69.3 average across 2 concepts
Local operating-model alignment analysis
Best Franchise Opportunities We Assessed in South Bend, Indiana
We compared 14 franchise concepts for South Bend, Indiana. University and government account demand was a leading positive mechanism. Frontline labor pressure was a leading operating constraint.
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
24Local sources used
26Local 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
0.5 points average among 6 affected concepts
0.6 points average reduction among 8 affected concepts
Tested rank range spans 12 positions
Executive conclusion
What the ranking means for South Bend, Indiana
City Wide, ActionCOACH, and FASTSIGNS produced the highest modeled local-alignment scores in the evaluated set. University and government account demand was the strongest positive scored mechanism among 6 exposed concepts, adding 0.5 points on average. Frontline labor pressure was the broadest operating constraint, reducing exposed concepts by 0.5 points on average. Jan-Pro International was especially relationship-sensitive: removing frontline labor pressure moved it from #14 to #2 in the full model rerun. 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 | 70.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +1.0 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.3 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 2 | ActionCOACHBusiness coachingInvestment: $71,668–$303,513 | 70.3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | No material negative local adjustment | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 3 | FASTSIGNSSigns and graphicsInvestment: $231,226–$386,285 | 70.0Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.5 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 4 | ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer serviceInvestment: $266,250–$570,500 | 69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.5 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 5 | Mr. RooterPlumbingInvestment: $152,900–$298,675 | 69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.5 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 6 | Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical | 69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.4 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 7 | Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHome inspectionInvestment: $102,690–$134,290 | 69.9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.2 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.3 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 8 | Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenanceInvestment: $113,308–$271,708 | 69.8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.4 ptsProperty replacement-cycle demand | -0.4 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 9 | Tiger AdjustersPublic insurance adjustingInvestment: $43,050–$159,500 | 69.7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | No material positive local adjustment | -0.2 ptsTransportation, routing, and parking | Moderate evidence confidence |
| 10 | HomeSmilesProperty maintenance servicesInvestment: $148,110–$201,800 | 69.6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment | +0.3 ptsTarget-market demand | -0.4 ptsLabor and staffing friction | Moderate evidence confidence |
Conditions that changed the analysis
What mattered most in South Bend, Indiana
Large adjacent Notre Dame campus creates an institutional account base accessible from South Bend
This relationship affected 6 concepts and added 0.5 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: University of Notre Dame total fall 2025 enrollment: 13,204 students. [11] [10]
Notre Dame competes directly for selected frontline and event-service labor at a $17.50 minimum starting rate
This relationship affected 9 concepts and reduced 0.5 points on average among those exposed. Local evidence: South Bend-Mishawaka major-group mean hourly wages for service occupations: food preparation and serving: 15.17; building and grounds cleaning and maintenance: 18.19; personal care and service: 17.52; office and administrative support: 22.43 usd per hour. [9] [11] [10]
The supplied docket characterized South Bend as experiencing unusually strong population growth. The current 2025 Census estimate is 103,201, down 0.2% from the April 2020 estimate base.
