Skip to content
Neighborhood · Ranked #18,240 of 84,120 nationally

Sherwood Park Eviction Risk: Moderate , Riverdale

Tract 13063040521 · Clayton County, GA · pop 3,935 · neighborhood within 1.0 mi

Census tract 13063040521 belongs to the Sherwood Park neighborhood of Riverdale, Georgia. It is home to 3,935 residents and scores 7.2/10, an elevated reading for landlords. That is riskier than roughly 97% of the 84,120 US census tracts we score.

74% of renter households here spend at least 30% of income on rent, a severe level, and 46% are severely burdened at 50% or more. Average rent runs $1,371 a month against an average household income of $50,216 a year, roughly 33% of income at the averages. About 47% of occupied units are renter-occupied.

Risk score
5.5
Moderate
Confidence 100% · 1–10 scale
Household mix · 100 hh
Burdened renters 35% Stable renters 12% Owners 53%
Tract context
Occupied units1,079
Renter share47.0%
SVI overall0.79
Poverty rate28.4%
Median income$50,216

Percentile rank

Higher percentile = riskier than more peers.
Within neighborhood
100 th percentile
Rank, 100th percentileLowHigh
#1 of 2 tracts In Sherwood Park
Very High
Within parent city
91 th percentile
Rank, 91st percentileLowHigh
#2 of 12 tracts In Riverdale
Very High
Within county
88 th percentile
Rank, 88th percentileLowHigh
#9 of 70 tracts In Clayton County
High
Within state
87 th percentile
Rank, 87th percentileLowHigh
#373 of 2,791 tracts In Georgia
High
Geographic context

Risk heat across Riverdale and the region

Centroid at 33.5698, -84.3905 · click any tract to drill in

Why Sherwood Park scores 5.5

9 axes · 1 = landlord-friendly
Local political climate
Inherited from Riverdale
8.7
Regional political climate
2024 county presidential margin
8.5
State political climate
Georgia legislature & governorship
2.0
Economic stress
28.4% poverty · this tract
7.1
Supply constraint
$1,371 rent vs county FMR
2.5
Rent control risk
Inherited from Riverdale
7.6
Eviction process difficulty
State law sets the calendar
1.5
Tenant organizing strength
Inherited from Riverdale
8.9
Housing court bias
Inherited from Riverdale
6.8

How Sherwood Park compares

Risk score vs. parent city, county, state.
Sherwood Park risk score vs. parent city / county / stateThis tract: 5.55.5This tracttract 040521Riverdale: 2.62.6Riverdaleparent cityCounty: 4.44.4Countyavg tract in countyState: 3.73.7Stateavg tract in state
CDC Social Vulnerability Index

SVI percentile: 79

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)

  • 1,380Total filings over 11 yrs
  • 26.28%Avg annual filing rate
  • 21.0%Peak (2008)
  • 127Filings in 2016 (latest validated)
Filings by year 2002 to 2016
Year-by-year eviction filings in tract 130630405212002: 87 filings (12.08/100 renter HHs)2005: 94 filings (13.31/100 renter HHs)2007: 141 filings (19.97/100 renter HHs)2008: 148 filings (20.96/100 renter HHs)2010: 137 filings (37.85/100 renter HHs)2011: 130 filings (32.58/100 renter HHs)2012: 131 filings (32.83/100 renter HHs)2013: 133 filings (33.33/100 renter HHs)2014: 138 filings (34.59/100 renter HHs)2015: 114 filings (28.57/100 renter HHs)2016: 127 filings (23.01/100 renter HHs)
Filings climbed 46% over the past 11 months.

Pandemic-era tracking (2020–2021)

