ZIP code
56101
in Windom, MinnesotaPopulation 6,157
51.11/ 100
Ranked #14,667 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 46%)
Ranked #639 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 26%)
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.
Radon
3.7 pCi/L
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS97thDefinition & 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
31.3%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Elder-services access
0.33 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.0% 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 ›Physician access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 13.6% 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 ›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
Windom, Minnesota (ZIP 56101), by its overall standing, sits in the top 46% healthiest ZIPs nationally (14,667th) and the bottom 26% of Minnesota (639th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Both sides of the picture show up plainly in this area's numbers: elder services registers in the top 4.0% nationally. Distance to a community health center stands at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Distance to a Superfund site lands in the top 11.8% nationally. Distance to a nursing home is at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Modeled short sleep resides in the bottom 14.0% nationally, and physicians rests in the top 13.6% nationally. By contrast, modeled radon lies in the top 3.2% nationally, and arsenic sits in the top 2.9% nationally. Modeled fine-particle settles in the top 12.9% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility registers at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs.
Held up against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, 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. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 56137, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 77%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 73%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 53%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 51%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 55%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Disability
healthier than 45%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 36%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 53%
8%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 22%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 27%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Disability
healthier than 13%
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
One of our published findings lists 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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 82.8 ± 3.0 years. A median household income of $77,083 predicts 79.1 years — 3.7 years above.
Ranked #234 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
56118
Minnesotashares a border
Score 45.25
Closest healthier
56137
Minnesotashares a border
Score 56.66
Similar health profile
18013
Pennsylvania96% similar profile
Score 50.14
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 | 27.3% | 24.4–30.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.1% | 32.4–39.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.1% | 9.2–11.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.5–8.4 |
| Depression among adults | 23.9% | 20.6–27.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.5% | 10.9–14.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.3% | 32.4–40.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.4% | 32.2–46.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.5% | 8.6–12.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.1% | 8.5–11.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.9% | 76.3–81.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.9% | 72.2–79.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.0% | 83.3–86.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.5% | 65.0–73.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.9% | 59.6–66.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.1% | 70.4–82.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.9% | 14.1–19.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.6% | 13.5–17.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.8% | 24.7–33.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.9% | 25.3–36.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.7% | 17.2–22.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.7–17.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.7% | 12.1–15.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.2% | 12.6–15.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.4% | 28.6–36.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.2–10.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.7–9.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.1% | 13.1–17.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.7–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.6% | 18.7–24.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.1% | 11.9–16.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.1–12.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.6% | 9.0–12.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.2% | 7.2–9.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.7% | 25.5–34.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 5.9–7.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 13.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 26.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 17.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 72.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 52.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 22.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 40.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $77,083 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $183,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $804 | $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 | 82.8 yr ± 1.54 | 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 1.54 years of 82.8, 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