Housing Choice Vouchers

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

The text below is an excerpt from the complete document. Read the full brief in PDF format, or view a summary of the seven briefs in this series.

Abstract

Most former HOPE VI residents have received Housing Choice Vouchers; these residents, who are now living in private-market housing are doing well in many ways. Compared with those who moved to traditional public housing developments, those who moved with vouchers are living in significantly better quality housing in neighborhoods that are lower poverty and dramatically safer. On most measures, they are substantially better off than those who have moved to other traditional public housing developments, particularly on the those outcomes directly affected by HOPE VI relocation: the quality of their housing, their neighborhoods, and their perceptions of safety. But while the story is generally positive, it is also clear that many voucher holders are struggling to cope with the financial challenges of living in the private market. Moving out of public housing presents new financial management challenges, such as paying rent on time and being responsible for separate utility payments, which are usually included in the rent in public housing. Relocation assistance and updated utility allowances could ease the burden of these challenges for those moving to the private market with Housing Choice Vouchers.

Introduction

The primary goal of the HOPE VI program is to improve living conditions for residents (see text box on page 11). The initial vision was that residents would temporarily relocate from distressed public housing developments so demolition and construction could proceed and, once reconstruction was complete, residents would move back to a new apartment in a mixed-income community. But after more than a decade, it is clear that most residents do not return to the revitalized developments, and others spend four or more years living elsewhere before moving back. As a result, for many residents, the main effect of the HOPE VI program is moving away rather than returning to live at the revitalized site.

Many critics have asserted that relocation—or displacement—will inevitably leave residents worse off, sending them to communities that were little better than the distressed developments where they started. Since a majority of these relocated residents receive Housing Choice Vouchers to enable them to rent apartments in the private market, how well the HOPE VI program succeeds in improving the life circumstances for original residents is partially a function of how well the voucher program succeeds in offering them better alternatives.

Using a voucher to move from distressed public housing to the private market is a major undertaking for many residents. For long-time public housing residents, the prospect of negotiating the private market—apartment hunting, dealing with private landlords, passing tenant screening criteria, and paying utilities—can be daunting. The voucher system adds further complexity by requiring compliance with special procedures, including inspections to ensure that units meet program standards. These challenges can sidetrack residents with vouchers, leaving some in bad neighborhoods and others struggling to keep their assistance. Therefore, it is critical that policymakers and program operators understand what happened to families who used a voucher to relocate from their original HOPE VI developments to the private market.

(End of excerpt. The complete brief is available in PDF format.)

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site:

Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required.

Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@urban.org.

If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.