ZIP code
56668
in Ranier, MinnesotaPopulation 217
51.04/ 100
Ranked #14,785 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 46%)
Ranked #644 of 866 Minnesota ZIPs (bottom 26%)
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 an emergency room
60.5 mi
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
5.8%
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
12.6%
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Distance to a community health center
35.7 mi
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST78thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Transportation noise
18.4%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & 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
27.1%
in the bottom 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
103.2 mi
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Outer-floodplain exposure
8.7%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Floodplain exposure
45.6%
in the top 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Ranier, Minnesota (ZIP 56668), by its composite score, sits in the top 46% healthiest ZIPs nationally (14,785th) and the bottom 26% of Minnesota (644th).
The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: modeled disaster risk stands in the bottom 0.8% nationally, and loneliness registers in the bottom 3.4% nationally. Distance to a Superfund site settles in the top 3.5% nationally. Pulling the other way, distance to an emergency room sits in the top 0.6% nationally, modeled loud transportation noise lies in the top 1.0% nationally, and modeled hearing disability rests in the top 2.8% nationally. Distance to a community health center resides in the top 2.8% nationally, modeled transportation noise is in the top 2.9% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure lands in the top 4.4% nationally. Floodplain exposure stands in the top 4.9% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, loud transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 56649, 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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 92%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 88%
8%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 40%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 25%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 16%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.6%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 99%
8%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 58%
16%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 3%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Disability
healthier than 9%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 2%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.9%
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
56649
Minnesotashares a border
Score 52.01
Closest healthier
56669
Minnesotaabout 8.0 mi away
Score 54.33
Similar health profile
67445
Kansas97% similar profile
Score 50.86
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 | 33.1% | 29.4–37.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 43.3% | 38.9–47.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 14.0% | 12.6–15.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.5% | 8.4–10.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.8% | 9.4–12.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.0% | 6.6–9.6 |
| Depression among adults | 21.2% | 17.9–24.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.3% | 12.2–16.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.1% | 35.4–44.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.1% | 28.0–42.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.0% | 4.3–5.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.7% | 8.9–12.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.1% | 4.7–7.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 84.4% | 81.7–86.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.6% | 77.3–83.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.5% | 88.9–91.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 72.4% | 67.8–76.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 66.5% | 63.0–70.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.9% | 70.7–84.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.0% | 11.5–16.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.8% | 11.2–16.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.0% | 23.0–33.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 28.7% | 23.1–34.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.5% | 15.5–22.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 12.7% | 11.0–14.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.0% | 12.0–16.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.0–13.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.5% | 29.8–39.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 12.6% | 10.9–14.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.9% | 6.6–9.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.9% | 14.1–19.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.5–4.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.2–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.2% | 15.9–22.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.8% | 6.9–11.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 5.0–8.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.7% | 5.3–8.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.7–6.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.1% | 22.4–32.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.5% | 3.7–5.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 1.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.4% (3.6–16.8%) n=872 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 0.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.2% (2.3–12.7%) n=872 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.5% (2.2–11.2%) n=873 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 45.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.4% (13.6–48.8%) n=873 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.8% | 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 | 88.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (81.6–95.3%) n=871 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 9.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.1% (14.0–31.1%) n=871 |
| Homeownership rate | 88.3% | 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 | 0.9% | 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+ | 14.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–30.7%) n=873 |
| Median age | 50.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (35.2–54.3) n=873 |
| Median household income | $116,250 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $77,917 ($58,441–$110,840) n=864 |
| Median home value | $183,900 | $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 | 76.2 yr ± 0.73 | 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 0.73 years of 76.2, 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