Research by Author & Topic

Publications by Martin D. Abravanel on Federal Programs and Policies

HOPE VI supports demolishing large, dilapidated public housing and replacing it with smaller-scale, more appealing properties. What makes this feasible (mixed financing; private-sector entities; and mixed-income, mixed-tenure complexes) also creates conditions that challenge and can undermine long-term sustainability. Sustainability has not yet been assessed and whether it should or can be assessed has been questioned. With input from housing practitioners and insight from a trial exploration of two HOPE VI redevelopments, this report demonstrates the need for, and feasibility of, conducting an assessment that can assist both private owners and public agencies in sustaining this valuable resource.

Recipients of housing assistance under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs can keep their benefits as long as they remain income eligible and abide by program requirements. Under HUD's MTW demonstration, however, a small number of housing agencies that administer these programs chose to impose time limits on various program benefits, including housing assistance. This report documents their rationale for doing so, companion policy and programmatic changes they made in conjunction with time limits, their design decisions and implementation experiences and, to the extent knowable, effects on recipients and housing agencies.

The Urban Institute's Center on Metropolitan Housing and Communities has just released two major reviews of research on the HOPE VI experience to date that offer five fundamental lessons for the next generation of public housing revitalization. The research record strongly supports continuing a flexible investment initiative like HOPE VI. But HOPE VI (or a successor) can and should be substantially strengthened based on lessons learned to date. In addition, the HOPE VI experience has broader applicability to the public housing program as a whole.

The Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration was launched by HUD in the late 1990s to permit a small number of local and state housing agencies (HAs) to experiment with limited deregulation. This demonstration was not designed with the rigorous controls or monitoring that would be required to definitively measure impacts, but it does provide valuable insights on the types of changes HAs make in response to regulatory flexibility, the implementation challenges they face, and implications for ongoing policy discussions about federal housing policy.

Building on lessons learned from the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration, the author reviews "Freedom to House," a proposal to reform and partially deregulate the nation's Public Housing Authorities (PHAs), submitted in the 2005 budget to Congress. The author discusses the climate of mutual cynicism and distrust between the federal regulatory agency, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the public housing industry that burdened the MTW demonstration, and argues for all parties approaching Freedom to House as a genuine experiment whose purpose is to demonstrate both the benefits of deregulation as well as any negative consequences.

This research examines the results and performance of loans to private businesses made by state and local governments through their own lending programs using HUD program funding. Relying on examination of nearly 1,000 loan files in 51 communities, researchers found that although default rates are somewhat higher than those of private-sector lenders, substantial amounts of new economic development money could be raised on a secondary market without undermining the policy goals of the federal programs that supply the funds. HUD could help arrange secondary market sales by accumulating and disseminating information and setting standards for loan underwriting, servicing, and documentation.

This report and data book summarizes the responses to a survey of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD's) key program implementation partners -- intermediaries who work with HUD to deliver services and benefits. In the survey, a national sample of 2,244 mayors, directors of community development, public housing, and fair housing agencies, and owners of multifamily housing properties were asked to assess their relationship with HUD and evaluate HUD performance in working with them to serve the Department's ultimate customers. The survey is responsive to the mandate of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), which requires Federal agencies to establish performance standards and measure progress against those standards over time. Most of HUD's partners express satisfaction with various aspects of the Department's performance, yet there are those who are dissatisfied -- in some instances, to the point of alienation.

The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program is today the federal government's primary tool for producing rental housing intended to be affordable by low- and moderate-income households. It relies on incentives built into the tax system, is administered primarily by state agencies, and is implemented by thousands of private businesses and non-profit organizations that develop and own the housing. Based on the first national (telephone) survey to be conducted of the owners of LIHTC properties, this report covers a range of issues including owners' development objectives, the performance of their properties, and what they intend to do with their properties when they come to the end of their compulsory compliance period.

The Fair Housing Act of 1968 -- which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, and disability in the sale or rental of housing and other real estate-related transactions -- is largely enforced through the filing of complaints by persons who believe they have suffered discrimination. The Act, therefore, presumes a basic awareness on the part of the general public as to what constitutes housing discrimination. This report is based on the first national survey designed to assess the extent and nature of the public’s knowledge of fair housing law. It shows that a majority is aware of many, although not all aspects of fair housing law, but that the size of that majority varies from modest to substantial -- depending on which aspect of the law is considered. The report also examines the extent to which the public supports fair housing provisions and perceives having been discriminated against in housing, as well as the responses of those who thought they were victims of discrimination.