This report presents the short-term outcomes of the families enrolled in the Family Options Study, a multi-site random assignment experiment designed to study the impact of various housing and services interventions on homeless families. The report documents how families are faring approximately 20 months after random assignment to one of four interventions: community-based rapid re-housing (CBRR), project-based transitional housing (PBTH), permanent housing subsidy (SUB), and usual care (UC). Outcome measures fall within five domains: housing stability; family preservation; adult well-being; child well-being; and self-sufficiency. The collection of extensive cost data for each of the interventions tested enables the calculation of the costs that can be tied to each of the interventions, and in turn, used to understand the cost of achieving the outcomes observed. The study resulted in strong and significant findings, particularly related to the power of offering a voucher to a homeless family.

Click here to access the study page

Housing subsidies, which help low-income families pay their rent and utilities in public housing developments or in the private rental market, are a vital component of the national social safety net. For many very low-income families, they stand directly between decent, stable housing and homelessness. They are also sometimes viewed as a “work support,” with the expectation that stable housing makes it easier to find a job and remain employed. Yet, several rigorous studies have found that housing subsidies by themselves (i.e., in the absence of a work-focused intervention) may not improve average employment rates and earnings for low-income adults, and may even worsen them somewhat under some conditions. More encouragingly, a number of other studies show that housing subsidies can be used effectively as a “platform” for employment, in that certain work-focused interventions can improve labor market outcomes for individuals already receiving housing subsidies. Still, such evidence is limited, and little proof exists of any interventions producing “transformative” effects – that is, helping large proportions and a diverse mix of participating tenants achieve earnings gains that are large enough to help them exit the housing subsidy system and other government transfer programs.

This paper describes an innovative self-sufficiency program that aims to achieve this ambitious goal. Called the Bridge to Family Self-Sufficiency (Bridge FSS), the program will be tested as part of a new research demonstration project intended to determine whether low-income families receiving government housing subsidies can, with the right supports, make large economic strides, reduce their reliance on a range of government transfer benefits, and improve their overall financial security and well-being. The demonstration is a joint initiative of the Crittenton Women’s Union (CWU), a service provider based in Boston, Massachusetts, and MDRC, a New York City-based not-for-profit social policy and education research organization.

The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program is the federal government’s largest low-income housing assistance program, serving approximately 2.1 million households nationwide. The HCV program is administered federally by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and locally by approximately 2,300 local, regional, and state agencies, referred to collectively as public housing agencies (PHAs). Funding for the HCV program is provided by the federal government. The funding that PHAs receive for running the HCV program includes the housing subsidy itself, plus administrative fees to cover the costs of running the program.

Click here to access the executive summary

Click here to access the study page

The Homelessness Prevention Study documented the first-ever large-scale implementation of homelessness prevention efforts—the prevention programs funded by the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP). Launched in 2009 to help American families survive a deep recession, HPRP distributed $1.5 billion in grant funding to 535 states, counties, cities, and U.S. territories; approximately 2,500 other entities, mostly direct service providers, were subgrantees. This report describes communities’ experiences with HPRP prevention programs and draws lessons for future efforts to prevent homelessness. It also identifies gaps in knowledge needed to support future policy development. As such, this report offers useful information to practitioners, researchers, and policymakers interested in homelessness and the prevention of homelessness.

Click here to view the executive summary

Click here to view the case studies

The Homelessness Prevention Study (HPS) documented the first 2 years of HPRP-funded homelessness prevention efforts. It included a nationally representative survey of HPRP grantees and subgrantees, analysis of HUD-required Annual Performance Report data, and 17 indepth case studies of local prevention programs. The communities chosen for case studies represent a range of approaches to homelessness prevention, as well as geographic diversity and a variety of special target populations. The case studies each describe the community, how they designed and implemented their HPRP prevention program—including details on outreach, point of entry, eligibility and assessment—data, monitoring, and future plans. The case studies give clear, concise, and detailed insight into different approaches to homelessness prevention.

Click here to view the full report

Click here to view the executive summary

Click the links below to view the case studies:

Albuquerque, NM
Arlington County, VA
Dayton/Montgomery, OH
Fall River, MA
Indiana
Jefferson County, AL
Kalamazoo, MI
Lancaster, PA
Maine
Massachusetts
Miami-Dade County, FL
North Carolina
Pasco County, FL
Philadelphia, PA
Pima County/Tucson, AZ
Rhode Island
Santa Clara/San Jose, CA

Launched in 2009 to help American families survive a deep recession, the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP) enabled the first ever large-scale implementation of homelessness prevention programs. HPRP distributed $1.5 billion in grant funding to 535 states, counties, cities, and U.S. territories, and approximately 2,500 other entities, mostly direct service providers, were subgrantees. As of September 30, 2011 (2 years into the 3-year program), HPRP had provided 909,192 people in 359,192 households with financial assistance and supportive services designed to prevent homelessness.

