WORST CASE

HOUSING NEEDS

2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research

Visit PD&R’s website

huduser.gov

to find this report and others sponsored by HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R).

Other services of HUD User, PD&R’s research information service, include listservs, special interest reports, bimonthly publications (best practices, significant studies from other sources), access to public use databases, and a hotline (800-245-2691) for help accessing the information you need.

WORST CASE

HOUSING NEEDS

2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

Prepared for

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Office of Policy Development and Research

Prepared by

Thyria A. Alvarez

Barry L. Steffen

May 2023

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Brian McCabe, Peter Kahn, and Jennifer

Turnham for their leadership and expert advice in this report.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

FOREWORD

Foreword

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Department (HUD) presents

to the U.S. Congress its 19th biennial report on Worst Case Housing

Needs. The 2023 report on Worst Case Housing Needs provides national

data and analyzes the critical problems facing low-income renting

families. The report primarily draws on data from the 2021 American

Housing Survey (AHS) sponsored by HUD and conducted by the U.S.

Census Bureau. AHS is a comprehensive national longitudinal housing

survey conducted since 1973.

Households with worst case housing needs are very low-income

renters—households with incomes at or below 50 percent of area median

income—who do not receive government housing assistance and who

pay more than one-half of their income toward rent, live in severely

inadequate conditions, or both. The 2023 report finds that in 2021,

during the COVID-19 pandemic, 8.53 million households had worst case

housing needs. This is an increase in worst case needs from the record

high of 8.48 million in 2011 and 70 percent greater than the 5.01 million

households with worst case housing needs in 2001.

The increase in renters with worst case housing needs since the last

biennial report was published (using data from 2019, when 7.77 million

renters had worst case housing needs) reflected the declining supply of

units affordable and available to very low-income renters at a time when

demand was rising. There is an urgent need to expand the supply of both

homes affordable for very low-income renters and for-sale homes for

renters locked out of the sales market.

The 2021 AHS captured housing needs in mid-2021, about a year

and a half after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic

fallout. The financial shock to the labor market and household incomes

contributed to the substantial increases in worst case needs. The major

federal legislative response to the pandemic, including enhanced

unemployment benefits, stimulus payments, and the Emergency Rental

Assistance program, reduced the economic hardship experienced by

renter households in 2021 and beyond. The 2021 AHS did not count

one-time Federal stimulus payments, such as those that were part of

the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, in

its measurement of household income, so such payments were not

considered for the estimates of worst case housing needs.1 Although the

AHS data collection does not capture the effect of the one-time stimulus

payments or the Emergency Rental Assistance program, government

relief measures provided over the pandemic have helped to offset the

dire needs of many families with worst case needs.

1 It would be difficult to capture emergency payments in the AHS, as the survey instrument must be tested and finalized in advance and the survey fieldwork occurs over an extended period. Additionally, changes in the number and content of income questions can depress response rates and disrupt the year-to-year comparability of income reporting without necessarily capturing temporary income sources accurately.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

FOREWORD

Demographic and pandemic-related economic factors greatly increased the number of very low-income renters needing affordable housing units, increasing competition and driving up rents in a housing market that has long acted only partially and slowly to meet the housing needs of this very low-income renter population, which accounts for about 15 percent of U.S. households.

No group of very low-income renters was immune from worst case needs if they

lacked access both to housing assistance and to sufficient affordable units to ease market pressure on rents. Among the various demographic subgroups, geographic regions, and urban-suburban-rural categories examined in this report, the rate of worst case needs among very low-income renters ranged from 23.4 to 58.2 percent. Two geographic variables explain much of this variation: first, places with more adequate supply than others have a greater share of unsubsidized very low-income renters who are free of severe cost burdens, and second, places with higher rates of housing assistance have less pressure on the most affordable housing units in the local housing supply.

This variation also provides the key to ending worst case housing needs—increasing affordable housing through both more supply and more rental assistance. This report finds that in 2021, only 57 affordable units (including those with rental assistance) were available for every 100 very low-income renter households. Only 36 affordable units were available for every 100 extremely low-income renter households. HUD is committed to ending worst case housing needs and homelessness in America by

increasing affordable housing access.

The serious scarcity of housing units affordable to the most vulnerable households and hard-working families makes it essential to prioritize production of affordable units, reducing regulatory barriers to affordable housing production and providing technical assistance to local governments to assist in removing barriers that drive up housing costs. Providing income supports to very low-income renters can also help address worst case needs. As these longer-term strategies take effect and as the nation emerges from the pandemic, increasing access to rental assistance may be essential to sustain affordable housing and prevent homelessness.

Although the pandemic has likely played a role in increasing worst case housing needs, this report and its predecessors provide clear, consistent evidence of the persistent, underlying structural gap in the affordable housing market. Ideally, a policy response that begins to bridge this affordable housing gap will also seek to address geographic disparities in resource allocation that contribute to inequities and pockets of distress.

