Characteristics of

HUD-Assisted Renters and

Their Units in 2011

December 2017

Characteristics of

HUD-Assisted Renters and

Their Units in 2011

Prepared for

U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

Office of Policy Development & Research

Prepared by

Frederick J. Eggers

Econometrica, Inc.

December 2017

Acknowledgments

Over the years, the author has participated in many studies using data from the American

Housing Survey. In every instance, staff at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD) and the Census Bureau have provided useful and often invaluable advice

and help. This report has benefited from their assistance. The author owes particular thanks to

David A. Vandenbroucke, a senior HUD economist who produced the Summary Tables, which

depend on information not available to the general public.

ii

Contents

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... vi

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

HUD Rental Assistance Programs .............................................................................................. 1

Organization of the Report and Data Tables .............................................................................. 3

Source of the Data ....................................................................................................................... 4

Relationship to Other Studies ..................................................................................................... 4

The Big Picture ............................................................................................................................... 5

Location and Key Unit Characteristics ........................................................................................... 8

Regional and Metropolitan Location .......................................................................................... 8

Year Structure Built .................................................................................................................... 9

Number of Bedrooms ................................................................................................................ 10

Householder Characteristics ......................................................................................................... 12

Race and Ethnic Origin of Householder ................................................................................... 12

Age of Householder .................................................................................................................. 13

Education of Householder ........................................................................................................ 14

Years in Same Unit ................................................................................................................... 15

Household Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 18

Household Income .................................................................................................................... 18

Income Sources ......................................................................................................................... 19

Household Composition ........................................................................................................... 20

Household Size and Overcrowding .......................................................................................... 22

Households With a Disabled Member ...................................................................................... 23

Housing Cost as Percent of Income .......................................................................................... 23

Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction ............................................................................................ 26

Structure Type ........................................................................................................................... 26

Equipment Failures ................................................................................................................... 26

Selected Deficiencies ................................................................................................................ 28

Indices of Physical Problems .................................................................................................... 28

Tenant Satisfaction ................................................................................................................... 30

Recent Movers .......................................................................................................................... 30

Detailed Summary Tables ............................................................................................................. 33

References ..................................................................................................................................... 56

iii

Tables and Figures

Table 2-1: Trends in HUD-Assisted Rental Housing, Relative to Need ........................................ 6

Table 2-2: Trends in HUD-Assisted Housing by Program Type .................................................... 6

Table 3-1: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Region, 2011 ............................................. 8

Table 3-2: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Metropolitan/Nonmetropolitan Status,

2011................................................................................................................................................. 9

Table 3-3: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Region and by

Metropolitan/Nonmetropolitan Status ............................................................................................ 9

Table 3-4: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Year Built, 2011 ..................................... 10

Table 3-5: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Number of Bedrooms, 2011 ................... 11

Table 3-6: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Number of Bedrooms .. 11

Table 4-1: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Race and Ethnicity of Householder, 2011 .... 12

Table 4-2: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Race and Ethnicity of

Householder .................................................................................................................................. 13

Table 4-3: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Age of Householder, 2011 ...................... 13

Table 4-4: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Age of Householder .... 14

Table 4-5: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Education Attainment of Householder by

Race and Ethnicity, 2011 .............................................................................................................. 15

Table 4-6: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Householder Years in Unit by Race,

Ethnicity, and Elderly and Disability Status, 2011 ....................................................................... 16

Table 4-7: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Years in Unit by

Householder .................................................................................................................................. 17

Table 5-1: Median Income of Households by Assistance Status, 2011 ........................................ 18

Table 5-2: Trends in Median Income of Households by Assistance Status ................................. 19

Table 5-3: Income Sources for Renter Households by Assistant Status and by

Elderly/Nonelderly, 2011 .............................................................................................................. 20

Table 5-4: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Household Composition, 2011 ............... 21

Table 5-5: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Number of Children in Household, 2011 ... 21

Table 5-6: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Household Composition ... 22

Table 5-7: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Household Size and the Incidence of

Overcrowding, 2011 ..................................................................................................................... 22

Table 5-8: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Disability Status of Members, 2011 ....... 23

Table 5-9: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Ratio of Housing Costs to Income, 2011 ... 23

Table 5-10: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Ratio of Housing Costs to

Income........................................................................................................................................... 25

iv

Table 6-1: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Structure Type, 2011 .............................. 26

Table 6-2: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Breakdowns in Housing Systems, 2011 . 27

Table 6-3: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Selected Deficiencies, 2011 .................... 28

Table 6-4: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Indices of Physical Problems, 2011 ........ 29

Table 6-5: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Indices of Physical Problems .. 30

Table 6-6: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Tenant Ratings as Best or Worst, 2011 .. 30

Table 6-7: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Percent of Recent Movers, 2011 ............. 31

Table 6-8: Distribution of Recent Movers Into HUD-Assisted Housing by Key Reasons Given

for Move, 2011.............................................................................................................................. 31

Table 6-9: Distribution of Recent Movers Into HUD-Assisted Housing by Comparison of

Current and Previous Home and Neighborhood, 2011 ................................................................. 32

Summary Table 1. 2011 Structural Characteristics ...................................................................... 34

Summary Table 2. 2011 Householder Characteristics .................................................................. 36

Summary Table 3. 2011 Household Characteristics ..................................................................... 38

Summary Table 4. 2011 Unit Conditions ..................................................................................... 42

Summary Table 5. 2011 Tenant Opinions .................................................................................... 43

Summary Table 6. Breakdown of Householder and Household Characteristics by Race,

Ethnicity, Age, and Disability Status ............................................................................................ 46

Figure 1. Renters—Eligibility and Housing Assistance ................................................................. 7

v

Executive Summary

The 2011 American Housing Survey (AHS) included a supplemental survey of rental units

receiving subsidies from programs administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD). In addition, the U.S. Census Bureau used addresses provided by HUD to

identify other units in its regular AHS sample that are subsidized by HUD. With the

supplemental sample and the address matches, the 2011 AHS contains 4,490 assisted sample

units. This report uses information on those units to characterize the 4.5 million rental units

assisted by HUD in 2011.

The 2013 AHS also contained the supplement survey of assisted units and plus address matches

similar to those that previously had been done for the 1989, 1991, 1993, 2007, 2009, and 2011

AHS surveys. This report uses information from all these efforts to analyze how the HUD-

assisted rental stock has changed during the past three decades. Because separate reports are

available for all but the 2007 effort, this Executive Summary focuses on the characteristics of the

HUD-assisted units and households in 2011, highlighting occasionally how HUD rental

assistance has evolved.

HUD Programs

Since 1937, HUD and its predecessor agencies have run a number of rental subsidy programs.

These programs fall into two broad categories— project-based assistance and  tenant-based

assistance. In project-based assistance, the subsidy goes to the housing unit, and households apply for admission to those units. Public housing is the oldest of these programs. In this report,

we group the other project-based programs into one category, privately owned project based. In

tenant-based assistance, households apply for the subsidy and then search for a unit that will

accept the subsidy. The Housing Choice Voucher program is the tenant-based assistance

program.

In 2011, the United States had 38.8.2 million renter households. According to the AHS, 19.7

million of these households qualified based on income for assistance through one of HUD’s

rental assistance programs. Combined, public housing, housing choice vouchers, and privately

owned HUD-assisted housing served 4.2 million households, 21.1 percent of those eligible.

During the 1991-to-2011 period, the number of renter households grew from 33.4 million to 38.9

million, an increase of 16 percent. During the same period, the number of households eligible for

housing assistance increased 22 percent, although the number of HUD-assisted units increased

only 3 percent. Therefore, the percentage of the eligible households receiving assistance fell

from 24.9 percent in 1991 to 22.1 percent in 2011.

During the 1991-to-2011 period, the number of HUD-assisted units increased by roughly

400,000, but the program mix changed dramatically. The voucher program’s share grew from

28.3 percent in 1991 to 48.7 percent in 2011. The privately owned assisted share fell from 43.3

to 27.7 percent, and the public housing share fell from 28.4 to 23.7 percent.

The shift in program mix proceeded smoothly throughout the period. The number of eligible

households fluctuated more, notably increasing by 3.2 million households between 2007 and

2011.

vi

Location and Unit Size

This report is interested mainly in who receives HUD assistance and in the assistance provided.

More than one-half of the 2011 assisted units are project-based units, and the percentage of

project-based units was higher in previous years. Project-based units are clumps of capital in

specific locations that last many years. Who receives assistance is dependent on where the

programs operate and the types of units provided.

When compared with either all renter households or all renter households eligible for assistance

(including those already assisted), HUD assistance in 2011 was more concentrated in the Northeast

and less concentrated in the West. Only 20 percent of all renters and 21 percent of eligible renters lived in the Northeast, but 28 percent of HUD-assisted housing was in the Northeast. In 2011, the

West contained 27 percent of all renters and 26 percent of eligible renters but only 20 percent of

HUD-assisted households. The shares of HUD-assisted renters in the Midwest and South are similar

to the geographic distributions of all renter households and all income-eligible renter households.

The regional distribution of public housing, the oldest HUD-assisted housing program, drives

this imbalance. Public housing authorities also administer most vouchers, the newest HUD

program. The voucher program has a regional distribution that is close to that of all renter

households but still has a higher percentage in the Northeast and a lower percentage in the West.

Overall, HUD-assisted housing is slightly more concentrated in metropolitan areas and slightly

less concentrated in nonmetropolitan areas than either all renter households or all income-eligible

renter households. Within metropolitan areas, HUD-assisted housing is more concentrated in

central cities and less concentrated in suburbs than either all renter households or all income-

eligible renter households. The central city-suburb disparity is most pronounced in public

housing, but the privately owned housing programs also exhibit this imbalance. Once again, the

voucher program presents the distribution closest to that of all renter households or all income-

eligible renter households.

Despite the growth in the voucher program, the overall distribution of HUD-assisted housing has

changed little in the past 24 years. The percentage of assisted housing in suburbs has increased

slightly, accompanied by a slight decrease in the percentage in central cities. The percentage

outside of metropolitan areas has declined over time.

The number of bedrooms in an assisted unit determines the size of the household that can be

served. Overall, HUD-assisted housing has a higher percentage of one-bedroom units and a

lower percentage of two-bedroom units than the percentage among all renter households or all

income-eligible renter households. This disparity is sharpest among privately owned subsidized

housing and probably results from a focus on elderly households among several of the programs

in this category (including both older Section 202 direct loans with project-based Section 8

assistance and newer Section 8 capital grant projects built after 1990) and from the preferences

of developers in the regular Section 8 program. Public housing displays a similar distribution of

unit sizes but to a lesser degree. Not surprisingly, the bedroom distribution among voucher units

closely resembles the distribution among all renters.

The combined bedroom distribution for all three HUD-assisted housing programs has definitely

shifted over time. The percentage of units with three or four or more bedrooms increased from

24 percent in 1989 to 30 percent in 2011 despite a decline in the number of large families. The

percentage of one-bedroom units decreased from 39 to 35 percent.

vii

Householder and Household Characteristics

The Census Bureau characterizes some households using data on all household members,

providing information such as household size, the presence or absence of children, or family

status. For other characteristics, such as age or race, the Census Bureau takes these characteristics from one individual, the householder. The householder is one of the responsible members of the

household who is competent to answer questions about the household. The next few paragraphs

start with householder characteristics and then move on to household characteristics.

The percentage of HUD-assisted units with Black householders in 2011 was 43.8 percent, although

the percentage of all income-eligible renter households with Black householders was 25.7 percent.

The differentials were greatest for the public housing and voucher programs, in which Black

householders occupied 50.2 and 42.9 percent of units, respectively. With respect to ethnicity, the

percentage of all HUD-assisted households with Hispanic householders is smaller than the

percentage of income-eligible households with Hispanic householders (17.8 versus 22.3 percent).

The percentage of households with Black householders rose sharply in 2009; the percentage of

units with Hispanic householders rose between 1993 and 2003, reflecting in part the rising

Hispanic share of the population.

Combined, HUD-assisted housing programs were serving households with elderly householders

at a rate greater than their share of the population of income-eligible renter households (25.0

versus 17.4 percent). The percentage of households with elderly householders was particularly

high among units in privately owned subsidized housing (40.3 percent). The voucher program

served elderly people at a rate (17.0 percent) similar to their share of income-eligible renter

households. As the relative importance of the voucher program increased over time, the share of

all HUD-assisted units with elderly householders fell relatively steadily from 35 percent in 1989

to 28 percent in 2011.

Because housing assistance is not an entitlement, one might expect households receiving

assistance to be reluctant to move if moving means giving up assistance. Approximately 19

percent of public housing households have householders who lived in the unit for more than 12

years compared with 11.4 percent among income-eligible renter households. The voucher

program has the most turnover; for example, only 10.1 percent of householders have lived in

their units more than 12 years, slightly less than all income-eligible householders. Among all

households, the differences in turnover across race and ethnicity are minor, but elderly

householders and householders with a disabled person in the household display lower turnover.

The same patterns are apparent among householders in the assisted housing programs.

Because the AHS reports data on years in units for assisted units in 5-year intervals, one can

compare only the 1991 and 2011 studies. Turnover was less in 2011 than in in 1991; that is,

fewer householders had moved in within the past 2 years and more had lived in their units for 12

years or more than in 1991.

Eligibility for assisted housing is based primarily on household income. In 2011, the median

income of all renters nationally was $28,000, based on AHS data. Households in HUD programs

had median incomes substantially less than that of all renters. The median income of voucher

recipients was 42.6 percent of that for all renters, and the ratios were even less in public housing (36.7 percent) and privately owned subsidized housing (42.6 percent). Individually, HUD

programs generally serve households from the lower end of the distribution of renter households.

viii

HUD-assisted households differ substantially from other households in how they obtain their income. Only 39.4 percent of HUD-assisted households have wage and salary income compared

with 55.8 percent of income-eligible renter households and 72.6 percent of all renters. Among

elderly households, the percentage receiving social security income differs little between assisted

renters and either eligible renters or all renters. However, the percentage of elderly households

receiving income from private pensions or survivor benefits varies by assistance status. Only

17.4 percent of elderly assisted households receive income from these sources compared with

22.4 percent among eligible renters and 31.8 percent among all renters. The income source

information reinforces the inference drawn from the median income ratios that HUD programs

serve the poorer of the poor. For example, 13.0 percent of HUD-assisted households reported

receiving welfare compared with 8.0 percent of income-eligible households and 4.6 percent of all

renter households. In addition, 52.7 percent of HUD-assisted households reported receiving food

stamps compared with 32.7 percent of income-eligible households and 17.4 percent of all renter

households.

Household composition provides further evidence that HUD-assisted housing programs serve a

clientele different from the typical renter household. In 2011, 26.7 percent of renter households

consisted of married couple households, and the percentage among all income-eligible renter

households was 20.1 percent, whereas the percentage across HUD programs ranged between

10.6 and 11.3 percent. With the exception of the privately owned housing program, HUD-

assisted housing serves households with children at a higher rate than their share of the

population. Overall, 44.1 percent of assisted households have children compared with 35.6

percent of all renter households. Slightly more than one-half of voucher households contain

children under 18. In addition, the percentage of households with three or more children is higher

in public housing (15.1 percent) and the voucher program (15.9 percent) than among all income-

eligible renter households (10.8 percent).

Despite observed program differences and the change in program mix over time, virtually no

change has occurred during the past 24 years in the type of households served by all three HUD

programs combined.

HUD-assisted housing serves households with one or more disabled members at a rate (37.7

percent) substantially higher than the rate among either income-eligible renter households (26.0

percent) or all renter households (18.6 percent). The privately owned assisted housing programs

contained the highest percentage of households with a disabled member, 41.4 percent.

Finally, rent-to-income ratio data from the 2011 AHS clearly illustrate why housing assistance is

needed. Among income-eligible renter households, 61 percent have excessive rent burdens; that

is, ratios greater than 40 percent. Excessive rent burdens affect 36 percent of HUD-assisted

households, a rate less than that for all renter households (39 percent). By the same rent-to-

income measure, the HUD-assisted housing programs have made housing more affordable for

clients. Nearly 60 percent of all HUD renter households have ratios less than or equal to 34

percent compared with 20 percent of income-eligible renters.

Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction

HUD and the Census Bureau use AHS data to construct two indices of physical problems—one

reports the incidence of severe physical problems, and one reports the incidence of moderate

physical problems. On both the index of severe physical problems and the index of moderate

physical problems, HUD-assisted housing has a slightly lower incidence of problems than units

ix

occupied by all income-eligible households but a higher incidence than all occupied rental units.

Within HUD-assisted housing, public housing units have the highest incidence of both severe

and moderate physical problems.

When we examine specific unit deficiencies, we find that HUD-assisted units have rates of

occurrence that are similar to those among all eligible renters but slightly higher in general than

among all renters.

The AHS has a series of questions that focuses on breakdowns in various housing systems. For

five of the seven reported system breakdowns (water supply stoppage, no working flush toilets,

public sewage disposal breakdowns, heating equipment breakdowns, and leaking water from

inside unit), the incidence of problems was higher for HUD-assisted units as a group than for all

renters. The differences are small. In most but not all categories, households in privately owned

subsidized units report a lower incidence of problems than households in other assisted

programs, although households in public housing report the highest incidence. However, voucher

recipients report the highest incidence of problems with fuses and circuit breakers.

The AHS asks respondents to rate their structures and neighborhoods on a scale from 1 to 10, on

which 10 is considered the best. Households receiving HUD assistance consistently gave their

units a 10 more frequently than either all income-eligible renter households or all renter

households. Voucher recipients gave the 10 rating most frequently. The worst rating of 1 was

generally more common among HUD-assisted households, but the differences in percentages are

small.

Although assisted households overall were more likely to rate their neighborhoods a 10 than

either income-eligible renters or all renters, public housing households were the least likely of all groups to do so, and 9.1 percent of public housing tenants gave their neighborhoods the worst

rating.

When asked to compare their current unit with their previous home, recent mover respondents in

HUD-assisted units were more likely to rate the HUD-assisted unit as better and less likely to

rate the HUD-assisted unit as worse than their previous unit than either all eligible renters or all renters. When asked to compare their current neighborhood with their previous neighborhood,

recent mover respondents in HUD-assisted units were generally more likely to rate their current

neighborhoods as better than their previous neighborhoods.

