Abstract
This article focuses on a specific component of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD’s) strategy to implement fair housing policy, its requirement for local jurisdictions that receive community development block grant (CDBG) dollars to prepare an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice (AI) report. The article’s analysis is based on an evaluation of the City of Buffalo’s 2004 AI report. The evaluation was conducted by a local fair housing organization in collaboration with university-based researchers. The findings from the evaluation revealed that the City had made little progress in implementing the action plan from its AI report over an eight year period. This was an outgrowth of local funding constraints, limited staff capacity, ambiguous HUD rules for AI reporting, and a lack of political will to pursue fair housing in Buffalo. In light of these findings, we recommend that HUD: mandate timeframes for AI implementation, require AI updates at regular intervals, and more clearly specify the format and content of AI reports. We also recommend that HUD require jurisdictions to include evaluation plans in their AI reports and measure outcomes from the implementation of AI action plans. These reforms will enhance the ability of AI reports to serve as effective planning tools for the affirmative furthering of fair housing policy.
Highlights
Discrimination in the sale and rental of housing has been an ignominy in the US for most of its history
This article focuses on a specific component of Housing and Urban Development (HUD’s) strategy to implement fair housing policy, its requirement for local jurisdictions that receive community development block grant (CDBG) dollars to prepare an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice (AI) report
We focused our analysis on the AI reporting process because it involves two critical steps in the fair housing enforcement process
Summary
Discrimination in the sale and rental of housing has been an ignominy in the US for most of its history. Local jurisdictions identify impediments to fair housing in their AI reports and develop action plans to reduce them. HUD generally accepts grantees’ annual certifications of affirmatively furthering fair housing, and does not initiate further review unless third party complaints produce evidence that suggest otherwise These two steps in the fair housing enforcement process are important, they have been criticized for lacking specificity and mandating that local jurisdictions submit AI reports to HUD for review and approval One of the most notable shortcomings of the AI reporting process is that there has been insufficient monitoring and evaluation of local jurisdictions’ implementation of action plans to reduce impediments to fair housing. AI reports identify impediments to fair housing and develop action plans to address them, but there is no formal process in place to ensure they will be implemented.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
