Business Retention

The Business Retention indicator measures the rate of growth or decline in the number of neighborhood businesses over time, and is an important barometer for the economic strength of a neighborhood. Business retention is key to the health of the local economy. Local businesses contribute to the social fabric of a community, by augmenting social networks and increasing access to the labor market. Some studies show that promoting business retention and expansion is integral to job creation; however most job creation efforts focus heavily on business recruitment, while giving relatively less attention to the former. At the population level, prolonged business decline has been linked to negative mental health outcomes and other morbidities. The HCAT includes a measure of the number of businesses that have opened or closed on a year-to-year basis. Although found under the Economic Health domain, the Business Retention indicator can also be linked to the Employment Opportunities, Social Cohesion, and Neighborhood Characteristics domains. Data for the Business Retention indicator is available from the InfoGroup, Inc.

Neighborhoodsort descending Indicator Value Rank
Acipco-Finley -21.7% 90
Airport Highlands 100.0% 1
Apple Valley -17.4% 79
Arlington - West End -3.3% 34
Belview Heights -10.0% 56
Bridlewood 0.0% 22
Brown Springs -13.0% 69
Brownsville Heights -40.0% 98
Brummitt Heights 0.0% 22
Bush Hills -12.8% 68
Central City -17.2% 77
Central Park -13.3% 70
Central Pratt -19.4% 85
College Hills -12.5% 67
Collegeville -10.5% 58
Crestline 0.0% 22
Crestwood North -9.3% 52
Crestwood South 3.8% 18
Dolomite 45.8% 5
Druid Hills 20.5% 11
East Avondale -17.3% 78
East Birmingham -27.4% 96
East Brownville -14.3% 73
East Lake -16.7% 76
East Thomas -8.7% 49
Eastwood -14.5% 74
Echo Highlands -10.3% 57
Enon Ridge 0.0% 22
Ensley -10.8% 60
Ensley Highlands 0.0% 22
Evergreen -25.9% 94
Fairmont -23.8% 91
Fairview -18.9% 83
Five Points South -4.4% 36
Forest Park -13.4% 71
Fountain Heights 1.6% 21
Garden Highlands -9.5% 54
Gate City 0.0% 22
Germania Park -11.6% 63
Glen Iris -12.2% 66
Grasselli Heights 11.1% 16
Graymont -21.6% 88
Green Acres -25.9% 94
Harriman Park -13.8% 72
Highland Park -16.0% 75
Hillman -25.0% 93
Hillman Park 0.0% 22
Hooper City -2.8% 33
Huffman -6.0% 39
Industrial Center 25.0% 9
Inglenook -19.2% 84
Jones Valley -7.3% 44
Killough Springs -11.1% 61
Kingston -9.4% 53
Liberty Highlands -4.7% 38
Maple Grove 100.0% 1
Mason City 36.8% 6
North Avondale -7.1% 43
North Birmingham -17.7% 80
North East Lake 5.1% 17
North Pratt 11.8% 15
North Titusville -7.8% 45
Norwood -6.0% 39
Oak Ridge 33.3% 7
Oak Ridge Park 28.6% 8
Oakwood Place 2.0% 20
Overton 0.0% 22
Oxmoor 13.3% 12
Penfield Park 12.5% 13
Pine Knoll Vista -50.0% 99
Powderly -8.7% 49
Redmont Park -21.6% 88
Riley -10.5% 58
Rising - West Princeton -20.0% 86
Roebuck -7.0% 42
Roebuck Springs -8.0% 47
Roosevelt -6.3% 41
Sandusky -9.1% 51
Sherman Heights -4.6% 37
Smithfield -18.6% 82
Smithfield Estates 24.1% 10
South East Lake -11.6% 63
South Pratt -28.6% 97
South Titusville -11.3% 62
South Woodlawn -8.0% 47
Southside -1.4% 32
Spring Lake -18.1% 81
Sun Valley -12.0% 65
Tarpley City 12.5% 13
Thomas -7.9% 46
Tuxedo -20.9% 87
Wahouma -3.7% 35
West Brownville 100.0% 1
West End Manor -9.7% 55
West Goldwire 50.0% 4
Woodland Park 0.0% 22
Woodlawn 3.3% 19
Wylam -24.6% 92
Zion City 0.0% 22

Key Citations:

  1. Cothran H. Business Retention and Expansion (BRE) Programs: Why Existing Businesses Are Important. Food and Resource Economics Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. 1 Aug. 2006. Web. 4 Feb. 2013. .
  2. Virtanen M, Mika K, MaElovainio, Pekka Virtanen, and Jussi Vahtera. “Local Economy and Sickness Absence: Prospective Cohort Study.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 59, no. 11
  3. Takano T, Nakamura K. An analysis of health levels and various indicators of urban environments for Healthy Cities projects. Epidemiol Community Health. 2001; 55: 263-270.