Housing Choice Voucher Research Articles

Location Efficiency and Affordability: A National Analysis of Walkable Access and HUD-Assisted Housing

As walkable neighborhoods are rapidly gaining popularity, these location-efficient areas are becoming less affordable to low-income tenants. We ask to what extent project- and tenant-based federal housing assistance is keeping these areas affordable and whether tradeoffs exist. Using descriptive statistical and logistic regression analysis for a data set of 3.8 million U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) tenants and a variety of neighborhood-level indicators, we find that HUD assistance provides tenants with differential access to walkable neighborhoods. Tenants who are senior, Asian, White, or have disabilities have higher chances of living in higher opportunity walkable areas. However, for those tenants with the greatest disadvantages (African American and Hispanic tenants), neighborhood quality remains compromised by higher poverty, segregation, and worse school quality, even in walkable neighborhoods. We identify the type of assistance (public housing, project-based rental assistance, and Housing Choice Vouchers) that is associated with compromised or higher opportunity access for these groups. This information can help prioritize assisted housing counseling, preservation, and siting to reduce existing spatial inequalities related to walkable amenity access, especially for African American and Hispanic tenants. This research also helps advance emerging research on the conceptualization and measurement of neighborhoods that integrates urban form and socioeconomic indicators.

Are Landlords Overcharging Housing Voucher Holders?

The structure of rental markets coupled with the design of the Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP), the largest federal housing subsidy for low–income families in the United States, provides the opportunity to overcharge voucher holders. Applying hedonic regression models to a unique data set of Milwaukee renters combined with administrative records, we find that vouchered households are charged between $51 and $68 more in monthly rent than unassisted renters in comparable units and neighborhoods. Overcharging voucher holders costs taxpayers an estimated $3.8 million each year in Milwaukee alone, the equivalent of supplying 620 additional families in that city with housing assistance. These findings suggest that the HCVP could be made more cost–effective—and therefore more expansive—if overcharging were prevented.

Searching for Affordability and Opportunity: A Framework for the Housing Choice Voucher Program

Affordability, a key factor in the housing search process, becomes critical when locating rental housing in opportunity-rich areas. The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program accommodates low-income households searching for housing and encourages recipients to reside in low-poverty areas. Affordable neighborhoods that are accessible to public transportation are often found in distressed areas, and not all HCV recipients succeed in locating qualified housing. To address these challenges, a housing search framework is developed to assist HCV households in the housing search process. This framework builds on the methodology of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Location Affordability Index and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing assessment tool by creating multivariate indices that incorporate housing supply, accessibility to opportunity, and neighborhood conditions. The framework serves as a foundation for an online housing search application for public housing authorities to further fair housing goals, HCV recipients to locate qualified housing units, and local governments to assess affordability and opportunity.

Low-Income Housing Rental Assistance, Perceptions of Neighborhood Food Environment, and Dietary Patterns among Latino Adults: the AHOME Study

Federal rental assistance programs, in the form of the traditional public housing program and the Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP-formerly known as Section 8), are designed to reduce the economic rental burden for low-income residents. While residents using federal housing vouchers, which allow low-income residents in public housing to move out of public housing to rent-subsidized homes, have been found to be have better cardiovascular outcomes compared to the cardiovascular outcomes of low-income public housing residents, the mechanisms explaining these associations remains an understudied area. The aim of this study is to assess whether residents participating in HCVP or unassisted residents had greater access to healthy foods such as fruits and vegetables, and less access to unhealthy foods such as fast food and sugar sweetened beverages, when compared to residents living in public housing (referent group). The Affordable Housing as an Obesity Mediating Environment (AHOME) study is a cross-sectional study of Latinos residing in low-income housing in the Bronx, NY (n=362). Participants were interviewed to assess food patterns and perceptions of neighborhood environment. The analytic sample was primarily female (74.5%) with a mean age of 46.4years (SD=14.68). Residents participating in HCVP had similar availability of fruits and vegetables in the home compared to residents receiving no assistance or public housing residents. HCVP participants consumed more fast food (β=0.34; CI=0.10-0.58) but had similar sugar sweetened beverage consumption compared to public housing residents. Unassisted residents had more fast food consumption (β=0.25; CI=0.01-0.49) but less sugar sweetened beverage consumption (β=-0.52; CI=-0.76--0.28) than public housing residents. Perceptions of neighborhood food environment were not significantly associated with dietary patterns. This study shows variability in consumption of sugar sweetened beverage consumption and fast food consumption, but not in availability of fruits and vegetables, across residents participating in HCVP, public housing residents, and unassisted residents. Evaluating the health benefits associated with low-income housing mobility programs, such as HCVP, requires examining how housing may influence dietary patterns above and beyond an individual's socioeconomic position.

