.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.8% | 15.5–20.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.2% | 13.5–17.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.5–14.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.9% | 11.4–14.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.5% | 25.7–33.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.3–9.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.5% | 11.7–15.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.2% | 17.1–23.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 8.8–12.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.5–9.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.1–9.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.4% | 24.1–32.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.4% | 4.6–6.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 18.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 18.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 85.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 61.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 22.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 48.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $80,804 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $203,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $920 | $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 | 84.6 yr ± 1.30 | 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 1.30 years of 84.6, 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