ZIP code
59915
in Elmo, MontanaPopulation 452
44.86/ 100
Ranked #22,566 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 30%)
Ranked #263 of 341 Montana ZIPs (bottom 23%)
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.
Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
5.2%
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
19.8%
in the top 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Mammography
66.9%
in the bottom 5.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
17.7 mi
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST78thUS94thDefinition & 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
18.2%
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Home broadband subscription
72.2%
in the bottom 7.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST10thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
11.2%
in the top 8.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST77thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Distance to a nursing home
11.2 mi
in the top 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST47thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing home.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.43%
in the bottom 9.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST29thUS9thDefinition & 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
Overall, Elmo, Montana (ZIP 59915) lands in the bottom 30% nationally (22,566th) and the bottom 23% of Montana (263rd).
Where the load on this area runs deepest, the data leads: modeled fine-particle rests in the top 1.0% nationally, and households without a vehicle stands in the top 4.6% nationally. Modeled mammography lies in the bottom 5.3% nationally, and arsenic lands in the top 7.4% nationally. Home broadband subscription sits in the bottom 7.5% nationally, modeled hearing disability is in the top 8.0% nationally, and distance to a nursing home settles in the top 9.1% nationally. More encouragingly, modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the bottom 1.4% nationally, and distance to a hazardous-chemical facility registers in the top 6.1% nationally. Unemployment rests at the national minimum, shared with about 15% of ZIPs.
Set beside the nearby areas, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. 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. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 59860, just across the boundary, ranks better overall.
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
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 97%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 48%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 49%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 32%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 21%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Disability
healthier than 25%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 9%
5%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 62%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 45%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 30%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 25%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 23%
8%
Disability
healthier than 14%
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
59845
Montanashares a border
Score 32.43
Closest healthier
59860
Montanashares a border
Score 49.79
Similar health profile
97632
Oregon91% similar profile
Score 39.99
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% | 29.9–36.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.8% | 34.2–41.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.1% | 9.2–11.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.9% | 11.5–14.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.9% | 7.8–10.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.6% | 7.2–10.0 |
| Depression among adults | 24.3% | 21.1–27.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.7% | 11.9–15.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.7% | 30.3–37.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.5% | 29.2–40.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.7% | 4.2–5.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.1% | 10.7–15.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.5% | 7.4–11.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.4% | 73.5–79.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.8% | 72.4–79.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.2% | 82.2–86.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.8% | 62.9–72.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.9% | 51.2–58.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 66.9% | 58.2–74.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.3% | 14.6–20.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.9% | 14.0–20.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.7% | 19.7–27.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.1% | 28.8–39.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.7% | 19.3–26.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.1% | 16.0–20.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.8% | 14.6–19.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.3% | 13.3–17.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.1% | 30.6–39.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.2% | 9.9–12.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.8% | 8.4–11.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.2% | 14.6–19.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.0–5.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.5% | 20.0–27.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.0% | 14.7–21.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 12.4% | 9.8–15.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.6% | 11.3–16.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.5% | 9.8–13.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.1% | 26.7–35.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.5–11.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.7% (1.9–27.5%) n=360 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 44.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 11.1% (0.0–33.1%) n=357 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 15.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 4.7% (0.0–14.1%) n=360 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 25.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 26.6% (12.3–46.1%) n=360 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 1.8% (0.0–10.2%) n=357 |
| Households without a vehicle | 19.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 1.7% (0.0–9.5%) n=360 |
| Broadband subscription | 72.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.3% (72.1–100.0%) n=360 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 11.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.3–37.2%) n=360 |
| Homeownership rate | 82.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.0% (56.9–95.8%) n=360 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.9% (0.0–6.6%) n=360 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.9% (0.0–4.9%) n=360 |
| Single-parent households | 65.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 61.3% (39.9–84.5%) n=356 |
| Population 65+ | 29.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 24.0% (12.9–44.0%) n=360 |
| Median age | 35.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 46.0 yr (32.9–62.3) n=358 |
| Median household income | $58,750 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $66,875 ($44,980–$95,192) n=321 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $292,450 ($127,430–$548,550) n=312 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 80.8 yr ± 1.19 | 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 1.19 years of 80.8, 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