Skip to main content
ZipVitals

Menu

ZIP code

59865

in St. Ignatius, MontanaPopulation 3,635

ZipVitals Score
How is the ZipVitals Score calculated? →

40.40/ 100

Ranked #26,480 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 17%)

Ranked #301 of 341 Montana ZIPs (bottom 11.8%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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

5.0%

in the top 1.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST91st
US99th
Definition & 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 ›

Elder-services access

0.6 per 1,000 residents

in the top 1.9% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST95th
US98th
Definition & source ›

The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›

Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility

23.3 mi

in the top 3.5% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST86th
US97th
Definition & 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 ›

Arsenic in groundwater

19.7%

in the top 6.6% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST96th
US93rd
Definition & source ›

The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.

A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.

Full methodology ›

Child-care access

0.6 per 1,000 residents

in the top 7.2% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST90th
US93rd
Definition & source ›

The number of child day-care services 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 ›

Crowded housing

7.0%

in the top 8.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST91st
US92nd
Definition & source ›

The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.

Full methodology ›

High cholesterol

33.1%

in the bottom 9.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST20th
US10th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.

Full methodology ›

Humid extreme heat

17.8 days/year

in the bottom 14.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST91st
US14th
Definition & source ›

The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.

Full methodology ›

Lack of transportation

11.7%

in the top 14.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST91st
US86th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.

Full methodology ›

Utility shut-off threat

10.4%

in the top 21% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST90th
US79th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.

Full methodology ›

The read

St. Ignatius, Montana (ZIP 59865), by its overall standing, sits in the bottom 17% nationally (26,480th) and the bottom 11.8% of Montana (301st).

continue reading

The data is direct about where this area carries real strain: modeled fine-particle settles in the top 1.1% nationally, modeled arsenic registers in the top 6.6% nationally, and crowded housing stands in the top 8.4% nationally. Distance to a community health center lands in the top 10.3% nationally, modeled mammography is in the bottom 10.1% nationally, and modeled hearing disability resides in the top 10.1% nationally. More encouragingly, elder services rests in the top 1.9% nationally, and distance to a hazardous-chemical facility lies in the top 3.5% nationally. Childcare sits in the top 7.2% nationally. Modeled extreme heat settles at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs.

Held up against its neighbors, elder services runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain 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 hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 59821, 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.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 96%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 30%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 30%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 11%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 12%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 35%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 16%

8%

Disability

healthier than 17%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 9%

5%

Nothing measured is lifting this score.

About typical

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 52%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 41%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 26%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 26%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 23%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 12%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 13%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 10%

8%

Disability

healthier than 5%

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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults33.5%30.4–36.7
High blood pressure among adults37.0%33.6–40.8
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults9.6%8.7–10.6
Current asthma among adults12.9%11.5–14.4
Coronary heart disease among adults8.7%7.8–9.6
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults9.7%8.5–11.2
Depression among adults26.2%23.0–29.9
Diagnosed diabetes among adults13.3%11.6–15.2
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened33.1%29.6–36.9
Obesity among adults35.1%29.8–40.9
Stroke among adults4.9%4.4–5.4
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years16.4%13.5–19.5
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years11.0%9.0–13.0
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure75.4%72.4–78.3
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults74.3%70.9–77.7
Cholesterol screening among adults81.8%79.6–83.9
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years62.0%56.9–66.9
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults54.5%50.7–58.1
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years68.9%60.6–76.5
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults17.9%15.2–20.9
Current cigarette smoking among adults18.0%15.5–20.7
No leisure-time physical activity among adults25.9%22.2–30.2
Short sleep duration among adults34.1%28.7–39.8
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults24.2%21.4–27.3
Frequent mental distress among adults19.2%17.2–21.4
Frequent physical distress among adults17.7%15.7–19.8
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults17.0%15.1–19.0
Any disability among adults36.6%32.7–40.8
Hearing disability among adults10.9%9.8–12.2
Independent living disability among adults11.1%9.9–12.4
Mobility disability among adults18.5%16.3–21.0
Self-care disability among adults5.4%4.8–6.0
Vision disability among adults7.2%6.5–8.0
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults23.0%19.7–26.7
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults18.8%16.0–22.0
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults14.5%12.2–17.2
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults13.7%11.7–15.9
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults11.7%10.3–13.4
Loneliness among adults31.8%27.3–36.6
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults10.4%9.0–12.0
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)MT median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate17.9%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,3649.7% (1.9–27.5%) n=360
Uninsured 18–6426.4%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,28611.1% (0.0–33.1%) n=357
No HS diploma (25+)13.6%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5054.7% (0.0–14.1%) n=360
Bachelor's or higher (25+)25.1%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50526.6% (12.3–46.1%) n=360
Unemployment rate (16+)8.3%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2741.8% (0.0–10.2%) n=357
Households without a vehicle8.8%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3221.7% (0.0–9.5%) n=360
Broadband subscription83.3%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32287.3% (72.1–100.0%) n=360
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)27.5%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32221.1% (7.3–37.2%) n=360
Homeownership rate73.3%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32278.0% (56.9–95.8%) n=360
Crowded housing (>1 per room)7.0%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3220.9% (0.0–6.6%) n=360
Foreign-born population1.8%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5530.9% (0.0–4.9%) n=360
Single-parent households54.5%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08761.3% (39.9–84.5%) n=356
Population 65+20.2%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55324.0% (12.9–44.0%) n=360
Median age38.3 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29246.0 yr (32.9–62.3) n=358
Median household income$56,473$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$66,875 ($44,980–$95,192) n=321
Median home value$345,300$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$292,450 ($127,430–$548,550) n=312
Median gross rent$723$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$877 ($544–$1,329) n=213
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)MT median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth77.5 yr ± 1.0978.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30879.7 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 1.09 years of 77.5, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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