ZIP code
56473
in Pillager, MinnesotaPopulation 3,518
55.10/ 100
Ranked #9,341 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 29%)
Ranked #331 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (top 38%)
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
79 mi
in the top 0.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
26.7%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.6%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Outpatient-care access
0.53 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient 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 ›Fiber broadband
96.9%
in the top 8.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST84thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.53 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST83rdUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Binge drinking
19.4%
in the top 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
1.2%
in the top 16% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS84thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.9%
in the bottom 24% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS24thDefinition & 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 ›Tree cover
40%
in the top 29% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS71stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›The read
Pillager, Minnesota (ZIP 56473), on the composite measure, lands in the top 29% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,341st) and the top 38% of Minnesota (331st), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The readings split fairly evenly between strengths and concerns: modeled loneliness registers in the bottom 2.3% nationally, outpatient lands in the top 7.0% nationally, and fiber broadband resides in the top 8.3% nationally. Childcare lies in the top 9.3% nationally, modeled humid heat settles in the bottom 10.2% nationally, and modeled mammography stands in the top 12.9% nationally. Working the other way, distance to a community health center is in the top 0.2% nationally, and modeled fine-particle rests in the top 5.6% nationally. Modeled binge drinking sits in the top 8.8% nationally, and loud transportation noise registers in the top 16% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 56425, 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 73%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 77%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 67%
13%
Disability
healthier than 73%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 97%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 39%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 1%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 72%
16%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 97%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 54%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 44%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 56%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 52%
8%
Disability
healthier than 58%
7%
Holding it back
Risk Behavior
healthier than 8%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 6%
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
56401
Minnesotashares a border
Score 52.80
Closest healthier
56425
Minnesotashares a border
Score 56.22
Similar health profile
56009
Minnesota97% similar profile
Score 53.84
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 | 24.7% | 22.0–27.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 33.2% | 29.9–36.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.5% | 8.6–10.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.4–7.1 |
| Depression among adults | 23.8% | 20.7–27.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.0% | 9.6–12.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.8% | 31.3–38.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.7% | 30.2–41.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.4% | 6.9–10.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.5% | 5.3–7.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.8% | 74.8–80.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.3% | 71.7–78.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.2% | 84.5–87.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.9% | 63.6–72.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.1% | 66.0–72.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.7% | 73.7–85.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.4% | 16.3–22.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.3% | 13.0–17.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.7% | 20.2–27.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.7% | 29.8–39.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.5% | 14.3–18.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.5% | 13.7–17.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.5% | 11.0–14.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.7% | 11.2–14.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.7% | 25.2–32.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.6% | 6.7–8.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.4–8.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.5% | 10.7–14.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.0–3.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.8% | 16.9–22.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.4–12.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.6% | 6.2–9.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 7.0–9.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 26.7% | 22.7–30.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.6% | 4.7–6.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 15.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 87.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 62.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 18.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 44.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $85,950 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $295,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $1,114 | $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 ± 0.84 | 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 0.84 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