Solomon Greene

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

CONTENTS

Contents

Executive Summary ..........................................................................................vii

Worst Case Needs Reached a New High in 2021 ...........................................vii

Prevalence of Worst Case Needs Worsened Across Demographic Groups

and Household Types ......................................................................................viii

Demographic and Market Factors Shape the Persistent Shortage of

Affordable and Available Rental Housing ......................................................... ix

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ xi

Section 1. Extent and Nature of Worst Case Needs ....................................... 1

Extent of Worst Case Needs in 2021 .................................................................2

Inadequate Income and Inadequate Housing ...................................................3

Prevalence of Worst Case Needs by Income ....................................................4

Worst Case Needs Prevalence Among U.S. Households .............................4

Demographics of Worst Case Needs ................................................................4

Worst Case Needs by Race and Ethnicity .....................................................5

Worst Case Needs by Household Type .........................................................7

Overcrowding and Worst Case Needs ........................................................ 10

Summary .......................................................................................................... 12

Section 2. Shortage of Affordable Housing ................................................... 15

Geography of Worst Case Needs.................................................................... 15

Worst Case Needs and Housing Assistance by Region and Metropolitan

Location ....................................................................................................... 16

Variation in Worst Case Needs Between Metropolitan Markets................... 18

Factors Limiting Access to Affordable Rental Housing ...................................20

How the Market Allocates Affordable Housing on a National Basis ............20

Affordability, Availability, and Adequacy of the National Rental Stock ........ 21

Rental Stock by Income ...............................................................................23

Geography of Supply ....................................................................................... 24

Rental Stock by Region ............................................................................... 24

Rental Stock by Metropolitan Location ........................................................25

Summary ..........................................................................................................26

Section 3. Understanding the Trend in Worst Case Needs ..........................27

Drivers of Affordable Housing Demand .........................................................27

Other Factors Affecting Affordable Housing Supply and Demand ............29

Concluding Summary ..................................................................................... 31

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

v

CONTENTS

Appendix A. Detailed Data on Housing Problems and Supply of

Affordable Housing ...........................................................................................33

Appendix B. Supplemental Exhibits ...............................................................73

Appendix C. Federal Housing Assistance and Affordable

Housing Programs ............................................................................................ 75

Appendix D. Previous Reports to Congress on Worst Case Needs ...........77

Appendix E. Data and Methodology ...............................................................79

Using the American Housing Survey Data ..................................................79

Household and Family Types .......................................................................80

Housing Assistance Status .......................................................................... 81

Housing Problems ........................................................................................ 81

Income Measurement ..................................................................................82

Income Categories .......................................................................................82

Location .......................................................................................................83

Mismatch of Supply and Demand for Affordable Rental Housing ...............84

Race and Ethnicity .......................................................................................84

Literature Cited .................................................................................................85

vi

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

Executive Summary

ExECUTIvE SUmmARy

Worst case need is a long-standing measure of the extent of unmet needs for

affordable rental housing of adequate quality. Housing affordability is made

Executive possible through housing offered in the private market at affordable rents, through public rental assistance, or a combination of the two. Renter households are defined as having worst case needs for such housing if they have very

Summary low incomes—household incomes at or below 50 percent of the area median income (AMI), do not receive government housing assistance, and either

pay more than one-half of their income for rent, or live in severely inadequate conditions, or both.

Worst Case Housing Needs: 2023 Report to Congress examines trends in and causes of worst case needs using the most recent data from the 2021 American

Housing Survey (AHS).2 This report finds that since 2019, worst case housing

needs have increased across demographic groups, household types, and

regions throughout the United States. The unmet need for decent, safe, and

affordable rental housing continues to outpace income growth and the ability of federal, state, and local governments to supply housing assistance and facilitate affordable housing production. As a result, the number of families with worst case housing needs in 2021 sets a historic record since the Great Recession of 2007–2009.

This report captures housing needs in mid-2021, about a year and a half

after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated brief recession

early in 2020. The financial shock to the labor market and household incomes

contributed to substantial increases in worst case needs as measured by the

2021 AHS.

Worst Case Needs Reached a New High

in 2021

There were 8.53 million renter households with worst case needs in 2021, an

increase of 760,000 cases compared with 7.77 million in 2019 (exhibit ES-1). The 2021 count of households with worst case needs is the highest ever recorded,

slightly higher than the previous record high of 8.48 million in 2011. The number of very low-income renters with worst case housing needs has averaged 8

million in the past decade, a major increase from the years preceding the 2007–

2009 recession when there was greater availability of affordable housing stock.

2 Unless otherwise cited, estimates presented in this report are the findings of HUD’s analysis of worst case needs and related factors using the AHS.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

vii

ExECUTIvE SUmmARy

Exhibit ES-1. Change in Worst Case Housing Needs, 2001–2021

Prevalence of Worst Case

10.0

8.48

Needs Worsened Across

9.0

8.30

8.0

7.72 7.77

8.53

Demographic Groups

7.72

7.10

7.0

5.99

and Household Types

6.0

5.91

The percentage of very low-income renters experiencing

5.18

5.0

worst case needs varied among demographic groups.