Click here to view the full report

Click here to view the case studies

The Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (Choice) of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) aims to transform distressed, high-poverty rate neighborhoods into revitalized mixed-income neighborhoods. Its primary vehicle to catalyze this transformation is the rebuilding of distressed public and assisted housing into energy-efficient, mixed-income housing that is physically and financially viable.

Fond du Lac Veterans Supportive Housing, which opened in 2013, is the most recent housing development for families and single people of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa (FDL) designed to support homeless tribal members—in this case veterans—while also advancing the FDL’s commitment to the environment. Participation in a survey process that included reservation lands led FDL to identify several new areas of unmet need among homeless tribal members. The band created reservationwide and departmentspecific housing and supportive services plans which successfully developed first the Supportive Housing Development and, later, the veterans’ housing development.

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Initiative

This report examines the characteristics of federally-assisted housing designated for disabled households living in the U.S. Prior research suggests that disabled persons face significant challenges when trying to secure affordable, high quality housing. The 2009 “Worst Case Housing Needs of People with Disabilities” report (Souza et al. 2011) finds that renter households with nonelderly disabled members are more likely than nondisabled households to have very low incomes, experience worst case housing needs, pay more than 50 percent of their income on rent, and live in inadequate or overcrowded housing. The inadequate housing conditions of the disabled reflects both the relatively lower incomes and assets of disabled persons (She and Livermore 2009) combined with the lack of available housing with accessibility features. Hoffman and Livermore (2012) find that disabled persons also tend to live in less desirable neighborhoods than non-disabled persons. Such neighborhoods exhibit lower median incomes, lower fair market rents, poorer access to public services, and more neighborhood problems such as crime and heavy street noise.

Learn more about Multidisciplinary Research Team (MDRT)

This study updates the HUD report Multifamily Properties: Opting In, Opting Out and Remaining Affordable, prepared by Econometrica and Abt Associates in 2006. The original report examined the loss of affordable housing units associated with HUD’s Section 8 project-based rental assistance and Section 236 and 221(d)(3) subsidized mortgage programs. The authors analyzed property-level data to identify the physical, financial, location, ownership and tenant characteristics associated with opt-outs from rental assistance programs, prepayment of subsidized mortgages, and enforcement actions by HUD.

The original study used cross-tabulation and multivariate regression analysis to identify characteristics associated with losses to the HUD-assisted inventory between 1998 and 2004.

Learn more about Multidisciplinary Research Team (MDRT)

This report presents the short-term outcomes of the families enrolled in the Family Options Study, a multi-site random assignment experiment designed to study the impact of various housing and services interventions on homeless families. The report documents how families are faring approximately 20 months after random assignment to one of four interventions: community-based rapid re-housing (CBRR), project-based transitional housing (PBTH), permanent housing subsidy (SUB), and usual care (UC). Outcome measures fall within five domains: housing stability; family preservation; adult well-being; child well-being; and self-sufficiency. The collection of extensive cost data for each of the interventions tested enables the calculation of the costs that can be tied to each of the interventions, and in turn, used to understand the cost of achieving the outcomes observed. The study resulted in strong and significant findings, particularly related to the power of offering a voucher to a homeless family.

Click here to access the study page

Housing subsidies, which help low-income families pay their rent and utilities in public housing developments or in the private rental market, are a vital component of the national social safety net. For many very low-income families, they stand directly between decent, stable housing and homelessness. They are also sometimes viewed as a “work support,” with the expectation that stable housing makes it easier to find a job and remain employed. Yet, several rigorous studies have found that housing subsidies by themselves (i.e., in the absence of a work-focused intervention) may not improve average employment rates and earnings for low-income adults, and may even worsen them somewhat under some conditions. More encouragingly, a number of other studies show that housing subsidies can be used effectively as a “platform” for employment, in that certain work-focused interventions can improve labor market outcomes for individuals already receiving housing subsidies. Still, such evidence is limited, and little proof exists of any interventions producing “transformative” effects – that is, helping large proportions and a diverse mix of participating tenants achieve earnings gains that are large enough to help them exit the housing subsidy system and other government transfer programs.

This paper describes an innovative self-sufficiency program that aims to achieve this ambitious goal. Called the Bridge to Family Self-Sufficiency (Bridge FSS), the program will be tested as part of a new research demonstration project intended to determine whether low-income families receiving government housing subsidies can, with the right supports, make large economic strides, reduce their reliance on a range of government transfer benefits, and improve their overall financial security and well-being. The demonstration is a joint initiative of the Crittenton Women’s Union (CWU), a service provider based in Boston, Massachusetts, and MDRC, a New York City-based not-for-profit social policy and education research organization.

