Chicago Public-Housing Residents Gain from Move to Private Market, but Multiple Challenges Face Those Awaiting Relocation

WASHINGTON, D.C., August 1, 2002 — Former residents of Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) apartments who moved to private-market units report substantial improvements in their overall well-being, says new research from the Urban Institute. But providing effective transition and counseling services to CHA's remaining residents — many with complex needs — is the key to getting more people into private-market housing.

While the housing authority has retooled and expanded many client-support services, researchers Susan Popkin and Mary Cunningham point out, "CHA will need to continue to think strategically and creatively about how to ensure that the very poor families who have depended on its developments for shelter end up in decent, secure housing."

Their report, "CHA Relocation Counseling Assessment," offers the first systematic look at what happened, from 1999 to 2001, as CHA began implementing an ambitious 10-year plan to demolish most of its high-rise buildings and relocate in the private rental market as many as 6,000 residents participating in the Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) program.

Among the study's findings is that just 38 percent of its sample had moved out of public housing after more than a year in the search process. Those who did move, however, report they are living in better homes and safer neighborhoods. Only 12 percent of movers indicate having one or more major problems, such as broken plumbing or rats, compared with 53 percent of non-movers. Further, movers report much less exposure to crime: 41 percent cite problems with shootings and other violence in their neighborhoods versus 90 percent of non-movers.

An inability to find a new apartment, problems with the voucher program, and personal and financial issues are among the reasons cited by respondents for not moving to the private market. More than a third have potential lease-compliance problems, such as large, unpaid utility bills, that could make them ineligible for assistance. Some report encountering discrimination against voucher holders, CHA clients, and large families, while others say they did not receive CHA counseling services.

"Many residents also had profound fears about leaving their public-housing communities," Popkin and Cunningham observe. "Bad as the conditions were, these developments were residents' long-term homes" where they had extensive networks of family and friends.

More Findings

• Those who move are living in lower-poverty neighborhoods than their original, extremely poor public-housing developments, but these areas are still racially segregated and high-poverty. Fifty-five percent are in communities with poverty rates greater than 40 percent. Eighty-seven percent live in neighborhoods more than 90 percent African-American.
• Movers show improvement in their mental outlook, with 51 percent - versus 65 percent of non-movers - agreeing that "every time I try to get ahead, something stops me."
• Many non-movers have complex family situations or other personal barriers, particularly financial difficulties and poor credit histories. For example, 40 percent say they have had problems paying their rent.
• Those who move tend to be employed and have fewer children than non-movers.

Lessons Learned and Continuing Challenges

To ensure that new policies and programs are implemented successfully, the report notes:

• Basic counseling may be inadequate, especially for those with multiple, complex problems.
• Many residents may need more intensive preparation for the private market, such as budgeting and household management skills, long-term follow-up, and reinforcement.
• Problems with rent and credit histories appear widespread among non-movers and enforcing lease-compliance requirements strictly could displace many households.
• Ongoing support is crucial to aid movers in overcoming landlord and other problems that threaten their stability in their new homes.
• Careful monitoring of CHA's counseling programs is vital.

The researchers suggest several issues, based on participant input, warranting closer scrutiny, including:

• Many residents are confused about the relocation process and feel alienated from it.
• CHA tenants may lack information about units in unfamiliar areas, landlords may be unwilling to rent to them, and they may end up in other very-low-income, problem-plagued communities.
• Lease-compliance problems, substance abuse, domestic violence, and other barriers may prevent successful moves to the private market or mixed-income developments.
• Thousands of unauthorized residents may become homeless because of building demolition.

Study Methodology

The study uses information from a three-wave panel survey of a random sample of 190 CHA residents. Because the respondents had been referred for transition counseling but were awaiting relocation with Section 8 vouchers, it is believed they represent residents facing the greatest challenges in leaving public housing. The study also includes in-depth interviews with 29 CHA clients and a review of the four counseling and relocation services provided by the contract counseling agencies. Data collection began in January 2000 and concluded in March 2002; it does not reflect recent changes to CHA's services.

Funded by a grant from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the study was conducted by the Urban Institute and the University of Illinois at Chicago. "CHA Relocation Counseling Assessment," available at www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/CHArelocation.pdf, is part of ongoing Urban Institute research into the Chicago Housing Authority and other housing programs. To access these studies, go to www.urban.org/r/housing.cfm.

The Urban Institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy research and education organization that examines the social, economic, and governance challenges facing the nation.

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.