WildfireRiskFinder

Norwood, MI

Norwood, MI's wildfire risk, in USFS's own numbers

Low
18thpercentile nationally

Out of every US place USFS scores, Norwood lands at the 18th percentile for wildfire risk to structures — among the lower wildfire-risk places nationally — a figure built from its 127 buildings, not the land around them. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)

Fire likelihood alone (USFS's burn-probability figure) ranks Norwood at the 17th national percentile — 1 points below its risk-to-structures score, a gap driven by how much is actually built there.

Where Norwood's buildings actually sit

127Total buildings
92.1%Direct exposure
1.6%Indirect exposure
6.3%Minimal exposure

USFS classifies 92.1% of Norwood's buildings as Direct exposure, higher than its 1.6% Indirect share and far above its 6.3% Minimal share — a profile where 117 structures sit close enough to vegetation that lot clearing matters most.

Norwood against the rest of the country

Compare Norwood's two percentiles: 61st within Michigan, only 18th nationally — a gap of 43 points that marks it as unusually exposed for its own state. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Norwood ranks 25,877 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 27,854 by building count (1 is largest). Within Michigan alone, it ranks 294 of 745 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Michigan on its state page.

Norwood and the insurance market

Norwood's low rating (18th percentile nationally) sits outside the range where wildfire risk alone reshapes an insurance market — still, a homeowner here loses nothing by comparing rates.

Lowering exposure, not just insuring around it

Because Direct exposure dominates in Norwood (92.1%), the highest-leverage fix is defensible space, not roofing or vents alone — covered in the home-hardening guide.

Where Norwood's figures come from

The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 127 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Norwood. The exposure-zones guide covers what Norwood's dominant direct exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.