Skip to content
Neighborhood · Ranked #56,048 of 84,120 nationally

Fruitland Park Eviction Risk: Lower , Painesville

Tract 39085206200 · Lake County, OH · pop 1,571 · neighborhood within 1.2 mi

Census tract 39085206200 covers part of the Fruitland Park area of Grand River, OH, and scores 3.6/10 on landlord eviction risk. Population here is 1,571. Cost burden runs 26% here against 36.8% across Lake County.

Risk score
3.6
Lower
Confidence 100% · 1–10 scale
Household mix · 100 hh
Burdened renters 6% Stable renters 16% Owners 78%
Tract context
Occupied units745
Renter share22.0%
SVI overall0.15
Poverty rate9.1%
Median income$70,625

Percentile rank

Higher percentile = riskier than more peers.
Within neighborhood
0 th percentile
Rank, 0th percentileLowHigh
#6 of 6 tracts In Fruitland Park
Very Low
Within parent city
50 th percentile
Rank, 50th percentileLowHigh
#1 of 1 tracts In Painesville
Moderate
Within county
53 th percentile
Rank, 53rd percentileLowHigh
#28 of 59 tracts In Lake County
Moderate
Within state
44 th percentile
Rank, 44th percentileLowHigh
#1,761 of 3,162 tracts In Ohio
Moderate
Geographic context

Risk heat across Painesville and the region

Centroid at 41.7338, -81.2797 · click any tract to drill in

Why Fruitland Park scores 3.6

9 axes · 1 = landlord-friendly
Local political climate
Inherited from Painesville
4.9
Regional political climate
2024 county presidential margin
4.3
State political climate
Ohio legislature & governorship
2.4
Economic stress
9.1% poverty · this tract
2.3
Supply constraint
$955 rent vs county FMR
2.9
Rent control risk
Inherited from Painesville
4.3
Eviction process difficulty
State law sets the calendar
2.6
Tenant organizing strength
Inherited from Painesville
3.8
Housing court bias
Inherited from Painesville
4.3

How Fruitland Park compares

Risk score vs. parent city, county, state.
Fruitland Park risk score vs. parent city / county / state3.6This tracttract 2062004.5Painesvilleparent city3.8Countyavg tract in county4.2Stateavg tract in state
CDC Social Vulnerability Index

SVI percentile: 15

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)

  • 135Total filings over 14 yrs
  • 4.85%Avg annual filing rate
  • 11.6%Peak (2009)
  • 8Filings in 2017 (latest validated)
Filings by year 2002 to 2017
Year-by-year eviction filings in tract 39085206200
Filings climbed 60% over the past 14 months.
Comparable tracts

Census tracts with similar eviction risk

Within Fruitland 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 Fruitland Park

Pulling hardest the other way is economic stress at 2.3/10. On the softer side, state political climate reads 2.4/10.

Running cool, eviction-process difficulty reads 2.6/10. The severe-burden share is 9%, and it is the single best predictor in this model of a filing that actually reaches judgment.

The filing record is not thin: 135 evictions over 14 years of observation. Average gross rent is $955, 10% below the Grand River average. Filings peaked in 2009 at 11.6% of renter households.

In a typical year about 4.9% of renter households face a filing. On the national scale it lands near the 33rd percentile of the 84,120 tracts scored. Only 22% of units are renter-occupied. Rental comparables are thin; price a renewal off the nearest genuine rental sub-market rather than off surrounding sale prices.

Social vulnerability reads 2.4/10 on the CDC index, a measure of exposure to housing and economic shocks. Rent consumes only 16% of average household income of $70,625, an unusually wide affordability cushion. Of its three components the socioeconomic standing measure is the least pressured.

It tracks the Lake County average of 3.8 closely.

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

Frequently asked

About tract 39085206200

Q1

What is the eviction-risk score for census tract 39085206200?

Census tract 39085206200 in the Fruitland Park neighborhood scores 3.6/10 (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 39085206200?

Median gross rent is $955/month (ACS 5-year 2023, table B25064). 26% of renter households are cost-burdened.
Q3

What is the poverty rate in tract 39085206200?

9.1% of residents in tract 39085206200 live below the federal poverty line (ACS B17001, 2023). Population: 1,571.
Q4

How socially vulnerable is tract 39085206200?

CDC Social Vulnerability Index ranks this tract in the 15th percentile nationally. Sub-themes: socioeconomic 20th, household 24th, minority 14th, housing 24th.
Q5

Is tract 39085206200 considered part of Fruitland Park?

Yes. Per Census Bureau 2020 Block Assignment Files, the plurality of blocks in tract 39085206200 fall within Fruitland Park (neighborhood centroid within 1.2 miles, OSM data).
Q6

How many evictions are filed each year in tract 39085206200?

Princeton Eviction Lab recorded 135 eviction filings across 14 validated years in tract 39085206200 (2000-2018). The average annual filing rate is 4.85% of renter households, peaking at 11.6% in 2009. Source: Eviction Lab tract-validated 2024 release.
Q7

What share of households in tract 39085206200 struggle to pay rent?

About 9.4% 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. 6.5% also reported utility shutoff threats, a frequent precursor to eviction filings.
Q8

How does tract 39085206200 compare to Painesville overall?

Tract 39085206200 scores 3.6/10, lower than the parent city of Painesville at 4.5/10. City-scale signals (state law, local rent controls, court bias) are inherited from Painesville; what makes this tract different are its tract-specific economic stress and supply-constraint sub-scores.
Related