5.01

In 2021, the prevalence of worst case needs was 52.6

4.0

percent among Asian households, 47.4 percent among

3.0

Hispanic households, 44.1 percent among non-Hispanic

2.0

White households, 41.6 percent among Native Hawaiian

Renters with worst case needs (millions)

or Other Pacific Islander households, 39.3 percent among

1.0

non-Hispanic Black households, and 36.4 percent among

0.0 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021

American Indian or Alaska Native households. Between 2019

and 2021, the prevalence of VLI renters with severe problems

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

increased by 3.2 percentage points for non-Hispanic Blacks,

by 2.3 points for Hispanics, by 0.4 points for non-Hispanic

Alongside the growth in the number of households with worst

Whites, and by 12.2 points for other races or other ethnicities.

case needs, the rate at which very low-income (VLI) renters

The prevalence of worst case needs remained the same for

experience worst case needs also has increased in recent

Asian households. Despite the increased prevalence of worst

years. The percentage of VLI renters experiencing worst

case needs, the percentage of VLI renters receiving rental

case needs (the “prevalence” of worst case needs) was 44.1

assistance decreased for non-Hispanic Blacks but remained

percent in 2021, an increase of 1.9 points from 42.2 percent

the same for non-Hispanic Whites and Hispanic households

in 2019, surpassing the record prevalence of 44.0 percent

between 2019 and 2021.

observed in 2011. Further, between 2019 and 2021, the

number of households with worst case needs grew

More than 8.5 million renter households had worst case

significantly more (9.8 percent) than the overall number of VLI

needs in 2021, of whom 3.17 million lived in the South, 2.25

renters (5.2 percent). The most recent biennial change in

million lived in the West, 1.62 million lived in the Northeast,

total worst case needs is attributable to three factors: (1) the

and 1.48 million lived in the Midwest. In the Midwest,

ongoing formation of new households; (2) a modest increase

Northeast, and South, the prevalence of worst case needs

in the number of renters with very low incomes; and (3)

among VLI renters increased by about 2 percentage

increased competition for affordable units, which made them

points between 2019 and 2021. The West, however, saw a

less available to VLI renters.

prevalence decrease of almost 1 percentage point during the

same period. The prevalence of worst case needs decreased

VLI renter households comprise two income groups:

in central cities between 2019 and 2021 but not in suburbs

households with extremely low incomes (ELIs) and

and nonmetropolitan areas. The greatest increase was

households with incomes between 30 and 50 percent of AMI.

observed in urban suburbs.

ELI renter households account for the majority of worst case

needs cases: 71.0 percent in 2021, down from 74.4 percent

For very low-income renters, worst case needs remained a

in 2019. The prevalence of worst case needs did not change

serious and prevalent problem among all household types

among ELI renters between 2019 and 2021 but increased

in 2021: 44.4 percent among families with children, 40.1

among renters with incomes between 30 and 50 percent of

percent among households headed by older adults without

AMI.

children, 50.0 percent among “other family” households

(including multiple family members without children), and

46.0 percent among “other nonfamily” households (mostly

single individuals). Between 2019 and 2021, the prevalence

of worst case needs increased by 4.2 points among families

with children and 6.3 points among the other families group,

remained the same among nonfamily households, and

slightly decreased among households headed by older

adults.

viii

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

ExECUTIvE SUmmARy

In absolute terms, worst case needs increased among all

how these factors worked together to result in the increase in

household types since 2019. In 2021, households with worst

worst case needs. An attribution analysis estimated the

case needs included 2.63 million families with children,

independent contribution of each of four increasingly focused

2.63 million “other nonfamily” households, 2.35 million older

demographic factors to assess its effect on the number of

adult households, compared with 0.92 million “other family”

unassisted VLI renters and thereby on the number of worst

households. About one in seven renter households with worst

case needs. The positive or negative effects attributed to the

case needs—14.7 percent or 1.26 million—included people

four demographic factors are represented by the first four

younger than 62 who have disabilities.

bars of exhibit ES-2: household formation increased worst

case needs because there was a net increase in new

This report includes a new analysis of the intersection

households from population changes; tenure shift reduced

between worst case needs and the related but less prevalent

worst case needs because the growth in renters between

problem of housing overcrowding. Overcrowding is defined

2019 and 2021 lagged the growth in homeowners; renter

as the condition of having more than one person per room

household income shifts increased worst case needs

in a residence, considering only whole rooms such as

because there was a net increase of renter households with

bedrooms, living rooms, dining rooms, kitchens, recreation

income below 50 percent of AMI; and the rental assistance

rooms, lodger’s rooms, and other finished rooms. In 2021,

gap increased worst case needs because there was a net

about 948,000 very low-income renter households, or 4.9

increase in VLI renters lacking rent subsidies from the

percent, were overcrowded. Of these, 390,000 households

federal, state, or local government.

also experienced worst case needs.3 About two-fifths of

households experiencing overcrowding also experienced

Exhibit ES-2. Worst Case Needs Markedly Increased as a

worst case needs. The large majority—75.8 percent—of

Result of Household Formation, Changes in Income, the

VLI households with overcrowding had moderate or severe

Rental Assistance Gap, and Greater Competition for

Affordable Units from 2019 to 2021

rent burden. Most VLI households with overcrowding—92.5

percent—were families with children. More than one-half

245,000

of overcrowded households in 2021—54.4 percent—were

increase from

less affordable Net

Hispanic, 17.9 percent were non-Hispanic White, 16.1

and available change:

percent were non-Hispanic Black, 7.1 percent were Asian,

102,000 units for VLI 760,000

increase

renters

increase

and 4.4 percent were of other races and ethnicities. The

from

majority of overcrowded households in 2021—70.6 percent—

reduced

had from five to seven household members.

