ZIP code
56639
in Effie, MinnesotaPopulation 359
47.71/ 100
Ranked #19,307 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #790 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 8.8%)
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 hazardous-chemical facility
36 mi
in the top 1.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
11.3%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Walkability
1.2 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
12.2%
in the top 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
28.2%
in the bottom 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.9%
in the top 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
10.2 per million
in the bottom 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.02%
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
27.8%
in the bottom 6.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, Effie, Minnesota (ZIP 56639) comes out in the bottom 40% nationally (19,307th) and the bottom 8.8% of Minnesota (790th).
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: distance to a hazardous-chemical facility settles in the top 1.4% nationally, modeled short sleep registers in the bottom 3.6% nationally, and modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the bottom 5.3% nationally. Modeled transportation noise lands in the bottom 6.0% nationally, and loneliness is in the bottom 6.4% nationally. Set against that, modeled coronary heart disease resides in the top 3.3% nationally, and walkability rests in the bottom 3.3% nationally. Modeled hearing disability lies in the top 3.8% nationally, and energy burden sits in the top 4.3% nationally. Modeled fine-particle settles in the top 5.0% nationally.
In plain terms, distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 55723, 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 74%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 66%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 65%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 14%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Disability
healthier than 21%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 97%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 95%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 79%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 52%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
in the bottom 0.9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 6%
16%
Disability
healthier than 2%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
55723
Minnesotashares a border
Score 52.87
Closest healthier
55771
Minnesotashares a border
Score 51.50
Similar health profile
03576
New Hampshire98% similar profile
Score 47.72
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 | 34.4% | 31.0–37.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 44.7% | 40.8–48.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 12.4% | 11.2–13.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 11.3% | 10.2–12.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.3% | 9.0–11.8 |
| Depression among adults | 23.4% | 20.4–26.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.6% | 15.5–19.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.3% | 35.4–43.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.5% | 32.5–44.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.5% | 5.0–6.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.2% | 9.1–13.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.4% | 6.8–10.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.7% | 80.1–85.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.9% | 75.7–81.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.8% | 86.2–89.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 73.3% | 69.0–77.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.6% | 58.1–65.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.3% | 67.5–80.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.6–16.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 19.1% | 16.3–22.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 30.7% | 26.3–35.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 28.2% | 23.6–33.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 23.3% | 20.3–26.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.9% | 13.3–16.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.4% | 14.5–18.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.4% | 12.7–16.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.5% | 34.3–43.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 12.2% | 11.0–13.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.5–11.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.0% | 17.5–22.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–5.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–7.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.8% | 17.7–24.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.1% | 11.5–16.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 9.5–13.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.6% | 8.1–11.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 6.9–9.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.8% | 23.7–32.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.7% | 5.7–7.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 10.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 8.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.2% (0.8–7.1%) n=872 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.4% (0.4–9.1%) n=871 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 82.7% | 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 | 0.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.1–11.9%) n=873 |
| Single-parent households | 68.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.9% (44.1–70.7%) n=870 |
| Population 65+ | 35.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 55.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $30,625 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $219,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $234,000 ($132,740–$396,860) n=857 |
| Median gross rent | $1,104 | $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 | 79.3 yr ± 1.23 | 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 1.23 years of 79.3, 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