Skip to content
Neighborhood · Ranked #57,812 of 84,120 nationally

Scenic Hills Eviction Risk: Lower , Ringgold

Tract 13047030201 · Catoosa County, GA · pop 5,576 · neighborhood within 1.2 mi

Tract 13047030201 sits in the Scenic Hills area of Ringgold, GA, carrying an eviction-risk score of 3.5/10. Population here is 5,576. The score leans hardest on court filing pressure at 9.1/10.

Risk score
3.5
Lower
Confidence 100% · 1–10 scale
Household mix · 100 hh
Burdened renters 14% Stable renters 21% Owners 65%
Tract context
Occupied units2,023
Renter share35.6%
SVI overall0.39
Poverty rate4.1%
Median income$73,291

Percentile rank

Higher percentile = riskier than more peers.
Within neighborhood
100 th percentile
Rank, 100th percentileLowHigh
#1 of 2 tracts In Scenic Hills
Very High
Within parent city
50 th percentile
Rank, 50th percentileLowHigh
#4 of 7 tracts In Ringgold
Moderate
Within county
43 th percentile
Rank, 43rd percentileLowHigh
#9 of 15 tracts In Catoosa County
Moderate
Within state
39 th percentile
Rank, 39th percentileLowHigh
#1,701 of 2,791 tracts In Georgia
Low
Geographic context

Risk heat across Ringgold and the region

Centroid at 34.9290, -85.1389 · click any tract to drill in

Why Scenic Hills scores 3.5

9 axes · 1 = landlord-friendly
Local political climate
Inherited from Ringgold
3.0
Regional political climate
2024 county presidential margin
2.2
State political climate
Georgia legislature & governorship
2.0
Economic stress
4.1% poverty · this tract
1.0
Supply constraint
$944 rent vs county FMR
1.6
Rent control risk
Inherited from Ringgold
6.5
Eviction process difficulty
State law sets the calendar
2.0
Tenant organizing strength
Inherited from Ringgold
8.9
Housing court bias
Inherited from Ringgold
5.7

How Scenic Hills compares

Risk score vs. parent city, county, state.
Scenic Hills risk score vs. parent city / county / stateThis tract: 3.53.5This tracttract 030201Ringgold: 4.04.0Ringgoldparent cityCounty: 4.04.0Countyavg tract in countyState: 4.24.2Stateavg tract in state
CDC Social Vulnerability Index

SVI percentile: 39

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)

  • 873Total filings over 11 yrs
  • 13.06%Avg annual filing rate
  • 18.3%Peak (2008)
  • 73Filings in 2015 (latest validated)
Filings by year 2005 to 2015
Year-by-year eviction filings in tract 130470302012005: 81 filings (13.20/100 renter HHs)2006: 77 filings (12.54/100 renter HHs)2007: 106 filings (17.27/100 renter HHs)2008: 112 filings (18.25/100 renter HHs)2009: 87 filings (14.17/100 renter HHs)2010: 73 filings (10.43/100 renter HHs)2011: 62 filings (10.63/100 renter HHs)2012: 71 filings (12.18/100 renter HHs)2013: 63 filings (10.81/100 renter HHs)2014: 68 filings (11.66/100 renter HHs)2015: 73 filings (12.52/100 renter HHs)
Filings stayed roughly flat over the past 11 months.
Comparable tracts

Census tracts with similar eviction risk

Within Scenic Hills. 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 Scenic Hills

Running cool, economic stress reads 1/10. Sitting well above the midpoint, tenant-organizing strength reads 8.9/10.

The severe-burden share is 14%, and it is the single best predictor in this model of a filing that actually reaches judgment. The filing record is not thin: 873 evictions over 11 years of observation.

Filings peaked in 2008 at 18.3% of renter households. In a typical year about 13.1% of renter households face a filing. Nationally it ranks #57,812 of 84,120 for landlord eviction difficulty.

Social vulnerability reads 4.5/10 on the CDC index, a measure of exposure to housing and economic shocks. Against average income of $73,291, annual rent is just 15%.

Poverty sits at 4%, low enough that arrears here usually signal a specific shock rather than a structural income gap. 41% of renter households spend at least 30% of income on rent.

It tracks the Catoosa County average of 4.0 closely. Average gross rent is $944, close to the Ringgold average.

All figures here are ACS 5-year estimates for this tract, refreshed as the underlying releases land.

Frequently asked

About tract 13047030201

Q1

What is the eviction-risk score for census tract 13047030201?

Census tract 13047030201 in the Scenic Hills neighborhood scores 3.5/10 (Lower 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 13047030201?

Median gross rent is $944/month (ACS 5-year 2023, table B25064). 41% of renter households are cost-burdened.
Q3

What is the poverty rate in tract 13047030201?

4.1% of residents in tract 13047030201 live below the federal poverty line (ACS B17001, 2023). Population: 5,576.
Q4

How socially vulnerable is tract 13047030201?

CDC Social Vulnerability Index ranks this tract in the 39th percentile nationally. Sub-themes: socioeconomic 40th, household 40th, minority 9th, housing 54th.
Q5

Is tract 13047030201 considered part of Scenic Hills?

Yes. Per Census Bureau 2020 Block Assignment Files, the plurality of blocks in tract 13047030201 fall within Scenic Hills (neighborhood centroid within 1.2 miles, OSM data).
Q6

How many evictions are filed each year in tract 13047030201?

Princeton Eviction Lab recorded 873 eviction filings across 11 validated years in tract 13047030201 (2000-2018). The average annual filing rate is 13.06% of renter households, peaking at 18.3% in 2008. Source: Eviction Lab tract-validated 2024 release.
Q7

What share of households in tract 13047030201 struggle to pay rent?

About 10.1% 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. 6.2% also reported utility shutoff threats, a frequent precursor to eviction filings.
Q8

How does tract 13047030201 compare to Ringgold overall?

Tract 13047030201 scores 3.5/10, lower than the parent city of Ringgold at 4/10. City-scale signals (state law, local rent controls, court bias) are inherited from Ringgold; what makes this tract different are its tract-specific economic stress and supply-constraint sub-scores.
Sibling tracts

Highest-risk tracts in Ringgold

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

Related