175,000 share of VLI

increase from renters

43,000 renter income receiving

assistance

Demographic and Market

282,000

decrease changes

increase

from adding to VLI

from

homeowner numbers

Factors Shape the Persistent

additions to increases

U.S.

relative to

Shortage of Affordable and

households renter share

Available Rental Housing

For most households, worst case needs are caused by

severe rent burdens—that is, paying more than one-half of

the household’s income for rent. Inadequate market supply,

Household

Renter

Renter

Rental

Affordable Net change

competition for affordable units, and a shortage of rental

formation

share

income

assistance

unit

in worst

assistance continued to pose a substantial challenge for

changes

gap

competition case needs

VLI renter households in 2021. Inadequate housing quality

VLI = very low-income.

caused only 2.8 percent of worst case needs.

Note: The columns of ES-2 are cascading in the sense that each column begins

where the previous one ends, while the final column displays the net effect on worst case needs.

The net increase in worst case needs by 760,000 cases

Source: HUD-PD&R analysis of American Housing Survey data

between 2019 and 2021 is attributable to a combination of

the demographic changes affecting the number of

unassisted VLI renter households and the housing market’s

Contributing most to the increase in worst case needs were

response to affordable housing demand. Exhibit ES-2 shows

household formation—individuals creating new single-

person or multi-person households in a separate housing

3 HUD categorizes overcrowding as a moderate housing problem rather than a severe problem, so households that experience overcrowding but do not experience severe rent burden or severely inadequate conditions are not included in the count of households with worst case needs.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

ix

ExECUTIvE SUmmARy

unit—and the increased competition for affordable units

Access of VLI renter households to a sufficient supply of

that reduced their availability to households with very low

naturally affordable rental units or assisted units is critical

incomes. Changes in income among VLI renters4 and the

to the extent of the worst case needs problem. Exhibit ES-3

widening of the already large gap between the number of

presents how the availability of rental units affordable to VLI

households eligible to receive housing assistance and the

households has responded to demand trends over the past

number who receive it were also major factors contributing

10 years.

to raising worst case needs to a level never before seen.

The only demographic factor that helped improve the worst

Exhibit ES-3. Trends in Housing Supply

case needs picture between 2019 and 2021 was the modest

Mismatch and Worst Case Needs, 2011–2021

increase in homeownership rates (by definition, only renters

100.0

10,000

can have worst case needs).

9,000

The four demographic factors together created the

80.0

8,000

environment for a substantial net increase in worst case

needs between 2019 and 2021 by increasing the size of the

7,000

unassisted VLI renter population. The market’s increase of

60.0

6,000

competition among renters for affordable units aggravated

worst case needs through 2021. The net increase attributed

5,000

to demographic changes was exacerbated 32.2 percent

40.0

4,000

more as the modest pace of additions to the rental stock

orst Case Needs (thousands)

Units per 100 Renter Households

W

relative to increases in renter households reduced the

3,000

availability of affordable VLI units, as indicated by the fifth

20.0

2,000

bar of the exhibit. If the supply of affordable rental units fails

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

to increase at the same rate as the renter population, greater

Affordable and available

demand would be expected to increase competition for

Affordable and available

Worst Case

units for ELI renters

units for VLI renters

Needs

affordable units, drive up rents, and increase the prevalence

(per 100 households)

(per 100 households)

(thousands)

of worst case needs. Competition may include higher-

ELI = extremely low income. VLI = very low income.

income households choosing to occupy units that would be

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

affordable to households with significantly lower incomes,

making those units unavailable to those with greater needs.

Although the supply of rental units slightly expanded in

2021, rental housing production has significantly lagged

By 2021, the VLI renter population increased by 950,000

household formation since 2010. At the same time, the

households while the rental units affordable and available

number of households receiving rental assistance has risen

to them decreased by 463,000. ELI renters increased by

only modestly and has not kept pace with the increase in the

571,000 households while the supply of affordable and

number of VLI households. Rental units added to the stock

available units for these renters decreased by 252,000.

have tended to be in higher-rent properties. As a result,

Added rental units, including converted owner-occupied

the ratio of affordable and available units to VLI renters

units, increased the rental unit supply by only 1.5 percent

followed a downward path from 2009 to 2017. After a modest

between 2019 and 2021.

improvement from 2017 to 2019, the ratio again worsened

from 62 units per 100 renter households in 2019 to 57 units

With tighter supply, rents increased at a much higher rate

per 100 renter households in 2021. For ELI households, the

than renter incomes between 2019 and 2021. Median renter

ratio decreased from 40 to only 36 affordable and available

housing costs5 increased by 10.6 percent, substantially more

units per 100 households in 2021. Increasing the affordable

than the 2.5 percent increase in the median renter income

housing supply by providing rental and sustainable

(see exhibit 3-2). For VLI renters as a group, mean rent

homeownership options for households across the income

increases of 13.8 percent between 2019 and 2021 nearly

spectrum—including by expanding rental assistance,

doubled their mean income increases of 7.6 percent (exhibit

particularly for poorer households—is critical for reducing

A-14), explaining why the prevalence of severe rent burdens

worst case needs.

increased.

