The Corners of Brookfield Eviction Risk: Lower

The voucher gap is 46.2%: households holding assistance that local rents will not absorb, which shows up as churn rather than arrears. 25% are severely burdened, paying half their income or more in rent. That cohort has no absorption capacity for an unexpected bill, and it is where non-payment filings originate. Pulling the other way is economic stress, at 1.5/10.

Running hot is supply constraint at 8.4/10. Internally this is not one market. Tract scores span 3 to 4.8, so two buildings inside the same boundary can carry materially different risk. Court records carry 32 eviction filings across its 3 observed tracts.

SNAP participation is 6.0% of households versus 15.2% nationally. The worst year on record was 2013, when filings touched 3.8% of renter households.

5.0% of adults carry no health insurance against 11.3% nationally, a common route into sudden unpayable debt. That places it #1 of 5 neighborhoods in Brookfield.

Judgments average 0.5% of renter households a year, the share of filings that actually convert to an order. For a like-for-like read, Civic Center and Elm Lane score within a fraction of it. Poverty sits at 6%, low enough that arrears here usually reflect a specific shock rather than a structural income gap.

Underwrite the address, not the area: with 1.8 points between its best and worst tract, the per-tract table below is the operative number. Scores move when the ACS release, the court-record feed, or the statute ledger behind them moves.