Tracking “Choice” in the Housing Choice Voucher Program: The Relationship Between Neighborhood Preference and Locational Outcome

Do residential locations of Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) households reflect tenants’ preferences for neighborhood quality? Study results come from a three-part methodology: (1) survey of voucher holders to find neighborhood preferences and other factors in the consumer decision-making model, (2) geographic information system (GIS) analysis of actual locational outcomes in terms of neighborhood opportunity and transportation accessibility, and (3) quantitative analysis of the strength of preference–outcome relationships. The results reveal that survey participants placed high priority on neighborhoods that were safe and clean, and with quality schools. Despite this, higher priority on quality housing and search barriers affected the housing choice. As such, to a large extent, the residents did not live in places that met their location preferences. The study calls for an expansion of location assessment measures in the current policy framework and the provision of more information about housing and neighborhood options to voucher recipients.

How to attract more landlords to the housing choice voucher program: a case study of landlord outreach efforts

Since 1980, the focus of American housing policy has shifted away from project-based to tenant-based subsidies, i.e. the Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP). Yet many HCVP recipients have remained in high-poverty and high-minority areas of central cities. To improve the effectiveness of HCVP in expanding residential choices, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is encouraging local public housing authorities to utilize a variety of techniques to provide more opportunity for voucher recipients to move to low poverty areas including meetings with current or prospective owners, owners’ newsletters, owner fairs, program videos and direct contact with owners. Although there has been a considerable body of research on voucher recipients in the Gautreaux and Moving to Opportunity programs, two special housing voucher programs, there has been little research on the effectiveness of landlord outreach efforts as part of the regular HCVP. We therefore conducted a case study of landlord outreach efforts currently being implemented by the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority. We combined observation of landlord outreach events with semi-structured interviews to determine reasons why landlords do or do not participate, landlords’ perceptions on the extent to which HCVP addresses their concerns, what they take away from these events, and how outreach efforts might be improved. This case study indicates that there is considerable room for improvement in landlord outreach efforts by the housing authority. The policy implications for HUD as well as public housing authorities across the United States are discussed.

Moving to Location Affordability? Housing Choice Vouchers and Residential Relocation in the Portland, Oregon, Region

Location affordability measures a household’s combined cost of housing and transportation. Low-income households have the most to gain from housing with lower transportation costs. This research analyzes whether Housing Choice Voucher Program households—participants in a program designed to provide low-income households with a greater degree of housing choice—are able to choose housing that lowers their transportation costs in a metropolitan region with a compact, vital urban core. A mixed-methods approach is used to investigate the differences in location affordability and efficiency among 2,026 voucher recipients who moved within the Portland, Oregon, region during 2012–2013. Location mattered to movers, but in some unexpected ways. Urban movers relocated to less location efficient areas, whereas suburban movers’ location efficiency remained stable. In tight housing markets, voucher holders may be edged out of location-efficient neighborhoods and thus incur increased transportation costs.

Cores and Peripheries: Spatial Analysis of Housing Choice Voucher Distribution in the San Francisco Bay Area Region, 2000–2010

This study uses spatial regressions and spatial statistics to examine the changes in the distribution of Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) households within an expanded San Francisco Bay Area region. From 2000 to 2010, the density of HCV households grew disproportionately across the region, and areas of significant increase emerged in both the region’s urban cores and its rural periphery. Furthermore, the destination communities shared a set of common characteristics. In 2010 HCV households were more likely to locate in areas with lower housing prices, lower percentages of educated people, higher rates of poverty, and higher percentages of African American households when compared with the region as a whole. These findings suggest that voucher holders locate where housing is affordable. We conclude that in regions with tight housing markets, supply matters. This study also introduces housing researchers and policy makers to a methodological approach that addresses what is known in geostatistics as a change of support problem.

Lists and Lotteries: Rationing in the Housing Choice Voucher Program

This article investigates how the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program rations subsidies. HCV is the largest low-income housing assistance program in the United States. Despite the program’s size, millions of HCV-eligible households go without subsidy each year. Because the demand for support exceeds the supply of subsidies, HCV assistance is rationed through several mechanisms. These mechanisms and their relationship with the HCV system from both the client and administrator perspectives will be discussed. Implications of HCV rationing will also be discussed.

Differential Health and Social Needs of Older Adults Waitlisted for Public Housing or Housing Choice Vouchers

ABSTRACTAffordable housing is an important form of income security for low-income older persons. This article describes characteristics of older persons waitlisted for either public housing or a housing choice voucher (HCV; previously Section 8) in Portland, Oregon. 358 persons (32% response rate) completed a mailed survey with questions about demographics, health and housing status, food insecurity, and preference for housing with services. Findings indicate that many waitlisted older persons experienced homelessness or housing instability, poor health, high hospital use, and food insecurity. Public housing applicants were significantly more likely to report lower incomes, homelessness, and food insecurity than HCV applicants. We conclude with policy implications for housing and health agencies that serve low-income older persons.

