70.1 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in Jackson, Mississippi
We compared 14 franchise concepts for Jackson, Mississippi. Healthcare institutional service demand was a leading positive mechanism.
What “best” means in this ranking“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page. It does not estimate earnings or determine which franchise is best for a particular candidate.
14Concepts evaluated
29Sources used
19Primary sources
31Local metrics
Evaluation set
Why these concepts were evaluated
This is not a ranking of every franchise that may be offered in the city.
14Concepts assessed
Concepts were included when enough operating-model information existed to assign a provisional local-sensitivity profile. Unresolved inputs reduce confidence or remain conditional rather than automatically excluding a concept.
A brand’s participation in our referral network does not add points or change its position.
City-level conclusions
What stood out in our assessment
1 point average among 6 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 12 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for Jackson, Mississippi
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, and FASTSIGNS produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. Healthcare institutional service demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 6 exposed concepts, adding 0.6 points on average. These scores describe local operating alignment, not expected returns or overall franchise quality; the offered territory and franchise economics still require separate diligence.
How this differs from a directory: the model does not award points for brand popularity, advertising placement, or referral compensation. It tests how documented local conditions interact with each concept’s operating requirements.
Best franchise opportunities assessed
Top 10 local-alignment scores from 14 concepts assessed
“Best” refers to modeled local operating alignment among the concepts assessed—not expected earnings, franchise-system quality, or candidate fit.
Rankings use full-precision scores.Displayed values use one decimal place. Identical displayed scores can therefore have different ranks, and close results should be treated as effectively similar.
| Rank | Franchise | Alignment and tier | Largest advantage | Largest constraint | Evidence confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City WideFacility managementInvestment: $229,729–$410,730 | 72.4Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment | +2.0 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaningInvestment: $130,000–$421,500 | 71.5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.5 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 70.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.9 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.5 ptsReferral ecosystem | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 70.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.7 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | Rainbow International RestorationRestorationInvestment: $185,336–$351,900 | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | Mr. RooterPlumbingInvestment: $152,900–$298,675 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in Jackson, Mississippi
Large Jackson healthcare institutions support institution-facing service demand
This relationship affected 6 concepts and added 0.6 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: Healthcare practitioners and technical occupation concentration in May 2025: jobs: 23,700; share of local employment percent: 8.8; national share percent: 6.3; approximate location quotient: 1.39; mean hourly wage usd: 41.79 mixed occupational metrics. [6] [4]
recurring-commercial-service
This operating-model cluster separated from the broader set because its exposure to local support and constraints differed. The strongest positive factor was target-market demand, while the main constraint was property replacement-cycle demand. [7] [6] [4] [22] [12] [23] [3] [1] [10] [9] [11] [8]
Jackson core and adjacent metro submarkets show materially different population and commercial-space conditions
The effect depends on the franchisor-defined territory, service radius, customer distribution, and chosen site; city and neighboring-county conditions diverge enough that the exact footprint must be resolved before scoring. [24] [4]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Large Jackson healthcare institutions support institution-facing service demand1 modeled effect
Healthcare institutional service demandTarget-market demand
University and government institutions create addressable institutional accounts and professional referral nodes3 local facts · 2 modeled effects · 4 sources
- Government nonfarm employment in June 2026: 56,200 jobs preliminary [7]
- Jackson State University total enrollment in Fall 2024: 6,326 students [12] [3]
- Mississippi MAGIC vendor registration provides RFx notifications, electronic search and response, and purchase-order access for state procurement: yes procurement access [23]
University and government account demandTarget-market demand
Institutional professional relationship baseReferral ecosystem
Designated historic properties can require Certificate of Appropriateness review for exterior and signage changes1 modeled effect
Signage and prototype adaptation burdenRegulatory and operating friction
Compare all assessed concepts
Local impact by franchise concept
14 concepts shown. Expand a concept to see the score-changing factors and their modeled drivers; the full audit ledger stays collapsed.