Other Related Studies

This report documents one of three studies (Eggers, 2017a, 2017b; Eggers and Moumen,

2017)—identical in structure and focus—that use the AHS to assess HUD-assisted rental

housing. These studies cover HUD-assisted rental housing in 2009, 2011, and 2013 respectively.

Readers who find a particular finding important are urged to consult the same table for the other

2 survey years. As a careful reading of all three Executive Summaries suggests, most of the

interesting findings are consistent in all three reports.

x

Introduction

This report is the eighth in a series of reports providing information on the size, composition, and quality of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-assisted housing

stock and the characteristics of its occupants (Casey, 1992, 1997; Eggers, 2017a, 2017b; Eggers

and Moumen, 2017; HUD, 2008; McGough, 1997). These reports are intended for use by

policymakers, analysts, and proponents of housing assistance for low-income households. HUD

obtains this information by identifying assisted households that are also surveyed in the biennial

national American Housing Survey (AHS).

The 2011 data reported here represent assisted households and units in all 50 states and the

District of Columbia but exclude households and units in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin

Islands, which are not included in the AHS. The 2011 data are a statistically valid description of

assisted households. These data are available only for the United States as a whole, with simple

tabulations for the four census regions. Because of sample limitations, data are not available for

states or smaller areas.

In this report, we compare HUD-assisted households with all income-eligible renters using the

same AHS survey dataset. Another series of HUD-produced reports and datasets focuses only on

assisted households using information gleaned from administrative records. These reports and

databases were published under the series title  Picture of Subsidized Households  and are posted at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/assthsg.html.

HUD Rental Assistance Programs

HUD rental housing assistance for low-income families and individuals falls into three basic

categories.

1.  Conventional public housing (hereafter referred to as  public housing).

2.  Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (hereafter referred to as  voucher).

3.  Privately owned assisted housing (hereafter referred to as  privately owned housing).

Public housing consists of housing developments owned by local public housing authorities

(PHAs) or Indian housing authorities; HUD makes payments to the authorities to cover the

development, rehabilitation, and operating costs of the housing units. Housing units in these

developments are then rented to selected low-income families and individuals at below-market

rents. Because the HUD payments cover the development and maintenance of the project, public

housing is referred to as  project based. The amount of rent low-income families pay is generally a fraction (30 percent) of their income. New tenants can select from vacant and available units

owned and operated by the local authorities. Tenants must live in units owned by the local

housing authority.

The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program involves selected low-income households

searching for housing units of their choice in the private rental market. After the household

locates a housing unit and the local housing authority grants approval, a subsidy payment is

made to the private-sector landlord on behalf of the tenant household. The program is designed

so that the out-of-pocket amount that tenants pay is 30 percent of the household’s income, if the

housing unit rents for less than the Fair Market Rent, or FMR, established by HUD for the area

and household size. Families are given the choice of renting units that are more expensive, but

tenants then pay 30 percent of their income plus the difference between the higher rent and the

1

payment standard. Because the payment is made on behalf of the tenant and the payment follows the tenant household if the household decides to move, the Section 8 voucher program is referred

to as  tenant-based assistance.

The third program category consists of privately owned projects containing housing units that are

rented to low-income households at subsidized rents. HUD provides assistance to encourage the

development of affordable housing. The following HUD programs are included in this third

category—Rent Supplement, Section 221(d)(3) Below Market Interest Rate, Section 202

Supportive Housing for the Elderly, Project-Based Section 8, Moderate Rehabilitation, and some

other smaller programs. Data on tenants in privately owned housing may not be altogether

comparable with data on public housing tenants or voucher recipients. The public housing and

voucher programs are deeply subsidized, with nearly all tenants paying income-based tenant

rents. Only approximately three-fourths of the households in privately owned housing pay

income-based tenant rents. The other tenants pay rents that do not vary by income; the project is

subsidized through initial financing without additional subsidy, and the rents are uniformly

reduced for all tenants. For these units, individual household income determines only eligibility,

not the amount by which the rent is reduced. As a consequence, approximately one-fourth of

tenants in privately owned housing may pay differing proportions of their income for rent and

also may differ in other characteristics from the other assisted tenants. Units in these programs

are also considered  project based.

Income-eligible renters are those households that would qualify for admission to assisted

housing because their income is within the HUD-determined income limit of 50 percent or less

of Median Family Income for their area, adjusted for family size. In HUD terminology, these

households are “very-low-income renters” and are eligible for assisted housing based on

income  alone. 1 Another term used in the report is “worst case households.” Worst case needs2

means renters who do not receive federal assistance, who have incomes below 50 percent of

1 All families with incomes below 50 percent of HUD-adjusted Median Family Income generally are eligible for housing assistance. The number of income-eligible families is a lower bound to the total number of eligible families, because other families with higher incomes (up to 80 percent of median income) are eligible if they also  meet additional (nonincome) criteria. These additional criteria include being displaced from certain HUD-assisted projects, having been previously assisted, being nonpurchasing tenants in certain homeownership programs, or meeting public housing agency-specified criteria.

2 Reports presenting estimates of worst case needs households have been submitted to Congress since 1991. HUD’s previous reports to Congress are  Priority Problems and “Worst Case” Needs in 1989 (June 1991, HUD-1314-PDR); The Location of Worst Case Needs in the Late 1980s (December 1992, HUD-1387-PDR);  Worst Case Needs for Housing Assistance in the United States in 1990 and 1991 (June 1994, HUD-1481-PDR);  Rental Housing Assistance at a Crossroads: A Report to Congress on Worst Case Housing Needs (March 1996);  Rental Housing Assistance—

The Crisis Continues (April 1998);  Rental Housing Assistance—The Worsening Crisis: A Report to Congress on Worst Case Housing Needs (March 2000);  A Report on Worst Case Housing Needs in 1999: New Opportunity Amid Continuing Challenges, Executive Summary (January 2001);  Trends in Worst Case Needs for Housing, 1978–1999

(December 2003);  Affordable Housing Needs: A Report to Congress on the Significant Need for Housing (December 2005);  Affordable Housing Needs 2005: Report to  Congress (May 2007);  Housing Needs of Persons With Disabilities: Supplemental Findings to the  Affordable Housing Needs 2005 Report;  Worst Case Housing Needs 2007: A Report to Congress (May 2010);  Worst Case Housing Needs 2009: A Report to Congress (February 2011); Worst Case Housing Needs 2011: Report to Congress (August 2011);  Worst Case Housing Needs: 2015 Report to Congress (April 2015). These publications are available online at

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/Worst-Case-Housing-Needs.html.

2

Median Family Income in their area, as adjusted by HUD, and who pay more than one-half their income for rent and utilities or live in severely substandard housing. 3

Readers should be aware that not all housing assistance programs are identified in this report.

Other renter households are receiving housing assistance from U.S. Department of Agriculture

(USDA) programs or state or local rental assistance programs. Estimates indicate that in fiscal

year 2004, approximately 464,000 units were available under the Rural Housing Service

(formerly known as the Farmers Home Administration) Section 515 Rental Assistance Program.

Approximately 264,000 of the available units received deep subsidies under the Section 521

Rental Assistance Program. The report also does not include units available for occupancy under

the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program; from 1987

through 2011, 40,502 projects containing 2.6 million units were placed in service for low-income

households (those with incomes less than 60 percent of local Area Median Income; HUD, 2016).

Some of these tax credit units may also receive HUD or USDA subsidies.

Organization of the Report and Data Tables

The Big Picture through the Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction sections of the report contain

short topical tables with accompanying commentary. These topical tables are derived from six

detailed summary tables contained in the Detailed Summary Tables section. The structure of

these sections follows the organization of the six detailed tables.

•  The Big Picture section uses information from all eight matched surveys to track the growth

of HUD-assisted housing from 1989 to 2011.

•  The Location and Key Unit Characteristics section examines where HUD-assisted units are

located, when they were built, and how many bedrooms they contain; it is based on Summary

Table 1.

•  The Householder Characteristics section and Summary Table 2 look at the characteristics of

householders.

•  The Household Characteristics section and Summary Table 3 summarize the composition

and financial characteristics of households.

•  The Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction section and Summary Tables 4 and 5 summarize

the condition of units and tenants’ opinions of their units and neighborhoods.

•  Detailed Summary Table 6 contains special breakouts of the data in Summary Tables 2 and 3.

Each topical table contains information for six categories of renter households: all HUD-assisted

households, public housing tenants, voucher recipients, tenants in privately owned subsidized

units, all income-eligible households, and all renter households. The six detailed tables in the

3 A unit is severely substandard if it has any of five physical problems: (1) Lacks complete plumbing, (2) Is uncomfortably cold for 24 hours or more in the winter due to frequent heating equipment breakdowns, (3) Has no electricity or three specified electrical problems, (4) Has any five of six serious maintenance problems, and (5) The public areas of the apartment building have four serious maintenance problems. For more detail, see “Appendix A: Definitions and Questionnaire,  American Housing Survey for the United States,  Current Housing Reports H150,”

U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research.

3

Detailed Summary Tables section contain two additional renter household categories: all unassisted, income-eligible renters and unassisted renters identified as having worst case needs.

Source of the Data

The national AHS collects detailed information on housing units and their occupants every 2

years. Unfortunately, although this large sample contains many assisted units, it has been

impossible to determine reliably, using the self-reported data of the AHS, which units are HUD-

assisted units. In earlier reports, HUD undertook two complementary manual matching efforts to

overcome this difficulty. One involved a manual matching of AHS renter respondents’ addresses

with a list of addresses HUD developed for public housing and privately owned assisted housing

projects. In the second match, which focused on voucher recipients, Census Bureau data

collectors compared names and addresses of AHS-sampled renters in an area with the records

that local housing authorities kept for voucher recipients.

Since the earlier reports, HUD has developed information on basic tenant demographic and

financial characteristics and limited data on unit characteristics from program administrative

records. In particular, the Public and Indian Housing Information Center (PIC) provides data for

the public housing and voucher programs, and the Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System

(TRACS) provides data for privately owned housing. Some differences exist between data from

program administrative systems and similar information from the AHS. PIC and TRACS were

designed to be 100-percent reporting systems and not scientific samples; thus, when reporting

falls substantially below 100 percent, the results will not be wholly accurate. In addition, the

small samples available for program data from the AHS will result in variability of results. Users

should therefore make comparisons across different data systems with great caution.

For this report and the 2013 report, specialists at the Census Bureau matched records from the

AHS and the two HUD administrative record systems using computerized matching algorithms

and techniques. These matching techniques use information on the AHS and HUD records,

including first name, last name, date of birth, and detailed addresses (street number, street name,

street direction/location [for example, North, South, Northwest, Southeast]), unit or apartment

number, city, state, and ZIP Code) to match households.

The 2011 and 2013 reports also utilize a special oversample of public housing and privately

owned subsidized units that were conducted as a part of the 2011 AHS.

Relationship to Other Studies

This report documents one of three studies (Eggers, 2017a, 2017b; Eggers and Moumen,

2017)—identical in structure and focus—that use the AHS to assess HUD-assisted rental

housing. These studies cover HUD-assisted rental housing in 2009, 2011, and 2013 respectively.

Because the universe of HUD-assisted rental housing underwent only marginal changes between

2009 and 2013, one should expect the findings to be nearly identical in all three studies and, for

the most part, they are. Some differences exist because the economy experienced a major swing

between 2009 and 2013 (June 2009 was the trough of the major 2007–2009 recession), because

the sample of HUD units was selected differently in each of the 3 years, and because respondents

sometimes answer the same question differently at different times due either to changes in

objective conditions or pure randomness. Readers who find a particular finding important are

urged to consult the same table for the other 2 survey years. As a careful reading of all three

Executive Summaries suggests, most of the interesting findings are consistent in all three reports.

4

The Big Picture

HUD spends approximately $40 billion a year on assisted housing (Weicher, 2012). 4 The matched AHS sample used in this report provides important information on how these

expenditures affected American households in 2011. Before reviewing the data, we call the

reader’s attention to three factors that are crucial for interpreting the data.

•  Unlike Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, assisted

housing is not an entitlement; that is, not every household that meets the eligibility

requirements for assisted housing will receive housing assistance. Some households receive

help, although others are placed on waiting lists. Such variations mean that the “who is

helped” question is particularly relevant. In other words, individually, and as a group, do the

assisted housing programs overserve some populations and underserve others?

•  HUD delivers housing assistance through agents. PHAs administer public housing, PHAs

and state agencies administer the voucher program, and private developers and landlords

administer the privately owned housing programs. The motivations of these agents and where

and when they function greatly affect how these programs operate.

•  Two of the three major categories of HUD-assisted housing—public housing and privately

owned, project-based housing—provide assisted housing by first producing the housing.

Housing units are clumps of capital and land that have long life spans. As a result, the

location and type of units produced determine who will be served for years to come.

HUD and the Census Bureau have matched administrative data on assisted housing with eight

AHS surveys (1989, 1991, 1993, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2011, and 2013). Including this document,

the results of those matches have been presented in seven reports (Casey, 1992, 1997; Eggers,

2017a, 2017b; Eggers and Moumen, 2017; HUD, 2008; McGough, 1997).

AHS data depict how housing assistance has evolved during the 24 years between the 1989 and

the 2013 matches. During the 1991-to-2013 period, the number of renter households grew from

33.3 million to 40.2 million, an increase of 21 percent. 5 During the same time period, the number of households eligible for housing assistance increased 16 percent, although the number of HUD-assisted units increased only 11 percent. The percentage of the eligible households receiving

assistance fell from 24.9 percent in 1991 to 21.1 percent in 2011, before rising to 23.8 percent in

2013.

The financial crisis and recession that began in 2007 caused a sharp increase in the number of

renter households and an even sharper increase in the number of renter households with incomes

that qualify them for housing assistance. Most of the decline in the percentage of eligible

households receiving assistance occurred during the 2007-to-2011 period. The number of eligible

renter households declined by approximately 1 million between 2011 and 2013, resulting in the

observed increase in the percentage of eligible households served (Table 2-1).

4 See Table 4-4.

5 The percentages reported in this and the following two sentences are based on the 1991-to-2013 period. In 1991, the Census Bureau revised the AHS weights to reflect information from the 1990 Census. This change corrected an over count of the housing stock in the 1989 AHS of more than a million units. Adjustments to the weights in 2003

and 2011 for subsequent censuses did not reveal any major problems in housing stock counts.

5

Table 2-1: Trends in HUD-Assisted Rental Housing, Relative to Need

AHS Survey Year  Al  Renters (000s)

Al  Eligible

Al  HUD-Assisted  Percent of Eligible

Renters (000s)

(000s)

Assisted (%)

1989

33,767

13,808

4,070

29.5

1991

33,351

16,194

4,036

24.9

1993

33,472

15,795

4,054

25.7

2003

33,604

16,576

4,280

25.8

2007

35,032

16,494

4,273

25.9

2009

35,378

18,233

4,426

24.3

2011

38,814

19,737

4,168

21.1

2013

40,202

18,856

4,490

23.8

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

During the 1989-to-2013 period, the number of HUD-assisted units increased by roughly

400,000 units, but program mix changed dramatically. The voucher program’s share grew from

26 percent in 1989 to 47 percent in 2013, although the shares of public housing and privately

owned assisted housing each declined by approximately 10 percentage points. Because of

differences in the way these programs are structured, one could expect to see big changes in how

HUD housing assistance affects American households during this period (Table 2-2).

Table 2-2: Trends in HUD-Assisted Housing by Program Type

Tenants in

AHS Survey Year  Al  HUD-Assisted  Tenants in Public

Voucher

(000s)

Housing (%)

Recipients (%)

Privately Owned

Housing (%)

1989

4,070

33.4

26.0

40.5

1991

4,036

28.4

28.3

43.3

1993

4,054

28.1

29.6

42.3

2003

4,280

25.6

42.1

32.4

2007

4,273

23.5

45.1

31.4

2009

4,426

22.6

46.8

30.6

2011

4,168

23.7

48.7

27.7

2013

4,490

22.9

46.8

30.2

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Figure 1 explains how HUD-assisted housing fits into the overall rental housing market. In 2011,

the U.S. housing market had 38,814,000 renter households; 19,737,000 of these households were

eligible on the basis of income for HUD assistance. HUD programs served 4,168,000 of the

eligible households (21.1 percent), leaving 15,569,000 eligible households without any HUD

housing assistance; of these, 8,797,000 were judged to have worst case housing needs. The

voucher program helped 2,028,000 households; another 1,153,000 households lived in privately

owned, project-based housing, and public housing provided housing to 987,000 households. 6

6 As in previous reports, HUD provided the Census Bureau with estimates of the number of HUD-assisted units by program. The Census Bureau used these estimates to adjust the weights of the matched units so that the weighted counts matched program totals.

6

Figure 1: Renters—Eligibility and Housing Assistance

7

Location and Key Unit Characteristics

Three factors greatly influence whom the HUD-assisted housing programs serve and the type of

housing provided. The factors are which agents choose to work with HUD to provide housing

assistance, where these agents are located, and what their objectives are. For this reason, we

begin the analysis with information on the location of HUD-assisted housing and the types of

units provided. This section summarizes information in Summary Table 1.

Regional and Metropolitan Location

When compared with either all renter households or all renter households eligible for assistance

(including those already assisted), the HUD programs as a group are more concentrated in the

Northeast and less concentrated in the West. Only 20 percent of all renters and 21 percent of

eligible renters live in the Northeast, but 28 percent of HUD-assisted housing is in the Northeast.

In 2011, the West contained 26 percent of all renters and 26 percent of eligible renters but 20

percent of HUD-assisted households. The share of HUD-assisted renters in the Midwest and

South is similar to the geographic distributions of all renter households and all income-eligible

renter households (Table 3-1).

