ZIP code
59101
in Billings, MontanaPopulation 42,250
44.70/ 100
Ranked #22,722 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 29%)
Ranked #266 of 341 Montana ZIPs (bottom 22%)
Ranked #30 of 30 Billings, MT ZIPs (bottom 3.4%)
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.
Natural-disaster risk
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
2.2%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST58thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.19 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health 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 ›Binge drinking
20.4%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
30.9%
in the bottom 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
11.3%
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
1.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices 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 ›Outpatient-care access
0.46 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›The read
In its overall standing, ZIP 59101, one of several in Billings, Montana lands in the bottom 29% nationally (22,722nd) and the bottom 22% of Montana (266th).
This area's pressures are easy to read across the measures: modeled disaster risk lies in the top 1.1% nationally, distance to a Superfund site stands at the national minimum, and modeled expected annual loss rests in the top 2.6% nationally. Modeled fine-particle registers in the top 4.3% nationally, binge drinking resides in the top 4.8% nationally, and transportation noise settles in the top 7.0% nationally. On the brighter side, mental-health providers is in the top 4.5% nationally. Distance to an emergency room sits at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Modeled high cholesterol lands in the bottom 4.5% nationally, and physicians lies in the top 8.4% nationally.
Against the wider neighborhood, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put simply, 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. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. On the overall standing, ZIP 59029, just across the boundary, ranks healthier.
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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Billings, MT metro area.
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 70%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 83%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 54%
16%
Disability
healthier than 42%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 4%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 12%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 6%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 81%
21%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 51%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 4%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 5%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 3%
8%
Disability
healthier than 37%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 13%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 74%
21%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 37%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.00%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the bottom 0.00%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 15%
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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
3 of our published findings list this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 76.6 ± 1.2 years. A median household income of $58,598 predicts 78.0 years — 1.4 years below.
Ranked #1,742 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 76.6 ± 1.2 years. The 50 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 79.9 years — 3.4 years below them.
Ranked #2,636 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 4.2 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 70.1 — 66 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,015 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
59029
Montanashares a border
Score 45.13
Closest healthier
59037
Montanashares a border
Score 49.51
Similar health profile
43228
Ohio99% similar profile
Score 44.75
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 | 26.3% | 24.0–28.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.5% | 28.7–34.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.5% | 6.8–8.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.2–12.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.7–8.1 |
| Depression among adults | 29.2% | 26.2–32.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 30.9% | 28.1–33.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.0% | 32.8–41.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 16.4% | 13.7–19.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.4% | 9.9–13.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.9% | 66.8–72.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.8% | 69.5–75.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 79.7% | 77.6–81.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.2% | 57.2–65.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.9% | 53.8–60.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.0% | 69.9–81.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 20.4% | 17.8–23.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.9% | 16.0–20.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.1% | 21.3–27.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.5% | 32.7–40.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.0% | 19.9–24.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.3% | 18.3–22.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.9–17.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.9% | 16.2–19.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.6% | 31.5–37.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 7.0–8.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.6% | 8.7–10.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.7% | 12.3–15.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.8–4.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.3% | 21.6–27.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.8% | 14.9–19.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 12.4% | 10.8–14.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.7% | 11.2–14.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.5% | 30.2–37.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.8–10.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.7% (1.9–27.5%) n=360 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 11.1% (0.0–33.1%) n=357 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.7% (0.0–14.1%) n=360 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 23.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 26.6% (12.3–46.1%) n=360 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 1.8% (0.0–10.2%) n=357 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 1.7% (0.0–9.5%) n=360 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.3% (72.1–100.0%) n=360 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.3–37.2%) n=360 |
| Homeownership rate | 56.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.0% (56.9–95.8%) n=360 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.9% (0.0–6.6%) n=360 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.9% (0.0–4.9%) n=360 |
| Single-parent households | 54.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 61.3% (39.9–84.5%) n=356 |
| Population 65+ | 15.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 24.0% (12.9–44.0%) n=360 |
| Median age | 37.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 46.0 yr (32.9–62.3) n=358 |
| Median household income | $58,598 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $66,875 ($44,980–$95,192) n=321 |
| Median home value | $268,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $292,450 ($127,430–$548,550) n=312 |
| Median gross rent | $972 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $877 ($544–$1,329) n=213 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 76.5 yr ± 0.60 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 79.7 yr (76.7–83.7) n=358 |
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 0.60 years of 76.5, 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