Examining Neighborhood Opportunity and Locational Outcomes for Housing Choice Voucher Recipients: A Comparative Study between Duval County,Florida,and Bexar County,Texas
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2017
Examining Neighborhood Opportunity and Locational Outcomes for Housing Choice Voucher Recipients: A Comparative Study between Duval County,Florida,and Bexar County,Texas
Recent attention has highlighted the importance of providing low–income households access to opportunity–rich neighborhoods. Using a neighborhood opportunity framework developed specifically for the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, this study investigates whether low–income households participating in the program live in opportunity areas. The results indicate that with scarce high–opportunity neighborhoods, most HCV households reside in mixed opportunity areas and face tradeoffs when deciding where to live. Voucher holders reside in areas with moderate or poor accessibility and neighborhood conditions compared to other assisted and nonassisted low–income renters. Opportunity outcomes also vary among different household types of HCV recipients.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArafatAbdulnaser A. A.2011. Evaluating accessibility and travel cost as suitability components in the allocation of land use, a case study of identifying land for affordable housing in three counties in Florida. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1517197493?accountid=10920
2.
BasoloVictoria. 2013. “Examining Mobility Outcomes in the Housing Choice Voucher Program: Neighborhood Poverty, Employment, and Public School Quality.” Cityscape15(2):135–54.
3.
BasoloVictoria, and NguyenMai T.. 2005. “Does Mobility Matter? The Neighborhood Conditions of Housing Voucher Holders by Race and Ethnicity.” Housing Policy Debate16:297–324.
4.
BeenVicki, CunninghamMary, EllenIngrid G., GordonAdam, ParillaJoe, TurnerMargery A., WhitneySheryl V., YowellAaron, and ZimmermanKen. 2010. Building Environmentally Sustainable Communities: A Framework for Inclusivity. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute What Works Collaborative.
5.
BrooksFred, LewinsonTerri, AszmanJennifer, and WolkJim. 2012. “Voucher Users and Revitalized Public–Housing Residents 6 Years after Displacement.” Research on Social Work Practice22:10–19.
6.
ChettyRaj, and HendrenNathaniel. 2015. The Impacts of Neighborhoods on Intergenerational Mobility: Childhood Exposure Effects and County–Level Estimates. Mimeo, Harvard University.
7.
DengLan. 2007. “Comparing the Effects of Housing Vouchers and Low–Income Housing Tax Credits on Neighborhood Integration and School Quality.” Journal of Planning Education and Research27:20–35.
8.
EllenIngrid G., HornKeren, KuaiYiwen, PazuniakRoman, and WilliamsMichael D.. 2015. Effect of QAP Incentives on the Location of LIHTC Properties. Washington, DC: HUD PD&R Multidisciplinary Research Team.
9.
EwingReid H., and HamidiShima. 2014. Measuring Sprawl 2014. Report Prepared for Smart Growth America.
10.
FloridaRichard, and MellanderCharlotta. 2015. Segregated City: The Geography of Economic Segregation in America's Metros. Toronto, ON: Martin Prosperity Institute.
11.
FreemanLance. 2012. “The Impact of Source of Income Laws on Voucher Utilization.” Housing Policy Debate22(2):297–319.
12.
FreemanLance, and LiYunjing. 2014. “Do Source of Income Anti–Discrimination Laws Facilitate Access to Less Disadvantaged Neighborhoods?” Housing Studies29(1):88–107.
13.
GalsterGeorge C., and KillenSean P.. 1995. “The Geography of Metropolitan Opportunity—A Reconnaissance and Conceptual–Framework.” Housing Policy Debate6(1):7–43.
14.
HairJoseph F., AndersonRolph E., TathamRonald L., and BlackBill. 1992. Multivariate Data Analysis. New York: Macmillan.
15.
HornKeren M., EllenIngrid G., and SchwartzAmy E.. 2014. “Do Housing Choice Voucher Holders Live Near Good Schools?” Journal of Housing Economics24:109–21.
16.
