What Happens to Housing Assistance Leavers

IntroductionHousing assistance1 in the United States is unusual: unlike many other forms of public assistance, it is not an entitlement and serves only about one-fourth of eligible households (Turner and Kingsley, 2008). In many jurisdictions, waiting lists for public housing and vouchers are closed or very long; applicants can wait years before they reach the top of the list. Those households lucky enough to successfully navigate the system receive deep subsidies that require them to pay one-third of their income for housing; they generally are able to keep their housing assistance as long as they remain income eligible and a tenant in good standing.2 Despite the open-ended nature of the subsidy-and the fact that after having left housing assistance, getting back on is extremely difficult-people nationwide remain on assistance for only a few years (Turner and Kingsley, 2008). Evidence suggests, however, that households in distressed urban public housing typically remain on assistance much longer than households receiving other forms of housing assistance, such as vouchers. Most HOPE VI Panel Study respondents who were residents of distressed public housing developments slated for demolition had lived in their developments for 10 years or longer (Popkin et al., 2002). Likewise, a long-term study of Chicago public housing residents found an average tenure of 28 years (Popkin et al., 2013).Housing assistance meets its basic goals for those households lucky enough to receive it. Having a voucher or living in public housing improves stability, dramatically reduces homelessness,3 and may lead to better outcomes for children (Mills et al., 2006; Newman and Harkness, 1999). On the contrary, individuals lacking stable housing or at risk of losing their permanent housing face serious mental and physical health consequences (Burgard, Seefeldt, and Zelner, 2012). The public and assisted housing programs, however, have significant flaws that leave them open to criticism from advocates, policymakers, and researchers, particularly the fundamental problem that the programs serve only a fraction of those in need. Observers are also concerned about the racial and economic segregation of public and assisted housing (Popkin et al., 2012) and whether the programs should be administered locally or regionally (Katz and Turner, 2013). In addition, like other safety-net programs, housing assistance has been the target of congressional budget cuts because of its relatively high cost.Despite the large body of research on housing assistance programs-especially on housing choice vouchers (formerly Section 8 vouchers)-few researchers have attempted to study what happens to recipients when they leave assisted housing. Given the research and policy attention to "welfare leavers" when welfare reform was first implemented, it is surprising that stakeholders know so little about why households stop receiving federal housing assistance and even less about how households fare afterward.4 We know that welfare leavers continue to experience economic hardship, with the average monthly household income for leavers near the poverty level, and that the most challenging barriers to self-sufficiency often involve unemployment and the inability to maintain or find work owing to poor health (Acs and Loprest, 2004, 2001). Still, most households who leave welfare are at least slightly better off than those who remain on assistance. Most welfare leavers are employed in the months after leaving assistance, and nearly two-thirds of all exits are associated with work (Hofferth, Stanhope, and Harris, 2002). In fact, Acs and Loprest found that "hourly wage rates of working leavers in NSAF and SIPP are consistently higher than those of current recipients, suggesting that those who can earn higher wages are more likely to exit or less likely to continue to be eligible for TANF [Temporary Assistance for Needy Families]" (Acs and Loprest, 2001: 78). Literature has also suggested, however, that employment rates of welfare leavers vary by year of exit (Acs and Loprest, 2004, 2001). …