Current citywide population is essentially flat relative to the 2020 estimate base, while large adjacent institutional demand and neighborhood-level housing conditions vary geographically. Population-growth narratives should therefore not be used as a proxy for uniform retail traffic, household-service growth, or territory quality. [5] [6] [2]
Evidence behind the city mechanisms
Notre Dame competes directly for selected frontline and event-service labor at a $17.50 minimum starting rate1 modeled effect
Frontline labor pressureLabor and staffing friction
Large adjacent Notre Dame campus creates an institutional account base accessible from South Bend1 modeled effect
University and government account demandTarget-market demand
Notre Dame offers a large institutional sales channel but uses formal supplier onboarding and threshold-based bidding1 modeled effect
Institutional procurement-cycle frictionSales and customer acquisition
Notre Dame football creates recurring event spikes concentrated around six 2026 home-game dates1 local fact · 2 modeled effects · 1 source
- Notre Dame lists six football home games for the 2026 season: 6 home games [14]
Event-driven demand upsideTarget-market demand
Event-demand volatilityTarget-market demand
Active 2026 paving affects multiple high-traffic South Bend street segments through the expected end of October1 modeled effect
Route and curb productivity pressureTransportation, routing, and parking
Snow response prioritizes main routes, allows up to 36 hours for all streets after snowfall, and leaves alleys to adjacent owners1 modeled effect
Winter parking and access pressureTransportation, routing, and parking
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 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.6
City Wide
Initial investment: $229,729–$410,730
Increase +1.0 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.3 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
| +1.0 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.59 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 | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.3 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 70.59 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.6 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +1.0 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#8
#2Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.3
ActionCOACH
Initial investment: $71,668–$303,513
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 |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Institutional procurement-cycle friction EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Effect below the publication threshold |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #1–#6
#3Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment70.0
FASTSIGNS
Initial investment: $231,226–$386,285
Increase +0.5 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
| +0.5 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Net local movement | +0.04 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 | +0.5 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 70.04 |
| 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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Target-market demand +0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#9
#4Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9
ZOOM DRAIN
Initial investment: $266,250–$570,500
Increase +0.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.5 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Route and curb productivity pressure EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.07 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.93 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.9 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Transportation, routing, and parking -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#8
#5Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9
Mr. Rooter
Initial investment: $152,900–$298,675
Increase +0.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.5 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.5 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Route and curb productivity pressure EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.08 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.5 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.92 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.9 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Transportation, routing, and parking -0.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #3–#10
#6Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9
Mister Sparky Electric
Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.4 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Route and curb productivity pressure EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.09 pts | |
Net uses full-precision effects; displayed factor and driver rows are rounded.
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 | +0.3 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.91 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.9 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Transportation, routing, and parking -0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#11
#7Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.9
Pillar To Post Home Inspectors
Initial investment: $102,690–$134,290
Increase +0.2 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.3 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.13 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 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 | +0.2 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.87 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.9 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Transportation, routing, and parking -0.3 pts
- Tested rank range
- #5–#12
#8Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.8
Aire Serv
Initial investment: $113,308–$271,708
Increase +0.4 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.4 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.4 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Route and curb productivity pressure EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.21 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
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 | +0.4 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.79 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.8 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Transportation, routing, and parking -0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#10
#9Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.7
Tiger Adjusters
Initial investment: $43,050–$159,500
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.2 pts Transportation, routing, and parking
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.1 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.27 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 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.1 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.73 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.7 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Transportation, routing, and parking -0.2 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#13
#10Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.6
HomeSmiles
Initial investment: $148,110–$201,800
Increase +0.3 pts Target-market demandReduction -0.4 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.4 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Net local movement | -0.37 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.4 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.63 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.6 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Adequate
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.4 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#11
#11Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.3
PuroClean
Initial investment: $54,575–$262,145
Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.7 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.7 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Route and curb productivity pressure EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.67 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.7 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.33 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.3 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.7 pts
- Tested rank range
- #6–#11
#12Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.2
Rainbow International Restoration
Initial investment: $185,336–$351,900
Increase +0.3 pts Property replacement-cycle demandReduction -0.8 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.8 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.4 pts |
| Property replacement-cycle demand |
| +0.3 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.1 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | Route and curb productivity pressure EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -0.76 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 | +0.1 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | +0.3 |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.8 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.4 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 69.24 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.2 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #4–#14
#13Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment69.0
Workout Anytime
Initial investment: $1,060,850–$1,840,550
No material positive local adjustment identifiedReduction -0.8 pts Labor and staffing friction
Rank sensitivity: Moderately sensitive
Why it ranks here
Score-changing local factors only. Evidence links open the underlying city finding.