#1Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.4
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +2.0 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | +2.35 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 72.35 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +2.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#2
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment71.5
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +1.5 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.5 pts | |
| Net local movement | +1.48 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +1.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 71.48 |
| Published local-market alignment | 71.5 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#14
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.9
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.9 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 pts | |
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.1 pts |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Signage and prototype adaptation burden EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | +0.93 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
2 images
Public company data assessed
3 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.9 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.1 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.93 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.9 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.9 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#3
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.9
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
Increase +0.5 pts Referral ecosystemNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Referral ecosystem |
| +0.5 pts |
| Target-market demand | +0.4 pts | |
| Net local movement | +0.87 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.4 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.5 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.87 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.9 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Referral ecosystem +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#5
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.7
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +0.7 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Stable
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 pts | |
| Net local movement | +0.73 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.73 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.7 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#5
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.3 pts Target-market demandNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Highly sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 pts | |
| Net local movement | +0.26 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +0.3 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.26 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.3 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#13
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
1 image
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#7
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
1 sourceFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#8
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #7–#9
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #8–#10
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Mister Sparky Electric
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #9–#11
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 19 — Financial Performance Representation
1 image
Public company data assessed
2 sourcesFull calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #10–#12
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #11–#13
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedNo material negative local adjustment identified
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
No material scored local adjustment was identified for this concept.
Franchise evidence
Source material assessed
Item 3 — Litigation
1 image
Item 6 — Other Fees
1 image
Item 7 — Estimated Initial Investment
2 images
Item 12 — Territory
1 image
Item 20 — Outlets and Franchise Information
1 image
Full calculation and evidence confidence
Audit layer
Full factor ledger
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Not included in the score |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 70.00 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.0 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Evidence confidence
- City Modifier Evidence
- Adequate
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Strong
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- 0.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #12–#14
No franchise concepts match the selected filters.
Worked score example
How we calculated City Wide
This example uses the same ledger shown for every concept and must reconcile exactly to the published score.
Full score ledger
Every factor is classified so a displayed zero is not mistaken for a score-changing effect.
| Neutral model baseline | 70.0 |
|---|---|
| Target-market demand | +2.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not included in the score |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | +0.3 |
| Territory quality | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Regulatory and operating friction | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Full-precision calculated score | 72.35 |
| Published local-market alignment | 72.4 |
Factor calculations use full precision. Contributions and published scores are displayed to one decimal place; ranking order uses the full-precision score.
Starting pointThe operating-model baseline shown in the first ledger row.
InteractionsAny interaction or gate is included in the relevant contribution or calibration row.
Confidence treatmentEvidence confidence is disclosed separately unless the model definition explicitly applies a calibration adjustment.
RoundingFull-precision contributions are summed before the final displayed score is rounded to one decimal place; whole-number results are shown without a trailing decimal.
Factor impact
Which local conditions changed scores or rankings?
We neutralized one factor at a time, recalculated every score, and then measured both absolute score movement and changes in rank order.
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Target-market demand
We tested how much of the city’s theoretical customer and business demand remained usable after operating friction.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 6 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 13 concepts changed position. HomeSmiles moved from #5 to #14, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted6 of 14
Average among affected+1.0 pts
Average across all concepts+0.4 pts
Concepts changing rank13
What we observed
- Health Care And Social Assistance Receipts/revenue In 20224,446,442,000 USD
- Healthcare Practitioners And Technical Occupation Concentration In May 2025jobs: 23,700; share of local employment percent: 8.8; national share percent: 6.3; approximate location quotient: 1.39; mean hourly wage usd: 41.79 mixed occupational metrics
- Ummc Reported Material Recent Construction, Facility Upgrade, Maintenance, And Leased Property Spending In Jacksonnew construction over prior two years usd: 204,000,000; facility upgrades and maintenance usd: 76,000,000; annual leased property spending usd: 4,500,000
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+2.0 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+1.5 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.9 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.7 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.4 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Referral ecosystem
We tested whether the local professional and institutional referral ecosystem materially separated the assessed concepts.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 3 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 2 concepts changed position. ActionCOACH moved from #4 to #5, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted3 of 14
Average among affected+0.3 pts
Average across all concepts+0.1 pts
Concepts changing rank2
Concepts helped most
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.5 pts
City WideFacility management
+0.3 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.1 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Property replacement-cycle demandNo material score adjustment
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Labor and staffing frictionNo material score adjustment
- Transportation, routing, and parkingNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Territory qualityNo material score adjustment
- Regulatory and operating frictionNo material score adjustment
Rank stability
Which positions depend most on individual assumptions?