Table 3-1: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Region, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Tenants in

Total

Regions

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Al  Renters

Assisted (%)

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters (%)

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Northeast

27.7

36.8

23.2

27.8

20.5

19.5

Midwest

19.4

19.7

15.9

25.5

20.0

19.7

South

32.4

34.0

31.3

33.0

33.8

34.7

West

20.5

9.4

29.7

13.7

25.8

26.1

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The regional distribution of public housing, the oldest HUD-assisted housing program, drives

this imbalance. Vouchers, the newest HUD program, are also administered mostly by PHAs. The

voucher program has a regional distribution that is close to that of all renter households but still has a higher percentage in the Northeast. The overall regional imbalance is a function of the age

of the programs. Communities in the Northeast created active PHAs in the early years of the

public housing program, whereas PHAs in the West became more active in the years when HUD

moved toward voucher assistance. During this period, the nation’s population also shifted toward

the West. Similar patterns appear in the metropolitan/nonmetropolitan distribution of HUD-

assisted housing.

Overall, the proportion of HUD-assisted housing in metropolitan areas and nonmetropolitan

areas matches the proportion of all renter households or all income-eligible renter households.

Within metropolitan areas, HUD-assisted housing is more concentrated in central cities and less

concentrated in suburbs than either all renter households or all income-eligible renter

households. The central city/suburb disparity is most pronounced in public housing, but the

privately owned housing programs also exhibit this imbalance. Once again, the voucher program

presents the distribution closest to that of all renter households or all income-eligible renter

households. Table 3-2 does not include similar programs administered by USDA’s Rural

Housing Service or Rural Development programs.

8

Table 3-2: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Metropolitan/Nonmetropolitan Status, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Metropolitan/

Total

Tenants in

Al

Nonmetropolitan

Tenants in

Voucher

Eligible

Al  HUD-

Privately

Renters

Areas

Public

Recipients

Renters

Assisted (%)  Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Inside metropolitan

statistical areas

83.9

84.3

84.0

83.2

82.5

82.6

In central cities

53.5

67.5

46.2

54.5

45.8

42.8

In suburbs

30.4

16.8

37.9

28.7

36.7

39.8

Outside metropolitan

statistical areas

16.1

15.7

15.9

16.8

17.5

17.4

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

In the section, The Big Picture, we called attention to the shifting importance of the voucher

program in HUD’s overall housing assistance between 1989 and 2013. Despite the growth in the

voucher program, the overall distribution of HUD-assisted housing has changed little in the past

24 years. The percentage of assisted housing in suburbs has increased slightly, accompanied by a

slight decrease in the percentage in central cities. The percentage outside of metropolitan areas

has declined over time.

Of course, the distribution of all renters and eligible renters has also changed over time. The

previously mentioned shift in the proportion of assisted housing from central city to suburbs and

the observed decline outside of metropolitan areas followed similar changes in broader renter

populations. Between 1989 and 2013, the proportion of assisted housing in suburbs grew from 26

to 32 percent, although the proportion of all renter households grew from 38 to 40 percent; the

proportion of assisted housing outside of metropolitan areas fell from 16 to 13 percent, although

the proportion of all renters fell from 16 percent to 12 percent (Table 3-3).

Table 3-3: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Region and by

Metropolitan/Nonmetropolitan Status

Al  HUD-Assisted

AHS Survey Year

Renters/Location

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2013

Northeast

28

24

27

28

28

28

28

28

Midwest

22

22

22

22

22

22

19

22

South

34

37

35

34

32

32

32

33

West

16

17

15

17

18

18

20

18

Inside metropolitan

statistical areas

84

81

82

87

86

86

84

87

In central cities

58

53

56

54

52

52

54

55

In suburbs

26

27

26

33

34

34

30

32

Outside metropolitan

statistical areas

16

19

18

13

14

14

16

13

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Notes: The tables in this document that describe trends during all eight matched data studies report percentages as whole percentages, whereas the tables describing characteristics of HUD programs in 2011 report percentages to one-tenth of a percentage point. The published matched data for 1989, 1991, and 1993 are available only as whole percentages, so the data for subsequent years are rounded to whole percentages.

Year Structure Built

Public housing and HUD’s privately owned subsidized housing programs work by creating new

rental units and then filling these units with eligible households. The types of units built

9

determine what types of families are served. PHAs and private developers, with HUD approval, choose what type of units to construct or renovate, and that choice is based on their objectives

and the needs at the time building takes place. Decisions made at one point in time become

frozen in housing capital. This fact was impressed on the author by a visit in the mid-1990s to an

unassisted, HUD-insured project in the suburbs outside Minneapolis and Saint Paul. The project

was constructed in the early 1970s to accommodate all the baby boomers entering the job market

and consisted entirely of one-bedroom units; after experiencing declining demand, the project

was being renovated at the time of his visit to serve a family market (Table 3-4).

Table 3-4: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Year Built, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Tenants in

Total

Year Built

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Al  Renters

Assisted (%)

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters (%)

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Housing (%)

1949 and earlier

18.6

15.8

24.9

9.9

25.6

24.8

1950–1969

23.3

39.0

20.7

14.4

21.8

21.3

1970–1984

36.9

33.5

27.1

56.9

30.6

28.1

1985 or later

21.4

11.9

27.3

19.0

22.0

25.8

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Public housing began in 1937, and 18.6 percent of public housing units were built before 1950.

More than 70 percent of public housing units were built between 1950 and 1985, when HUD

restructured its housing assistance programs to favor the voucher approach. The privately owned

housing programs were most active between 1965 and 1985; 56.9 percent of these units were

constructed between 1970 and 1984. The 9.9 percent of privately owned units reportedly built

before 1950 results from a combination of rehabilitating older buildings for use as assisted

housing and errors on the part of AHS respondents in identifying the year built.

Because the voucher program can use any rental units in the stock if their owners are willing to

participate, its distribution by year built closely matches the distribution of all renter households.

Number of Bedrooms

The number of bedrooms in an assisted unit determines the size of the household that can be

served. Overall, HUD-assisted housing has a higher percentage of one-bedroom units than the

percentage among all renter households or all income-eligible renter households and a lower

percentage of two-bedroom units. This disparity is sharpest among privately owned subsidized

housing and probably results from a focus on elderly households among several of the programs

in this category (including both older Section 202 direct loans with project-based Section 8

assistance and newer Section 8 capital grant projects built after 1990) and the preferences of

developers in the regular Section 8 program. Public housing displays a similar distribution of

unit sizes but to a lesser degree. Not surprisingly, the bedroom distribution among voucher units

closely resembles the distribution among all renters but with a higher percentage of three-

bedroom units. The voucher program has the highest percentage of units with three or four or

more bedrooms among the HUD-assisted programs, probably reflecting the fact that vouchers

can also be used to rent single-family rentals, including townhomes or rowhouses; these

percentages are actually higher than the percentage among income-eligible renter households

(Table 3-5).

10

Table 3-5: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Number of Bedrooms, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Total

Number of

Tenants in

Voucher

Tenants in

Eligible

Al

Bedrooms

Al  HUD-

Public

Recipients

Privately

Renters

Renters

Assisted (%)  Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Efficiency

1.9

2.9

0.6

3.2

2.7

2.2

One

34.6

34.0

24.7

52.6

30.3

26.6

Two

33.7

33.5

37.6

27.0

39.9

39.8

Three

23.7

23.1

28.9

15.0

21.3

23.9

Four or more

6.1

6.4

8.2

2.3

5.9

7.5

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The combined bedroom distribution for all three HUD-assisted housing programs has definitely

shifted over time. The percentage of units with three or four or more bedrooms has increased

from 24 percent in 1989 to 28 percent in 2011 despite a decline in the number of large families.

The percentage of one-bedroom units decreased slightly from 39 to 38 percent (Table 3-6).

Table 3-6: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Number of Bedrooms

Percent of

Al  HUD-Assisted Renters

Units by

Number of

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2013

Bedrooms

Efficiency

5

5

4

3

3

1

2

1

One

39

40

38

38

40

37

35

38

Two

32

33

35

33

30

31

34

33

Three

20

20

19

22

22

23

24

22

Four or more

4

3

4

4

4

7

6

6

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

With this background on where HUD programs function and the types of units they provide, we

will examine whom the programs serve in the Householder Characteristics and Household

Characteristics sections. In the Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction section, we will discuss the

quality of housing provided and tenant satisfaction; the Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction

section will include information on the type of structure. More detailed information on location

and other unit characteristics is in Summary Table 1.

11

Householder Characteristics

The Census Bureau characterizes some households using data on all household members,

providing information such as household size, the presence or absence of children, or family

status. For other characteristics, such as age or race, the Census Bureau takes these

characteristics from one individual, the householder. The householder is any responsible member

of the household who is competent to answer questions about the household. 7 In a traditional household with a father, a mother, and children, the householder could be either the father or

mother. This section draws information from Summary Table 2.

Race and Ethnic Origin of Householder

The percentage of HUD-assisted units with Black householders in 2011 was 43.8 percent,

although the percentage of all income-eligible renter households with Black householders was

25.7 percent. The differentials were greatest for the public housing and voucher programs, in

which Black householders occupied 50.2 and 42.9 percent of units, respectively. One possible

explanation for public housing is its high concentration in central cities. Privately owned

subsidized units, however, have the smallest but still substantial differential (39.9 versus 25.7

percent), and these units are also disproportionally concentrated in central cities (Table 4-1).

Table 4-1: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Race and Ethnicity of Householder, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Race and Ethnic

Total

Tenants in

Al

Origin of

Al  HUD-  Tenants in

Voucher

Eligible

Privately

Renters

Householder

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Renters

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

White alone

48.9

43.3

49.6

52.5

66.0

70.8

Black alone

43.8

50.2

42.9

39.9

25.7

20.7

Other races alone or

multiple races

7.3

6.6

7.6

7.5

8.3

8.6

Hispanic (of any race)

17.8

21.5

8.7

30.4

22.3

18.8

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

With respect to ethnicity, the percentage of al  HUD-assisted households with Hispanic householders

is smaller than the percentage of income-eligible households with Hispanic householders.

Table 4-2 traces how the racial and ethnic distribution of HUD-assisted renters has changed over

time. Unfortunately, the results from the 1989, 1991, and 1993 surveys are not strictly

comparable with those from the 2003, 2007, 2009, and 2011 surveys because HUD and other

federal agencies changed how they collect data on race in 2001. Prior to that year, survey

respondents were forced to choose between four racial groups or an “other” category. Starting in

2001, respondents could choose more than one racial category. Thus, “other” in the later surveys

consists of those who reported two or more races, and White is really White alone after 2001.

7 The Census Bureau defines the householder as follows: “The householder is the first household member listed on the questionnaire who is an owner or renter of the sample unit and is 18 years or older…. If no one meets the full criteria, the age requirement is relaxed to 14 years or older before the owner/renter requirement. Where the respondent is one of several unrelated persons who all could meet the criteria, the interviewer will select one of them to be … the householder. The householder is not necessarily the one answering the survey questions.”

12

Table 4-2: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Race and Ethnicity of Householder

Percent of Al  HUD-

AHS Survey Year

Assisted Renters

by Race and Ethnic

Origin of

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2013

Householder

White alone

54

61

54

54

52

48

49

49

Black alone

40

35

40

40

41

46

44

44

Other races alone or

multiple races

6

4

6

6

7

6

7

8

Hispanic (of any

race)

10

10

10

18

15

17

18

17

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Despite this qualification, the numbers tell an interesting story. The percentage of households

with Black householders rose sharply in 2009, long after the change in the race question. The

percentage of units with Hispanic householders rose between 1993 and 2003, reflecting in part

the rising Hispanic share of the population. The change in the race question did not directly

affect the collection of data on ethnicity.

Age of Householder

Combined HUD-assisted housing programs were serving households with elderly householders

at a rate greater than their share of the population of income-eligible renter households (25.0

versus 17.4 percent). The percentage of households with elderly householders was particularly

high among units in privately owned subsidized housing (40.3 percent). Only the voucher

program served elderly people at a rate (17.0 percent) similar to their share of income-eligible

renter households.

The share of households with householders under 35 years old is less in all three HUD programs

than their share of income-eligible renter households. The voucher program has a higher

proportion of households with householders between 35 and 64 years old than the share of such

households in the overall renter population, 55.4 compared with 47.6 percent. Only 33.5 percent

of households in privately owned subsidized units were in this age range (Table 4-3).

Table 4-3: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Age of Householder, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Age of

Tenants in

Total

Tenants in

Voucher

Al  Renters

Householder

Al  HUD-

Privately

Eligible

Assisted (%)

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters (%)

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Under 35

27.7

29.4

27.6

26.4

36.8

40.0

35 to 64

47.4

47.0

55.4

33.5

45.8

47.6

65 or older

25.0

23.6

17.0

40.3

17.4

12.4

Median age

48

48

46

57

42

40

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. NA = data not available.

Notes: The medians in this table were hand calculated from the age of householder data reported in Summary Table 2. They are not based on the less aggregated data available on the AHS internal use file.

The median age data highlight how the privately owned subsidized housing programs have

concentrated on serving an elderly population. The median age in these programs is 57 years,

compared with 48 in public housing and 46 in the voucher program.

13

As the relative importance of the voucher program increased over time, the share of all HUD-assisted units with elderly householders fell nearly steadily from 35 percent in 1989 to 28 percent

in 2013 (Table 4-4).

Table 4-4: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Age of Householder

Al  HUD-Assisted

AHS Survey Year

Renters/Age of

Householder

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2013

Under 35

29

31

34

29

24

27

28

25

35 to 64

36

33

34

43

48

45

47

47

65 or older

35

36

32

28

28

28

25

28

Median age (in years)

50

50

44

48

50

49

48

NA

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

NA = data not available.

Education of Householder

The last two columns in Table 4-5 emphasize the link between education and income. Income-

eligible renter households are much less educated than all renter households. Among income-

eligible renter households, 27.4 percent had householders without high school degrees compared

with 18.2 percent among all renter households; 39.0 percent of income-eligible households have

householders with education beyond the high school level compared with 51.5 percent among all

renter households. Because of this important linkage, we present data on educational attainment

by race and ethnicity.

The high school graduation rates are low in all three HUD programs (58.8 percent in public

housing, 68.8 percent in the voucher program, and 63.2 percent in privately owned housing)

compared with 72.6 percent among all income-eligible renter households and 81.8 percent

among all renter households. These results are consistent with the finding in the Household

Characteristics section that HUD-assisted households have lower incomes than income-eligible

renter households overall.

When the educational attainment data are disaggregated by race or ethnicity, the patterns are

similar among the White alone and Black alone populations. Among the Hispanic population, the

level of educational attainment measured by the percent of high school graduates is lower than

that of the White alone or Black alone populations (some of whom are Hispanic by ethnicity).

14

Table 4-5: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Education Attainment of Householder by Race and Ethnicity, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Educational Attainment of

Tenants in  Total

Tenants in

Al

Householder by Race and

Al  HUD-

Voucher  Privately  Eligible

Public

Renters

Ethnicity

Assisted

Recipients  Owned  Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Housing

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

Less than 9th grade—al

households

11.3

12.4

9.5

13.8

9.0

5.8

White alone

15.5

18.3

13.6

16.5

10.4

6.3

Black alone

5.7

6.0

4.0

8.7

5.0

3.8

Other races

17.9

21.2

13.7

22.7

10.5

6.0

Hispanic

27.0

29.2

31.6

23.4

22.2

17.5

9th to 12th grade, no diploma—

al  households

23.8

29.0

21.7

23.1

18.4

12.4

White alone

22.5

29.3

21.5

19.5

17.6

11.8

Black alone

26.2

29.6

23.5

27.6

22.1

16.3

Other races

17.9

21.2

13.1

23.9

13.0

8.2

Hispanic

25.7

30.7

20.9

25.1

24.1

20.2

High school graduation

(includes equivalency)—al

35.1

31.9

35.7

36.8

33.6

30.3

households

White alone

33.8

27.4

35.8

35.2

33.1

30.1

Black alone

37.1

35.1

36.9

39.8

36.2

33.4

Other races

31.6

37.9

29.4

30.7

29.4

24.2

Hispanic

28.0

22.6

24.9

32.8

30.0

30.0

More than high school

graduation—al  households

29.8

26.8

33.0

26.5

39.0

51.5

White alone

28.1

25.1

29.1

28.8

38.9

51.8

Black alone

30.9

29.2

35.6

23.9

36.6

46.4

Other races

32.6

19.7

43.8

22.7

47.1

61.6

Hispanic

19.3

17.5

22.6

18.8

23.7

32.3

High school graduate—al

households

64.9

58.8

68.8

63.2

72.6

81.8

White alone

62.0

52.5

64.8

64.0

72.0

81.9

Black alone

68.0

64.3

72.4

63.7

72.8

79.8

Other races

64.2

57.6

73.2

53.4

76.5

85.7

Hispanic

47.3

40.1

47.5

51.6

53.7

62.4

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Years in Same Unit

Because housing assistance is not an entitlement, one might expect households receiving assistance

to be reluctant to move if moving means giving up assistance. Table 4-6 supports that presumption.

The bolded rows report the percentages for all householders, regardless of race, ethnicity, age, or

disability. Householders who have lived in the unit fewer than 3 years constitute 44.6 percent of

income-eligible renter households, compared with 31.7 percent in public housing, 32.8 percent

among voucher recipients, and 28.7 percent in privately owned housing. Approximately 19

percent of public housing households have householders who have lived in the unit for more than

12 years compared with 11.4 percent among income-eligible renter households. Both income-

eligible renters and all renters show shorter tenancies than assisted households.