4 The 2021 AHS did not count one-time Federal stimulus payments, such as those that were part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, in its measurement of household income, so such payments were not considered for the estimates of worst case housing needs. AHS captures the total money income in the 12 months before the interview for household members ages 16 and older, where “money income” is defined as income received on a regular basis (exclusive of certain money receipts such as capital gains and lump-sum payments). See definition of income at https://www2.census.gov/

programs-surveys/ahs/2021/2021%20AHS%20Definitions.pdf.

5 Those housing costs include rent, utilities, property insurance, land rent, and association fees but exclude any separate security deposit or parking fees.

x

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

ExECUTIvE SUmmARy

Availability ratios are as important as worst case needs

and available housing units as of 2021. Rental housing

measurement for understanding affordable housing

assistance—such as that offered by HUD programs, other

problems. Availability ratios demonstrate the critical role of

federal programs, states, or localities—help many vulnerable

rental assistance in expanding affordable housing options

renter households who have such limited incomes. Among

for VLI renters: among VLI renters with access to affordable

VLI renters in 2021, 26.6 percent of households were able to

housing, a large share have such access by virtue of the

avoid worst case needs because they had rental assistance.

rental assistance they receive. Availability ratios, when

Rental assistance is in short supply: because of inadequate

compared with affordability ratios, also make clear the

funding, only about one in four eligible households received

intense competition for the most affordable housing. For

rental assistance. Another 29.3 percent of VLI renters were

each affordability bracket, renters with incomes above the

able to avoid severe housing problems in the unassisted

bracket levels occupy large shares of units affordable to

private rental market by finding affordable units of adequate

households within the bracket. Such crowding-out affects 40

quality. The remaining 44.1 percent, however, were left with

percent of the units affordable to ELI renters, 40 percent of

worst case needs and almost five in seven of those were

the units affordable at incomes of 30 to 50 percent of AMI,

ELI households. Worst case needs weigh upon families

and 35 percent of the units affordable at incomes of 50 to

of all types; in all regions of the country; and in rural,

80 percent of AMI. When higher-income renters defer home

suburban, and urban areas. Non-Hispanic White households

purchases, they continue to compete for affordable units and

experienced worst case needs as well as households of

sustain rental demand, limiting the availability of affordable

color and worst case needs were found among families with

rental units for lower-income renters by nearly two-fifths. In

children, older adults, people with disabilities, and people

short, the effect of weak growth in the rental housing supply,

living on their own.

a shortage of rental assistance, and strong competition for

available rental units from higher-income renters seem to be

A broad strategy at the federal, state, and local levels has

having the most detrimental effect on the availability of units

long been needed to continue to grow the economy, support

affordable to renters with incomes at and below 30 percent

market production and access to affordable homes, and

of AMI. Improving the availability of affordable rental units for

provide rental assistance to the most vulnerable households.

ELI renters will be crucial to reducing worst case needs.

With the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated

economic difficulties in 2020 and 2021, worst case housing

Conclusion

needs have increased substantially, reaching a new

record high and highlighting more than ever the need for

Worst case housing needs increased markedly between

a comprehensive approach to addressing the affordable

2019 and 2021 due to household formation (new households

housing crisis.

formed as a result of population increase), the widening

of the rental assistance gap for eligible very low-income

households, and the continuing shortage of affordable rental

housing. Reductions in worst case needs generally result

when economic growth improves household incomes, when

the production of affordable housing is sufficient to reduce

market rents, or, alternatively, when the availability of rental

assistance increases.

The worsening between 2019 and 2021 of severe housing

problems among the nation’s VLI renter households

is attributable to demographic factors, beginning with

substantial household formation, that increased the number

of VLI renters needing affordable units and increased

competition for such units, combined with an inadequate

response of the housing market to quantitative changes

in demand. The weak supply response of the housing

market exacerbated the increase in worst case needs

cases resulting from demographic and economic factors—

especially household formation, income loss, and the

widening gap between renter households eligible to receive

housing assistance and those receiving it. More than

three in five ELI renter households and three in seven VLI

renter households continued to lack access to affordable

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

xi

xii

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

Section 1. Extent and Nature of Worst Case Needs

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Extent and Nature of Worst Case

Needs

HUD is the largest federal provider of affordable rental housing. In response to a request by Congress in 1991, HUD’s Office of Policy Development and

1 Research (PD&R) periodically reports on the severity of worst case needs for affordable rental housing, using data collected in the biennial American Housing Survey (AHS). This report is the 19th in the series of core reports.6 This report measures worst case housing needs as of mid-2021, about a year and a half

after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated economic recession

Section

early in 2020. The financial shock to the labor market and household incomes

contributed to substantial increases in worst case needs as measured by the 2021 AHS.

WHICH HOUSEHOLDS CAN HAVE WORST CASE NEEDS?

By definition, households that can have worst case needs are

households that—

• Are renters.