LensMichael C., EllenIngrid G., and O'ReganKatherine. 2011. “Do Vouchers Help Low–Income Households Live in Safer Neighborhoods? Evidence on the Housing Choice Voucher Program.” Cityscape13(3):135–59.
17.
MavoaSuzanne, WittenKaren, McCreanorTim, and O'SullivanDavid. 2012. “GIS Based Destination Accessibility via Public Transit and Walking in Auckland, New Zealand.” Journal of Transport Geography20(1):15–22.
18.
McClureKirk. 2010. “The Prospects for Guiding Housing Choice Voucher Households to High–Opportunity Neighborhoods.” Cityscape12(3):101–22.
19.
McClureKirk. 2015. “The Future of Research on Assisted Housing for the Poor.” Housing Policy Debate25(4):802–5.
20.
McClureKirk, SchwartzAlex, and TaghaviLydia. 2015. “Housing Choice Voucher Location Patterns a Decade Later.” Housing Policy Debate25(2):215–33.
21.
MusterdSako, and AnderssonRoger. 2005. “Housing Mix, Social Mix, and Social Opportunities.” Urban Affairs Review40(6):761–90.
PendallRolf. 2000. “Why Voucher and Certificate Users Live in Distressed Neighborhoods.” Housing Policy Debate11(4):881–910.
24.
PendallRolf, HeyesChristopher, GeorgeArthur, DawkinsCasey, JeonJae Sik, KnaapElijah, BlumenbergEvelyn, PierceGregory, and SmartMichael. 2015. “Driving to Opportunities: Voucher Users, Cars, and Movement to Sustainable Neighborhoods.” Cityscape17(2):57–87.
25.
ReeceJason, GambhirSamir, RatchfordCraig, MartinMatthew, and OlingerJillian. 2010. The Geography of Opportunity: Mapping to Promote Equitable Community Development and Fair Housing in King County, WA. Columbus, OH: Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, The Ohio State University.
26.
RiceDouglas, and SardBarbara. 2007. The Effects of the Federal Budget Squeeze on Low–Income Housing Assistance. Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
27.
TurnerMargery A., ComeyJennifer, KuehnDaniel, and NicholsAustin. 2011. Helping Poor Families Gain and Sustain Access to High–Opportunity Neighborhoods. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
28.
UrahnSusan K., PlunkettTravis, CurrierErin, ElliottDiana, SattelmeyerSarah, and WilsonDenise. 2013. Mobility and the Metropolis: How Communities Factor into Economic Mobility. Pennsylvania: The PEW Charitable Trusts.
29.
U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. 2013. American Community Survey 5–Year Estimates, Table B03002; Generated by Ruoniu Wang; Using American FactFinder; <http://factfinder2.census.gov>; 20 August 2015.
WalterRebecca J., EvansAaron, and AtherwoodSerge. 2015b. “Addressing the Affordable Housing Crisis for Vulnerable Renters: Insights from Broward County on an Affordable Housing Acquisition Tool.” Housing Policy Debate26(1):123–49.
34.
WalterRebecca J., LiYanmei, and AtherwoodSerge. 2015a. “Moving to Opportunity? An Examination of Housing Choice Vouchers on Urban Poverty Deconcentration in South Florida.” Housing Studies30(7):1064–91.
35.
WalterRebecca J., and WangRuoniu. 2016. “Searching for Affordability and Opportunity: A Framework for the Housing Choice Voucher Program.” Housing Policy Debate26(4–5):670–91.
36.
WangRuoniu. 2016. “Tracking ‘Choice’ in the Housing Choice Voucher Program: The Relationship between Neighborhood Preference and Locational Outcome.” Urban Affairs Review, https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087416646205
37.
WangRuoniu, LarsenKristin, and RayAnne. 2015. “Rethinking Locational Outcomes for Housing Choice Vouchers: A Case Study in Duval County, Florida.” Housing Policy Debate25(4):715–38.
38.
WangXinhao, and VaradyDavid P.. 2005. “Using Hot–Spot Analysis to Study the Clustering of Section 8 Housing Voucher Families.” Housing Studies20:29–48.