The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program is the federal government’s largest low-income housing assistance program, serving approximately 2.1 million households nationwide. The HCV program is administered federally by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and locally by approximately 2,300 local, regional, and state agencies, referred to collectively as public housing agencies (PHAs). Funding for the HCV program is provided by the federal government. The funding that PHAs receive for running the HCV program includes the housing subsidy itself, plus administrative fees to cover the costs of running the program.

Click here to access the executive summary

Click here to access the study page

The Homelessness Prevention Study documented the first-ever large-scale implementation of homelessness prevention efforts—the prevention programs funded by the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP). Launched in 2009 to help American families survive a deep recession, HPRP distributed $1.5 billion in grant funding to 535 states, counties, cities, and U.S. territories; approximately 2,500 other entities, mostly direct service providers, were subgrantees. This report describes communities’ experiences with HPRP prevention programs and draws lessons for future efforts to prevent homelessness. It also identifies gaps in knowledge needed to support future policy development. As such, this report offers useful information to practitioners, researchers, and policymakers interested in homelessness and the prevention of homelessness.

Click here to view the executive summary

Click here to view the case studies

The Homelessness Prevention Study (HPS) documented the first 2 years of HPRP-funded homelessness prevention efforts. It included a nationally representative survey of HPRP grantees and subgrantees, analysis of HUD-required Annual Performance Report data, and 17 indepth case studies of local prevention programs. The communities chosen for case studies represent a range of approaches to homelessness prevention, as well as geographic diversity and a variety of special target populations. The case studies each describe the community, how they designed and implemented their HPRP prevention program—including details on outreach, point of entry, eligibility and assessment—data, monitoring, and future plans. The case studies give clear, concise, and detailed insight into different approaches to homelessness prevention.

Click here to view the full report

Click here to view the executive summary

Click the links below to view the case studies:

Albuquerque, NM
Arlington County, VA
Dayton/Montgomery, OH
Fall River, MA
Indiana
Jefferson County, AL
Kalamazoo, MI
Lancaster, PA
Maine
Massachusetts
Miami-Dade County, FL
North Carolina
Pasco County, FL
Philadelphia, PA
Pima County/Tucson, AZ
Rhode Island
Santa Clara/San Jose, CA

Launched in 2009 to help American families survive a deep recession, the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP) enabled the first ever large-scale implementation of homelessness prevention programs. HPRP distributed $1.5 billion in grant funding to 535 states, counties, cities, and U.S. territories, and approximately 2,500 other entities, mostly direct service providers, were subgrantees. As of September 30, 2011 (2 years into the 3-year program), HPRP had provided 909,192 people in 359,192 households with financial assistance and supportive services designed to prevent homelessness.

Click here to view the full report

Click here to view the case studies

The Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (Choice) of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) aims to transform distressed, high-poverty rate neighborhoods into revitalized mixed-income neighborhoods. Its primary vehicle to catalyze this transformation is the rebuilding of distressed public and assisted housing into energy-efficient, mixed-income housing that is physically and financially viable.

Fond du Lac Veterans Supportive Housing, which opened in 2013, is the most recent housing development for families and single people of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa (FDL) designed to support homeless tribal members—in this case veterans—while also advancing the FDL’s commitment to the environment. Participation in a survey process that included reservation lands led FDL to identify several new areas of unmet need among homeless tribal members. The band created reservationwide and departmentspecific housing and supportive services plans which successfully developed first the Supportive Housing Development and, later, the veterans’ housing development.

Sustainable Construction in Indian Country Initiative

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Quality Control for Rental Assistance Subsidy Determinations (HUDQC) Study provides national estimates of the extent, severity, costs, and sources of rent errors in tenant subsidies for the largest housing programs administered by the Office of Housing and the Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH). These programs account for nearly all of HUD’s current housing assistance outlays administered by the Office of Housing and PIH, as well as the large majority of units assisted by HUD. This study was designed to measure the extent of administrator income and rent determination error by housing providers. It does not involve an audit of individual Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) or projects, nor does it monitor the implementation of housing programs. Its singular focus is to identify households for which an error was made in the calculation of the amount of the household’s rent and to provide nationally representative findings related to those errors.

In 2008, Congress passed the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA), requiring each state housing finance agency (HFA) that administers the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) to submit certain demographic and economic information on tenants in LIHTC units to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) according to standards determined by the Secretary of HUD. HERA specifically requires HFAs to submit to HUD information concerning race, ethnicity, family composition, age, income, use of rental assistance, disability status, and monthly rental payments of households residing in LIHTC properties. This report represents the second annual data release of information collected under this mandate. Detailed background of this data collection and a summary of LIHTC tenants as of December 31, 2012, are available in the report.

Click here to access Understanding Whom the LIHTC Program Serves: Tenants in LIHTC Units as of December 31, 2012