The line shows the best and worst rank reached when one factor was removed from every concept. A narrow range indicates a more stable position.
#1 City WideStable · tested #1–#2
#2 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #2–#14
#3 FASTSIGNSStable · tested #3–#3
#4 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #1–#5
#5 HomeSmilesStable · tested #4–#5
#6 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #6–#13
#7 Aire ServModerately sensitive · tested #4–#7
#8 Tiger AdjustersModerately sensitive · tested #6–#8
#9 ZOOM DRAINModerately sensitive · tested #7–#9
#10 Mr. RooterModerately sensitive · tested #8–#10
#11 Mister Sparky ElectricModerately sensitive · tested #9–#11
#12 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsModerately sensitive · tested #10–#12
#13 PuroCleanModerately sensitive · tested #11–#13
#14 Workout AnytimeModerately sensitive · tested #12–#14
Neutralizing a factor removes it from every concept. A concept can move down even when its own score improves because competitors may benefit more.
Score-changing factors
Factors that changed the calculated scores
The graph includes the top 14 concepts by local-alignment score. Only nonzero score contributions are plotted. A factor is removed when every displayed concept received 0.0 points from it. Hover or focus a concept name to highlight all of its remaining data points.
Primary source records by factorTarget-market demand: [4] [7] [6] [8] [9] [12] [22] [23] [1] [3]Property replacement-cycle demand: [13] [14] [15] [4] [1]Competitive environment: [5] [4] [3]Labor and staffing friction: [6] [7] [8] [1] [3]Transportation, routing, and parking: [4] [29] [3]Real estate and site feasibility: [27] [28] [18] [16] [17] [19] [1] [2]Sales and customer acquisition: [5] [22] [23] [10] [11] [3]Referral ecosystem: [7] [6] [8] [12] [22] [23] [3]Territory quality: [4] [24] [25] [26] [27] [3]Regulatory and operating friction: [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [2] [3]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Referral ecosystem |
|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +2.0 pts | +0.3 pts |
| #2 Jan-Pro International | +1.5 pts | — |
| #3 FASTSIGNS | +0.9 pts | +0.1 pts |
| #4 ActionCOACH | +0.4 pts | +0.5 pts |
| #5 HomeSmiles | +0.7 pts | — |
| #6 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.3 pts | — |
| #7 Aire Serv | — | — |
| #8 Tiger Adjusters | — | — |
| #9 ZOOM DRAIN | — | — |
| #10 Mr. Rooter | — | — |
| #11 Mister Sparky Electric | — | — |
| #12 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | — | — |
| #13 PuroClean | — | — |
| #14 Workout Anytime | — | — |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, Jan-Pro International, FASTSIGNS led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to property replacement-cycle demand. The same city condition can help one operating model and constrain another, so score differences should be read through each concept's factor pattern rather than as a universal franchise-quality verdict. The ordering is most assumption-sensitive for Jan-Pro International, ActionCOACH, Rainbow International Restoration; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Local evidence assessed for modeling
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in Jackson, Mississippi
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
70.1Limited comparison: Restoration franchise opportunities assessed in Jackson, Mississippi
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 70.0 to 70.3. Rainbow International Restoration ranked highest at 70.3. Target-market demand added 0.1 points on average among the affected concepts.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.3-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 70.0–70.3
- Category average
- 70.1
Rainbow International Restoration70.3
PuroClean70.0
Metric registry
The 31 local metrics behind this analysis
The registry shows each public metric’s raw value, period, geography, source, and its actual role in the compiled analysis.
