Natural Hazard Loss Profile
Expected annual loss across the 18 natural hazards in FEMA's National Risk Index. Life safety is expressed in fatality-equivalents, combining expected deaths and injuries. Property loss counts building damage only, separate from agriculture.
These figures cover natural hazards only. Structure fire, EMS, and motor vehicle incidents are not included in the National Risk Index and are not counted here, so this is not an all-cause life safety measure. For Panola County, the largest single contributor is Tornado, 28% of the life-safety total.
Panola County carries an expected under 1 natural hazard fatality-equivalents and $7.0M in building loss per year. Rank chips compare the 82 Mississippi counties. Nationally, Panola County ranks 789th of 3,222 U.S. counties for life-safety loss, 526th for life safety per 100k residents, 1886th for property loss, and 2650th for property loss per resident. Computed from census tract data covering every resident, independent of fire department boundaries.
Add fire mortality, cause, and loss
Natural hazard exposure is one half of the picture. The other half is what your departments run on: fire deaths and injuries, cause of ignition, dollar loss per incident. That comes from NERIS incident reporting, and it grows as departments serving Panola County enroll. Our Regional tier brings it together across your jurisdiction, with participating departments, alongside response time analytics, cross-department benchmarking, and coverage gap analysis.
Talk to us about Panola County See what a department seesWhat Drives the Loss
Total expected annual loss: $17,330,595 per year. Life safety is shown here in dollars, at FEMA's $13.7M value of statistical life, so the three shares sum to the total.
Hazards Ranked Two Ways
The hazard that threatens people is often not the hazard that destroys buildings. Both columns cover the same 18 hazards over the same year.
By life-safety loss ($/yr)
By property loss ($/yr)
Census Tract Risk Map
Shaded by quintile across the census tracts in Panola County. Gray tracts have no modeled loss or no resident population. Per-resident figures on this map use the National Risk Index 2020 tract population.
Fire Service Profile
Department composition covers the 6 departments registered in NERIS Public for Panola County, MS. Departments that have not registered are not counted. Station coverage divides census population by registered stations; department service areas overlap, so their populations are not summed.
Department Rankings
Fire and EMS departments serving Panola County. Click column headers to sort.
NRI Rating is from FEMA's National Risk Index, which measures community risk across 18 natural hazards using expected annual losses, social vulnerability, and community resilience. Life-Safety Loss uses FEMA's Value of Statistical Life ($13.7M per expected fatality) to estimate annual risk to human life.
Department boundaries and station counts are self-reported through NERIS Public and may not reflect current service areas. Population and Life-Safety Loss reflect each department's full jurisdiction. County-level risk metrics are computed from census tract data and are not affected by boundary accuracy. See full methodology.
| Department ▲ | Est. Population ▲ | Life-Safety Loss ▼ | NRI Rating ▲ | Stations ▲ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Batesville Fire Department | 15,400 | $5.0M | Very High | 3 |
| Courtland Volunteer Fire Department | 11,961 | $3.5M | Relatively High | 1 |
| Pope Volunteer Fire Department | 11,961 | $3.5M | Relatively High | 2 |
| Mt. Olivet Volunteer Fire Department | 7,743 | $2.2M | Relatively High | 1 |
| Pleasant Grove Volunteer Fire Department | 6,485 | $1.9M | Very High | 1 |
| Bynum Volunteer Fire Department | 4,926 | $1.5M | Relatively High | 3 |
Risk Snapshot
FEMA Disaster Declarations
Response-level intelligence for your region
Our Regional tier gives county fire authorities and state fire marshals rollup dashboards across all departments in your jurisdiction: response time analytics, cross-department benchmarking, and coverage gap analysis.
Explore the Regional Tier See the Response Demo