15

Table 4-6: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Householder Years in Unit by Race, Ethnicity, and Elderly and Disability Status, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters  Tenants  Total

Tenants

in

Al

Year in Unit, 2011

Al  HUD

Voucher

Eligible

Assisted  in Public  Recipien Privately  Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing

ts (%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

(%)

Housing

(%)

0 to 2—Al  householders

31.4

31.7

32.8

28.7

44.6

47.0

White alone

31.4

33.9

32.0

28.6

45.7

47.9

Black alone

32.4

31.5

33.7

31.0

41.9

43.3

Other races

27.0

19.0

35.1

18.6

44.5

48.5

Hispanic

29.9

27.8

34.3

23.4

44.2

45.6

Under 65

36.4

36.6

36.8

35.3

50.1

50.8

Over 65

16.6

15.9

13.7

19.1

18.6

20.0

Without a disabled person

35.0

35.5

36.8

31.1

48.4

49.5

With a disabled person

25.5

24.8

25.9

25.6

33.8

35.6

3 to 7—Al  householders

40.6

34.8

43.6

40.2

34.1

34.7

White alone

38.1

32.7

41.4

36.3

33.0

33.9

Black alone

43.6

36.4

47.0

45.1

37.3

38.0

Other races

39.0

33.3

39.1

43.0

33.2

33.0

Hispanic

41.2

34.4

44.9

42.3

36.8

37.0

Under 65

43.1

37.5

45.5

43.3

34.6

35.0

Over 65

33.0

25.9

34.3

35.6

32.1

32.2

Without a disabled person

40.1

35.5

41.1

42.5

33.5

34.4

With a disabled person

41.5

33.5

48.1

37.1

36.0

35.8

8 to 12—Al  householders

13.7

14.0

13.4

14.0

9.8

8.8

White alone

15.6

14.0

15.3

17.1

9.7

8.7

Black alone

10.7

12.7

10.7

8.7

9.3

8.7

Other races

19.7

27.0

16.6

19.8

11.9

9.8

Hispanic

11.8

12.7

10.6

13.1

8.8

8.5

Under 65

10.9

11.5

11.2

9.6

8.1

7.6

Over 65

22.2

22.0

24.4

20.6

17.8

16.9

Without a disabled person

12.6

12.8

12.2

12.9

8.8

8.0

With a disabled person

15.7

16.3

15.4

15.5

12.8

12.0

More than 12: Al

householders

14.2

19.5

10.1

17.1

11.4

9.6

White alone

15.0

19.4

11.3

18.0

11.5

9.6

Black alone

13.2

19.4

8.6

15.2

11.4

10.1

Other races

14.3

20.6

9.3

18.6

10.3

8.7

Hispanic

17.1

25.0

10.3

21.1

10.3

8.9

Under 65

9.6

14.3

6.5

11.9

7.2

6.6

Over 65

28.2

36.2

27.6

24.7

31.5

31.0

Without a disabled person

12.4

16.2

9.8

13.6

9.3

8.0

With a disabled person

17.3

25.4

10.6

21.8

17.3

16.6

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Notes: The Census Bureau does not tabulate “years in unit”; rather, it reports the year the household moved into the unit in 5-year blocks. For 2011, the blocks include 2000–2004, 2005–2009, and 2010–2011. This presentation translates into 0 to 2 years, 3 to 7

years, 8 to 12 years, and more than 12 years categories for years in unit. Because the size of the initial category depends on the survey year, the 2011 results can be compared only with tabulations from 1991 match study.

As one might expect, differences exist between the two assistance paradigms—the public

housing and privately owned program in which the subsidy attaches to the unit and the voucher

16

program in which the subsidy moves with the tenant. The voucher program has the most turnover; for example, only 10.1 percent of householders have lived in their units more than 12

years, roughly the same as all income-eligible householders. The voucher program does not

match the turnover pattern among all renters probably because moving is expensive, and voucher

participants can carry their subsidies only to units whose landlords will participate in the voucher program.

The race, ethnicity, age, and disability breakouts are best understood by looking down the

columns within each “years in unit” category. In the all renters and the income eligible columns,

the differences across race and ethnicity are minor, but elderly householders and householders

with a disabled person in the household display lower turnover, that is, lower rates of short

tenure (0–2 years) and higher rates of long tenures (more than 12 years).

The same patterns are apparent among householders in the assisted housing programs.

Because of the way that the AHS collects data on years in units, one can compare only data

across the 1991 and 2011 studies (see Table 4-7 note). Table 4-7 shows that turnover is less in

2011 than in 1991; that is, fewer householders had moved within the past 2 years and more had

lived in their units for 12 years or more.

Table 4-7: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Households by Years in Unit by Householder

Years in Unit

Al  HUD-Assisted Renters

1991 (%)

2011%

0 to 2

33.9

31.4

3 to 7

39.1

40.6

8 to 12

14.3

13.7

More than 12

12.6

14.2

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Notes: More detailed information on householder characteristics can be found in Summary Table 2 in the Detailed Summary Tables section. Years in unit are derived from year-moved-in data. For assisted units, year moved in is reported in decade or one-half-decade intervals. For the 1991 and 2011 surveys, the first of these intervals corresponds to 0–2 years in units. For the 1993 and 2013 surveys, the first of these intervals corresponds to 0–3 years in unit.

17

Household Characteristics

The Household Characteristics section describes key characteristics of HUD-assisted households,

focusing primarily on characteristics that relate to need for housing assistance. This section

draws on information from Summary Table 3. One should not expect significant year-to-year

changes in the characteristics of HUD households or householders. Only new units and turnover

among assisted units can alter the mix of households. In the 24 years covered by these studies,

the number of assisted units has increased by only 11 percent, and the previous section showed

that turnover is low.

Household Income

Eligibility for assisted housing is based primarily on household income. Eligibility is determined

by comparing household income with Median Family Income in the locality; typically, a

household is eligible if it earns less than 50 percent of the median income of families in that

locality adjusted for family size. Within a group of lower-income households, HUD agents may

in some circumstances look at additional criteria, such as being homeless or displaced, in

prioritizing households for the limited number of units available at a given time.

In 2011, the median income of all renters nationally was $28,000, based on AHS data.

Households in HUD programs had median incomes substantially less than that of all renters. The

median income of voucher recipients was 42.6 percent of that for all eligible renters, and the

ratios were even lower in public housing (36.7 percent) and privately owned subsidized housing

(34.3 percent). Individually the HUD programs are generally serving households from the lower

end of the distribution of renter households. See Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Median Income of Households by Assistance Status, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Median

Tenants in

Total

Al

Household

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Eligible  Renters

Income

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters

Housing

Housing

Median household

income

NA

$10,300

$11,900

$9,600

NA

$28,000

Percent of all renter

households

NA

36.7

42.6

34.3

NA

100

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. NA = data not available.

Table 5-2 reveals no clear overall trend in how HUD-assisted housing programs functioned

during the 1989-to-2011 period. The ratios of the median incomes of households served by the

public housing and voucher programs to renter median income have remained relatively flat

during the period, with the voucher ratio being higher than the public housing ratio. The ratio of

median income in the privately owned assisted stock to the median income of all renters declined

steadily from 1989 to 2009. During that period, the stock of privately owned assisted housing

decreased by approximately 300,000. The Introduction noted that some components of the

privately owned assisted rental stock had rents that could be greater than 30 percent of tenant

income. In recent years, particularly 1995 to 2005, many of these units—rent supplements,

Section 236, and the old 202 program—left the programs, a fact that may explain the downtrend

in the ratio of median incomes among households in the privately owned stock.

18

Table 5-2: Trends in Median Income of Households by Assistance Status

Group Median Income

AHS Survey Year

as Percent of Renter

Median Income

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2013

All HUD-assisted

41

39

38

39

36

37

NA

NA

Tenants in public housing

37

36

35

37

33

32

37

36

Voucher recipients

42

39

39

40

38

42

43

39

Tenants in privately

owned housing

43

42

40

39

37

34

37

34

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. NA = data not available.

Income Sources

HUD-assisted households differ substantially from other households in how they obtain their

income. Only 39.4 percent of HUD-assisted households have wage and salary income compared

with 55.8 percent of income-eligible renter households and 72.6 percent of all renters.

Controlling for the age of the householders does not eliminate this difference, with 50.3 percent

of assisted households with householders under 65 having wage and salary income compared

with 65.2 percent among nonelderly eligible households and 79.9 percent among all nonelderly

renters.

Among elderly households, the percentage receiving social security income differs little between

assisted renters and either eligible renters or all renters. However, the percentage of elderly

households receiving income from private pensions or survivor benefits varies by assistance

status. Only 17.4 percent of elderly assisted households receive income from these sources

compared with 22.4 percent among eligible renters and 31.8 percent among all renters.

The income source information reinforces the inference drawn from the median income ratios

that HUD programs serve the poorer of the poor. For example, 13.0 percent of HUD-assisted

households reported receiving welfare compared with 8.0 percent of income-eligible households

and 4.6 percent of all renter households. In addition, 52.7 percent of HUD-assisted households

reported receiving food stamps compared with 32.7 percent of income-eligible households and

17.4 percent of all renter households. Controlling for the age of householders alters the observed

percentages but not the difference between assisted renters and either all income-eligible renters

or all renters. For example, 32.4 percent of elderly renters and 21.8 percent of nonelderly renters

in assisted housing received supplement security income compared with 12.3 percent and 7.2

percent respectively among all renter households (Table 5-3).

19

Table 5-3: Income Sources for Renter Households by Assistant Status and by Elderly/Nonelderly, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Tenants in

Total

Tenants in

Al

Income Sources

Al  HUD-

Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Housing

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

Wages and salaries

39.4

39.0

45.1

29.8

55.8

72.6

Under 65

50.3

47.9

53.1

46.1

65.2

79.9

Over 65

6.8

10.3

6.1

5.6

11.3

20.5

Social Security

income

28.8

27.3

22.9

40.6

21.7

15.8

Under 65

12.6

10.9

12.2

15.5

9.1

6.3

Over 65

77.5

80.3

75.1

77.8

81.6

83.0

Retirement or

survivors pensions

5.6

5.3

4.1

8.5

5.3

6.0

Under 65

1.7

1.1

1.9

1.9

1.7

2.4

Over 65

17.4

18.9

15.1

18.3

22.4

31.8

Supplemental

Security Income

24.5

24.6

25.1

23.3

12.3

7.2

Under 65

21.8

22.5

22.8

18.7

10.9

6.2

Over 65

32.4

31.3

36.2

30.1

18.4

14.4

Welfare

13.0

13.5

15.1

8.9

8.0

4.6

Under 65

15.6

15.5

16.9

12.5

9.0

4.8

Over 65

5.4

6.9

6.7

3.7

3.4

2.8

Food stamps

52.7

53.6

52.6

52.0

32.7

17.4

Under 65

57.5

55.6

56.9

61.0

35.0

17.6

Over 65

38.4

47.2

31.9

38.7

21.7

15.8

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Household Composition

Household composition provides further evidence that HUD-assisted housing programs serve a

clientele different from the typical renter household. In 2011, 26.7 percent of renter households

consisted of married couple households, and the percentage among all income-eligible renter

households was 20.1 percent, whereas the percentage across all HUD programs ranged between

10.6 and 11.3 percent.

Combining the fourth (other female householder) and last (female householder) rows of Table 5-4

provides some additional insight to whom HUD programs serve. Approximately 70 percent of

HUD-assisted households are female-headed compared with 53 percent among income-eligible

households and 42 percent among all renter households.

Finally, Table 5-4 reveals some important differences across HUD programs in the households

served. Approximately one-half of all voucher recipient households were two-or-more-person,

female-headed households (twice the rate among all renter households), although only 30.7

percent of households in privately owned subsidized units were. In the previous section, we

noted that the privately owned subsidized housing program served elderly households at a much

higher rate than their share of the income-eligible renter household population.

20

Table 5-4: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Household Composition, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Total

Household

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Tenants in  Eligible

Al

Composition

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Privately

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Two-or-more-person

households

58.2

57.1

65.8

45.7

60.8

64.5

Married couple families,

no nonrelatives

11.0

10.6

11.3

10.8

20.1

26.7

Other male

householder

5.1

4.5

5.4

4.9

10.0

13.3

Other female

householder

42.2

42.0

49.1

30.0

30.7

24.5

One-person

households

41.8

42.9

34.2

54.4

39.2

35.5

Male householder

13.6

15.8

11.1

16.0

16.9

17.7

Female householder

28.2

27.1

23.1

38.2

22.2

17.8

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

With the exception of the privately owned housing program, HUD-assisted housing serves

households with children at a higher rate than their share of the population. Overall 44.1 percent

of assisted households have children compared with 35.5 percent of all renter households.

Slightly more than one-half of voucher households contain children under 18, although 33.0

percent of assisted households in privately owned housing have children. In addition, the

percentage of households with three or more children is higher in the public housing (15.1

percent) and the voucher program (15.9 percent) than among all income-eligible renter

households (10.8 percent). See Table 5-5.

Table 5-5: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Number of Children in Household, 2011

Number of

HUD-Assisted Renters

Single

Tenants in

Total

Children

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Al  Renters

Under 18

Assisted (%)

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters (%)

(%)

Years

Housing (%)

(%)

Housing (%)

None

55.9

55.8

49.7

67.0

60.4

64.5

One

15.9

16.7

15.7

15.4

15.1

14.9

Two

13.8

12.4

16.6

10.0

13.1

12.1

Three

8.7

9.1

10.7

4.8

7.3

5.7

Four

3.7

4.0

4.4

2.3

2.8

2.0

Five

1.6

1.2

0.2

4.2

0.3

0.7

Six or more

0.5

0.8

0.5

0.2

0.3

0.2

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Despite the observed program differences and the noted change in program mix over time,

virtually no change has occurred during the past 24 years in the type of households served by all

three HUD programs combined. All the rows in Table 5-6 appear to contain only random

movements.

21

Table 5-6: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Household Composition Household

AHS Survey Year

Composition

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2011

Two-or-more-person

households

57

56

58

54

53

55

58

55

Married couple

families, no

13

15

13

11

10

9

11

10

nonrelatives

Other male

householder

4

4

3

2

4

3

5

4

Other female

householder

39

36

42

41

40

42

42

40

One-person

households

43

44

42

46

47

45

42

45

Male householder

10

13

13

14

13

13

14

15

Female

householder

33

32

29

32

34

33

28

30

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Household Size and Overcrowding

The AHS data on household size highlights the differences among the HUD programs. Overall,

HUD-assisted households have a household size distribution similar to that of all income-eligible

renter households but with slightly smaller households. Assisted households include a higher

percentage of one-person households (41.8 versus 39.2 percent) and a lower percentage of two-

to-four-person households (46.9 versus 49.2 percent). Households with five or more persons

account for 11.3 percent of HUD-assisted households and 11.7 income-eligible households

(Table 5-7).

Table 5-7: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Household Size and the Incidence of

Overcrowding, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Total

Tenants in

Al

Household Size

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Eligible

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Privately

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

One person

41.8

42.9

34.2

54.4

39.2

35.5

Two to four persons

46.9

46.5

51.0

40.0

49.2

54.5

Five or more persons

11.3

10.5

14.8

5.7

11.7

10.0

Overcrowded

4.0

5.2

4.4

2.2

6.2

4.5

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Taken individually, the programs have sharply different household size distributions. The

privately owned housing program has by far the highest percentage of one-person households;

public housing also has a high percentage of one-person households. The voucher program has

the highest percentage of large (five-or-more-person) households.

One problem that assisted housing is intended to address is overcrowded housing conditions. For

purposes of this report, an overcrowded house is defined as one in which more persons live in the

households than the units have rooms. Nationally, 4.5 percent of renter households were

overcrowded in 2011. Overcrowding was more prevalent among income-eligible renter

households, of which 6.2 percent were overcrowded.

22

HUD-assisted households experienced less overcrowding than either income-eligible households or all renter households. Among HUD-assisted households, overcrowding was highest among

households in public housing (5.2 percent).

Households With a Disabled Member

Table 5-8 shows that HUD-assisted housing serves households with one or more disabled

members at a rate (37.7 percent) substantially higher than the rate among either income-eligible

renter households or all renter households. Income-eligible renter households were more likely

than a typical renter household to contain a disabled member, 26.0 percent compared with 18.6

percent. The privately owned assisted housing programs contained the highest percentage of

households with a disabled member, 41.4 percent.

Table 5-8: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Disability Status of Members, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Total

Households by Disability  Al  HUD-  Tenants

Voucher

Tenants in  Eligible

Al

Status of Members

Assisted  in Public  Recipients

Privately

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

With a disabled member

37.7

36.0

36.4

41.4

26.0

18.6

Without a disabled member

62.3

64.0

63.6

58.6

74.0

81.4

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Housing Cost as Percent of Income

The primary objective of assisted housing is to make decent housing affordable for needy

households. The traditional measure of affordability is the ratio of monthly housing costs to

monthly household income, whereby housing costs include both rent and utility expenses. A

ratio of 0.3 is generally considered acceptable, although a ratio greater than 0.4 is considered

excessive (Eggers and Moumen, 2008).

The rent-to-income data from the 2011 AHS clearly illustrated why housing assistance is needed.

Among income-eligible renter households, 61 percent have excessive rent burdens; that is, ratios

greater than 40 percent. Excessive rent burdens affect 36 percent of HUD-assisted households, a

rate less than that for all renter households (39 percent). See Table 5-9.

Table 5-9: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Ratio of Housing Costs to Income, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Monthly Housing

Total

Tenants in

Al

Cost-to-Income

Tenants in

Voucher

Eligible

Al  HUD-

Privately

Renters

Ratio

Public

Recipients

Renters

Assisted (%)  Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Less than 20%

11

16

10

10

5

16

40% or more

36

28

43

31

61

39

Median rent burden

32

28

34

31

37

32

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Notes: The bottom row in this table is the median of the individual ratios of housing cost to income, not a ratio of medians. For the 2011 report, the medians were hand calculated from the data in Summary Table 3.

23

By the same rent-to-income measure, the HUD-assisted housing programs have made housing more affordable for their clients. Nearly 60 percent of all HUD renter households have ratios less

than or equal to 34 percent compared with 30 percent for income-eligible renters. 8

In all previous analyses of HUD-assisted housing using AHS data, Table 5-9 generated

unnecessary confusion. The AHS data on how HUD programs function appear to be at odds with

program rules. Since the early 1980s, HUD has  generally  required tenants to contribute 30

percent of their income toward rent and related expenses. No such uniformity exists in Table 5-9.

According to AHS data, a number of households in each of the HUD programs spend

considerably less than 30 percent, and a number spend considerably more than 30 percent.

The reported results should not be considered surprising. For one thing, HUD rules allow for

some variation around 30 percent. As noted previously, approximately one-quarter of households

in privately owned subsidized housing do not pay rent based on the 30 percent of income

requirement. Another important exception applies to the voucher program, in which recipient

households are allowed to rent units more expensive than the payment standard if the households

incur all the added rental costs. Finally, public housing also enables PHAs to establish minimum

rent contributions that can exceed 30 percent of income for families with very small incomes.