| Local factor | Modeled drivers | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -0.8 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.2 pts |
| Net local movement | -1.04 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 | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.8 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.2 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Not included in the score |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 68.96 |
| Published local-market alignment | 69.0 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -0.8 pts
- Tested rank range
- #12–#14
#14Tier 3 · Mixed modeled alignment68.9
Jan-Pro International
Initial investment: $130,000–$421,500
Increase +0.7 pts Target-market demandReduction -1.5 pts Labor and staffing friction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Labor and staffing friction |
| -1.5 pts |
| Target-market demand |
| +0.7 pts |
| Transportation, routing, and parking |
| -0.3 pts |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Institutional procurement-cycle friction EvidenceConditional — applicability must be confirmed | Not scored |
| Net local movement | -1.05 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 | +0.7 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -1.5 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.3 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 68.95 |
| Published local-market alignment | 68.9 |
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
- Strong
- Factor Research Coverage
- Adequate
- Franchise-profile completeness
- Limited
- Source-evidence confidence
- Adequate
- Geographic applicability
- Limited
- Overall evidence confidence
- Moderate evidence confidence
- Largest absolute effect
- Labor and staffing friction -1.5 pts
- Tested rank range
- #2–#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 | +1.0 |
| Property replacement-cycle demand | Not applicable to this operating model |
| Competitive environment | Not included in the score |
| Labor and staffing friction | -0.3 |
| Transportation, routing, and parking | -0.1 |
| Real estate and site feasibility | Not included in the score |
| Sales and customer acquisition | Depends on the specific site, territory, or operating condition |
| Referral ecosystem | Measured; no meaningful local adjustment |
| 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 | 70.59 |
| Published local-market alignment | 70.6 |
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, 11 concepts changed position. City Wide moved from #1 to #8, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted6 of 14
Average among affected+0.5 pts
Average across all concepts+0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank11
What we observed
- University Of Notre Dame Total Fall 2025 Enrollment13,204 students
- Notre Dame Campus Operating Scale Reported In Winter 2025 26students: more than 13000; employees approx: 8,300; campus acres: more than 1250 mixed
- Notre Dame Supplier Access And Competitive Procurement Requirementssupplier registration: invitation required via PaymentWorks; open sourcing events: yes; simplified acquisition range usd: 50000.01-250000; simplified acquisition quote requirement: three quotes if not preferred supplier; formal procurement threshold usd: 250,000; procurement led bid minimum time: two weeks for procurement services solicitation structured record
Concepts helped most
City WideFacility management
+1.0 pts
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
+0.7 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
+0.5 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
+0.3 pts
ActionCOACHBusiness coaching
+0.3 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Property replacement-cycle demand
We compared the age and condition of relevant property systems with the services each concept is actually equipped to provide.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 7 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 9 concepts changed position. ZOOM DRAIN moved from #4 to #9, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted7 of 14
Average among affected+0.3 pts
Average across all concepts+0.2 pts
Concepts changing rank9
What we observed
- Owner Occupied Housing Unit Rate, 2020 202460.2 percent
- City Commissioned Housing Report Found Many South Bend Homes Are Older And Only 121 Of Roughly 6,000 Sales Since 2016 Were Homes Built In The Prior Decaderecent construction sales: 121; approx total sales since 2016: 6,000; report characterization: many South Bend homes are older mixed
Concepts helped most
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
+0.4 pts
Mr. RooterPlumbing
+0.4 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
+0.4 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
+0.3 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
+0.3 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Labor and staffing friction
We compared each concept’s frontline and specialist staffing requirements with the local labor environment.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 8 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 12 concepts changed position. Jan-Pro International moved from #14 to #2, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted8 of 14
Average among affected-0.6 pts
Average across all concepts-0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank12
What we observed
- South Bend Mishawaka Major Group Mean Hourly Wages For Service Occupationsfood preparation and serving: 15.17; building and grounds cleaning and maintenance: 18.19; personal care and service: 17.52; office and administrative support: 22.43 usd per hour
- Notre Dame Campus Operating Scale Reported In Winter 2025 26students: more than 13000; employees approx: 8,300; campus acres: more than 1250 mixed
- Notre Dame Event Parking Role Directly Overlaps With Customer Service And Event Support Labor At The University Minimum Starting Rateemployer: University of Notre Dame; cited role: Temporary Parking Services Team Member; compensation usd per hour: 17.5; affected franchise labor attributes: frontline hourly labor, high opening headcount, high turnover exposure; occupational overlap confidence: high; limitations: Direct overlap is strongest for event, parking, hospitality, customer-service, and similar frontline roles; it does not establish pressure for every occupation. structured record
Concepts challenged most
Jan-Pro InternationalCommercial cleaning
-1.5 pts
Rainbow International RestorationRestoration
-0.8 pts
Workout AnytimeFitness
-0.8 pts
PuroCleanRestoration
-0.7 pts
HomeSmilesProperty maintenance services
-0.4 pts
Observed model effectMixed or model dependent
Transportation, routing, and parking
We recalculated route-dependent models after accounting for travel corridors, parking, and the number of productive stops they require.