• Have very low incomes—that is, incomes of no more than 50

percent of the area median income (as adjusted for family size).

• Do not receive housing assistance.

SEVERE PROBLEMS TRIGGER WORST CASE NEEDS

Two types of severe problems determine whether households have

worst case needs:

1. Severe rent burden, which means that a renter household is paying more than one-half of its income for gross rent (rent and utilities).

2. Severely inadequate housing, which refers to units having one or

more serious physical problems related to heating, plumbing, and

electrical systems or maintenance (problems are listed in appendix

E).

6 PD&R supplements the core reports on worst case needs with periodic topical reports. For a list of previous titles, see appendix D.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

1

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Extent of Worst Case Needs

with incomes between 30 and 50 percent of AMI and

271,000 new cases among renters with extremely low

in 2021

incomes.

HUD analysts examined the 2021 AHS data to understand

- Consistent with long-term trends, the primary problem

the evolving dimensions of the large and growing shortage

for worst case needs renters in 2021 was severe rent

of decent and affordable rental housing for lower-income

burden resulting from insufficient income relative to rent.

households. The basic facts presented and examined in the

Severely inadequate housing accounted for only 2.8

following pages are—

percent of worst case needs.

- In 2021, 8.53 million renter households had worst case

- Negative demographic and economic forces prevented

needs (see exhibit 1-1). These are renters that have very low

worst case needs from subsiding between 2019

incomes,7 lack housing assistance, and have either severe

and 2021. Competition for affordable units slightly

rent burdens or severely inadequate housing (or both).

increased, and not many households moved toward

homeownership, erasing reductions in worst case needs

Exhibit 1-1. Growth in Worst Case Housing Needs, 2001–2021

since 2011.

10.0

- In 2021, there were 19.34 million VLI renter households,

9.0

8.48

8.30

a 5.2-percent increase from 2019 levels, reversing the

8.0

7.72 7.77

8.53

slight decreases seen in previous periods.8 In 2021, 44.1

7.10

7.72

percent of VLI renter households and 49.1 percent of ELI

7.0

5.99

renter households had worst case needs.

6.0

5.91

5.18

5.0

- Housing assistance prevents millions of renters from

5.01

experiencing worst case needs. The shortfall of housing

4.0

assistance relative to need worsened between 2019

3.0

and 2021. Although the number of assisted, VLI renters

2.0

increased by 1.8 percent between 2019 and 2021, rental

assistance programs did not keep pace, causing the share

Renters with worst case needs (millions) 1.0

of VLI renter households receiving housing assistance to

0.0

decrease by 0.9 points. As of 2021, 26.6 percent of VLI

2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021

renter households receive housing assistance.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

- An important dimension of the affordable housing supply

- Between 2019 and 2021, the number of very low-income

gap is that affordable units are not necessarily available

renters with worst case needs increased by 9.8 percent.

to the renters who need them most; higher-income

The new estimate of 8.53 million households with worst

renters occupy substantial shares of units that would be

case needs is the highest estimate observed in the past

affordable to the lowest-income renters. In 2021, only

20 years. The number of households experiencing worst

36.4 percent of units were affordable and available9

case needs has increased 70.0 percent since 2001,

to households with extremely low incomes, and 56.7

when the number of worst case needs was 5.01 million

percent of units were affordable and available to renters

households. The number of renters with worst case

with very low incomes.

needs has averaged 8.08 million households since the

Great Recession of 2007–2009.

With these key facts in mind, this section explores the current

extent and the demographic characteristics of worst case

- The 760,000 additional cases of worst case needs

needs—which households have such needs and what their

since 2019 comprise 489,000 new cases among renters

situations are.

7 Very low income and extremely low income refer throughout this report to the income levels of renters. Very low incomes (VLIs) are those incomes of no more than 50 percent of the area median income (AMI), and extremely low incomes (ELIs) are those incomes of no more than 30 percent of AMI. Worst case needs estimates, like HUD programs, use AMI based on local family incomes with adjustments for household size, precisely known as HUD area median family income, or HAMFI (see the discussion of income categories in appendix E). In 2021, the median renter was classified with respect to a family-size-adjusted VLI limit of $34,150 and ELI limit of $21,960 (see exhibit 3-2). ELI and VLI families may have substantially lower incomes if they have fewer than four members or live in areas with lower median family incomes, or substantially greater incomes if they live in the highest-cost metropolitan areas.

8 Data collection for the 2021 AHS continued standard practice of excluding one-time payments such as federal stimulus payments but including recurring payments such as unemployment income, which might have been temporarily boosted during the pandemic. See definition of income at https://www2.census.

gov/programs-surveys/ahs/2021/2021%20AHS%20Definitions.pdf.

9 The definition of affordability and availability is in the Mismatch of Supply and Demand for Affordable Rental Housing section in Appendix E. Data and Methodology.