Encouraging Residential Moves to Opportunity Neighborhoods: An Experiment Testing Incentives Offered to Housing Voucher Recipients

This study tests whether mobility counseling and cash incentives will affect a Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) recipient’s move to an opportunity area. Opportunity areas are defined as tracks rated 6-10 on a HUD-created index—factoring in poverty, housing stability, job and transit access, school quality, and employment. This move from a non-opportunity neighborhood (ranked 1-5) to an opportunity neighborhood (ranked 6-10) is considered an “opportunity move.” When a HCV recipient requests to move to a new housing unit, they must work with their Public Housing Authority (PHA). Briefings provided by PHAs are part of this process. For this study, 2,005 voucher holders who requested to move were randomly selected to receive one of three interventions to test any effect on moves to opportunity areas: 1. A “business-as-usual” briefing covering basic information about moving with a voucher. 2. A “business-as-usual” briefing and the promise of a $500 grant if voucher holders used their voucher in an opportunity area. 3. A mobility counseling briefing and an offer of a $500 grant if voucher holders used their voucher in an opportunity area.

Deconcentration without Integration: Examining the Social Outcomes of Housing Choice Voucher Movement in Los Angeles County

This article reports on the social experiences of tenants moving from low–income neighborhoods in the City of Los Angeles to a racially mixed, lower poverty suburb—the Antelope Valley—using Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers. Voucher tenants experience significant social exclusion and aggressive oversight. Local residents use racial shorthand to label their black neighbors as voucher holders and apply additional scrutiny to their activity. They aggressively report voucher tenants to the housing authority and police, instigating inspections that threaten tenants’ voucher status. Tenants react to these circumstances by withdrawing from their communities in order to avoid scrutiny and protect their status in the program. These findings illustrate that the social difficulties documented in mixed–income developments may also exist in voucher programs, highlight the ways in which neighborhood effects may be extended to include social experiences, and suggest the limits of the voucher program to translate geographic mobility into socioeconomic progress.

Rooms for Improvement: A Qualitative Metasynthesis of the Housing Choice Voucher Program

This article synthesizes housing subsidy voucher research to explain why, when in theory vouchers enable users to move out of poor neighborhoods, in practice they often do not. This qualitative meta-analysis presents an examination of the assumptions of the program and their relationship to empirical findings.Two themes emerged from this synthesis: market barriers and product problems. Data from a variety of studies and contexts portray recipients struggling to use vouchers in the private rental market due to market barriers, including lack of public transportation and the presence of discrimination. Product problems constrained freedom of choice about where to move and when to make a housing transition. These constraints manifest as compromised housing quality and low voucher utilization. This synthetic view cannot account for all outcomes or exceptional cases, but results suggest where participant experiences are generalizable and attributable to features of the housing market and structure of the program itself.

Housing Choice Voucher Holders and Neighborhood Crime

It is often alleged that households moving into neighborhoods with the aid of housing choice vouchers (HCVs) raise crime rates there. We use 1999–2008 quarterly data from Chicago census tracts to test this allegation with a dynamic panel model designed to overcome the challenges of omitted variable and endogeneity biases. We find no support for the proposition that growth in HCV holders leads to growth in violent crime rates, regardless of neighborhood context. We find that growth in HCV holders is positively associated with growth in property crime rates, however, in higher poverty neighborhoods or if HCVs exceed a threshold concentration.

Exploring the Housing Pathways of Low-Income Women: A Biographical Approach

This research explores the use of a housing pathways framework and a biographical method to improve our understanding of the long-term housing experiences of low-income women. Biographical methods have been employed in the study of vulnerable and special populations outside of the US; however, there has been limited application of the method to examine low-income households within the US. This study draws on interviews of 29 low-income women with children in a large Midwestern metropolitan area to examine the nature of low-income housing pathways. The wages provided in the jobs that were available to the women in this study were insufficient to afford even low-quality, low-rent apartments, suggesting that the ability to achieve stability in modest housing is predicated on achieving much higher levels of household income. Federal rental assistance provided through the Housing Choice Voucher programme, rather than increased job stability or wages, resulted in improved housing conditions and stability for the women in this study. Biographical methods present great potential in providing a nuanced understanding of the housing experiences and life circumstances of low-income households and other vulnerable populations in the United States.