Second, one should never expect the AHS data collection process to correspond to the process by

which HUD agents collect information on tenant incomes and set tenant rents. The HUD-

mandated process is more formal and detailed and is focused solely on determining program

eligibility and setting tenant rent. HUD agents require households to present corroborating

information on income. The AHS collects data on income and rent within an instrument that also

gathers information on other household characteristics and unit and neighborhood characteristics.

The AHS interview may be separated by as much as a year from the income recertification

process carried out by HUD agents. Measurement errors, misreporting, and month-to-month

variation in both income and housing-related expenses affect both HUD agents and the AHS.

A recent HUD-funded study showed the rent-to-income ratio can vary significantly between

surveys for the same household and demonstrated how normal variation and measurement error

might account for a large portion of the survey-to-survey variation (Eggers and Moumen, 2010).

Table 5-10 examines how the median rent-to-income ratio varied over time among various

components of the rental housing stock. The numbers in Table 5-10 are all medians, meaning

that one-half of the renters in that category had ratios less than or equal to the reported ratio, and one-half had ratios greater than or equal to the reported ratio.

For all renter households as a group, the ratio of rent to income increased steadily from 1991 until 2011, when it declined slightly. Among income-eligible renters, more than one-half of the group

began to experience excessive rent burdens of more than 40 percent sometime between 1993 and

2003 and remained greater than one-half through 2009, the most recent year for which a median

for this group is available. 9 Throughout the six periods for which comparable data are available, the median ratios in each of the HUD programs were substantially less than the median reported

for all income-eligible renter households. Finally, consistent with the special voucher exception,

the voucher program had the highest median ratio among the HUD programs in all eight periods.

8 Derived from Table 3 in the Detailed Summary Tables section.

9 The 81-percent median rent burdens for all eligible households in 2003 seems an anomaly.

24

Table 5-10: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Ratio of Housing Costs to Income Median Monthly

AHS Survey

Housing Cost-to-

Income Ratio

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2013

All HUD-assisted

30

31

29

32

34

35

32

34

Tenants in public

housing

30

30

29

27

30

35

28

30

Voucher recipients

32

34

32

40

39

40

34

39

Tenants in privately

owned housing

30

31

28

32

31

30

31

31

Total income-

eligible renters

39

36

38

81

51

52

37

52

Al  renters

28

27

28

30

33

34

32

33

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Note: More detailed information on household characteristics can be found in Summary Table 3 in the Detailed Summary Tables section.

25

Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction

The preceding two sections show that HUD-assisted housing programs serve households that, for

the most part, have substantially lower incomes than all renter households and serve elderly

households, female-headed households, and larger households at a rate higher than their share of

either all income-eligible renter or all renter households. HUD-assisted households experience

lower rent-to-income ratios than all income-eligible households. This section examines the

quality of the housing provided in the assisted housing programs. The section presents

information from Summary Tables 4 and 5; it also reports some information found in Summary

Table 1.

Structure Type

Structure type can affect quality of life, but households differ in what they consider the most

desirable structure type. Elderly people and small renter households generally favor units in

garden or highrise apartments that are safe and low maintenance, although households with

children generally favor single-family units, either detached or attached (for example,

townhouses). See Table 6-1.

Table 6-1: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Structure Type, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Tenants in

Total

Tenants in

Al

Structure Type

Al  HUD-

Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Housing

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

Single-family

23.8

20.3

34.8

7.6

30.0

35.4

Detached

15.2

7.8

26.5

1.7

23.4

28.6

Attached

8.6

12.5

8.3

5.9

6.7

6.8

2 to 4 units

20.5

20.2

24.7

13.3

21.4

19.4

5 to 9 units

14.0

13.3

11.8

18.5

13.3

12.3

10 to 19 units

10.1

8.1

11.1

10.1

11.4

11.6

20 to 49 units

9.4

8.5

7.8

12.7

9.4

8.5

50 or more units

20.5

28.8

7.6

36.3

9.8

8.8

Manufactured/mobile

home or trailer

1.7

1.0

2.1

1.5

4.6

3.9

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

In 2011, structure type varied markedly across HUD-assisted housing programs. Large buildings

(10 or more units) dominated the privately owned subsidized program (59.2 percent) and, to a

lesser extent, public housing (45.4 percent). The voucher program, on the other hand, had a

distribution of structure types that has an even higher distribution of units in housing with four or fewer units than the distribution of units occupied by all renter households (59.5 versus 54.8

percent), reflecting the fact that vouchers can be used to access single family housing that rents

at or below the voucher payment standard.

Equipment Failures

The AHS collects detailed information about deficiencies in individual sample units. A series of

questions focuses on breakdowns in various housing systems. Although one should be careful

about drawing conclusions from small differences in 1 survey year, some interesting patterns

appear in Table 6-2.

26

Table 6-2: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Breakdowns in Housing Systems, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters  Tenants in  Total

Breakdowns in Housing  Al  HUD-  Tenants in  Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Al

Systems

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Housing

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

Equipment failures in last 3 months

Water supply stoppage

5.6

6.9

4.8

6.0

5.2

5.0

Flush toilet—none

working

4.2

4.4

4.1

4.3

4.0

3.4

Public sewage disposal

breakdowns

1.7

2.0

1.6

1.6

1.8

1.5

Electric fuse and circuit

breaker failures

8.2

7.3

10.5

5.0

8.7

9.3

Heating equipment

breakdown last winter

13.0

16.2

13.4

9.7

11.1

9.6

Water leakage

Leakage from inside

structure

12.5

14.9

12.1

11.3

11.5

11.1

Leakage from outside

structure

8.8

8.7

9.3

7.9

10.1

9.8

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

For five of the reported system breakdowns (water supply stoppage, no working flush toilets,

public sewage disposal breakdowns, heating equipment breakdowns, and leaking water from

inside unit), the incidence of problems was higher for HUD-assisted units as a group than for all

rental units. In four of the five categories (public sewage disposal breakdowns being the

exception), the incidence of problems among total eligible renters was intermediate between

assisted renters and all renters. The differences are small from a substantive perspective, but the

sample sizes are large enough for some (for example, heating equipment breakdowns) to qualify

as statistically significant.

For problems with fuses and circuit breakers, the highest incidence appears among all renters and

was smallest among renters in privately owned assisted units. For leakages from outside the

structure, the highest incidence is among voucher units and the lowest incidence among units in

privately owned assisted housing. The leakages from outside results are not surprising given the

high percentage of voucher households living in detached single-family detached structures and

the concentration of privately owned assisted units in large structures (see Table 6-1).

In most but not all categories, households in privately owned subsidized units report a lower

incidence of problems than households in other assisted programs, although households in public

housing report the highest incidence. However, voucher recipients report the highest incidence of

problems with fuses and circuit breakers. Differences in structure type probably account for

some of the variation across program types. For example, privately owned assisted housing

frequently serves elderly households in small units, although the voucher program frequently

serves larger households in single-family structures. Single-family structures are more likely to

have multiple bathrooms and therefore less likely to have no working toilets.

27

Selected Deficiencies

When we examine specific unit deficiencies, we find that HUD-assisted units as a group have

rates of occurrence that are similar to those among all eligible renters but slightly higher in

general than among all renters. For all six categories of selected deficiencies, Table 6-3 shows

the highest incidence of deficiencies in public housing, but some of the differences are

substantively small. 10 For four of the five deficiencies, the incidence among voucher recipients and households in privately owned subsidized units is less than or equal to the incidence among

all income-eligible renter households.

Table 6-3: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Selected Deficiencies, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Total

Tenants in

Tenants in

Al

Selected Deficiencies

Al  HUD-

Voucher

Eligible

Assisted

Public  Recipients  Privately  Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Signs of mice in last 12

months

12.3

14.7

11.2

12.1

10.8

10.0

Holes in floors

2.0

3.7

1.3

1.6

2.0

1.6

Open cracks or holes

(interior)

7.8

13.0

7.2

4.5

8.2

7.1

Broken plaster or peeling

paint (interior)

4.0

8.9

2.4

2.4

3.6

3.1

Exposed wiring

2.2

2.8

2.2

1.6

2.5

2.1

Rooms without electric

outlets

1.1

1.5

0.8

1.1

1.1

1.0

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Indices of Physical Problems

HUD and the Census Bureau use AHS data to construct two indices of physical problems—one

reports the incidence of severe physical problems, and one reports the incidence of moderate

10 Because of the large samples, some of the differences across programs are statistically significance, for example, the difference between public housing and privately owned assisted housing with respect to open cracks and holes.

28

physical problems. 11 Over time the structure of the indices and the variables used to construct them have changed. 12, 13

On both the index of severe physical problems and the index of moderate physical problems,

HUD-assisted housing has a slightly lower incidence of problems than units occupied by all

income-eligible households but a higher incidence than all occupied rental units. Within HUD-

assisted housing, public housing units have the highest incidence of both severe physical

problem and moderate physical problems (Table 6-4).

Table 6-4: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Indices of Physical Problems, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters  Tenants in  Total

Tenants in

Al

Physical Problems

Al  HUD-

Voucher  Privately  Eligible

Assisted

Public  Recipients  Owned  Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Housing

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

Severe physical problems

3.5

4.8

2.7

3.6

3.8

3.1

Moderate physical problems

7.3

9.2

7.1

6.1

8.2

6.7

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Because the definitions of severely inadequate and moderately inadequate have changed over time,

one cannot use the indices to see whether the adequacy of HUD-assisted housing has improved or

worsened. However, one can use the indices to assess whether HUD-assisted housing has

improved or worsened relative to other rental housing. Because a unit cannot be classified as both

severely inadequate and moderately inadequate, Table 6-5 reports the percentage of units that are

either severely inadequate or moderately inadequate for a given survey.

Prior to the change in definitions of inadequacy in 2009, the percentage of units that were either

severely inadequate or moderately inadequate was lower among HUD-assisted units as group

than among all rental units and markedly lower than the percentage among units occupied by all

income-eligible renter households. In 2009, 2011, and 2013, HUD-assisted units still have a

lower incidence of inadequacy than units occupied by income-eligible households, but their

incidence is higher than that of all occupied rental units.

11 A unit is considered  severely inadequate if any of the following criteria apply: (1) Unit does not have hot and cold running water; (2) Unit does not have a bathtub or shower; (3) Unit does not have a flush toilet; (4) Unit shares plumbing facilities; (5) Unit was cold for 24 hours or more and more than two breakdowns of the heating equipment have occurred that lasted longer than 6 hours; (6) Electricity is not used; (7) Unit has exposed wiring, not every room has working electrical plugs, and the fuses have blown more than twice; (8) Unit has five or six of the following structural conditions: (a) Unit has had outside water leaks in the past 12 months, (b) Unit has had inside water leaks in the past 12 months, (c) Unit has holes in the floor, (d) Unit has open cracks wider than a dime, (e) Unit has an area of peeling paint larger than 8 by 11 inches, (f) Rats have been seen recently in the unit. A unit is considered  moderately inadequate room if the unit has not been identified as being severely inadequate and meets one of the following conditions: (1) there have been more than two breakdowns of the toilet that lasted longer than 6

hours; (2) The main heating equipment is unvented heaters burning kerosene, gas, or oil; or (3) The unit is lacking complete kitchen facilities.

12 The definition changed with the 2009 AHS. See the AHS Codebook Interactive Tool at

https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs/tech-documentation/codebooks.html.

13 For a discussion of the index of severe physical problems and what deficiencies cause units to be classified as severely inadequate, see Eggers and Moumen (2013).

29

Table 6-5: Trends in the Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Indices of Physical Problems Severe or Moderate

AHS Survey Year

Physical Problems

1989

1991

1993

2003

2007

2009

2011

2013

All HUD-assisted

10

10

7

8.8

9.0

9.7  10.8

9.4

Tenants in public

housing

12

14

12

10.0

8.7

15.4  14.0

11.4

Voucher recipients

13

11

9

8.6

8.4

9.6

9.8

9.0

Tenants in privately

owned housing

7

6

4

8.1

10.1

5.8

9.7

8.3

Total income-eligible

renters

16

13

10

12.2

11.3

11.0  12.0

10.9

Al  renters

12

11

10

10.6

9.9

9.2

9.8

9.1

AHS = American Housing Survey. HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Notes: In previous tables using all eight surveys, we did not report percentages to one-tenth of a percentage point, because that level of precision is not available for the first three surveys. Because of the smallest of the percentages, we use tenths of a percentage point in this table for the surveys when that level of precision was available.

Previous research has shown that inadequacy is not a persistent characteristic (Eggers and

Moumen, 2013) for occupied units as a group, but no study of the persistence of inadequacy

among HUD-assisted households has been conducted.

Tenant Satisfaction

The AHS asks respondents to rate their structure and their neighborhood on a scale from 1 to 10,

on which 10 is considered the best. Households receiving HUD assistance consistently gave their

units a 10 more frequently than either all income-eligible renter households or all renter

households. Voucher recipients gave the 10 rating most frequently. The worst rating of 1 was also

more common among HUD-assisted households, but the differences in percentages are small.

Tenants in privately owned housing had the highest percentage of “worst” ratings (Table 6-6).

Table 6-6: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Tenant Ratings as Best or Worst, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters  Tenants in  Total

Tenants in

Al

Overal  Opinion

Al  HUD-

Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters

Renters

(%)

Housing

(%)

Housing

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

Structure

10 (best)

29.3

28.2

32.0

28.3

23.2

21.2

1 (worst)

1.9

1.4

1.5

2.4

1.5

1.0

Neighborhood

10 (best)

25.6

20.7

28.4

26.5

24.5

23.7

1 (worst)

5.3

9.1

5.7

3.1

2.7

1.7

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Although assisted households overall were more likely to rate their neighborhoods a 10 than

either income-eligible renters or all renters, public housing households were the least likely of all groups to do so, and 9.1 percent of public housing tenants gave their neighborhood the worst

rating.

Recent Movers

The AHS gathers additional information on households in which the respondent had moved into

the unit during the past year. In the Householder Characteristics section, we saw that

30

householders tended to remain in assisted units much longer than householders in income-eligible households or all renters. The same pattern holds when we look at recent movers. Recent

mover households occupy only 22.7 percent of HUD-assisted units compared with 33.7 percent

of all renter households (Table 6-7).

Table 6-7: Distribution of HUD-Assisted Housing by Percent of Recent Movers, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Total

Recent Mover

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Tenants in  Eligible

Al

Households

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Privately

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Respondent moved

during past year

22.7

21.8

24.1

21.0

32.4

33.7

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The AHS asks a detailed series of questions about why recent-mover respondents moved into the

units. Table 6-8 discusses some key reasons given by respondents; Summary Table 5 reports all

the reasons given.

Table 6-8: Distribution of Recent Movers Into HUD-Assisted Housing by Key Reasons Given for Move, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Total

Reasons for

Al  HUD-

Tenants in

Voucher

Tenants in  Eligible

Al

Moving

Assisted

Public

Recipients

Privately

Renters  Renters

(%)

Housing (%)

(%)

Owned

(%)

(%)

Housing (%)

Displaced

5.7

8.8

4.9

4.5

4.9

5.0

New job, closer to

job, school, or other

financial/employment

13.5

10.7

12.3

18.6

24.1

29.8

reasons

To establish own

household

13.2

12.6

9.4

21.5

14.1

12.4

Needed larger house

or apartment

13.4

11.6

16.0

9.9

10.9

11.3

Wanted better home

16.3

10.2

19.4

15.3

11.0

10.2

Change from owner

to renter

1.1

0.0

1.4

1.2

0.8

1.1

Wanted lower rent or

maintenance

9.9

10.2

8.4

12.8

9.6

8.5

Other housing-

related reasons

5.2

2.8

6.1

5.4

5.6

5.1

Other

40.0

47.4

38.9

35.5

34.4

32.2

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

“Displaced,” the first reason listed, means the recent mover was forced to leave the previous unit

by private action, government action, fire, natural disaster, or eviction. Between 4 and 9 percent

of recent movers were displaced across all the groups. Thirty percent of respondents from the all

renters group say their move resulted from a new job or transfer, a desire to be closer to an

existing job or to a school, or another financial or employment reason. Among HUD-assisted

households, respondents gave the location-related reasons at a much lower rate.

31

Reflecting the greater flexibility of tenant-based assistance, voucher respondents were the most likely to give improved housing reasons, namely “needed larger house or apartment” and

“wanted better home.”

When asked to compare their current units with previous homes, recent mover respondents in

HUD-assisted units were more likely to rate the HUD-assisted unit as better and less likely to

rate the HUD-assisted unit as worse than their previous units (Table 6-9).

Table 6-9: Distribution of Recent Movers Into HUD-Assisted Housing by Comparison of Current and

Previous Home and Neighborhood, 2011

HUD-Assisted Renters

Comparison of

Tenants in

Total

Current and

Al  HUD-  Tenants in  Voucher

Privately

Eligible

Al

Previous Home and  Assisted

Public

Recipients

Owned

Renters

Renters

Neighborhood

(%)

Housing

(%)

Housing

(%)

(%)

(%)

(%)

Current home

Better

59.9

54.4

65.2

54.1

48.5

47.3

Worse

10.8

10.2

10.2

12.4

19.5

19.7

Current neighborhood

Better

45.1

36.7

52.1

38.4

38.2

37.3

Worse

14.2

16.3

12.1

16.5

15.5

14.6

HUD = U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

When asked to compare their current neighborhoods with their previous neighborhoods, recent

mover respondents in HUD-assisted units were more likely to rate their current neighborhood as

better than their previous neighborhoods. Recent movers in public housing units were more

likely to rate their neighborhood as worse.

More detailed results on unit quality can be found in Summary Table 4 and on tenant satisfaction

in Summary Table 5.

32

Detailed Summary Tables

This section contains six tables that present detail information on eight sets of rental households.

The six tables are—

Summary Table 1: 2011 Structural Characteristics.

Summary Table 2: 2011 Householder Characteristics.

Summary Table 3: 2011 Household Characteristics.

Summary Table 4: 2011 Unit Conditions.

