One Strike to Second Chances: Using Criminal Backgrounds in Admission Decisions for Assisted Housing

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has changed its position toward housing individuals with criminal records from strict one-strike policies in the 1980s to providing second chances to returning citizens. Many public housing authorities have not updated their admission policies for using criminal backgrounds and still adhere to the one-strike philosophy. In response to new guidance from HUD, housing agencies are trying to find a balance between screening practices to identify demonstrable risk but avoid discrimination and violation of the Fair Housing Act. This research examines several questions critical to assisting housing providers to address the new guidance from HUD. Findings provide direction for housing providers on understanding recidivism risk rates, using useful lookback periods, considering risk and harm across crime types, and verifying rehabilitation and other evidence to design informed policies and procedures for using criminal records in admission decisions for assisted housing.     

Post-Foreclosure Conveyance of Occupied Homes and Preferential Sales to Nonprofits: Rationales,Policies, and Underlying Conflicts

This article explores the reasons why the conveyance of foreclosed homes with occupants makes sense, and why nonprofits should be given preferential treatment as purchasers, as well as the relevant policies and practices of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Housing Administration (HUD/FHA) and the Federal Housing Finance Agency and the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (FHFA/GSEs). It also presents recommendations for revising current policies, and suggestions for further research. These issues also raise underlying questions about how the federal agencies view their public purpose roles and the implications for possible increased long-term public costs to shelter low-income households displaced because of foreclosure of their homes. Although HUD/FHA’s guidelines allow for conveyance of foreclosed homes with occupants, the evidence—interviews with key stakeholders in Boston and data obtained from HUD through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request—reveal that the guidelines are largely irrelevant in practice. Although there has been a change in an FHFA policy that could soften the GSEs’ practice of no occupants at conveyance, it is not yet clear whether this will result in former owners and tenants being allowed to remain in their homes following foreclosure. Concerning preferential sales to nonprofits, whereas positive new policies have been issued by both the FHFA and HUD, the extent of implementation is not known. Finally, it appears that HUD/FHA and the FHFA/GSEs view foreclosed homes more as financial assets, whose value they seek to maximize, rather than as dwellings for financially strained households that, if evicted, may need additional housing subsidies and as part of a strategy to preemptively stabilize neighborhoods.     

The Origins of the Rental Assistance Demonstration Program and the End of Public Housing

The Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Program is designed to address a $26 billion public housing capital needs backlog. New investment is leveraged by converting public housing to project-based assistance, with ownership transferred to nonprofit and private entities. In other words, RAD is expediting the end of the country’s 80-year-old public housing program. While this may seem like a dramatic policy shift, there is actually little about RAD that is new. This investigation of RAD’s origins reveals it to be the coalescence of existing programs, established policies, and longstanding trends multiple decades in the making. This in turn helps explain why RAD has expanded so quickly and why its expansion is likely to continue. There exists a great need for more research on and monitoring of RAD’s implementation, and for a reassessment of the policy priorities that produced both the program itself and the problem it attempts to solve.     

Potential Challenges to Targeting Low- and Moderate-Income Communities in a Time of Urgent Need: The Case of CDBG-DR in New York State after Superstorm Sandy

New York State received $4.5 billion in Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds after Superstorm Sandy. A major CDBG-DR requirement is to prioritize assistance to low- and moderate-income (LMI) populations. The state is spending two fifths of funds on community-wide (e.g., infrastructure) recovery activities. For these activities to be documented as LMI, a specified percentage of residents benefiting from them must be LMI. We explore the potential tension between addressing community recovery needs and prioritizing LMI assistance. Specifically, we develop a series of scenarios to estimate the likelihood that any community-wide activities will be documented as LMI in New York State. We find that documenting these activities as LMI is largely dependent on the underlying demographics of disaster-impacted areas. Additionally, as recovery activities increase in size, thereby impacting larger populations, they are less likely to be documented as LMI, potentially disincentivizing larger, more impactful investments. We recommend empirically based LMI targets for CDBG-DR grantees.     

Housing Choice Vouchers and Crime in Charlotte,NC

Recent media attention and research have focused on the effect of housing vouchers on crime, with different conclusions. The purpose of this study is to bring further evidence to the voucher–crime debate, using annual data from 2000 to 2009 for Charlotte-Mecklenburg County. We study the relationship between crime counts and housing vouchers with quantile regression models with year and census tract fixed effects. We found that voucher households are associated with increased crime, controlling for past crime levels. Estimates vary, however, with the concentration of vouchers in the neighborhood, with little impact in areas with low concentrations. Estimates also vary with the neighborhood crime level. We extend the literature by examining the effect of different voucher family types, finding no evidence that elderly households or nonelderly households without disabilities and without children are associated with more crime. However, we found a very significant positive association for nonelderly households without disabilities with children. Our results indicate that significant crime reductions could be accomplished by focusing U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, local housing agency, and criminal justice resources on the types of places and voucher families most at risk for crime problems when a family uses a voucher to move into a new neighborhood.     

A different lens: administrative perspectives on portability in Illinois' Housing Choice Voucher Program

Over the last decade, the Housing Choice Voucher Program has grown to become the USA's primary strategy for providing safe, decent, and affordable housing. Annually serving more than 2 million low-income households, the program is designed to help low-income households afford private market rental housing. The program also allows for the “portability” of vouchers nationally between housing authority jurisdictions. Both features aim to mitigate the effects of concentrated poverty. Research on the Moving to Opportunity Program and the Gautreaux consent decree have produced data confirming that residential mobility can at times lead to positive opportunities for assisted households. This past research has been conducted on specific programs occurring outside of the general Housing Choice Voucher Program framework and has focused on household-level outcomes, paying little attention to the ways in which program administration may affect outcomes for voucher households. This article aims to understand voucher portability from the perspective of housing authority executive directors and program administrators, in order to better understand how program administration impacts the types of household outcomes observed in prior research. The results reveal that housing authority administrative practices and inter-housing authority relationships play a significant role in shaping the types of outcomes realized by porting voucher households. These findings suggest several changes to program administrative design and policy that may improve support for voucher households as they make portability moves.     

Denver Housing Authority's Park Avenue HOPE VI revitalization project: community impact results

In 2002, the Denver Housing Authority1 ¹Data and support for the study were provided by The Denver Housing Authority. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily shared by the Denver Housing Authority. received a HOPE VI grant from HUD in the amount of 20 million dollars to raze and rehabilitate three “severally distressed” public housing communities. Named the Park Avenue HOPE VI Revitalization Project, the purpose was to create both low-income and market-rate housing in an urban environment along with recreation and business opportunities. An evaluation of the community impact of the project has yielded favorable results. Employing a quasi-experimental research design, analyses of the data collected revealed impressive outcomes in three areas. These include a decrease in overall as well as violent crime, increased home-buying activity, and increased property values within a quarter-mile radius of the Park Avenue HOPE VI site. Adding to the many evaluations of HOPE VI projects nationally, this article offers community-level results to further our understanding of federal housing policy and its effects on urban centers.