4.2 Article

Section 8 Vouchers and Rent Limits: Do Small Area Fair Market Rent Limits Increase Access to Opportunity Neighborhoods? An Early Evaluation

Journal

HOUSING POLICY DEBATE
Volume 29, Issue 1, Pages 44-61

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2018.1476897

Keywords

Section 8; low-income housing; subsidized housing; vouchers; neighborhood; access

Funding

  1. Fels Policy Research Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania
  2. Penn Institute for Urban Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One critique of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)'s Housing Choice Voucher program is that its maximum rent limit is set at the metropolitan level, making more expensive neighborhoods effectively off limits to households who receive rental assistance. As a result, the design of the program limits a voucher household's access to opportunity neighborhood. In response, HUD created the Small Area Fair Market Rent (SAFMR) demonstration program, which calculates the maximum voucher rent at the zip code level so that HUD's rent limits more closely align with local neighborhood rents. In theory, this program should improve a voucher household's choice set and location outcomes. Looking at changes in the location of beneficiaries in the six sites that participated in the SAFMR demonstration program, we find a significant amount of regional variation in the results. Specifically, introduction of the SAFMR rent calculations results in voucher households living in higher opportunity neighborhoods in Dallas, Texas, in lower opportunity neighborhoods in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and mixed effects in other areas. These mixed results highlight some of the potential incremental benefits of the program and reinforce the importance of viewing this policy over a longer period of time, and in the context of other constraints voucher households face in accessing neighborhood opportunity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available