Summary Table 5: 2011 Tenant Opinions

Summary Table 6: Breakdown of Householder and Household Characteristics by Race,

Ethnicity, Age, and Disability Status.

The nine columns in each table contain counts by—

1.  All assisted households.

2.  Public housing tenants.

3.  Voucher recipients.

4.  Tenants in privately owned assisted housing units.

5.  Eligible (income at or below 50 percent of Area Median Income) but not subsidized

households.

6.  All income-eligible renters.

7.  Total renters.

8.  Worst case needs households.

9.  Not eligible renters.

Previous reports (1989, 1991, 1993, 2003, and 2005) contained special tabulation prepared by

the Census Bureau. The 2009, 2011, and 2013 reports do not contain these Census Bureau

tabulations.

33

Summary Table 1. 2011 Structural Characteristics

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Structural Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted, Not

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Worst Case

Renters

Housing

Housing

Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

Total households

4,168

987

2,028

1,153

6,771

19,736

38,814

8,797

19,079

Structure type

One, detached

634

77

537

20

1,696

4,614

11,099

2,284

6,485

One, attached

360

123

169

68

386

1,313

2,654

567

1,342

2 to 4

853

199

501

153

1,542

4,231

7,530

1,836

3,299

5 to 9

584

131

240

213

897

2,630

4,789

1,149

2,159

10 to 19

423

80

226

117

768

2,244

4,511

1,053

2,267

20 to 49

390

84

159

147

594

1,864

3,294

880

1,430

50 or more

856

284

154

418

411

1,928

3,425

661

1,497

Manufactured / mobile home or

trailer

69

10

42

17

477

912

1,512

366

600

Year built

1919 or earlier

209

23

153

33

644

1,608

3,141

755

1,533

1920 to 1929

150

15

117

18

410

1,067

2,014

507

946

1930 to 1939

151

33

95

23

361

1,011

2,008

499

997

1940 to 1949

265

85

140

40

454

1,373

2,451

654

1,079

1950 to 1959

406

165

187

54

602

1,741

3,357

733

1,617

1960 to 1969

565

220

233

112

886

2,555

4,917

1,104

2,362

1970 to 1974

576

182

216

178

756

2,228

3,927

896

1,701

1975 to 1979

577

100

226

251

890

2,511

4,507

1,044

1,996

1980 to 1984

383

49

107

227

406

1,307

2,470

518

1,162

1985 to 1989

201

21

118

62

432

1,230

2,714

597

1,484

1990 to 1994

131

15

65

51

239

717

1,497

347

780

1995 to 1999

177

29

105

43

289

862

1,861

396

999

2000 to 2004

187

16

133

38

218

776

1,887

371

1,111

2005 to 2009

178

30

129

19

173

700

1,917

349

1,218

2010 to 2014

16

6

4

6

10

54

147

28

92

Region

Northeast

1,154

363

470

321

1,200

4,049

7,585

1,695

3,537

New England

295

74

126

95

307

1,009

1,785

407

776

Middle Atlantic

859

289

344

226

893

3,039

5,800

1,287

2,761

Midwest

810

194

322

294

1,484

3,938

7,651

1,644

3,713

East North Central

551

132

205

214

990

2,723

5,250

1,182

2,529

West North Central

259

63

117

79

494

1,215

2,400

462

1,184

South

1,350

336

634

380

2,310

6,664

13,464

3,004

6,799

South Atlantic and East South

Central

962

255

413

294

1,522

4,513

9,027

2,029

4,514

West South Central

390

82

222

86

788

2,153

4,437

975

2,285

West

853

93

602

158

1,777

5,084

10,114

2,454

5,030

Metropolitan status

Inside metropolitan statistical

areas

3,495

832

1,704

959

5,426

16,288

32,069

7,367

15,780

In central city

2,230

666

936

628

2,815

9,046

16,609

4,001

7,564

In suburbs

1,266

166

769

331

2,611

7,244

15,460

3,367

8,216

34

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Structural Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted, Not

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Worst Case

Renters

Housing

Housing

Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

Outside metropolitan areas

672

155

323

194

1,344

3,445

6,746

1,429

3,299

Number of bedrooms

None

79

29

13

37

216

526

840

231

314

One

1,442

336

500

606

2,020

5,980

10,336

2,518

4,357

Two

1,404

331

762

311

2,850

7,866

15,458

3,612

7,592

Three

987

228

586

173

1,340

4,201

9,262

1,874

5,060

Four or more

255

63

166

26

345

1,161

2,917

561

1,755

Number of complete bathrooms

None

19

4

6

9

46

201

304

155

84

One

3,144

855

1,336

953

4,853

10,690

24,148

5,837

10,313

One and one half

411

63

216

132

594

1,377

3,834

783

2,046

Two or more

592

64

470

58

1,278

3,299

10,528

2,021

6,635

NA = data not available. – represents or rounds to 0.

35

Summary Table 2. 2011 Householder Characteristics

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Householder Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not Eligible

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Renters

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Total households

4,168

987

2,028

1,153

6,772

19,737

38,816

8,797

19,080

Race and origin of householder

White alone

2,037

427

1,005

605

4,899

13,033

27,463

6,097

14,431

White alone Hispanic

632

170

305

157

1,451

3,965

6,547

1,882

2,581

White alone Non-Hispanic

1,404

257

699

448

3,448

9,066

20,916

4,214

11,850

Black alone

1,825

495

870

460

1,250

5,067

8,033

1,992

2,965

Black alone Hispanic

67

26

31

10

45

209

369

97

160

Black alone Non-Hispanic

1,758

469

839

450

1,206

4,859

7,664

1,895

2,805

American Indian or Alaskan Native only

71

14

46

11

139

335

556

125

220

Asian only

145

27

59

59

280

824

1,907

399

1,083

Hawaiian, Pacific Islander only

8

1

7

0

32

90

170

50

79

Two or more races

82

23

42

17

170

387

688

135

301

Hispanic or Latino (any race)

740

212

177

351

1,598

4,410

7,311

2,072

2,902

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

301

75

95

131

988

2,734

4,570

1,445

1,836

25–29 years old

416

106

198

112

834

2,371

5,615

1,121

3,244

30–34 years old

437

109

267

61

784

2,157

5,351

936

3,194

35–44 years old

643

136

396

111

1,224

3,443

7,585

1,576

4,143

45–54 years old

731

175

433

123

1,100

3,223

6,420

1,392

3,197

55–64 years old

600

153

295

152

781

2,374

4,467

993

2,094

65–74 years old

478

102

175

201

500

1,596

2,365

618

770

75 years old and older

565

131

170

264

561

1,842

2,443

716

603

Educational attainment of the

householder

Less than 9th grade

473

122

192

159

555

1,781

2,240

753

459

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

993

286

441

266

1,161

3,628

4,813

1,474

1,186

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

1,464

315

725

424

2,395

6,632

11,756

2,773

5,126

Additional vocational training

191

35

100

56

201

723

1,321

331

598

Some college, no degree

751

177

384

190

1,379

4,126

7,981

1,996

3,856

Associate's degree

235

43

143

49

435

1,223

3,037

553

1,814

Bachelor's degree

187

31

108

48

622

1,743

6,201

934

4,458

Graduate or professional degree

67

14

35

18

224

605

2,789

314

2,182

High school graduate or higher

2,704

580

1,395

729

5,055

14,329

31,764

6,570

17,436

Bachelor's degree or higher

255

45

143

67

846

2,349

8,989

1,248

6,640

Citizenship of householder

Citizen of the United States

3,904

929

1,896

1,079

5,655

16,951

34,090

7,392

17,139

Naturalized Citizen of the United States

354

74

154

126

486

1,483

2,770

643

1,288

Not a citizen of the United States

264

58

132

74

1,116

2,785

4,725

1,405

1,940

Year householder moved into unit

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

2

2

2

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

4

0

4

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

12

16

26

4

11

1950 to 1959

4

4

NA

NA

35

51

67

12

16

1960 to 1969

12

8

3

1

51

84

139

21

55

36

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Householder Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not Eligible

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Renters

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

1970 to 1974

15

7

6

2

47

101

141

39

40

1975 to 1979

36

10

19

7

45

132

229

51

97

1980 to 1984

46

12

17

17

63

169

295

60

126

1985 to 1989

55

14

20

21

74

242

434

113

191

1990 to 1994

190

62

68

60

199

552

879

163

326

1995 to 1999

234

75

72

87

315

901

1,521

352

619

2000 to 2004

573

139

272

162

674

1,938

3,405

691

1,467

2005 to 2009

1,693

343

885

465

2,279

6,740

13,450

2,768

6,710

2010 to 2011

1,310

312

666

332

2,975

8,809

18,225

4,524

9,416

NA = data not available. – represents or rounds to 0.

37

Summary Table 3. 2011 Household Characteristics

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Household Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

Total households

4,168

987

2,028

1,153

19,737

38,816

6,772

8,797

19,080

Number of persons in household

One person

1,743

423

693

627

7,729

13,769

2,506

3,480

6,041

Two persons

858

189

417

252

4,462

10,524

1,621

1,983

6,061

Three persons

636

151

357

128

2,958

5,974

985

1,337

3,016

Four persons

461

119

261

81

2,287

4,669

882

944

2,382

Five persons

274

57

179

38

1,404

2,403

520

610

999

Six persons

114

22

73

19

542

905

145

283

363

Seven persons or more

82

25

48

9

357

572

114

161

217

Number of persons per room

0.50 or fewer

2,582

594

1,169

819

11,720

23,980

3,834

5,304

12,260

0.51 to 1.00

1,422

343

770

309

6,786

13,097

2,460

2,904

6,311

1.01 to 1.50

156

48

86

22

996

1,429

372

468

433

1.51 or more

9

3

3

3

236

311

106

121

76

Number of children under 18

years

None

2,331

551

1,007

773

11,915

25,017

4,117

5,467

13,103

One

662

165

319

178

2,986

5,801

1,077

1,247

2,815

Two

574

122

337

115

2,588

4,696

918

1,096

2,108

Three

362

90

217

55

1,448

2,200

476

610

753

Four

155

39

90

26

562

761

136

271

199

Five

65

12

5

48

65

256

0

0

0

Six or more

21

8

11

2

63

86

14

28

24

Household composition

Two-or-more-person households

2,426

564

1,335

527

12,009

25,047

4,266

5,317

13,038

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

264

66

83

115

1,898

3,327

702

932

1,429

25–29 years old

371

87

188

96

1,810

4,028

631

808

2,217

30–34 years old

398

97

249

52

1,708

4,066

592

718

2,358

35–44 years old

536

115

336

85

2,704

5,776

953

1,215

3,072

45–54 years old

443

94

278

71

1,969

4,129

668

858

2,161

55–64 years old

208

46

118

44

998

2,132

361

429

1,132

65–74 years old

119

32

53

34

525

950

209

197

426

75 years old and older

88

27

31

30

397

639

150

159

243

Married couple families, no

nonrelatives

458

105

229

124

3,974

10,345

1,758

1,758

6,371

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

50

15

24

11

394

689

195

149

320

25–29 years old

50

15

24

11

522

1,418

246

226

896

30–34 years old

53

10

38

5

574

1,837

268

253

1,264

35–44 years old

86

18

48

20

973

2,718

404

483

1,747

45–54 years old

84

19

49

16

672

1,804

290

298

1,132

55–64 years old

52

11

22

19

388

994

164

172

606

65–74 years old

62

16

25

21

265

515

102

101

250

75 years old and older

48

11

18

19

213

369

89

76

156

38

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Household Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

Other female householder

1,757

415

996

346

6,065

9,527

1,676

2,632

3,463

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

194

54

55

85

963

1,512

288

481

550

25–29 years old

296

65

154

77

979

1,542

261

422

563

30–34 years old

309

80

188

41

925

1,462

230

386

538

35–44 years old

413

88

271

54

1,383

2,113

379

591

730

45–54 years old

325

66

212

47

1,018

1,617

269

424

600

55–64 years old

137

32

84

21

453

749

122

194

295

65–74 years old

49

14

23

12

195

309

68

78

114

75 years old and older

35

16

10

9

150

223

57

58

73

Other male householder

211

44

110

57

1,970

5,174

832

927

3,204

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

47

5

24

18

567

1,126

218

302

559

25–29 years old

25

8

9

8

309

1,067

124

160

758

30–34 years old

37

7

24

6

211

767

94

80

556

35–44 years old

38

9

18

11

351

944

171

142

595

45–54 years old

34

9

17

8

280

709

109

137

429

55–64 years old

19

3

12

4

156

389

74

63

231

65–74 years old

7

2

4

1

63

126

38

18

62

75 years old and older

3

0

2

1

32

47

4

25

14

One-person households

1,743

423

693

627

7,729

13,769

2,506

3,480

6,041

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

38

10

12

16

837

1,243

286

513

407

25–29 years old

46

19

11

16

562

1,587

203

313

1,027

30–34 years old

39

12

18

9

449

1,284

192

218

836

35–44 years old

107

21

60

26

739

1,809

271

361

1,071

45–54 years old

289

81

155

53

1,255

2,291

432

534

1,036

55–64 years old

390

107

176

107

1,373

2,336

419

564

962

65–74 years old

359

70

122

167

1,071

1,414

292

420

344

75 years old and older

477

104

139

234

1,445

1,804

411

557

360

Male householder 1-person

566

156

225

185

3,338

6,868

1,286

1,486

3,531

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

12

1

7

4

386

604

145

229

217

25–29 years old

14

5

4

5

286

879

99

173

593

30–34 years old

13

3

8

2

259

803

121

125

544

35–44 years old

53

10

30

13

436

1,119

179

204

684

45–54 years old

122

33

67

22

670

1,317

280

268

647

55–64 years old

133

43

49

41

593

1,130

210

250

537

65–74 years old

95

17

27

51

372

553

134

143

181

75 years old and older

124

44

32

48

335

465

118

93

129

Female householder 1-person

1,176

267

468

441

4,390

6,901

1,220

1,994

2,510

Age of householder

Under 25 years old

25

9

4

12

449

640

141

283

190

25–29 years old

32

14

7

11

275

709

103

140

434

30–34 years old

26

9

10

7

191

482

72

93

292

35–44 years old

53

11

30

12

302

690

92

157

388

39

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Household Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

45–54 years old

167

48

88

31

586

974

153

266

389

55–64 years old

257

64

127

66

780

1,205

209

314

424

65–74 years old

263

52

95

116

697

861

157

277

163

75 years old and older

352

60

106

186

1,108

1,340

293

463

231

Households with children

1,838

436

1,021

381

7,822

13,799

2,654

3,330

5,977

Children in household with one adult

1,094

265

591

238

3,150

4,259

803

1,253

1,108

With relatives not spouse or children

417

100

241

76

2,021

3,713

768

836

1,693

With nonrelatives

211

32

136

43

2,588

6,653

1,012

1,365

4,066

Disability status

With a disabled member

1,570

355

738

477

5,131

7,237

1,455

2,106

2,102

Without a disabled member

2,597

631

1,290

676

14,601

31,578

5,315

6,689

16,979

Median monthly household

income

NA

$10,264

$11,910

$9,600

NA  $27,982

$19,982

$11,964

$51,956

Income sources of families and

primary individuals

Wages and salaries

1,644

385

915

344

11,018

28,166

4,281

5,093

17,149

Self-employment

140

21

80

39

1,194

3,186

360

694

1,992

Interest

73

14

28

31

838

2,945

286

479

2,106

Dividends

12

3

5

4

204

966

55

137

762

Rental income

21

5

10

6

169

648

43

105

479

Social Security or Railroad

Retirement

1,204

269

465

470

4,292

6,149

1,362

1,726

1,857

Retirement or survivor pensions

235

53

84

98

1,056

2,331

400

421

1,275

Supplementary Security Income

(SSI)

1,020

242

509

269

2,418

2,797

530

868

379

Child support or alimony

415

86

239

90

1,348

2,227

342

591

880

Public assistance or public welfare

543

133

307

103

1,579

1,775

332

704

196

Food stamp benefits

2,198

529

1,068

601

6,452

6,736

1,454

2,800

284

Food Stamps

Did not receive Food Stamps

1,233

287

537

409

9,673

11,697

3,518

4,922

2,023

Household members received Food

Stamps

2,198

529

1,068

601

6,452

6,736

1,454

2,800

284

Not reported

736

170

423

143

3,611

20,383

1,800

1,075

16,772

Median monthly housing cost

(excludes no cash rent)

NA

$302

$562

$291

NA

$842

$657

$857

$999

Monthly cost as a percentage of

current income

Less than 5%

20

9

5

6

40

199

18

2

159

5 to 9%

90

50

29

11

153

897

59

4

743

10 to 14%

139

48

55

36

228

2,081

87

2

1,852

15 to 19%

214

55

102

57

343

2,992

120

9

2,650

20 to 24%

289

86

126

77

551

3,689

247

15

3,138

25 to 29%

615

184

210

221

1,168

3,988

507

46

2,820

30 to 34%

505

125

223

157

1,339

3,250

799

35

1,911

35 to 39%

338

56

178

104

1,387

2,676

1,005

44

1,289

40 to 49%

394

68

224

102

2,299

3,732

1,853

52

1,433

40

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Household Characteristics

All

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

50 to 59%

172

37

92

43

1,968

2,630

247

1,549

662

60 to 69%

150

30

94

26

1,353

1,674

58

1,145

323

70 to 99%

216

29

129

58

2,288

2,645

88

1,984

357

100% or more

584

117

334

133

4,192

4,638

137

3,471

446

Zero or negative income

178

46

78

54

1,064

1,454

667

219

390

No Cash Rent

267

48

150

69

1,366

2,271

878

221

905

NA = data not available. – represents or rounds to 0.