View all local metrics
| Metric | Raw value | Period | Geography | Role in analysis | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025 | 141,196people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Jackson, Mississippi | Context only | [4] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | -8.1percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Jackson, Mississippi | Conditional relationship | [4] |
| Households in the 2020-2024 Census QuickFacts period | 61,415households | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Jackson, Mississippi | Context only | [4] |
| Owner-occupied housing unit rate in the 2020-2024 period | 48.6percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Jackson, Mississippi | Context only | [4] |
| Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022 | 4,446,442,000USD | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Jackson, Mississippi | Used in scoring | [4] |
| Total retail sales in 2022 | 3,800,522,000USD | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Jackson, Mississippi | Context only | [4] |
| Mean travel time to work for workers age 16 years and older | 19.9minutes | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS characteristics; 2022 Economic Census measures | Jackson, Mississippi | Context only | [4] |
| Government nonfarm employment in June 2026 | 56,200jobs preliminary | June 2026 preliminary labor-force and nonfarm employment data | Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area | Supports modeled relationship | [7] |
| Education and health services nonfarm employment in June 2026 | 48,400jobs preliminary | June 2026 preliminary labor-force and nonfarm employment data | Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [7] |
| Professional and business services nonfarm employment in June 2026 | 37,000jobs preliminary | June 2026 preliminary labor-force and nonfarm employment data | Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [7] |
| Selected mean hourly wages in the Jackson metropolitan area | all occupations: 25.96; food preparation and serving: 13.04; building and grounds cleaning and maintenance: 14.79; healthcare support: 14.88; personal care and service: 15.25USD per hour | May 2025 | Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area | Context only | [6] |
| Healthcare practitioners and technical occupation concentration in May 2025 | jobs: 23,700; share of local employment percent: 8.8; national share percent: 6.3; approximate location quotient: 1.39; mean hourly wage usd: 41.79mixed occupational metrics | May 2025 | Jackson, MS Metropolitan Statistical Area | Used in scoring | [6] |
| UMMC reported more than 13,000 full- and part-time employees | 13,000employees minimum | 2026 workforce statement | University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson-based system | Used in scoring | [8] [3] [1] |
| UMMC reported material recent construction, facility-upgrade, maintenance, and leased-property spending in Jackson | new construction over prior two years usd: 204,000,000; facility upgrades and maintenance usd: 76,000,000; annual leased property spending usd: 4,500,000USD | Two-year construction and facility-investment period reported July 2025 | UMMC facilities in Jackson, Mississippi | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Jackson State University total enrollment in Fall 2024 | 6,326students | Fall 2024 | Jackson State University, Jackson, Mississippi | Supports modeled relationship | [12] [3] |
| The Yazoo Clay outcrop belt includes Jackson-area counties and is an expansive clay with documented Jackson-area construction problems | counties explicitly in outcrop belt: Hinds, Madison, Rankin; documented mechanism: moisture-driven expansion and shrinkage; jackson area foundation damage identified: yesgeologic condition | Permanent geologic and engineering condition documented in 1988 | Jackson area and Yazoo Clay outcrop belt in central Mississippi | Conditional relationship | [13] [14] [1] |
| Jackson Housing Rehabilitation Program includes plumbing, electrical, roof, and structural safety repairs for eligible owner-occupied homes | roof replacement, plumbing repair, electrical repair, structural safety improvementeligible repair categories | Current program accessed August 2026 | Eligible owner-occupied homes in Jackson, Mississippi | Conditional relationship | [15] |
| Qualifying exterior changes and outdoor advertising signs on designated historic resources require Certificate of Appropriateness review | yesrequirement | Current ordinance text accessed August 2026 | Jackson local historic districts, landmarks, and landmark sites | Conditional relationship | [16] [3] |
| Historic-preservation application guidance specifies compliance and Certificate of Appropriateness filing fees and a public-hearing process when applicable | compliance fee usd: 15; coa application fee usd: 40; additional fee per additional 5000 sqft usd: 40; minimum legal ad days before public hearing: 15; appeal window days after denial: 10mixed permit metrics | Current application process and fees accessed August 2026 | Jackson local historic districts and designated historic resources | Conditional relationship | [17] |