2

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Inadequate Income and

units are demolished each year.11 In addition, some of the

severe physical inadequacies reported in the AHS result from

Inadequate Housing

maintenance or upgrade activity that affects the operation of

key systems such as plumbing, heat, or structural integrity

Of the two types of severe problems that make up worst

while units remain occupied. Among all renter households,

case needs, severe rent burden is, by far, the more frequent

3.4 percent of those with very low incomes and 1.4 percent of

problem. As exhibit 1-2 illustrates, 97.2 percent of all

those with higher incomes12 had severely inadequate housing

worst case needs renters, or 8.29 million households, had

in 2021. Nevertheless, the housing stock is continually

severe rent burdens in 2021. Paying one-half (or more) of

aging, and thousands of renters continue to live in severely

a limited total income for rent leaves very little income for

inadequate units. The costs associated with repairing severe

other essentials, such as food, medical care, transportation

quality deficiencies present another formidable barrier to the

expenses, education, and childcare.10

ability of lower-income households to improve their housing

Exhibit 1-2. Severe Rent Burdens Drove

conditions. Landlords offering lower-priced units for rent

Worst Case Needs in 2021

may similarly delay or avoid high maintenance and repair

expenses as units age.13

2.8%

2.9%

PROGRESS IN REDUCING HOMELESSNESS

Severe rent

burden only

Individuals and families experiencing homelessness

clearly have the greatest need for affordable

Severely

or assisted housing. People experiencing

inadequate

homelessness, however, are not included in official

housing only

94.4%

estimates of worst case needs because the AHS

covers only housing units and the households

Both severe

that live in them, and people experiencing

problems

homelessness, by definition, do not live in a housing

unit and are not surveyed by the American Housing

Survey (AHS).a

In its 2022 Annual Homeless Assessment Report

N = 8.526 million renters with worst case needs.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

to Congress, HUD estimates that 582,500 people

were experiencing homelessness on a given night

Severely inadequate housing alone caused only 2.8 percent

in 2022. Most of these, 60 percent, were staying in

of worst case needs in 2021, although 5.6 percent of renter

sheltered locations such as emergency shelters and

households with worst case needs had severely inadequate

transitional housing programs. The remaining 40

housing, either alone or in combination with severe rent

percent were staying in unsheltered locations such

burdens. The number and share of worst case needs

as parks, abandoned buildings, and cars (HUD-

households experiencing severe housing quality problems

CPD, 2022b). Over the course of a year, between

remained almost unchanged between 2019 and 2021,

October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020, almost

increasing by 107,000 households and 0.8 percentage points.

1.3 million people accessed an emergency shelter,

safe haven, or transitional housing program (HUD-

That severely inadequate housing causes such a small

CPD, 2022a).

fraction of worst case needs is the result of a decades-long

trend of improvements to the nation’s housing stock. More

Since 2007, total homelessness on a given night

stringent building codes prevent the construction of units

has declined by 10 percent. However, total

without complete plumbing or heating systems, and obsolete

homelessness has been on the rise since 2016, with

10 Joint Center for Housing Studies (JCHS) of Harvard University. 2021. The State of the Nation’s Housing: 2021. Cambridge, MA: JCHS of Harvard University.

https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/state-nations-housing-2021.

11 Changes in the overall housing stock are primarily driven by new construction and losses due to demolition and natural disasters (Eggers and Moumen, 2016).

12 Homeowners reported severely inadequate housing at even lower rates than renters: 2.0 percent of VLI homeowners and 0.5 percent of homeowners with higher incomes had severely inadequate housing. See exhibit A-1B.

13 Divringi et al. (2019) estimated repair costs associated with quality deficiencies identified in the 2017 AHS and found that units occupied by renters with incomes at or below the poverty line accounted for $25.5 billion, or 56.7 percent, of the aggregate estimated repair costs associated with rental units in the United States. Older single-family and multifamily units occupied by poor renters had higher median repair cost estimates—$2,096 and $1,355, respectively—

than newer units. Similarly, Wallace, Divringi, and Wardrip (2019) found that repair costs increase with the degree of housing inadequacy as measured by the AHS, with median costs for repairing moderately and severely inadequate units estimated at $2,440 and $3,346, respectively.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

3

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

increases in the numbers of people experiencing

Worst Case Needs Prevalence

unsheltered homelessness only partially offset by

decreases in the sheltered homeless population.

Among U.S. Households

Between 2020 and 2022, the period spanning the

The estimated number of households with worst case needs

2021 AHS data collection, the number of people

increased by 760,000 cases (or 9.8 percent) from 2019 to

experiencing either sheltered or unsheltered

2021. Over the 10-year span from 2011 to 2021, the number

homelessness on a given night slightly increased

of households with worst case needs had risen by less than

nationwide, by 1,996 people (HUD-CPD, 2022b).

1 percent, or 51,000 households (exhibit 1-4), with the 2021

count surpassing the highest estimate of worst case needs

a The AHS samples both occupied and vacant residential housing

recorded in the aftermath of the Great Recession, in 2011.15

units but excludes places such as group quarters or motels where

homeless persons may be sheltered (Census-HUD, 2017: 3–5).

Worst case needs also increased as a proportion of U.S.

households during the most recent 2-year period, from 6.3

Prevalence of Worst Case

percent in 2019 to 6.6 percent in 2021.

Exhibit 1-4. Growth in Worst Case Needs Among All U.S.

