Abstract

Policies and research around affordable rental housing remain stuck between the “rock” of not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) fears and the “hard place” of deconcentrating poverty goals, leading to fragmented outcome measurement in contemporary project-based affordable rental housing programs. This article compares the motivations and results of existing research focused on NIMBY concerns around place to that of programs that promote the deconcentration of poor people. We suggest reframing the argument for project-based affordable rental housing by bolstering outcome measurement on neighborhoods and developments and expanding it to include tenants. Building upon current evaluation practices of mobility studies and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, we present a comprehensive framework for evaluating outcomes of project-based rental housing developments within their local context at three relevant scales: project, household, and community. We present an array of indicators and examine data collection needs and limitations, acknowledging the political and financial obstacles to comprehensive evaluation but arguing for the need to justify expenditures and prove results to the public. We recommend that government agencies stretch beyond NIMBY arguments and deconcentration of poverty goals to be proactive in targeting, measuring, publicizing, and redressing an expanded set of outcomes through better comprehensive planning for affordable housing. Through more rigorous and comprehensive evaluation of outcomes at all scales, it may be shown that affordable housing development yields a broad range of benefits for the people housed, projects financed, and the communities where it is built.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call