| New development in the AC Mixed-Use Activity Center Overlay District must use the first floor for non-residential use | yesrequirement | Ordinance amended through December 31, 2024; current copy hosted in 2026 | Properties designated AC Mixed-Use Activity Center Overlay on the Jackson official zoning map | Context only | [18] [2] |
| Court-approved JXN Water rate adjustment effective March 23, 2026 | approximate all customer rate increase percent: 12; residential bill increase percent: 11.7; combined water sewer usage rate first 50 ccf usd per ccf: 7.48; availability charge 1 inch meter usd per month: 60; availability charge 2 inch meter usd per month: 320mixed utility rate metrics | Court-approved rate structure effective March 23, 2026 | JXN Water customer accounts in Jackson, Mississippi | Context only | [19] [2] [3] |
| JXN Water reported the water system operationally stable in Q2 2025, with drinking water meeting Safe Drinking Water Act standards except brief local interruptions during repairs | operationally stable reported: yes; water production change since june 2023 percent: -27.1; pressure improved and stabilized reported: yesutility status | Quarter ending June 30, 2025 | Jackson water system | Context only | [20] |
| Federal oversight report found existing rates insufficient for debt-service and identified unfunded wastewater capital needs | rate increase required for sustainable financial path: yes; city water sewer debt service usd per year over mid 2030s: 17,000,000; unfunded wastewater needs identified: yesutility financial condition | Quarter ending December 31, 2025, with January 2026 financial developments | Jackson water and wastewater systems | Context only | [21] |
| Vendors doing business with the City of Jackson are required to register in Vendor Self Service and submit required tax/payment documentation | vendor self service registration required: yes; w9 required: yes; direct deposit form required: yesprocurement requirement | Current vendor-registration process accessed August 2026 | City of Jackson, Mississippi | Supports modeled relationship | [22] [3] |
| Mississippi MAGIC vendor registration provides RFx notifications, electronic search and response, and purchase-order access for state procurement | yesprocurement access | Current MAGIC eProcurement process accessed August 2026 | State of Mississippi | Supports modeled relationship | [23] |
| UMMC requires vendor registration in GHX VendorMate to gain facility access and be eligible for business | yesprocurement requirement | Current requirements accessed August 2026 | University of Mississippi Medical Center | Used in scoring | [10] [11] |
| Hinds County population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | -7percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate and April 1, 2020 estimate base | Hinds County, Mississippi | Conditional relationship | [24] |
| Madison County population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | 6.6percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate and April 1, 2020 estimate base | Madison County, Mississippi (adjacent comparison) | Conditional relationship | [25] |
| Rankin County population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | 3.3percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate and April 1, 2020 estimate base | Rankin County, Mississippi (adjacent comparison) | Conditional relationship | [26] |
| Jackson office vacancy varied materially across named submarkets in 2025 | market vacancy percent: 23.48; jackson cbd vacancy percent: 29.96; jackson west vacancy percent: 15.12; i55 corridor vacancy percent: 14.38; flowood vacancy percent: 17.07; market average asking rent usd per sqft year: 19.65mixed office market metrics | Calendar year 2025 | Jackson office market and listed submarkets | Conditional relationship | [27] |
| A public listing snapshot showed multiple Jackson flex-space offerings, including small and mid-size examples | active jackson flex listings on snapshot: 11; selected size examples sqft: 1,162, 1,393, 1,791, 4,000, 7,500, 8,000, 8,384; examples with loading or rollup access: yesdynamic listing snapshot | Dynamic listing snapshot accessed August 2026 | Listings labeled Jackson, Mississippi | Context only | [28] |
How to use the ranking
What the model can and cannot establish
- Scores measure local operating alignment, not expected financial performance or franchise-system quality.
- Citywide evidence may not describe the exact site or territory ultimately offered.
- Conditional effects are shown for diligence but do not change the published score until their applicability is established.
Methodology
How the local-alignment ranking is calculated
Measure the city
Collect reusable local metrics with source, period, geography, and confidence fields.