  • 547Total filings 2020-21
  • 7.2Avg monthly (observed)
  • 0.0Pre-pandemic baseline
  • 0.00×Ratio to baseline
Monthly filings 2020–2021 2020-01-01 to 2026-04-01
Monthly eviction filings vs pre-pandemic baseline2020-01-01: 10 filings (100.00× baseline)2020-02-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2020-03-01: 3 filings (30.00× baseline)2020-04-01: 1 filings (10.00× baseline)2020-05-01: 4 filings (40.00× baseline)2020-06-01: 2 filings (20.00× baseline)2020-07-01: 5 filings (50.00× baseline)2020-08-01: 1 filings (10.00× baseline)2020-09-01: 4 filings (40.00× baseline)2020-10-01: 5 filings (50.00× baseline)2020-11-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2020-12-01: 1 filings (10.00× baseline)2021-01-01: 6 filings (60.00× baseline)2021-02-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2021-03-01: 5 filings (50.00× baseline)2021-04-01: 2 filings (20.00× baseline)2021-05-01: 4 filings (40.00× baseline)2021-06-01: 4 filings (40.00× baseline)2021-07-01: 3 filings (30.00× baseline)2021-08-01: 1 filings (10.00× baseline)2021-09-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2021-10-01: 9 filings (90.00× baseline)2021-11-01: 3 filings (30.00× baseline)2021-12-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2022-01-01: 5 filings (50.00× baseline)2022-02-01: 6 filings (60.00× baseline)2022-03-01: 4 filings (40.00× baseline)2022-04-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2022-05-01: 5 filings (50.00× baseline)2022-06-01: 6 filings (60.00× baseline)2022-07-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2022-08-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2022-09-01: 17 filings (170.00× baseline)2022-10-01: 6 filings (60.00× baseline)2022-11-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2022-12-01: 9 filings (90.00× baseline)2023-01-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2023-02-01: 10 filings (100.00× baseline)2023-03-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2023-04-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2023-05-01: 2 filings (20.00× baseline)2023-06-01: 9 filings (90.00× baseline)2023-07-01: 15 filings (150.00× baseline)2023-08-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2023-09-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2023-10-01: 11 filings (110.00× baseline)2023-11-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2023-12-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2024-01-01: 10 filings (100.00× baseline)2024-02-01: 14 filings (140.00× baseline)2024-03-01: 6 filings (60.00× baseline)2024-04-01: 6 filings (60.00× baseline)2024-05-01: 12 filings (120.00× baseline)2024-06-01: 12 filings (120.00× baseline)2024-07-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2024-08-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2024-09-01: 7 filings (70.00× baseline)2024-10-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2024-11-01: 1 filings (10.00× baseline)2024-12-01: 13 filings (130.00× baseline)2025-01-01: 10 filings (100.00× baseline)2025-02-01: 11 filings (110.00× baseline)2025-03-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2025-04-01: 13 filings (130.00× baseline)2025-05-01: 6 filings (60.00× baseline)2025-06-01: 17 filings (170.00× baseline)2025-07-01: 10 filings (100.00× baseline)2025-08-01: 9 filings (90.00× baseline)2025-09-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2025-10-01: 11 filings (110.00× baseline)2025-11-01: 9 filings (90.00× baseline)2025-12-01: 8 filings (80.00× baseline)2026-01-01: 9 filings (90.00× baseline)2026-02-01: 12 filings (120.00× baseline)2026-03-01: 4 filings (40.00× baseline)2026-04-01: 0 filings (0.00× baseline)

Pandemic filings ran far below baseline (moratorium effect). Eviction Lab tracked Atlanta, GA as part of its 34-metro Eviction Tracking System.

Comparable tracts

Census tracts with similar eviction risk

Within Sherwood Park. 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 Sherwood Park

What moves this score most is tenant organizing strength at 8.9/10. That part comes from the wider legal climate rather than the tract itself. Statewide and court-level factors such as eviction-process speed and rent-control exposure are inherited from Riverdale, while the economic and supply signals are measured at the tract level.

Set against its neighbors, this tract scores above the Clayton County average of 6.4 and above the Georgia statewide average of 5.6. Within its own county it reads on the riskier side for landlords.

The tract is Black and Hispanic or Latino and ranks around the 79th percentile nationally on the CDC Social Vulnerability Index, a measure of how exposed residents are to housing and economic shocks. High vulnerability tends to track with higher eviction-filing rates when rents climb.

Princeton's Eviction Lab logged 1,380 eviction filings here over 11 tracked years, with about 26.3% of renter households facing a filing in a typical year. Filings peaked at 21.0% of renter households in 2008.

For a landlord, this is a tract where process discipline pays off. Clean paperwork and steady screening keep the elevated risk manageable.

Frequently asked

About tract 13063040521

Q1

What is the eviction-risk score for census tract 13063040521?

Census tract 13063040521 in the Sherwood Park neighborhood scores 5.5/10 (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 13063040521?

Median gross rent is $1,371/month (ACS 5-year 2023, table B25064). 74% of renter households are cost-burdened.
Q3

What is the poverty rate in tract 13063040521?

28.4% of residents in tract 13063040521 live below the federal poverty line (ACS B17001, 2023). Population: 3,935.
Q4

How socially vulnerable is tract 13063040521?

CDC Social Vulnerability Index ranks this tract in the 79th percentile nationally. Sub-themes: socioeconomic 92th, household 56th, minority 94th, housing 41th.
Q5

Is tract 13063040521 considered part of Sherwood Park?

Yes. Per Census Bureau 2020 Block Assignment Files, the plurality of blocks in tract 13063040521 fall within Sherwood Park (neighborhood centroid within 1.0 miles, OSM data).
Q6

How many evictions are filed each year in tract 13063040521?

Princeton Eviction Lab recorded 1,380 eviction filings across 11 validated years in tract 13063040521 (2000-2018). The average annual filing rate is 26.28% of renter households, peaking at 21.0% in 2008. Source: Eviction Lab tract-validated 2024 release.
Q7

What share of households in tract 13063040521 struggle to pay rent?

About 28.6% 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. 19.1% also reported utility shutoff threats, a frequent precursor to eviction filings.
Q8

How does tract 13063040521 compare to Riverdale overall?

Tract 13063040521 scores 5.5/10, higher than the parent city of Riverdale at 2.6/10. City-scale signals (state law, local rent controls, court bias) are inherited from Riverdale; what makes this tract different are its tract-specific economic stress and supply-constraint sub-scores.
Sibling tracts

Highest-risk tracts in Riverdale

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

Related