41

Summary Table 4. 2011 Unit Conditions

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Unit Conditions

All

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Public

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Housing

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Case Renters  Renters

Households

Renters

Total households

4,168

987

2,028

1,153

6,772

19,737

38,816

8,797

19,080

Severe physical problems

144

47

55

42

0

753

1,207

609

454

Plumbing

90

23

32

35

0

461

797

371

336

Heating

51

19

23

9

0

259

365

208

105

Electric

0

0

0

0

0

9

16

9

7

Upkeep

8

6

2

0

0

42

57

34

14

Moderate physical problems

305

91

144

70

653

1,611

2,601

653

989

Plumbing

20

2

15

3

26

79

138

33

59

Heating

18

4

10

4

152

265

424

95

159

Upkeep

97

37

43

17

167

458

700

194

243

Kitchen

188

54

85

49

332

876

1,438

356

561

Selected deficiencies

Signs of rats in last 12 months

49

16

26

7

111

335

510

175

175

Signs of mice in last 12 months

512

145

227

140

773

2,131

3,867

846

1,735

Signs of rodents, not sure which kind, in last 12

months

19

4

11

4

57

187

328

111

142

Holes in floor

82

37

27

18

94

398

608

222

209

Cracks in walls or ceiling

327

128

147

52

530

1,621

2,769

764

1,148

Broken plaster or peeling paint

165

88

49

28

246

709

1,214

298

505

No electrical wiring

8

2

3

3

11

58

80

39

21

Exposed wiring

90

28

44

18

163

484

822

231

338

Rooms without electric outlets

45

15

17

13

76

221

378

100

157

Equipment failures in last 3 months

Water supply stoppage

235

68

98

69

359

1,034

1,958

440

924

Flush toilet—none working

177

43

84

50

245

790

1,308

368

517

Public sewage disposal breakdowns

71

20

33

18

114

352

587

167

234

Electric and circuit breaker failures

342

72

212

58

598

1,721

3,599

781

1,879

Heating equipment breakdown last winter

543

160

271

112

608

2,188

3,723

1,037

1,534

Leakage from outside the structure

365

86

188

91

676

1,984

3,785

943

1,801

Leakage from inside the structure

523

147

246

130

702

2,264

4,301

1,039

2,038

NA = data not available. – represents or rounds to 0.

42

Summary Table 5. 2011 Tenant Opinions

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Tenant Opinions

All

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Public

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Housing

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

Total households

4,168

987

2,028

1,153

6,772

19,737

38,816

8,797

19,080

Overal  opinion of structure

1 (Worst)

79

14

48

17

81

288

398

128

109

2

45

15

17

13

45

190

256

100

66

3

69

21

24

24

102

299

467

128

168

4

90

30

38

22

160

403

666

153

263

5

349

96

161

92

574

1,676

2,805

753

1,130

6

273

67

139

67

571

1,502

2,883

658

1,380

7

564

130

292

142

1,080

3,066

6,611

1,422

3,544

8

876

189

435

252

1,748

4,885

10,411

2,261

5,526

9

480

112

235

133

745

2,164

4,748

939

2,584

10 (Best)

1,220

278

573

369

1,418

4,574

8,220

1,936

3,646

Not Reported

120

33

65

22

247

687

1,352

320

664

Overal  opinion of

neighborhood

1 (Worst)

219

90

63

66

144

529

663

166

135

2

95

21

49

25

87

322

482

140

160

3

106

35

40

31

129

435

695

200

260

4

155

47

67

41

200

659

1,053

304

394

5

441

123

205

113

634

1,795

3,033

720

1,238

6

271

72

120

79

516

1,354

2,671

567

1,317

7

484

121

250

113

916

2,635

5,526

1,235

2,891

8

775

155

399

221

1,543

4,231

9,107

1,913

4,874

9

405

78

224

103

737

2,168

4,936

1,026

2,767

10 (Best)

1,069

204

538

327

1,595

4,836

9,189

2,172

4,354

No Neighborhood

9

1

5

3

11

35

50

15

15

Not Reported

138

40

68

30

261

738

1,411

339

673

Recent mover from inside U.S.

946

215

489

242

2,144

6,389

13,073

3,299

6,684

Reason for leaving previous

unit

Private Displacement

9

1

3

5

66

147

337

72

190

Owner taking over unit

3

0

0

3

14

37

106

20

68

Unit was going condo/co-op

0

0

0

0

0

2

6

2

4

Unit closed for repairs

0

0

0

0

4

5

19

1

13

Other

5

1

2

2

47

101

203

49

102

Not Reported

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

0

3

Government Displacement

26

7

17

2

13

62

105

23

43

Government using land/unit

3

2

1

0

4

9

14

2

6

Unit was condemned

11

0

9

2

0

18

19

7

2

Other

14

6

7

1

9

37

72

14

35

Not Reported

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Financial/employment related

Foreclosure reasons

16

3

12

1

31

129

246

82

117

New job or job transfer

18

2

8

8

128

365

1,449

219

1,083

43

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Tenant Opinions

All

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Public

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Housing

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

To be closer to

work/school/other

57

12

35

10

292

881

1,907

532

1,026

Other financial/employment

reasons

53

9

17

27

91

293

534

149

241

Family/person related

Marital status change

34

17

8

9

136

326

722

156

397

Other family/personal reasons

120

27

71

22

189

636

1,128

327

493

Housing related

Establish own household

125

27

46

52

336

900

1,619

439

720

Needed larger unit

127

25

78

24

242

694

1,483

325

789

To obtain higher quality unit

154

22

95

37

200

701

1,332

347

632

To change tenure

10

0

7

3

14

53

145

29

92

Less expensive

rent/maintenance

94

22

41

31

210

611

1,107

307

495

Other housing related reasons

49

6

30

13

113

358

667

196

308

Eviction

6

2

0

4

29

76

114

41

38

Disaster loss

13

9

4

0

9

31

92

9

60

Some other reason

202

49

102

51

340

1,038

1,966

496

928

Not Reported

22

9

9

4

92

198

397

84

200

Choice of present home

Financial reasons

339

98

130

111

920

2,473

4,795

1,214

2,322

Room layout/design

228

47

133

48

417

1,507

3,302

862

1,796

Kitchen

43

4

33

6

97

316

694

176

378

Size

208

39

120

49

382

1,341

2,983

751

1,643

Exterior appearance

102

12

58

32

156

611

1,415

353

803

Yard/trees/view

63

4

34

25

149

450

1,167

238

717

Quality of Construction

80

8

50

22

122

444

963

242

518

Only one available

76

22

36

18

128

419

716

215

296

Other

202

46

105

51

493

1,447

3,046

752

1,599

Not Reported

36

11

20

5

81

221

464

104

244

Main reason for choice of

present home

Al  reasons equal

123

26

60

37

229

792

1,780

440

989

Financial reasons

258

74

92

92

735

1,875

3,498

882

1,623

Room layout/design

98

25

57

16

203

733

1,525

432

792

Kitchen

5

0

5

0

14

33

88

14

53

Size

118

22

71

25

198

706

1,515

390

810

Exterior appearance

19

4

10

5

42

144

348

83

203

Yard/trees/view

15

3

9

3

49

122

322

58

200

Quality of construction

29

1

28

0

54

161

325

78

164

Only one available

61

10

34

17

109

354

592

184

238

Other

176

39

97

40

419

1,205

2,525

610

1,320

Not reported

2

NA

2

NA

NA

2

3

NA

0

Not applicable

42

11

24

7

92

261

552

127

291

Recent mover comparison to

previous home

44

Tenants in

Eligible

2011 Tenant Opinions

All

Tenants in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

All

Worst Case

Not

(000s)

Assisted

Public

Eligible

Needs

Eligible

Renters

Housing

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Renters

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Renters

Better

567

117

319

131

969

3,098

6,178

1,562

3,080

Worse

102

22

50

30

464

1,248

2,574

682

1,325

About the same

252

68

109

75

637

1,832

3,863

943

2,031

Not reported

22

8

10

4

73

200

442

105

241

Not applicable

2

0

NA

2

1

10

16

7

7

Choice of present

neighborhood

Convenient to job

95

23

56

16

425

1,042

2,890

522

1,848

Convenient to friends or relatives

156

30

71

55

378

1,095

2,027

561

932

Convenient to leisure activity

25

8

7

10

129

319

865

165

547

Convenient to public

transportation

51

17

15

19

103

362

675

208

313

Good schools

103

6

82

15

222

653

1,234

328

581

Other public services

69

25

24

20

89

267

472

109

206

Looks/design of neighborhood

116

19

58

39

217

699

1,619

366

920

House was most important

consideration

109

18

60

31

200

610

1,284

301

674

Other reasons

184

52

80

52

374

1,185

2,209

627

1,025

Not reported

301

86

158

57

665

1,993

3,986

1,027

1,992

Main reason for choice of

neighborhood

Al  reasons equal

72

24

28

20

132

424

941

220

516

Convenient to job

56

14

31

11

301

709

1,991

352

1,281

Convenient to friends or relatives

96

14

45

37

225

675

1,189

354

513

Convenient to leisure activities

3

NA

2

1

33

84

207

48

123

Convenient to public

transportation

14

2

4

8

37

116

176

65

59

Good schools

70

2

61

7

135

425

771

220

345

Other public services

32

11

13

8

29

104

145

43

41

Looks/design of neighborhood

61

5

33

23

115

375

839

199

465

House was an important

consideration

73

12

41

20

136

433

925

224

491

Other

164

45

71

48

334

1,038

1,888

540

850

Not applicable

303

86

158

59

665

2,002

4,002

1,034

1,999

Not reported

0

NA

NA

NA

0

0

0

NA

NA

Recent mover comparison to

previous neighborhood

Better

427

79

255

93

788

2,438

4,876

1,223

2,437

Worse

134

35

59

40

318

990

1,909

538

918

About the same

301

80

140

81

842

2,380

5,111

1,237

2,733

Same neighborhood

58

12

24

22

116

356

691

182

334

Not reported

24

9

11

4

80

216

470

112

254

Not applicable

2

0

NA

2

1

10

16

7

7

NA = data not available. – represents or rounds to 0.

45

Summary Table 6. Breakdown of Householder and Household Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity, Age, and Disability Status 2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Total Households

4,168

987

2,028

1,153

6,772

19,737

38,816

8,797

19,080

Educational attainment of

householder

Race and origin of householder

All

Less than 9th grade

473

122

192

159

555

1,781

2,240

753

459

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

993

286

441

266

1,161

3,628

4,813

1,474

1,186

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

1,464

315

725

424

2,395

6,632

11,756

2,773

5,126

Additional vocational training

191

35

100

56

201

723

1,321

331

598

Some college, no degree

751

177

384

190

1,379

4,126

7,981

1,996

3,856

Associate's degree

235

43

143

49

435

1,223

3,037

553

1,814

Bachelor's degree

187

31

108

48

622

1,743

6,201

934

4,458

Graduate or professional degree

67

14

35

18

224

605

2,789

314

2,182

High school graduate or higher

2,704

580

1,395

729

5,055

14,329

31,764

6,570

17,436

Bachelor's degree or higher

255

45

143

67

846

2,349

8,989

1,248

6,640

White alone

Less than 9th grade

315

78

137

100

458

1,356

1,730

583

375

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

459

125

216

118

845

2,294

3,228

990

934

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

689

117

359

213

1,727

4,317

8,273

1,901

3,955

Additional vocational training

92

9

55

28

155

484

957

237

473

Some college, no degree

344

72

174

98

985

2,705

5,594

1,376

2,888

Associate's degree

89

9

51

29

295

754

2,142

370

1,388

Bachelor's degree

96

15

47

34

443

1,202

4,567

663

3,365

Graduate or professional degree

44

11

20

13

145

402

1,929

213

1,527

High school graduate or higher

1,262

224

651

387

3,595

9,380

22,505

4,523

13,123

Bachelor's degree or higher

140

26

67

47

588

1,604

6,496

876

4,892

White alone Hispanic

Less than 9th grade

190

54

82

54

335

918

1,183

393

265

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

167

55

80

32

347

966

1,354

452

388

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

161

31

93

37

439

1,181

1,970

581

789

Additional vocational training

17

1

9

7

21

98

171

60

73

Some college, no degree

77

21

37

19

195

533

987

261

454

Associate's degree

16

4

8

4

56

154

396

82

243

Bachelor's degree

20

4

6

10

64

170

479

86

310

Graduate or professional degree

3

3

NA

0

15

46

178

28

132

High school graduate or higher

277

63

144

70

769

2,084

4,010

1,038

1,928

Bachelor's degree or higher

22

6

6

10

79

215

657

114

442

White alone Non-Hispanic

Less than 9th grade

125

24

55

46

123

438

548

190

110

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

292

70

136

86

498

1,328

1,874

538

546

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

527

85

266

176

1,290

3,138

6,303

1,321

3,166

46

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Additional vocational training

74

7

46

21

135

387

786

178

400

Some college, no degree

268

51

138

79

790

2,173

4,607

1,115

2,434

Associate's degree

74

5

44

25

238

601

1,746

289

1,145

Bachelor's degree

76

11

41

24

379

1,031

4,088

576

3,056

Graduate or professional degree

42

9

20

13

130

357

1,751

185

1,394

High school graduate or higher

987

161

509

317

2,827

7,300

18,495

3,486

11,195

Bachelor's degree or higher

119

20

62

37

509

1,389

5,839

761

4,450

Black alone

Less than 9th grade

105

30

35

40

42

256

309

109

54

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

479

147

205

127

237

1,122

1,312

406

191

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

678

174

321

183

467

1,834

2,681

689

849

Additional vocational training

85

20

43

22

31

195

287

79

93

Some college, no degree

361

100

178

83

267

1,098

1,796

470

698

Associate's degree

126

31

79

16

97

362

693

139

330

Bachelor's degree

58

11

38

9

98

299

877

143

577

Graduate or professional degree

20

3

15

2

42

99

364

37

266

High school graduate or higher

1,243

319

631

293

971

3,692

6,411

1,478

2,720

Bachelor's degree or higher

78

14

53

11

141

399

1,241

180

843

Black alone Hispanic

Less than 9th grade

2

1

0

1

5

18

36

11

19

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

15

9

5

1

5

47

61

27

13

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

28

11

13

4

10

55

87

17

29

Additional vocational training

2

0

2

0

0

6

15

4

7

Some college, no degree

14

3

10

1

14

46

89

18

43

Associate's degree

5

2

1

2

3

19

40

11

19

Bachelor's degree

0

NA

NA

0

8

20

49

12

28

Graduate or professional degree

0

0

NA

0

NA

0

8

0

7

High school graduate or higher

47

16

24

7

35

140

273

58

126

Bachelor's degree or higher

1

0

NA

1

8

21

57

12

36

Black alone Non-Hispanic

Less than 9th grade

103

29

35

39

37

238

273

98

35

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

464

138

200

126

232

1,075

1,252

379

177

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

648

162

306

180

457

1,776

2,595

671

820

Additional vocational training

82

20

40

22

31

188

273

75

86

Some college, no degree

347

97

168

82

254

1,053

1,707

452

655

Associate's degree

120

29

78

13

94

342

653

128

311

Bachelor's degree

58

11

38

9

90

279

828

131

549

Graduate or professional degree

20

3

15

2

42

99

357

37

258

High school graduate or higher

1,193

302

605

286

937

3,549

6,140

1,419

2,593

Bachelor's degree or higher

78

14

53

11

132

378

1,185

168

808

American Indian or Alaskan Native

only

Less than 9th grade

3

2

NA

1

8

24

34

13

10

47

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

23

7

9

7

33

80

103

24

23

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

18

3

12

3

55

101

188

28

88

Additional vocational training

4

2

2

NA

1

10

12

5

2

Some college, no degree

10

0

9

1

23

66

116

33

50

Associate's degree

12

2

10

0

16

46

63

18

17

Bachelor's degree

5

0

5

0

4

17

37

8

20

Graduate or professional degree

0

NA

NA

NA

1

1

14

0

13

High school graduate or higher

45

5

36

4

99

231

418

87

188

Bachelor's degree or higher

5

0

5

0

5

18

51

8

32

Asian only

Less than 9th grade

37

6

15

16

20

92

105

35

14

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

18

4

5

9

22

75

101

35

26

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

45

11

17

17

76

219

354

98

135

Additional vocational training

4

2

0

2

6

16

34

6

18

Some college, no degree

14

1

8

5

50

117

238

53

120

Associate's degree

3

0

0

3

21

39

81

15

41

Bachelor's degree

23

5

13

5

58

183

602

102

419

Graduate or professional degree

4

NA

1

3

34

98

426

60

328

High school graduate or higher

90

17

39

34

239

659

1,701

330

1,042

Bachelor's degree or higher

27

5

14

8

92

281

1,028

162

747

Hawaiian, Pacific Islander only

Less than 9th grade

0

0

0

NA

7

9

9

2

0

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

1

NA

1

NA

6

12

16

5

5

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

5

1

4

0

8

30

58

17

28

Additional vocational training

0

NA

0

NA

2

2

4

0

2

Some college, no degree

2

0

2

0

9

27

50

16

22

Associate's degree

0

NA

NA

NA

1

2

9

1

6

Bachelor's degree

0

NA

0

NA

1

8

19

7

11

Graduate or professional degree

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

1

8

1

7

High school graduate or higher

6

1

5

0

20

69

145

43

75

Bachelor's degree or higher

0

NA

0

NA

1

9

27

8

18

Two or more races

Less than 9th grade

15

6

6

3

21

47

52

11

5

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

13

3

5

5

18

46

53

15

7

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

29

10

12

7

63

131

202

39

72

Additional vocational training

6

2

0

4

7

16

27

3

11

Some college, no degree

19

4

13

2

44

110

187

47

78

Associate's degree

3

0

2

1

6

17

48

8

31

Bachelor's degree

5

1

4

0

16

33

99

12

66

Graduate or professional degree

0

NA

NA

NA

3

6

47

3

41

High school graduate or higher

55

14

31

10

131

294

582

108

288

Bachelor's degree or higher

5

1

0

4

19

39

146

15

107

48

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Hispanic

Less than 9th grade

200

62

56

82

357

980

1,276

423

296

9th to 12th grade, no diploma

190

65

37

88

371

1,061

1,475

500

414

High school graduate (includes

equivalency)

