Vouchering out distressed subsidized developments: Does moving lead to improvements in housing and neighborhood conditions?

TLDR

Section 8 vouchers or rent certificates, combined with limited counseling and no mandated relocation requirements, raise questions about how far recipients will move and the success of those moves. The study seeks to determine how far households receiving Section 8 vouchers or rent certificates will move and how successful those moves are. It analyzes the experiences of households relocated from four distressed, privately owned subsidized developments in Baltimore, Newport News, Kansas City, and San Francisco. Most residents improved by moving, yet many stayed in the same area and continued to live in racially segregated neighborhoods, and the modest counseling offered had little effect on their housing search or satisfaction, suggesting that expecting voucher holders to relocate without substantial support is unrealistic.

Abstract

Abstract When households receive Section 8 vouchers or rent certificates and moderate amounts of counseling, and have no program requirements dictating where they should move, how far will they go and how successful will the moves be? This article offers some answers to these questions by analyzing the experiences of households relocated from four distressed, privately owned subsidized developments in Baltimore; Newport News, VA; Kansas City, MO; and San Francisco. Although many of the residents chose to remain in the same area, most of them improved their situation by moving. However, the majority continued to live in racially segregated areas. The moderate relocation counseling that residents received had little impact on their housing search and on satisfaction with their new home. It may be unreasonable to expect households that are given certificates or vouchers to relocate to new or unfamiliar neighborhoods without support or without intensive counseling encouraging them to do so.