Profile each operating model
Map each franchise to controlled operating attributes and local sensitivities.
Apply scoreable effects
Score only effects whose applicability is established at the report’s current geographic and operating scope.
Preserve conditional effects
Keep location- or territory-dependent issues visible for diligence without automatically changing the score.
Test rank sensitivity
Remove one factor at a time from every concept and rerank using full-precision scores.
Generate public output
Create the ranking, factor-status ledger, visuals, metric registry, and automated quality report from the same data.
How the common baseline becomes a city-specific score
Every concept starts from the same 70.0 reference point, so differences come only from modeled local interactions. In this city, City Wide reached 72.35 after target-market demand +2.0 pts and referral ecosystem +0.3 pts. The current model caps total local movement at ±18.0 points. The score is not a percentage, probability, or estimate of investment quality.
Precision and materiality
Calculations use full-precision values. Published scores and factor contributions display one decimal place, while ranks use full precision. Effects smaller than 0.1 points are identified as below the publication threshold rather than presented as a meaningful zero.
Score tiers
Tier 1 · Strongest modeled alignment80.0–100.0
Tier 2 · Favorable modeled alignment72.0–<80.0
Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment64.0–<72.0
Tier 4 · Higher-friction modeled alignment0.0–<64.0
How factor rows are classified
Positive local adjustmentNegative local adjustmentMeasured; no meaningful local adjustmentEffect below the publication thresholdNot applicable to this operating modelDepends on the specific site, territory, or operating conditionNot included in the score
What “best” means here
“Best” means the strongest modeled local operating alignment among the franchise concepts assessed on this page.
Model governance
How this report is calculated and corrected
Calculation controls
- Model designer
- Thomas Jepsen
No concept’s final score is manually raised or lowered after calculation. Reports are checked for source scope, classification, arithmetic, unsupported claims, duplication, and readability before publication.
Model history
- Model 0.9.0-calibration · August 19, 2026Added compiler-derived decision intelligence and observation usage mapping., Changed factor sensitivity and channel counterfactuals to full model reruns., Added data-dependent city content signals while preserving legacy public report fields., and Added model-owned semantic compatibility gates and backward-compatible channel-level evidence attribution.
Corrections policy
Corrected source, geography, or operating-profile evidence triggers a full compiler rerun so every dependent score and visual is recalculated.
Source registry
Local evidence supporting this report
The city page keeps the local sources used for its visible findings and metrics. Franchise-source provenance stays with the underlying franchise research rather than being duplicated across every city page.
- 1I 122(9).docx — supplied structural franchise-city research docketInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: UMMC reported more than 13,000 full- and part-time employees and The Yazoo Clay outcrop belt includes Jackson-area counties and is an expansive clay with documented Jackson-area construction problems
- 2F 122-131(5).docx — supplied municipal friction research docketInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: New development in the AC Mixed-Use Activity Center Overlay District must use the first floor for non-residential use and Court-approved JXN Water rate adjustment effective March 23, 2026
- 3Franchise data - remake - mod(8).csvInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: UMMC reported more than 13,000 full- and part-time employees, Jackson State University total enrollment in Fall 2024, Qualifying exterior changes and outdoor advertising signs on designated historic resources require Certificate of Appropriateness review, Court-approved JXN Water rate adjustment effective March 23, 2026, and Vendors doing business with the City of Jackson are required to register in Vendor Self Service and submit required tax/payment documentation
- 4QuickFacts: Jackson city, Mississippi
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, Households in the 2020-2024 Census QuickFacts period, Owner-occupied housing unit rate in the 2020-2024 period, and Health care and social assistance receipts/revenue in 2022
- 5
- 6Occupational Employment and Wages in Jackson, MS — May 2025
Used for: Selected mean hourly wages in the Jackson metropolitan area and Healthcare practitioners and technical occupation concentration in May 2025
- 7Jackson, MS, Area Economic Summary and Economy at a Glance
