ZIP code
56301
in St. Cloud, MinnesotaPopulation 35,580
50.60/ 100
Ranked #15,426 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 48%)
Ranked #666 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 23%)
Ranked #30 of 32 St. Cloud, MN ZIPs (bottom 6.3%)
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
41 mi
in the top 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS98thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
30.3%
in the bottom 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
0.3 mi
in the bottom 4.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS5thDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.6%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
370 units
in the top 6.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Mental-health provider access
0.15 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Crowded housing
8.0%
in the top 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
57.5%
in the top 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›The read
By its overall health score, ZIP 56301, one of several in St. Cloud, Minnesota lands in the top 48% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,426th) and the bottom 23% of Minnesota (666th).
The measures split the difference for this area: modeled high cholesterol registers in the bottom 3.7% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing sits in the top 6.5% nationally. Mental-health providers rests in the top 6.8% nationally. Against that, distance to a community health center is in the top 2.0% nationally, distance to a Superfund site stands in the bottom 4.9% nationally, and modeled fine-particle settles in the top 5.9% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss lies in the top 6.1% nationally, crowded housing resides in the top 6.8% nationally, and modeled disaster risk lands in the top 8.7% nationally. Modeled pfas registers in the top 9.1% nationally.
Weighed against the ZIPs nearby, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To translate a couple of terms, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 55319, 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 St. Cloud, MN 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 84%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 85%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 48%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 26%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 18%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 2%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 75%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 40%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 6%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 17%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 2%
8%
Disability
healthier than 21%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 16%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 45%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 29%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 16%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 3%
8%
Disability
healthier than 10%
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
2 of our published findings list 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 82.1 ± 2.0 years. A median household income of $73,142 predicts 78.8 years — 3.3 years above.
Ranked #349 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 14.3; chronic-disease standing 84.3 — 70 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,385 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
55319
Minnesotashares a border
Score 58.29
Closest healthier
55320
Minnesotashares a border
Score 57.12
Similar health profile
56267
Minnesota93% similar profile
Score 53.26
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 | 19.2% | 17.2–21.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 28.5% | 25.7–31.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.6% | 6.0–7.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.9% | 9.7–12.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.5 |
| Depression among adults | 26.3% | 23.2–29.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.7% | 8.6–11.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 30.3% | 27.5–33.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.7% | 33.0–42.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.8–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.2% | 11.0–15.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.2% | 7.8–10.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 71.2% | 68.4–73.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.0% | 69.6–76.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 77.9% | 75.7–80.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.3% | 65.3–73.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.1% | 59.0–65.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.2% | 74.6–85.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.6% | 15.9–21.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.3% | 13.4–17.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.9% | 21.7–28.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.9% | 28.7–37.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.8% | 16.7–21.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.8% | 16.9–20.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.2% | 10.8–13.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.1% | 15.3–18.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.5% | 26.1–32.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–6.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.6% | 8.6–10.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.2% | 9.8–12.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.5% | 5.0–6.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.8% | 20.6–26.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.4% | 17.1–22.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.4% | 14.5–18.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.4% | 12.5–16.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.9% | 10.6–13.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.5% | 29.2–37.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.6–11.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 20.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 32.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 50.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 8.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 16.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 40.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 10.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 27.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $73,142 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $288,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $1,151 | $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 | 82.1 yr ± 1.00 | 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 1.00 years of 82.1, 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