Why concepts react differently
We applied a measurable adjustment to 13 of 14 concepts. When we neutralized the factor and recalculated the table, 8 concepts changed position. Mr. Rooter moved from #5 to #3, the largest movement among concepts directly affected by this factor.
Concepts adjusted13 of 14
Average among affected-0.3 pts
Average across all concepts-0.3 pts
Concepts changing rank8
What we observed
- South Bend Snow Response Prioritizes Main Routes; The City Targets All Streets Safely Drivable Within 36 Hours After Snowfall Ends And Does Not Plow Alleysmain routes prioritized: yes; target hours after snow stops: 36; alleys plowed by city: no structured record
- City Added 19 Lane Miles Of 2026 Paving On Named High Traffic Streets, Expected To Finish By End Of Octoberadditional lane miles: 19; expected completion: 2026-10-31; named corridors include: Angela Boulevard, Ewing Avenue, Ironwood Road/Drive, Main Street, McKinley Avenue, Mishawaka Avenue, Portage Avenue, Riverside Drive, additional values omitted mixed
- Purdue Extension Reported Frozen Soil Deeper Than 12 Inches In Many Northern Indiana Locations During Winter 2024 25 And Noted Frozen Ground Can Limit Infiltration And Percolationfrozen depth: greater than 12 inches in many locations; mechanism: frozen ground can limit infiltration and percolation; freeze-thaw loosens soil structured record
Concepts challenged most
Mr. RooterPlumbing
-0.5 pts
ZOOM DRAINDrain and sewer service
-0.5 pts
Aire ServHVAC installation, repair, and maintenance
-0.4 pts
FASTSIGNSSigns and graphics
-0.4 pts
Mister Sparky ElectricElectrical
-0.4 pts
Measured but not differentiating in this concept set
- Competitive environmentNo material score adjustment
- Real estate and site feasibilityNo material score adjustment
- Sales and customer acquisitionNo material score adjustment
- Referral ecosystemNo 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 WideHighly sensitive · tested #1–#8
#2 ActionCOACHHighly sensitive · tested #1–#6
#3 FASTSIGNSHighly sensitive · tested #2–#9
#4 ZOOM DRAINHighly sensitive · tested #2–#8
#5 Mr. RooterHighly sensitive · tested #3–#10
#6 Mister Sparky ElectricHighly sensitive · tested #4–#11
#7 Pillar To Post Home InspectorsHighly sensitive · tested #5–#12
#8 Aire ServHighly sensitive · tested #6–#10
#9 Tiger AdjustersHighly sensitive · tested #4–#13
#10 HomeSmilesHighly sensitive · tested #6–#11
#11 PuroCleanHighly sensitive · tested #6–#11
#12 Rainbow International RestorationHighly sensitive · tested #4–#14
#13 Workout AnytimeModerately sensitive · tested #12–#14
#14 Jan-Pro InternationalHighly sensitive · tested #2–#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: [5] [6] [10] [11] [12] [14] [15] [2]Property replacement-cycle demand: [6] [5] [23] [2]Competitive environment: [24] [5] [4]Labor and staffing friction: [7] [8] [9] [10] [3]Transportation, routing, and parking: [21] [22] [23] [5] [4]Real estate and site feasibility: [17] [6] [2] [4]Sales and customer acquisition: [12] [13] [24] [4]Referral ecosystem: [12] [10] [15] [4]Territory quality: [6] [17] [21] [4]Regulatory and operating friction: [18] [19] [20] [3] [4]
View the chart data as a table
| Concept | Target-market demand | Property replacement-cycle demand | Labor and staffing friction | Transportation, routing, and parking |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 City Wide | +1.0 pts | — | -0.3 pts | -0.1 pts |
| #2 ActionCOACH | +0.3 pts | — | — | — |
| #3 FASTSIGNS | +0.5 pts | — | — | -0.4 pts |
| #4 ZOOM DRAIN | — | +0.4 pts | — | -0.5 pts |
| #5 Mr. Rooter | — | +0.4 pts | — | -0.5 pts |
| #6 Mister Sparky Electric | — | +0.3 pts | — | -0.4 pts |
| #7 Pillar To Post Home Inspectors | — | +0.2 pts | — | -0.3 pts |
| #8 Aire Serv | — | +0.4 pts | -0.1 pts | -0.4 pts |
| #9 Tiger Adjusters | — | — | -0.1 pts | -0.2 pts |
| #10 HomeSmiles | +0.3 pts | — | -0.4 pts | -0.3 pts |
| #11 PuroClean | — | +0.3 pts | -0.7 pts | -0.3 pts |
| #12 Rainbow International Restoration | +0.1 pts | +0.3 pts | -0.8 pts | -0.4 pts |
| #13 Workout Anytime | — | — | -0.8 pts | -0.2 pts |
| #14 Jan-Pro International | +0.7 pts | — | -1.5 pts | -0.3 pts |
Interpretation
How to interpret the result
City Wide, ActionCOACH, FASTSIGNS led because their operating requirements captured more of the local support from target-market demand while remaining less exposed to labor and staffing friction. 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 City Wide, ActionCOACH, FASTSIGNS; their ranks move more widely when individual factors are neutralized.
