ZIP code
58379
in Tokio, North DakotaPopulation 247
30.76/ 100
Ranked #30,598 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 4.6%)
Ranked #365 of 371 North Dakota ZIPs (bottom 1.7%)
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.
Colon-cancer screening
48%
in the bottom 1.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Distance to a community health center
53.8 mi
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Vision disability
10.8%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
176.4 mi
in the top 1.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST53rdUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Lack of transportation
20.9%
in the top 1.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
13.9%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
36%
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
24.2%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
18.6%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
26.6%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›The read
On the composite measure, Tokio, North Dakota (ZIP 58379) stands in the bottom 4.6% nationally (30,598th) and the bottom 1.7% of North Dakota (365th).
A number of readings press hard on the profile and set its tone: modeled colon screening sits in the bottom 1.4% nationally, and distance to a community health center resides in the top 0.9% nationally. Modeled vision disability stands in the top 3.4% nationally, and transportation sits in the top 1.8% nationally. Modeled independent living disability resides in the top 4.3% nationally, modeled food insecurity stands in the top 3.2% nationally, and households without a vehicle sits in the top 3.3% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff resides in the top 3.4% nationally, and tooth loss stands in the top 5.6% nationally. On the brighter side, distance to a Superfund site sits in the top 1.3% nationally.
For clarity, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. ZIP 58374, just across the boundary, ranks better overall among the ZIPs nearby.
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 91%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 87%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 28%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the bottom 0.6%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 25%
8%
Disability
healthier than 5%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.6%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
in the top 1.0%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 64%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 18%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 2%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 2%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 4%
8%
Disability
healthier than 3%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 7%
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
58370
North Dakotashares a border
Score 26.99
Closest healthier
58374
North Dakotashares a border
Score 42.48
Similar health profile
58528
North Dakota98% similar profile
Score 24.04
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 | 25.2% | 22.2–28.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.5% | 32.4–40.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 14.1% | 12.5–16.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.5% | 6.5–8.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.6% | 7.0–10.4 |
| Depression among adults | 22.1% | 18.7–26.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.4% | 14.2–18.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 31.9% | 27.9–36.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 46.8% | 38.5–55.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.0–5.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 26.6% | 22.0–31.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.5% | 8.2–15.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 72.3% | 69.3–75.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.6% | 68.0–77.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 74.1% | 69.6–78.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 48.0% | 42.3–53.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 43.2% | 39.3–47.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.8% | 61.7–79.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.0% | 15.6–22.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 26.3% | 21.3–31.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 33.7% | 27.5–40.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 43.4% | 36.1–50.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.7% | 25.9–35.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.5% | 17.4–23.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.0% | 15.4–20.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 20.8% | 17.1–24.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 43.1% | 37.0–49.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.9% | 11.5–16.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.1% | 16.1–22.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.1–7.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.1–12.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 29.3% | 24.3–34.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 36.0% | 28.4–44.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 25.7% | 19.7–32.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 25.2% | 20.3–30.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 20.9% | 16.8–25.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.8% | 28.3–39.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 18.6% | 15.3–22.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ND median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 33.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.0% (1.0–21.4%) n=380 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 34.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.5% (0.0–19.2%) n=380 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 19.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.3% (0.6–13.4%) n=382 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 4.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 24.6% (12.5–41.0%) n=382 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 1.1% (0.0–6.5%) n=382 |
| Households without a vehicle | 24.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 1.5% (0.0–7.4%) n=379 |
| Broadband subscription | 80.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.7% (75.3–98.1%) n=379 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 27.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 15.2% (4.0–28.2%) n=379 |
| Homeownership rate | 45.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.5% (59.2–98.7%) n=379 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.2% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.0% (0.0–4.6%) n=379 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.9% (0.0–5.7%) n=383 |
| Single-parent households | 17.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 59.3% (40.0–83.3%) n=377 |
| Population 65+ | 4.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 21.6% (9.1–38.9%) n=383 |
| Median age | 19.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.9 yr (31.1–60.2) n=381 |
| Median household income | $42,333 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $79,666 ($56,729–$115,391) n=354 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $159,750 ($88,870–$297,180) n=328 |
| Median gross rent | $833 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $767 ($513–$1,222) n=212 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ND median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 70.6 yr ± 2.75 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.0 yr (77.6–84.0) n=379 |
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 2.75 years of 70.6, 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