Research by Author & Topic

Publications by Susan J. Popkin on Housing

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) launched the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) demonstration in 1994 in five cities: Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York. MTO targeted families living in some of the nation’s poorest, highest-crime communities and used housing subsidies to offer them a chance to move to lower-poverty neighborhoods. Research on the families conducted in 2002 raised some important questions about the impact of the program. Findings from the follow up Three-City Study of MTO, in 2004 and 2005, answer some of the questions but also highlight the complexity of the MTO experience and the limitations of a relocation-only strategy in being able to bring about fundamental changes in the lives of very low income families.

The Moving to Opportunity program targeted families living in some of the nation's poorest, highest-crime neighborhoods and offered them a chance to move to lower poverty areas. One hope was that, away from concentrated poverty and the risks associated with it–including poor physical and mental health, risky sexual behavior and delinquency–families would fare better. This brief examines how adolescent girls benefited from moving out of high poverty and discusses why girls might have fared so much better than boys.

The devastation and displacement of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita poses a unique set of affordable housing challenges. Although everyone who was displaced by the disaster face significant housing challenges, the needs of low- and moderate-income renters warrant far more attention than they have thus far received. Without affordable rental options, many residents will not be able to return to their communities and the region’s economic recovery may be undermined by the lack of critical workers. This report is intended to help inform and invigorate public debate about affordable rental housing policies that would improve the ongoing recovery from the storms.

The HOPE VI program has invested over $6 billion in federal funds for the redevelopment of severely distressed public housing. Drawing on the existing research evidence, this study systematically compares the costs (both monetary and nonmonetary) of maintaining severely distressed public housing developments to the potential costs and benefits of effectively revitalizing them. An effective redevelopment strategy can dramatically improve living conditions for families, resulting in better physical and mental health and increased employment and earnings. Moreover, redevelopment can trigger the revitalization of previously blighted communities. These outcomes also save public resources. In fact, for a typical distressed public housing project, mixed-income redevelopment can save the public more than $20 million over 20 years.

Fear of crime has profound implications for residents, causing stress and social isolation; relocation has brought about a dramatic positive impact on residents’ life circumstances. Those residents who left traditional public housing—voucher holders and unassisted renters and homeowners—are now living in neighborhoods that are dramatically safer than their original public housing developments. These improvements in safety have had a profound impact on their quality of life; they can let their children play outside, they are sleeping better, and are feeling less worried and anxious overall. However, those who remain in traditional public housing developments are still living in extremely dangerous circumstances, little better than where they started.

At every age level, HOPE VI Panel Study respondents are much more likely than other adults overall to describe their health as fair or poor; the rates are even higher than those of black women, a group with higher-than-average rates of poor health. HOPE VI Panel Study respondents suffer many serious conditions including arthritis, asthma, depression, diabetes, hypertension, and stroke at rates twice as high as black women nationally; a significant number of HOPE VI Panel Study respondents also face the burden of multiple serious health problems. And the death rate of HOPE VI residents far exceeds the national average of black women, with the gap increasing dramatically at older ages. These findings imply an urgent need for better and more comprehensive support for families as they undergo the stress of involuntary relocation.

A main criticism of the HOPE VI program is that intentionally relocating residents—even temporarily—increases the likelihood that some residents will end up homeless. Housing authorities have been accused of "losing" residents and not providing them with the relocation assistance to which they were entitled; critics in some cities have claimed increases in shelter populations. However, most of the evidence has been anecdotal, and while there has been much rhetoric on both sides, there has been no hard evidence to support or disprove critics' claims that HOPE VI increases homelessness.

The HOPE VI program has invested over $6 billion in federal funds for the redevelopment of severely distressed public housing. Drawing on the existing research evidence, this study systematically compares the costs (both monetary and nonmonetary) of maintaining severely distressed public housing developments to the potential costs and benefits of effectively revitalizing them. An effective redevelopment strategy can dramatically improve living conditions for families, resulting in better physical and mental health and increased employment and earnings. Moreover, redevelopment can trigger the revitalization of previously blighted communities. These outcomes also save public resources. In fact, for a typical distressed public housing project, mixed-income redevelopment can save the public more than $20 million over 20 years.

Children in the HOPE VI Panel Study sample face enormous challenges in becoming successful adults. Despite these challenges, some children do surprisingly well and seem able to cope effectively with the challenges in their environment. This report reviews existing research from a range of social science disciplines to identify key factors related to resiliency and to understand how these factors protect children from negative outcomes. Then, using data from the HOPE VI Panel Study, we explore which of these factors are related to resiliency in our sample of children from HOPE VI developments.

When an earthquake hit Northridge, California, in 1994, emergency housing vouchers helped hard-pressed families secure homes and apartments in decent neighborhoods. For those left destitute by recent Gulf Coast devastation, say two housing experts from the Urban Institute, vouchers, especially when coupled with counseling services, can open up opportunities for stability, security, and economic advancement.