Local evidence assessed for modeling
Category comparisons
Best franchise categories we assessed in South Bend, Indiana
Category summaries are shown only when at least two concepts qualified. Two-concept comparisons are explicitly labeled as limited.
Limited two-concept comparison
69.3Limited comparison: Restoration franchise opportunities assessed in South Bend, Indiana
2 Restoration concepts qualified for comparison, with scores ranging from 69.2 to 69.3. PuroClean ranked highest at 69.3. Property replacement-cycle demand added 0.3 points on average among the affected concepts. Labor and staffing friction reduced the exposed concepts by 0.7 points on average.
Interpret cautiously: A 0.1-point spread is too small to support a strong brand-level conclusion from city alignment alone.
- Concepts compared
- 2
- Score range
- 69.2–69.3
- Category average
- 69.3
PuroClean69.3
Rainbow International Restoration69.2
Metric registry
The 26 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 | 103,201people | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Supports research conclusion | [5] |
| Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025 | -0.2percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Supports research conclusion | [5] |
| Estimated households, 2020-2024 | 41,282households | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Context only | [5] |
| Owner-occupied housing unit rate, 2020-2024 | 60.2percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Used in scoring | [5] |
| Median value of owner-occupied housing units, 2020-2024 | 140,400usd | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Context only | [5] |
| Median gross rent, 2020-2024 | 1,033usd per month | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Context only | [5] |
| Median household income, 2020-2024 | 55,786usd 2024 | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Context only | [5] |
| Persons in poverty | 20.8percent | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Context only | [5] |
| Mean travel time to work, 2020-2024 | 20.2minutes | July 1, 2025 population estimate; 2020-2024 ACS measures; 2022 economic receipts | South Bend, Indiana | Context only | [5] |
| City-commissioned housing report found many South Bend homes are older and only 121 of roughly 6,000 sales since 2016 were homes built in the prior decade | recent construction sales: 121; approx total sales since 2016: 6,000; report characterization: many South Bend homes are oldermixed | Housing, sales, affordability, and neighborhood evidence largely through 2019-2021 | South Bend, Indiana | Used in scoring | [6] [2] |
| Rent exceeded 30% of tract median household income in 10 of 43 South Bend census tracts in the city-commissioned housing report | tracts above 30 percent rent to mhi: 10; total tracts: 43; concentration: south and west of downtowncensus tracts | Housing, sales, affordability, and neighborhood evidence largely through 2019-2021 | South Bend, Indiana | Conditional relationship | [6] |
| Existing market studies summarized in the city-commissioned report estimated absorption capacity of about 2,000 to 2,500 new units over five years in central neighborhoods | low: 2,000; high: 2,500; period years: 5housing units | Housing, sales, affordability, and neighborhood evidence largely through 2019-2021 | Central South Bend neighborhoods studied before 2022 | Conditional relationship | [6] |
| Notre Dame campus operating scale reported in Winter 2025-26 | students: more than 13000; employees approx: 8,300; campus acres: more than 1250mixed | Winter 2025-26 campus operating scale | University of Notre Dame campus, Notre Dame, Indiana, immediately north of South Bend | Used in scoring | [10] [11] |
| University of Notre Dame total fall 2025 enrollment | 13,204students | Fall 2025 enrollment | University of Notre Dame | Used in scoring | [11] |
| Notre Dame minimum starting rate for full-time and part-time positions | 17.5usd per hour | Current policy accessed August 18, 2026 | University of Notre Dame | Used in scoring | [7] [3] |
| Notre Dame event-parking role directly overlaps with customer-service and event-support labor at the university minimum starting rate | employer: University of Notre Dame; cited role: Temporary Parking Services Team Member; compensation usd per hour: 17.5; affected franchise labor attributes: frontline hourly labor, high opening headcount, high turnover exposure; occupational overlap confidence: high; limitations: Direct overlap is strongest for event, parking, hospitality, customer-service, and similar frontline roles; it does not establish pressure for every occupation.structured record | 2026-2027 event season posting | University of Notre Dame | Used in scoring | [8] [7] |
