ZIP code
56550
in Hendrum, MinnesotaPopulation 413
47.23/ 100
Ranked #19,879 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 38%)
Ranked #802 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 7.4%)
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.
Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
3.2%
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Floodplain exposure
54.3%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Outer-floodplain exposure
11.6%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
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 ›Energy-cost burden
5.6%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
67.8 mi
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST88thUS93rdDefinition & 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
21.5 mi
in the top 7.4% 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the bottom 10.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS10thDefinition & 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 ›Home broadband subscription
95.4%
in the top 18% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS82ndDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
15.1 days/year
in the top 28% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS72ndDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, Hendrum, Minnesota (ZIP 56550) lands in the bottom 38% nationally (19,879th) and the bottom 7.4% of Minnesota (802nd).
The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: distance to a Superfund site sits in the top 7.0% nationally, and modeled expected annual loss is in the bottom 10.5% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise settles at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Modeled loneliness resides in the bottom 13.3% nationally. On the other side, modeled fine-particle registers in the top 2.2% nationally, floodplain exposure rests in the top 3.3% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure stands in the top 3.3% nationally. Modeled energy burden lies in the top 4.3% nationally, distance to a community health center lands in the top 7.4% nationally, and modeled radon sits in the top 11.2% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: 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 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. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 56510, just across the boundary, ranks better overall.
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 66%
21%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 50%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 40%
8%
Disability
healthier than 59%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 14%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 39%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 8%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 42%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 7%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 25%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 8%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 17%
8%
Disability
healthier than 31%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the bottom 0.4%
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
56510
Minnesotashares a border
Score 49.83
Closest healthier
56548
Minnesotashares a border
Score 47.89
Similar health profile
17850
Pennsylvania94% similar profile
Score 44.73
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 | 25.0% | 21.9–28.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.8% | 30.7–39.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.0% | 8.1–9.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.0% | 6.1–7.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.9% | 5.9–8.1 |
| Depression among adults | 25.2% | 21.4–29.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.6% | 10.0–13.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.5% | 30.2–39.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.6% | 29.1–45.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.2% | 9.8–14.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.1% | 6.5–9.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.8% | 73.6–79.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.0% | 69.8–77.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.8% | 82.5–86.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.5% | 62.6–71.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.1% | 61.4–68.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.3% | 72.1–85.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.8% | 15.5–22.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.1% | 14.2–20.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.8% | 21.3–31.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.4% | 26.0–39.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.7% | 15.7–22.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.4% | 14.5–18.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.3% | 11.5–15.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.4% | 12.5–16.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.2% | 25.9–35.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.9% | 6.9–8.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.0–9.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.6% | 11.5–15.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.3–4.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.6% | 4.0–5.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.2% | 17.6–24.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.7% | 10.1–15.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.5% | 7.6–11.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.2–12.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.5–8.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.9% | 24.0–34.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 5.5–7.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.8% | 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+) | 27.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 72.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.9% (67.0–94.0%) n=871 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.9%) n=871 |
| Foreign-born population | 9.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 56.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 15.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 40.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $86,667 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $172,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $913 | $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 | 77.9 yr ± 1.10 | 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 1.10 years of 77.9, 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