ZIP code
56287
in Seaforth, MinnesotaPopulation 98
50.63/ 100
Ranked #15,372 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 48%)
Ranked #663 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 23%)
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.
Energy-cost burden
6.7%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
36.1%
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Transportation noise
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the bottom 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & 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 bottom 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
20.3%
in the top 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
97.1%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
2.0%
in the bottom 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS7thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
67.2 mi
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a community health center
21.4 mi
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST56thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›The read
By its overall health score, Seaforth, Minnesota (ZIP 56287) lands in the top 48% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,372nd) and the bottom 23% of Minnesota (663rd).
Strengths and concerns sit side by side across the measures here: modeled transportation noise rests at the national minimum, and expected annual loss is in the bottom 2.6% nationally. Modeled disaster risk stands in the bottom 3.5% nationally, and homeownership settles in the top 6.3% nationally. Poverty lies in the bottom 7.0% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site resides in the top 7.1% nationally. On the other hand, modeled energy burden lands in the top 1.5% nationally, arsenic registers in the top 2.2% nationally, and binge drinking sits in the top 5.2% nationally. Distance to a community health center rests in the top 7.5% nationally.
To translate a couple of terms, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. 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. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 56293, 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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 80%
21%
Disability
healthier than 73%
7%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 46%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 43%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 8%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 34%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 30%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 6%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 67%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 58%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 14%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 14%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 8%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 13%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 35%
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
56292
Minnesotashares a border
Score 49.45
Closest healthier
56293
Minnesotashares a border
Score 52.56
Similar health profile
62273
Illinois91% similar profile
Score 48.98
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 | 23.2% | 20.3–26.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.7% | 26.1–33.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.0% | 9.8–12.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.5–6.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.1% | 4.8–7.5 |
| Depression among adults | 25.8% | 22.2–29.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.4% | 8.8–12.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 32.8% | 28.9–36.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.8% | 30.7–45.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.5–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.2% | 8.1–12.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.8% | 5.0–9.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.4% | 71.0–77.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.1% | 69.2–77.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.4% | 81.5–87.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.0% | 60.1–69.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.8% | 59.3–66.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.8% | 71.6–84.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 20.3% | 17.1–23.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.6% | 13.3–22.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.5% | 17.7–28.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 29.9% | 24.1–36.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.0% | 13.6–20.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.2% | 14.7–19.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.8% | 10.6–15.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.5% | 11.8–17.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 26.9% | 21.9–32.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.0% | 5.1–6.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.7% | 6.3–9.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.6% | 9.3–14.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.0–4.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.4–5.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.4% | 17.3–25.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.6% | 9.3–16.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.6% | 6.9–12.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.3% | 7.9–12.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.1–9.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.0% | 25.7–36.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 5.4–8.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 2.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 17.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 10.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 74.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 97.1% | 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 | 9.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 12.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 25.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $73,750 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $70,000 | $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 | 87.4 yr ± 2.54 | 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 2.54 years of 87.4, 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