Publications on Federal Urban Policies

Neighborhoods with high concentrations of foreclosures and increasing vacancy rates are likely to generate substantial unanticipated costs for resident families and jurisdictions. Any formula distributing resources to help cover those costs must be carefully constructed if it is to be equitable. In this testimony, Kingsley makes six points related to that goal.

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.

Children are particularly vulnerable to the effects of HOPE VI relocation. While they are the most likely to benefit in important ways from improved housing quality—and reduced exposure to risks like lead paint or mold—and from safer, less distressed neighborhoods, moving can disrupt their education and friendships and even put older youth at risk for conflict with local gangs. Where they moved was also significant. Children whose families moved to the private market with vouchers are doing better, while those whose families moved to other traditional public housing are not faring as well. Girls, in particular, are suffering from the ill effects of being left behind in developments that are becoming increasingly dangerous and chaotic as vacancies increase.

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.

In addition to providing residents with an improved living environment, the HOPE VI program seeks to help them attain self-sufficiency. However, while there have been dramatic improvements in quality of life, there have been no overall changes in employment. HOPE VI residents' poor health impedes their ability to work. Efforts that address physical and mental health and other key barriers, such as education and safe, affordable child care availability, could prove more effective than job training or placement efforts alone in improving the chances that former and current public housing residents move into employment or retain jobs they already have.