ZIP code
56096
in Waterville, MinnesotaPopulation 2,953
55.20/ 100
Ranked #9,207 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 29%)
Ranked #321 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (top 37%)
Ranked #170 of 224 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI ZIPs (bottom 24%)
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.
Grocery access
0.34 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.34 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3.2 pCi/L
in the top 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
15.3%
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS90thDefinition & 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 ›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
Judged by its overall standing, Waterville, Minnesota (ZIP 56096) sits in the top 29% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,207th) and the top 37% of Minnesota (321st).
A healthy showing across the board, and a few measures carry it: grocery registers in the top 3.0% nationally, elder services is in the top 3.9% nationally, and modeled loneliness lies in the bottom 14.1% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff registers in the bottom 14.9% nationally, and short sleep is in the bottom 17% nationally. On the other hand, modeled radon lies in the top 8.1% nationally, and arsenic registers in the top 9.8% nationally. Modeled fine-particle is in the top 11.7% nationally, and distance to a community health center lies in the top 13.6% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility registers at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs.
Put plainly, 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. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 55052, 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 61%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 75%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 62%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
Disability
healthier than 68%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 13%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 63%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 72%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 75%
8%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 56%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 45%
11%
Disability
healthier than 50%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 34%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 66%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 5%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 23%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 33%
11%
Disability
healthier than 17%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 35%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 25%
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
55052
Minnesotashares a border
Score 57.42
Closest healthier
56017
Minnesotashares a border
Score 56.09
Similar health profile
51244
Iowa99% similar profile
Score 55.38
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 | 27.0% | 24.0–30.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.7% | 31.8–39.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.4% | 9.5–11.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.6–8.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.7% | 5.8–7.7 |
| Depression among adults | 23.5% | 20.1–27.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.0% | 10.5–13.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.3% | 32.2–40.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.0% | 29.3–43.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.7% | 9.5–14.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.1% | 5.8–8.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.8% | 77.0–82.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.7% | 72.9–80.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.8% | 85.0–88.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.4% | 66.1–74.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.4% | 67.3–73.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.7% | 71.5–83.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.9% | 14.9–21.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.1% | 12.7–17.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.5% | 19.6–28.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.5% | 26.3–37.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.0% | 14.6–19.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.6% | 12.9–16.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.8% | 11.2–14.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.7% | 11.1–14.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.5% | 24.7–33.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.3–9.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.4–8.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.4% | 11.5–15.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.5% | 3.1–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.7–4.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.1% | 16.8–23.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.2% | 8.2–12.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.2% | 5.6–9.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 6.6–9.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.3% | 5.3–7.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.0% | 24.3–34.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.3–6.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 22.7% | 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 | 3.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 27.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 81.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.4% | 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 | 59.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 22.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 47.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $87,679 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $278,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $886 | $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 | 79.2 yr ± 1.10 | 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 1.10 years of 79.2, 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