ZIP code
56227
in Correll, MinnesotaPopulation 215
52.12/ 100
Ranked #13,289 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 41%)
Ranked #558 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 36%)
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.
Distance to a community health center
50.8 mi
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Short sleep
27.3%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
27.1%
in the bottom 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
98.7%
in the top 5.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST88thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
72.5 mi
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3.1 pCi/L
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST70thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.4%
in the top 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST64thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
5.1%
in the top 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST78thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
24.6%
in the top 13.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS87thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›The read
Correll, Minnesota (ZIP 56227), by its composite score, sits in the top 41% healthiest ZIPs nationally (13,289th) and the bottom 36% of Minnesota (558th).
The data opens on a genuinely even set of readings: modeled short sleep sits in the bottom 1.9% nationally, and loneliness lies in the bottom 3.4% nationally. Fiber broadband rests in the top 5.3% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site resides in the top 6.1% nationally. Unemployment is at the national minimum, shared with about 15% of ZIPs. Modeled disaster risk lands in the bottom 7.6% nationally. On the other side, distance to a community health center stands in the top 1.1% nationally, modeled radon registers in the top 8.9% nationally, and modeled fine-particle settles in the top 6.9% nationally. Modeled energy burden sits in the top 8.1% nationally.
For anyone unfamiliar, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 56221, 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
Preventive Care
healthier than 84%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 73%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 43%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 40%
16%
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 30%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 2%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 88%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 92%
8%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 54%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 11%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 31%
16%
Disability
healthier than 22%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 6%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 8%
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
56208
Minnesotashares a border
Score 47.19
Closest healthier
56221
Minnesotashares a border
Score 54.58
Similar health profile
56465
Minnesota96% similar profile
Score 56.02
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 | 30.1% | 26.5–33.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.5% | 33.0–42.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.5% | 10.3–12.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 8.7–11.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.4% | 7.2–9.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.8% | 6.4–9.3 |
| Depression among adults | 21.9% | 18.6–25.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.2% | 11.2–15.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.8% | 34.5–43.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.3% | 30.5–46.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.3% | 3.7–4.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.9% | 7.9–12.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.7% | 5.1–8.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.7% | 78.7–84.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.6% | 73.9–80.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.5% | 86.6–90.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.6% | 65.8–75.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.2% | 66.8–73.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.5% | 71.3–84.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.3% | 13.5–19.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.2% | 13.1–19.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.8% | 22.1–32.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 27.3% | 21.6–33.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.4% | 15.3–21.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.3–16.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.9% | 11.9–16.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.5% | 10.7–14.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.7% | 26.1–35.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.3% | 8.1–10.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.9% | 6.6–9.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.4% | 12.7–18.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.4–4.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.6% | 3.9–5.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.7% | 16.3–23.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 7.8–12.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.6% | 5.9–9.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.3–9.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 5.1–7.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.1% | 22.6–32.0 |
| 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 | 14.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 2.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 26.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 22.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 90.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 62.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 24.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 44.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $97,604 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $206,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 78.4 yr ± 0.56 | 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 0.56 years of 78.4, 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