Skip to content
Neighborhood · Ranked #22,681 of 84,120 nationally

Alabama Village Eviction Risk: Moderate , Chickasaw

Tract 01097005200 · Mobile County, AL · pop 1,431 · neighborhood within 0.8 mi

01097005200 is a census tract in the Alabama Village area of Chickasaw, AL. It scores 5.6/10 for landlords. Population here is 1,431. 59% of renter households cross the 30%-of-income line, markedly above the Mobile County average of 43.6%.

Risk score
5.6
Moderate
Confidence 100% · 1–10 scale
Household mix · 100 hh
Burdened renters 32% Stable renters 22% Owners 46%
Tract context
Occupied units609
Renter share54.2%
SVI overall0.53
Poverty rate24.4%
Median income$38,875

Percentile rank

Higher percentile = riskier than more peers.
Within neighborhood
0 th percentile
Rank, 0th percentileLowHigh
#6 of 6 tracts In Alabama Village
Very Low
Within parent city
0 th percentile
Rank, 0th percentileLowHigh
#4 of 4 tracts In Chickasaw
Very Low
Within county
93 th percentile
Rank, 93rd percentileLowHigh
#11 of 135 tracts In Mobile County
Very High
Within state
97 th percentile
Rank, 97th percentileLowHigh
#46 of 1,436 tracts In Alabama
Very High
Geographic context

Risk heat across Chickasaw and the region

Centroid at 30.7636, -88.0781 · click any tract to drill in

Why Alabama Village scores 5.6

9 axes · 1 = landlord-friendly
Local political climate
Inherited from Chickasaw
5.0
Regional political climate
2024 county presidential margin
4.4
State political climate
Alabama legislature & governorship
1.8
Economic stress
24.4% poverty · this tract
6.1
Supply constraint
$1,030 rent vs county FMR
4.4
Rent control risk
Inherited from Chickasaw
8.3
Eviction process difficulty
State law sets the calendar
1.9
Tenant organizing strength
Inherited from Chickasaw
9.1
Housing court bias
Inherited from Chickasaw
8.6

How Alabama Village compares

Risk score vs. parent city, county, state.
Alabama Village risk score vs. parent city / county / state5.6This tracttract 0052004.3Chickasawparent city4.0Countyavg tract in county4.0Stateavg tract in state
CDC Social Vulnerability Index

SVI percentile: 53

CDC/ATSDR 2022. Higher = more vulnerable. National percentile across 84k tracts.

Eviction filings

Court-record eviction history

Court-validated eviction filings collected from county clerks and consolidated by the Eviction Lab at Princeton University. Filing rate is filings per 100 renter households.1

Historic baseline (2000–2018)

  • 155Total filings over 10 yrs
  • 6.94%Avg annual filing rate
  • 9.8%Peak (2002)
  • 9Filings in 2016 (latest validated)
Filings by year 2001 to 2016
Year-by-year eviction filings in tract 01097005200
Filings stayed roughly flat over the past 10 months.
Comparable tracts

Census tracts with similar eviction risk

Within Alabama Village. Closest by Eviction Risk Score.

CDC PLACES 2023 · health & economic stress

Eviction-adjacent indicators

Crude prevalence of conditions linked to housing loss. Source: CDC PLACES (cwsq-ngmh), 2023 model-based small-area estimates.

Analysis

What drives eviction risk in Alabama Village

The score leans hardest on tenant-organizing strength at 9.1/10. On the high side, housing-court posture reads 8.6/10.

Against the Mobile County average of 4.0, this tract reads riskier for landlords by 1.6 points. Running hot, rent-regulation exposure reads 8.3/10. Severe burden reaches 17%. Those are renters paying half their income or more, and that is where non-payment filings originate.

The poverty rate is 24%. Judgments in high-poverty tracts are collectible far less often than filing counts suggest. Food insecurity runs 28.0% against 17.8% nationally.

Court records carry 155 eviction filings across 10 observed years. Inability to pay a utility bill runs 14.7% against 9.2% nationally. Utility arrears usually lead rent arrears by a month or two. The worst year on record was 2002, when 9.8% of renter households were served.

In a typical year about 6.9% of renter households face a filing. That is riskier than roughly 73% of the 84,120 US census tracts in this model.

CDC social-vulnerability scoring puts the tract at 5.7/10.

Tract-level figures come from the ACS 5-year release and are rebuilt whenever that, the court-record feed, or the statutory ledger behind the score changes.

Frequently asked

About tract 01097005200

Q1

What is the eviction-risk score for census tract 01097005200?

Census tract 01097005200 in the Alabama Village neighborhood scores 5.6/10 (Moderate tier). The Eviction Risk Score blends state law, county filing rates, parent-city politics, and tract-specific rent-to-income ratios + poverty signals.
Q2

What is the average rent in tract 01097005200?

Median gross rent is $1,030/month (ACS 5-year 2023, table B25064). 59% of renter households are cost-burdened.
Q3

What is the poverty rate in tract 01097005200?

24.4% of residents in tract 01097005200 live below the federal poverty line (ACS B17001, 2023). Population: 1,431.
Q4

How socially vulnerable is tract 01097005200?

CDC Social Vulnerability Index ranks this tract in the 53th percentile nationally. Sub-themes: socioeconomic 67th, household 15th, minority 60th, housing 52th.
Q5

Is tract 01097005200 considered part of Alabama Village?

Yes. Per Census Bureau 2020 Block Assignment Files, the plurality of blocks in tract 01097005200 fall within Alabama Village (neighborhood centroid within 0.8 miles, OSM data).
Q6

How many evictions are filed each year in tract 01097005200?

Princeton Eviction Lab recorded 155 eviction filings across 10 validated years in tract 01097005200 (2000-2018). The average annual filing rate is 6.94% of renter households, peaking at 9.8% in 2002. Source: Eviction Lab tract-validated 2024 release.
Q7

What share of households in tract 01097005200 struggle to pay rent?

About 19.8% of adults in this tract reported housing insecurity (could not pay rent or mortgage in the past 12 months), per the CDC PLACES 2023 model-based small-area estimate. 14.7% also reported utility shutoff threats, a frequent precursor to eviction filings.
Q8

How does tract 01097005200 compare to Chickasaw overall?

Tract 01097005200 scores 5.6/10, higher than the parent city of Chickasaw at 4.3/10. City-scale signals (state law, local rent controls, court bias) are inherited from Chickasaw; what makes this tract different are its tract-specific economic stress and supply-constraint sub-scores.
Sibling tracts

Highest-risk tracts in Chickasaw

Top eight tracts in Chickasaw ranked by composite eviction-risk score.

Related