| South Bend-Mishawaka major-group mean hourly wages for service occupations | food preparation and serving: 15.17; building and grounds cleaning and maintenance: 18.19; personal care and service: 17.52; office and administrative support: 22.43usd per hour | May 2025 | South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI MSA | Used in scoring | [9] |
| Notre Dame supplier access and competitive procurement requirements | supplier registration: invitation required via PaymentWorks; open sourcing events: yes; simplified acquisition range usd: 50000.01-250000; simplified acquisition quote requirement: three quotes if not preferred supplier; formal procurement threshold usd: 250,000; procurement led bid minimum time: two weeks for procurement services solicitationstructured record | Current supplier and sourcing process accessed August 18, 2026 | University of Notre Dame | Used in scoring | [12] [13] |
| Notre Dame lists six football home games for the 2026 season | 6home games | 2026 football season | University of Notre Dame campus and nearby South Bend corridors | Supports modeled relationship | [14] |
| Memorial Hospital patient tower remained under active construction in August 2026 | status: active construction; planned total adult beds: 302; planned bed increase: 53; planned new jobs upon opening: 500; published completion target: Q3 2026mixed | Active construction as of August 2026 | Memorial Hospital of South Bend, downtown South Bend | Context only | [15] [16] |
| St. Joseph County office and industrial market snapshot, Q2 2026 | office vacancy percent: 7.6; office avg lease rate usd psf: 19.47; industrial vacancy percent: 8.6; industrial avg lease rate usd psf: 6.11; industrial under construction sqft: 2,100,000mixed | Q2 2026 CoStar-derived market snapshot | St | Conditional relationship | [17] |
| South Bend System Development Charge schedule for a new 1.0-ERU connection | water charge usd: 475; sewer charge usd: 1,145; combined usd: 1,620; trigger: new municipal water or sewer connection, or meter-size increase; nonresidential ERUs depend on flow calculation factorsusd per 1 eru | Current guide published June 2025 | South Bend, Indiana | Context only | [18] [3] |
| Exterior work on locally designated historic properties requires a Certificate of Appropriateness; the city sign permit flags a COA requirement in historic districts | staff turnaround for smaller complete applications: about 24 to 48 hours; larger or material change review: Historic Preservation Commission typically meets monthly; site gate: locally designated historic landmark or districtstructured record | Current guidance accessed August 18, 2026 | Locally designated historic landmarks and districts in South Bend / St | Conditional relationship | [19] [20] [4] |
| City added 19 lane miles of 2026 paving on named high-traffic streets, expected to finish by end of October | additional lane miles: 19; expected completion: 2026-10-31; named corridors include: Angela Boulevard, Ewing Avenue, Ironwood Road/Drive, Main Street, McKinley Avenue, Mishawaka Avenue, Portage Avenue, Riverside Drive, additional values omittedmixed | 2026 paving season through expected end of October | Named South Bend street segments | Conditional relationship | [21] [4] |
| South Bend snow response prioritizes main routes; the city targets all streets safely drivable within 36 hours after snowfall ends and does not plow alleys | main routes prioritized: yes; target hours after snow stops: 36; alleys plowed by city: nostructured record | Current snow-response guidance accessed August 18, 2026 | South Bend, Indiana | Used in scoring | [22] |
| Purdue Extension reported frozen soil deeper than 12 inches in many northern Indiana locations during winter 2024-25 and noted frozen ground can limit infiltration and percolation | frozen depth: greater than 12 inches in many locations; mechanism: frozen ground can limit infiltration and percolation; freeze-thaw loosens soilstructured record | Winter 2024-2025 Michiana / northern Indiana conditions | Michiana and northern Indiana | Used in scoring | [23] [2] |
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 70.59 after target-market demand +1.0 pts, labor and staffing friction -0.3 pts, and transportation, routing, and parking -0.1 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.