Used for: Government nonfarm employment in June 2026, Education and health services nonfarm employment in June 2026, and Professional and business services nonfarm employment in June 2026
- 8UMMC makes celebrated list of top employers
Used for: UMMC reported more than 13,000 full- and part-time employees
- 9Jackson: Our Home
Used for: UMMC reported material recent construction, facility-upgrade, maintenance, and leased-property spending in Jackson
- 10Contracting with UMMC
Used for: UMMC requires vendor registration in GHX VendorMate to gain facility access and be eligible for business
- 11Business Opportunities
Used for: UMMC requires vendor registration in GHX VendorMate to gain facility access and be eligible for business
- 12Fall 24 Tiger Data — Jackson State University Data Highlights
Used for: Jackson State University total enrollment in Fall 2024
- 13Yazoo Clay: Engineering Aspects and Environmental Geology of an Expansive Clay
Used for: The Yazoo Clay outcrop belt includes Jackson-area counties and is an expansive clay with documented Jackson-area construction problems
- 14A Continuous Core Through the Undifferentiated Yazoo Clay (Late Eocene, Jackson Group) of Central Mississippi
Used for: The Yazoo Clay outcrop belt includes Jackson-area counties and is an expansive clay with documented Jackson-area construction problems
- 15Housing Rehabilitation
Used for: Jackson Housing Rehabilitation Program includes plumbing, electrical, roof, and structural safety repairs for eligible owner-occupied homes
- 16City of Jackson Historic Preservation Ordinance
Used for: Qualifying exterior changes and outdoor advertising signs on designated historic resources require Certificate of Appropriateness review
- 17How to Apply — Historic Preservation
Used for: Historic-preservation application guidance specifies compliance and Certificate of Appropriateness filing fees and a public-hearing process when applicable
- 18Official Zoning Ordinance of the City of Jackson, Mississippi — amended through December 2024
Used for: New development in the AC Mixed-Use Activity Center Overlay District must use the first floor for non-residential use
- 19Rates
Used for: Court-approved JXN Water rate adjustment effective March 23, 2026
- 20The Consolidated Report of Activities — Quarter Ending June 30, 2025
Used for: JXN Water reported the water system operationally stable in Q2 2025, with drinking water meeting Safe Drinking Water Act standards except brief local interruptions during repairs
- 21Quarterly Status Report for Quarter Ending December 31, 2025
Used for: Federal oversight report found existing rates insufficient for debt-service and identified unfunded wastewater capital needs
- 22Vendor Self Service — New Vendor Registration Guide
Used for: Vendors doing business with the City of Jackson are required to register in Vendor Self Service and submit required tax/payment documentation
- 23Vendors — Vendor Registration / Self Service
Used for: Mississippi MAGIC vendor registration provides RFx notifications, electronic search and response, and purchase-order access for state procurement
- 24QuickFacts: Hinds County, Mississippi
Used for: Hinds County population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025
- 25QuickFacts: Madison County, Mississippi
Used for: Madison County population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025
- 26QuickFacts: Rankin County, Mississippi
Used for: Rankin County population change from April 2020 estimate base to July 2025
- 27Jackson Office Rent Price & Sales Report
Used for: Jackson office vacancy varied materially across named submarkets in 2025
- 28Jackson, MS Flex Space for Lease
Used for: A public listing snapshot showed multiple Jackson flex-space offerings, including small and mid-size examples
- 29
Before contacting a franchisor
Complete the next layer of due diligence
- Confirm the exact protected territory and neighboring units.
- Review the current Franchise Disclosure Document.
- Validate local staffing, licensing, insurance, and service-base assumptions.
- Obtain location, vehicle, buildout, or working-capital estimates.
- Speak with current and former franchisees.
- Build a candidate-specific financial scenario.
Apply the analysis to your situation
Review how these market findings apply to your budget, role, and proposed territory.
The city score does not include your experience, capital structure, time commitment, financing, or exact territory.
Disclaimer and broker disclosure: This analysis is informational and does not constitute financial, legal, accounting, or investment advice. Market-alignment scores do not predict financial performance or business success. Offers are made only through the delivery of a Franchise Disclosure Document. We may receive referral compensation from participating franchisors; compensation is not an input to the scoring model.