This study examines the use of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Choice Mobility option, which is available to residents of the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program and gives residents of RAD properties the opportunity to obtain a tenant-based voucher. The study is a component of the RAD evaluation prepared for HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research.

This study involved a multitier data collection effort using a variety of data sources from HUD, other public sources, and primary data collection, including HUD administrative data; site visits to conduct interviews with Public Housing Agency (PHA) staff, property owners, property managers, and residents; surveys of these groups; and other publicly available data on neighborhoods and local housing conditions.

The report presents findings on three themes: use of the Choice Mobility option, implementation of the Choice Mobility option, and emergent outcomes for households and PHAs.

• Use: This study finds that residents of the RAD program are using the Choice Mobility option relatively infrequently. Several factors may be driving this finding, including tenants not understanding the option; the characteristics of the RAD tenant population, which has high proportions of older adults and people with disabilities; and tenants’ satisfaction with renovated units, which was the most common reason nonmovers reported for not using the Choice Mobility option.
• Implementation: PHAs report using a range of approaches to inform residents about the Choice Mobility option; however, some residents report being unfamiliar with the option. While 75 percent of movers consider themselves familiar with the option, only one-third of nonmovers reported that they were familiar with the opportunity. Most PHAs provide little support for moving beyond what they provide to the broader tenant-based voucher population.
• Outcomes for households: With low use of the Choice Mobility option, effects overall are limited. Those who do move tend to move to lower-poverty neighborhoods than where RAD developments are located. Households reported that neighborhood characteristics are a stronger driver than employment opportunities to use the option. Choice Mobility users were more likely than nonusers to report they were satisfied with their neighborhood. However, tenants aware of and wanting to use the option still faced barriers in doing so, including finding a home that meets their needs, finding landlords to accept the voucher, and having long waiting periods between requesting and receiving a voucher.
• Outcomes for PHAs: Since there are low numbers of Choice Mobility movers, effects from turnover or on the general voucher waiting list have been limited . However, some options are in place to handle increased demand for tenant-based vouchers. In places where increased demand may occur, the already long regular waitlist times would increase even more.

The report offers a number of recommendations:

• HUD could call for improved Choice Mobility tracking, management, uptake, and quality, to address data gaps that make it difficult to track households using Choice Mobility.
• HUD could consider strategies for supporting PHAs in conducting outreach and communication about residents’ Choice Mobility option, to more effectively inform residents who are not already participating (particularly those in project-based rental assistance properties).
• HUD could consider building evidence on how to effectively use available resources for Choice Mobility funding, management, and communications, to inform more residents of the option and to identify groups that may benefit from using it. HUD could also consider supporting other studies using community-engaged methods and related equity frameworks to engage residents.