- 1Franchise-to-city operating-fit scoring modelInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
- 2Utility Delta Audit: Structural Inefficiencies and Asymmetric Opportunities in U.S. MarketsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: City-commissioned housing report found many South Bend homes are older and only 121 of roughly 6,000 sales since 2016 were homes built in the prior decade and Purdue Extension reported frozen soil deeper than 12 inches in many northern Indiana locations during winter 2024-25 and noted frozen ground can limit infiltration and percolation
- 3Municipal Hostility Index: Forensic Capitalization of Structural Constraints and Economic Choke PointsInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Notre Dame minimum starting rate for full-time and part-time positions and South Bend System Development Charge schedule for a new 1.0-ERU connection
- 4Franchise data - remake - 162.csvInternal or supplied research; not publicly accessible.
Used for: Exterior work on locally designated historic properties requires a Certificate of Appropriateness; the city sign permit flags a COA requirement in historic districts and City added 19 lane miles of 2026 paving on named high-traffic streets, expected to finish by end of October
- 5QuickFacts: South Bend city, Indiana
Used for: Resident population estimate on July 1, 2025, Population change from the April 2020 estimate base to July 2025, Estimated households, 2020-2024, Owner-occupied housing unit rate, 2020-2024, and Median value of owner-occupied housing units, 2020-2024
- 6Housing South Bend: Opportunities for transformative investment
Used for: City-commissioned housing report found many South Bend homes are older and only 121 of roughly 6,000 sales since 2016 were homes built in the prior decade, Rent exceeded 30% of tract median household income in 10 of 43 South Bend census tracts in the city-commissioned housing report, and Existing market studies summarized in the city-commissioned report estimated absorption capacity of about 2,000 to 2,500 new units over five years in central neighborhoods
- 7Compensation
Used for: Notre Dame minimum starting rate for full-time and part-time positions and Notre Dame event-parking role directly overlaps with customer-service and event-support labor at the university minimum starting rate
- 8Temporary | Parking Services
Used for: Notre Dame event-parking role directly overlaps with customer-service and event-support labor at the university minimum starting rate
- 9Occupational Employment and Wages in South Bend-Mishawaka — May 2025
Used for: South Bend-Mishawaka major-group mean hourly wages for service occupations
- 10A Tall Order
Used for: Notre Dame campus operating scale reported in Winter 2025-26
- 11IPEDS Fall Enrollment Component Summary 2025-2026
Used for: Notre Dame campus operating scale reported in Winter 2025-26 and University of Notre Dame total fall 2025 enrollment
- 12For Suppliers
Used for: Notre Dame supplier access and competitive procurement requirements
- 13Policies & Procedures
Used for: Notre Dame supplier access and competitive procurement requirements
- 14Football Gameday
Used for: Notre Dame lists six football home games for the 2026 season
- 15Behind the scenes of Memorial Hospital’s new patient tower
Used for: Memorial Hospital patient tower remained under active construction in August 2026
- 16Memorial Tower: By the Numbers
Used for: Memorial Hospital patient tower remained under active construction in August 2026
- 17Market Trends Q2 2026
Used for: St. Joseph County office and industrial market snapshot, Q2 2026
- 18Site Development Guide
Used for: South Bend System Development Charge schedule for a new 1.0-ERU connection
- 19Historic Preservation Commission FAQ
Used for: Exterior work on locally designated historic properties requires a Certificate of Appropriateness; the city sign permit flags a COA requirement in historic districts
- 20City of South Bend Permit Application for Off-Premise Sign
Used for: Exterior work on locally designated historic properties requires a Certificate of Appropriateness; the city sign permit flags a COA requirement in historic districts
- 21City Announces Additional Paving for 2026
Used for: City added 19 lane miles of 2026 paving on named high-traffic streets, expected to finish by end of October
- 22Street Needs to be Plowed
Used for: South Bend snow response prioritizes main routes; the city targets all streets safely drivable within 36 hours after snowfall ends and does not plow alleys
- 23Impact of Frozen Soil
Used for: Purdue Extension reported frozen soil deeper than 12 inches in many northern Indiana locations during winter 2024-25 and noted frozen ground can limit infiltration and percolation
- 24
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.