Moving to Opportunity? An Examination of Housing Choice Vouchers on Urban Poverty Deconcentration in South Florida

The increase in socioeconomic disparity between households runs counter to federal housing goals to improve the prospects of the poor. One goal of the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, which provides rental assistance to low-income families, is the deconcentration of poverty. This study is a longitudinal analysis of the HCV program's deconcentration effectiveness in Broward County, Florida. The movement of HCV households before and after voucher assignment is examined. Spatial statistics reveal that HCV recipients are highly clustered in low opportunity areas both prior to and after receiving a voucher. Factors that significantly relate to the likelihood that a voucher recipient will or will not move to an area of higher opportunity are assessed. Results from an opportunity index derived from principal components analysis and an ordinary least squares regression model indicate that being non-Black, having a larger household, and originating from economically distressed areas with high poverty and unemployment relates more strongly to relocation to neighborhoods with greater opportunity.

Transportation Access, Rental Vouchers, and Neighborhood Satisfaction: Evidence From the Moving to Opportunity Experiment

The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program is designed in part to expand the neighborhood choices of assisted households, thereby enabling assisted households to find a living environment that simultaneously meets their housing and neighborhood preferences. While several studies have examined the impact of rental subsidies on neighborhood satisfaction, few have examined whether access to adequate transportation enables HCV recipients to locate housing in more desirable locations. This article relies on data from the Moving to Opportunity experiment to examine the impact of transportation access, rental housing vouchers, and geographic constraints on neighborhood satisfaction. We find that access to both vehicles and public transit positively influences neighborhood satisfaction, and the influence of vehicle access varies with transit proximity. These findings point to the importance of transportation in helping low-income assisted renter households locate housing in more desirable neighborhoods.

Rethinking Locational Outcomes for Housing Choice Vouchers: A Case Study in Duval County, Florida

This study examines locational patterns of housing choice vouchers in Duval County, Florida, using the Housing Suitability Model (HSM), a newly developed geographic information system–based model that evaluates residential land parcels and neighborhoods in terms of their suitability for affordable housing. The HSM was used to characterize voucher locations and other residential parcels across the county in terms of opportunity and accessibility. The analysis explores the tradeoffs between opportunity and accessibility inherent in many neighborhoods throughout the county. It finds that voucher holders' locations lag substantially behind other residential locations in terms of opportunity measures but are more comparable in terms of accessibility. Further analysis finds differences in opportunity and accessibility among subgroups of voucher holders by various demographic characteristics. The study recommends the incorporation of opportunity and accessibility for voucher holders into local housing planning, including the implementation of proposed rules for Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

Rigging the Rules of the Game: How Landlords Geographically Sort Low–Income Renters

This paper considers an unexamined mechanism in the selection processes that sort the urban poor into different neighborhood environments: the landlord. Scholars of poverty and residential mobility have long been interested in how the choices of low–income families interact with structural barriers to create high–poverty neighborhoods that reproduce social and economic isolation as well as racial segregation. However, they have not examined the ways in which these choices are shaped by the intermediary force of the landlord. This paper draws on ethnographic observation and in–depth interviews with 20 landlords and 82 residents in Baltimore, examining their engagement with the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program. Findings show that landlords’ strategic implementations of voucher rules contribute to residential sorting patterns through a three–step process: first, selection, in which targeted recruitment tactics favor voucher tenants; second, a sorting process in which landlords cherry–pick the lower–end voucher tenants, matching them to hard–to–rent units; and third, landlords’ selective retention of tenants who do not have the means to leave. This results in rigging the game, where a process of “reverse selection” operates: Rather than tenants selecting homes and neighborhoods, landlords are selecting tenants. Taken together, these tactics result in a strategic balkanization of the rental housing market that retains voucher holders where they can be most profitable—in the very neighborhoods policymakers would like to provide them with the opportunity to leave. Landlord tactics serve as a powerful mechanism in the concentration of poverty.

Do Tenant- and Place-Based Rental Housing Programs Complement Each Other? Evidence from Ohio

We characterize Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) use in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) units and explore whether the subsidy overlap responds to needs unmet by the HCV program alone. We present a subsidy allocation model allowing for complementarity of tenant-based and place-based subsidies to guide our analysis. Findings for Ohio in 2011 suggest vouchers tied to LIHTC units are more likely allocated to very poor households with special needs. We also find that HCV users who freely choose to redeem their voucher in a LIHTC unit make up a somewhat larger share of LIHTC households in tighter or less affordable markets. There is little evidence that using both programs in concert enables access to better neighborhoods: households across both programs live in neighborhoods that tend to have above 20% poverty rates, with HCVLIHTC users actually living in higher poverty neighborhoods in the most urban Ohio counties when compared to the HCV population as a whole.