207

48

44

115

492

1,324

2,197

625

874

Additional vocational training

25

6

7

12

23

115

197

67

82

Some college, no degree

92

24

21

47

218

607

1,141

297

533

Associate's degree

25

6

7

12

62

181

457

94

275

Bachelor's degree

22

4

11

7

81

208

571

105

363

Graduate or professional degree

4

3

1

NA

16

48

195

28

147

High school graduate or higher

350

84

84

182

870

2,369

4,561

1,149

2,192

Bachelor's degree or higher

25

6

12

7

97

255

766

133

510

Year householder moved into unit

Race and origin of householder

White alone

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

2

2

2

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

2

0

2

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

12

14

25

2

11

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

35

44

57

9

13

1960 to 1969

0

0

NA

0

41

57

102

16

45

1970 to 1974

9

2

6

1

38

78

105

31

27

1975 to 1979

19

5

11

3

40

88

170

29

82

1980 to 1984

19

1

7

11

48

101

194

34

92

1985 to 1989

35

8

17

10

53

165

293

77

128

1990 to 1994

90

26

26

38

157

339

587

92

247

1995 to 1999

133

41

46

46

226

612

1,097

253

486

2000 to 2004

317

60

154

103

471

1,270

2,384

482

1,113

2005 to 2009

775

140

416

219

1,607

4,301

9,303

1,919

5,001

2010 to 2011

639

145

321

173

2,167

5,958

13,143

3,152

7,185

White alone Hispanic

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

0

0

3

0

2

1960 to 1969

0

NA

NA

0

2

7

13

5

5

1970 to 1974

3

2

NA

1

8

21

26

10

5

1975 to 1979

10

5

3

2

5

33

44

18

11

1980 to 1984

12

0

5

7

8

30

43

10

12

1985 to 1989

15

6

4

5

16

48

70

17

22

1990 to 1994

30

15

5

10

31

81

116

20

35

1995 to 1999

42

17

16

9

57

189

264

90

74

2000 to 2004

76

19

35

22

121

347

560

150

213

2005 to 2009

255

58

133

64

560

1,456

2,440

641

985

2010 to 2011

188

49

103

36

642

1,752

2,969

922

1,217

White alone Non-Hispanic

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

2

2

2

NA

NA

49

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

2

0

2

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

12

14

25

2

11

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

35

44

54

9

11

1960 to 1969

0

0

NA

NA

39

50

89

11

39

1970 to 1974

6

NA

6

0

30

57

79

21

23

1975 to 1979

8

0

8

0

35

54

126

11

71

1980 to 1984

7

1

2

4

40

71

151

24

80

1985 to 1989

20

2

13

5

37

117

223

60

106

1990 to 1994

60

11

21

28

127

259

471

72

212

1995 to 1999

90

24

30

36

169

422

834

163

412

2000 to 2004

241

40

119

82

351

924

1,824

332

900

2005 to 2009

522

83

283

156

1,047

2,847

6,863

1,278

4,016

2010 to 2011

451

96

218

137

1,525

4,206

10,174

2,230

5,968

Black alone

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

2

NA

2

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

0

1

1

1

0

1950 to 1959

4

4

NA

NA

0

7

9

3

3

1960 to 1969

9

6

3

0

8

22

32

5

11

1970 to 1974

6

5

NA

1

9

23

29

8

7

1975 to 1979

15

5

6

4

5

38

48

18

10

1980 to 1984

21

10

5

6

12

58

83

25

26

1985 to 1989

19

6

3

10

12

53

89

22

36

1990 to 1994

84

30

37

17

20

159

214

55

54

1995 to 1999

83

30

21

32

58

218

302

77

85

2000 to 2004

196

63

93

40

115

473

697

162

224

2005 to 2009

797

180

409

208

473

1,893

3,051

623

1,158

2010 to 2011

592

156

293

143

539

2,126

3,473

995

1,348

Black alone Hispanic

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1960 to 1969

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1970 to 1974

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

3

3

3

NA

1975 to 1979

4

NA

4

NA

NA

4

4

NA

NA

1980 to 1984

0

NA

NA

NA

5

7

9

2

2

1985 to 1989

0

NA

NA

NA

0

2

5

2

2

1990 to 1994

4

4

NA

0

0

4

10

0

5

1995 to 1999

1

0

NA

1

1

12

18

10

5

2000 to 2004

4

2

1

1

3

16

21

9

5

2005 to 2009

32

10

15

7

18

74

138

24

63

2010 to 2011

22

9

11

2

17

85

162

46

77

Black alone Non-Hispanic

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

2

NA

2

50

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

0

1

1

1

0

1950 to 1959

4

4

NA

NA

0

7

9

3

3

1960 to 1969

9

6

3

0

8

22

32

5

11

1970 to 1974

6

5

NA

1

9

20

26

5

7

1975 to 1979

11

5

2

4

5

34

44

18

10

1980 to 1984

21

10

5

6

8

52

74

23

23

1985 to 1989

19

6

3

10

11

49

85

19

34

1990 to 1994

80

26

37

17

20

155

204

55

49

1995 to 1999

82

30

21

31

56

204

285

66

80

2000 to 2004

192

60

92

40

113

457

676

152

219

2005 to 2009

765

170

394

201

455

1,819

2,914

599

1,095

2010 to 2011

570

147

282

141

521

2,040

3,311

949

1,271

American Indian or Alaskan Native

only

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1960 to 1969

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

0

0

NA

1970 to 1974

0

NA

NA

NA

0

0

3

NA

3

1975 to 1979

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1980 to 1984

2

0

2

0

0

2

6

NA

4

1985 to 1989

0

NA

NA

NA

4

10

16

6

6

1990 to 1994

0

0

NA

NA

11

16

18

5

2

1995 to 1999

3

2

1

0

7

11

24

1

13

2000 to 2004

13

8

5

0

27

47

67

7

20

2005 to 2009

30

3

20

7

36

99

167

33

68

2010 to 2011

22

1

17

4

56

151

255

73

105

Asian only

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

0

0

0

NA

NA

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

1

NA

1

1960 to 1969

2

2

NA

NA

2

4

4

NA

NA

1970 to 1974

0

NA

NA

NA

0

0

3

NA

3

1975 to 1979

0

NA

NA

0

NA

4

6

4

2

1980 to 1984

0

NA

0

0

0

0

3

0

2

1985 to 1989

1

0

NA

1

5

12

33

6

20

1990 to 1994

11

2

4

5

4

26

40

11

14

1995 to 1999

14

2

3

9

16

46

62

16

16

2000 to 2004

31

7

11

13

37

91

155

23

64

2005 to 2009

50

9

17

24

80

250

622

120

370

2010 to 2011

34

4

23

7

136

389

978

219

590

Hawaiian, Pacific Islander only

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

51

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1960 to 1969

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1970 to 1974

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1975 to 1979

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

2

NA

2

1980 to 1984

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1985 to 1989

0

NA

NA

0

NA

0

0

0

0

1990 to 1994

0

NA

NA

NA

0

1

5

1

4

1995 to 1999

0

NA

NA

NA

0

0

5

0

5

2000 to 2004

0

0

0

0

6

15

30

9

14

2005 to 2009

4

0

4

0

11

29

53

14

23

2010 to 2011

3

0

3

NA

15

44

75

26

31

Two or more races

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1960 to 1969

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1970 to 1974

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

0

NA

0

1975 to 1979

2

0

2

0

NA

2

2

NA

0

1980 to 1984

3

1

2

NA

2

5

8

NA

3

1985 to 1989

0

NA

NA

0

0

3

3

3

0

1990 to 1994

4

4

0

0

7

11

16

0

4

1995 to 1999

1

0

0

1

8

15

30

6

15

2000 to 2004

15

2

9

4

18

42

73

9

31

2005 to 2009

33

9

18

6

72

164

254

59

90

2010 to 2011

22

7

10

5

63

143

301

58

158

Hispanic or Latino (of any race)

1920 to 1929

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1950 to 1959

0

NA

NA

NA

0

0

3

0

2

1960 to 1969

0

NA

NA

0

2

7

13

5

5

1970 to 1974

3

2

NA

1

8

24

32

13

8

1975 to 1979

13

5

6

2

5

36

48

18

11

1980 to 1984

12

0

5

7

15

39

55

12

15

1985 to 1989

15

6

4

5

17

51

77

19

26

1990 to 1994

38

23

5

10

31

90

131

21

40

1995 to 1999

45

17

16

12

60

206

290

101

84

2000 to 2004

87

27

37

23

134

388

623

167

235

2005 to 2009

304

73

157

74

615

1,619

2,708

700

1,089

2010 to 2011

220

59

120

41

710

1,945

3,331

1,015

1,386

Not Hispanic or Latino (of any

race)

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

2

2

2

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

4

0

4

52

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

12

16

26

4

11

1950 to 1959

4

4

NA

NA

35

51

64

12

14

1960 to 1969

11

8

3

0

49

76

126

16

50

1970 to 1974

12

5

6

1

39

77

109

26

33

1975 to 1979

21

5

12

4

40

95

181

34

86

1980 to 1984

34

12

12

10

48

130

240

48

111

1985 to 1989

41

9

16

16

58

193

357

94

164

1990 to 1994

152

39

63

50

168

462

748

142

286

1995 to 1999

188

58

55

75

255

693

1,230

250

536

2000 to 2004

487

112

236

139

540

1,551

2,782

524

1,233

2005 to 2009

1,388

269

728

391

1,664

5,120

10,742

2,068

5,621

2010 to 2011

1,090

253

546

291

2,265

6,863

14,893

3,508

8,030

Age of householder

64 or younger

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

1

1

2

NA

1

1950 to 1959

2

2

NA

NA

3

8

12

3

4

1960 to 1969

5

2

3

0

12

21

38

4

17

1970 to 1974

4

4

NA

0

16

27

46

7

19

1975 to 1979

18

7

6

5

14

49

109

17

60

1980 to 1984

22

5

7

10

30

67

151

15

85

1985 to 1989

25

6

13

6

44

127

273

58

147

1990 to 1994

99

36

40

23

134

328

575

95

247

1995 to 1999

125

46

41

38

199

543

1,041

219

498

2000 to 2004

341

87

188

66

494

1,324

2,593

489

1,269

2005 to 2009

1,348

283

767

298

1,974

5,634

11,902

2,312

6,268

2010 to 2011

1,138

276

619

243

2,790

8,172

17,265

4,244

9,093

65 or older

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

2

2

2

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

4

0

4

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

10

14

24

4

10

1950 to 1959

2

2

NA

NA

32

43

55

9

13

1960 to 1969

7

6

0

1

40

63

101

16

38

1970 to 1974

11

3

6

2

31

74

95

32

22

1975 to 1979

18

3

13

2

31

83

120

34

37

1980 to 1984

24

7

10

7

34

102

143

44

41

1985 to 1989

30

8

7

15

31

117

161

56

44

1990 to 1994

92

26

28

38

66

226

304

68

79

1995 to 1999

110

29

31

50

116

359

480

133

121

2000 to 2004

231

51

84

96

180

613

811

202

199

2005 to 2009

344

60

118

166

305

1,105

1,548

456

443

2010 to 2011

173

37

47

89

185

638

960

280

323

Disability status of household

Disabled person in household

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

2

2

2

NA

NA

53

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

2

0

2

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

11

13

20

2

6

1950 to 1959

2

2

NA

NA

21

30

38

7

7

1960 to 1969

4

4

0

0

26

35

57

5

22

1970 to 1974

7

3

3

1

21

43

51

15

7

1975 to 1979

17

3

10

4

9

31

39

5

9

1980 to 1984

21

8

8

5

25

78

111

32

33

1985 to 1989

25

6

15

4

33

108

155

50

47

1990 to 1994

84

30

15

39

70

225

283

71

57

1995 to 1999

112

34

27

51

91

324

440

121

116

2000 to 2004

246

58

114

74

193

658

872

219

213

2005 to 2009

651

119

355

177

449

1,848

2,589

748

741

2010 to 2011

401

88

191

122

504

1,736

2,578

831

842

No disabled person in household

1920 to 1929

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

NA

NA

NA

1930 to 1939

0

NA

NA

NA

NA

0

2

NA

2

1940 to 1949

0

NA

NA

NA

0

1

6

1

5

1950 to 1959

2

2

NA

NA

14

20

29

4

9

1960 to 1969

7

4

3

0

25

48

82

16

33

1970 to 1974

8

4

3

1

25

57

90

24

33

1975 to 1979

19

7

9

3

36

101

189

46

89

1980 to 1984

26

5

9

12

38

92

184

28

93

1985 to 1989

31

8

6

17

42

136

279

63

143

1990 to 1994

106

31

53

22

129

328

596

93

269

1995 to 1999

122

41

44

37

224

576

1,081

230

504

2000 to 2004

326

81

158

87

481

1,278

2,533

471

1,255

2005 to 2009

1,041

224

530

287

1,830

4,891

10,861

2,020

5,970

2010 to 2011

909

224

475

210

2,471

7,073

15,646

3,693

8,574

Income sources of families and

primary individuals

Age of householder

64 or younger

Wages and salaries

1,573

361

894

318

4,108

10,630

27,181

4,949

16,552

Self-employment

129

17

78

34

339

1,117

3,026

649

1,908

Interest

31

5

18

8

184

557

2,277

342

1,719

Dividends

5

0

5

0

31

112

692

76

579

Rental income

20

5

9

6

27

130

541

83

411

Social Security or Railroad

Retirement

395

82

206

107

459

1,484

2,159

630

674

Retirement or survivor pensions

53

8

32

13

108

285

800

124

515

Supplementary Security Income

(SSI)

683

170

384

129

408

1,785

2,106

694

321

Child support or alimony

402

84

237

81

330

1,309

2,184

577

874

Public assistance or public welfare

487

117

284

86

300

1,461

1,642

674

181

Food stamp benefits

1,798

419

958

421

1,318

5,704

5,974

2,588

269

65 or older

54

2011 Householder and Household

Tenants

Tenants in

Eligible

Characteristics by Race, Ethnicity,

All Assisted

in

Voucher

Privately

Unassisted,

Total

Worst Case

Not Eligible

Age, and Disability Status

Renters

Public

Recipients

Owned

Not Worst

Eligible

All Renters

Needs

Renters

(000s)

Housing

Housing

Case Renters

Renters

Households

Wages and salaries

71

24

21

26

173

388

986

144

597

Self-employment

11

4

2

5

21

76

160

44

84

Interest

41

8

10

23

102

279

668

136

387

Dividends

6

2

0

4

24

91

274

61

183

Rental income

1

0

1

0

16

39

107

22

67

Social Security or Railroad

Retirement

808

187

259

362

903

2,807

3,990

1,096

1,183

Retirement or survivor pensions

181

44

52

85

292

770

1,531

297

760

Supplementary Security Income

(SSI)

338

73

125

140

122

634

691

174

58

Child support or alimony

13

2

2

9

12

39

43

14

5

Public assistance or public welfare

56

16

23

17

32

117

133

29

15

Food stamp benefits

400

110

110

180

135

746

762

211

15

NA = data not available. – represents or rounds to 0.

55

References

Casey, Connie H. 1992.  Characteristics of HUD-Assisted Renters and Their Units in 1989.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy

Development and Research.

———. 1997.  Characteristics of HUD-Assisted Renters and Their Units in 1991. Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and

Research.

Eggers, Frederick J. 2017a.  Characteristics  of HUD-Assisted Renters and Their Units in 2011.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy

Development and Research.

———. 2017b.  Characteristics of HUD-Assisted Renters and Their Units in 2013.  Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and

Research.

Eggers, Frederick J., and Fouad Moumen. 2008. “Trends in Housing Costs: 1985–2005 and the

30-Percent-of-Income Standard.”

http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/ahsrep/trends_inhousing.html.

———. 2010. “Investigating Very High Rent Burdens Among Renters in the American Housing

Survey.”  http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/ahsrep/investing_veryhigh.html.

———. 2013.  American Housing Survey: Housing Adequacy and Quality As Measured by the

AHS. Report prepared for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy

Development and Research. Washington, DC: Econometrica, Inc.

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/ahsrep/AHS_hsg_adequacy.html.

———. 2017.  Characteristics of HUD-Assisted Renters and Their Units in 2009.  Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and

Research.

McGough, Duane T. 1997.  Characteristics of HUD-Assisted Renters and Their Units in 1993.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy

Development and Research.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).   2008.  Characteristics of HUD-

Assisted Renters and Their Units in 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research.

———. 2016. “Low-Income Tax Credit Housing Tax Credits.”

http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/lihtc.html#data.

Weicher, John C. 2012.  Housing Policy at a Crossroads.  Washington, DC: AEI Press.

56

Document Outline

- Cover

- Acknowledgments

- Contents

- Tables and Figures

- Executive Summary

- HUD Programs

- Location and Unit Size

- Householder and Household Characteristics

- Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction

- Other Related Studies

- Introduction

- HUD Rental Assistance Programs

- Organization of the Report and Data Tables

- Source of the Data

- Relationship to Other Studies

- The Big Picture

- Location and Key Unit Characteristics

- Regional and Metropolitan Location

- Year Structure Built

- Number of Bedrooms

- Householder Characteristics

- Race and Ethnic Origin of Householder

- Age of Householder

- Education of Householder

- Years in Same Unit

- Household Characteristics

- Household Income

- Income Sources

- Household Composition

- Household Size and Overcrowding

- Households With a Disabled Member

- Housing Cost as Percent of Income

- Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction

- Structure Type

- Equipment Failures

- Selected Deficiencies

- Indices of Physical Problems

- Tenant Satisfaction

- Recent Movers

- Detailed Summary Tables

- References

Table of Contents

Cover

Acknowledgments

Contents

Tables and Figures

Executive Summary

HUD Programs

Location and Unit Size

Householder and Household Characteristics

Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction

Other Related Studies

Introduction

HUD Rental Assistance Programs

Organization of the Report and Data Tables

Source of the Data

Relationship to Other Studies

The Big Picture

Location and Key Unit Characteristics

Regional and Metropolitan Location

Year Structure Built

Number of Bedrooms

Householder Characteristics

Race and Ethnic Origin of Householder

Age of Householder

Education of Householder

Years in Same Unit

Household Characteristics

Household Income

Income Sources

Household Composition

Household Size and Overcrowding

Households With a Disabled Member

Housing Cost as Percent of Income

Unit Quality and Tenant Satisfaction

Structure Type

Equipment Failures

Selected Deficiencies

Indices of Physical Problems

Tenant Satisfaction

Recent Movers

Detailed Summary Tables

References