Needs by Income

Households from 2011 to 2021

Because most cases of worst case needs are triggered by

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

severe rent burdens, the adequacy of household incomes

All

relative to rents of available units is crucial. Among the 19.34

households

million VLI renter households in 2021, nearly one-half or 44.1

(millions)

115.08 116.03 118.29 121.56 124.14 128.51

percent had worst case needs (exhibit 1-3). The VLI category

Renters

includes ELI renters, who had an even greater prevalence

with worst

of worst case needs at 49.1 percent. That is, one in two ELI

case needs

(millions)

8.48

7.72

8.30

7.72

7.77

8.53

households had a severe housing cost burden or lived in

a severely inadequate unit, or both. ELI renter households

Worst case

needs as

constituted a large share (63.7 percent) of VLI renter

percentage

households in 2021, yet their 4.9 percent increase between

of all

2019 and 2021 was slightly lower than the 5.7 percent

households

7.36

6.65

7.02

6.35

6.26

6.63

increase of the 30–50 percent of AMI population. With their

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

greater numbers and greater prevalence of severe problems,

ELI renter households account for the majority—71.0

Because the problem of worst case needs is primarily one

percent—of worst case needs in 2021, slightly down from

of a scarcity of units with affordable rents relative to the

74.4 percent in 2019.14

number of renters with very low incomes, the balance of

section 1 examines the demographics of the renters who

Exhibit 1-3. Extremely Low-Income Renters Were Most

have those problems. Section 2 explores the dimensions of

Vulnerable to Worst Case Needs in 2021

the inadequate supply of affordable rental units, and section

0–30% AMI >30–50% Total VLI

3 summarizes and integrates supply and demand issues to

AMI

shed light on the root causes and shifting dimensions of this

Number of renters

persistent national problem.

(thousands)

12,319

7,019

19,338

Number that are worst

Demographics of Worst Case

case needs renters

6,051

2,475

8,526

(thousands)

Needs

Percentage that are worst

49.1

35.3

44.1

case needs renters

Worst case needs are an economic reality for many of the

nation’s VLI renter households. The severe housing problems

AMI = area median income (HUD adjusted). VLI = very low income.

that trigger worst case needs are widespread for such

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

households, yet notable variations exist among subgroups of

the population.

14 Of the 6.3 million ELI renter households without worst case needs, 4.1 million (or 65.2 percent) received rental assistance subsidized by HUD or other federal, state, or local programs. In other words, only 2.2 million of the 12.3 million ELI renter households nationally (or 17.7 percent) avoided severe housing problems in the unassisted private market in 2021. See exhibit A-1A.

15 Previous Worst Case Needs reports have documented much more rapid growth during the preceding 10 years. During 2001 to 2011, the number of worst case needs increased from 5.01 million to 8.48 million, an increase of 69 percent.

4

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Worst Case Needs by Race and

Variation in rates of housing assistance among VLI renter

Ethnicity

households contributed to variation in the prevalence of

worst case needs and the likelihood that households avoided

Worst case needs were found across all types of

severe housing problems unassisted in the private market.19

communities, racial groups, and ethnic lines. Both similarities

Non-Hispanic White and Hispanic VLI renter households

and differences emerged when examining the four largest

had the best odds of avoiding severe housing problems in

racial and ethnic groups: non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic

the private market in 2021—32.1 percent of non-Hispanic

Black, Hispanic, and Asian. This section also examines

White VLI renters and 30.9 percent of Hispanic VLI renters

detailed subgroups within the “other races and ethnicities”

avoided severe problems without housing assistance.

group16 to the extent supported by the AHS sample size (see

Only about one-fourth of Asians, non-Hispanic Black, and

exhibit 1-7).

other VLI renter households—26.5, 24.6, and 23.3 percent,

respectively—avoided severe problems in the private market

In 2021, non-Hispanic White renters accounted for the largest

without housing assistance.

number of households with worst case needs (3.65 million)

by race and ethnicity. Non-Hispanic Whites accounted for

Exhibit 1-5. Very Low-Income Renters from

42.8 percent of worst case needs, followed by Hispanics,

All Racial and Ethnic Groups Experienced

with 25.4 percent; non-Hispanic Blacks, with 22.5 percent;

Worst Case Needs in 2021

Asians, with 5.5 percent; and renters of all other races and

ethnicities, with 3.8 percent. Together, the four largest race

cent) 60%

and ethnicity groups accounted for 96.2 percent of worst

Asian

case needs in 2021, and households headed by people of

color accounted for more than one-half—57.2 percent—of

50%

Hispanic

worst case needs.17

Non-Hispanic White

Other race/ethnicity

As suggested by exhibit 1-5, very low-income renters do

40%

not experience worst case needs at a uniform rate. In 2021,

Non-Hispanic Black

worst case needs affected 52.6 percent of VLI renters

among Asians, a higher prevalence than 47.4 percent

30%

among Hispanics, 45.0 percent among the other race and

ethnicity group, and 44.1 percent among non-Hispanic

oup VLIR with worst case needs (per 20%

Whites. Prevalence was lower among non-Hispanic Black

Subgr

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

VLI households, with 39.3 percent having worst case

Subgroup share of all very low-income renters (percent)

needs. The lower prevalence of worst case needs among

VLIR = very low-income renters.

Black households reflects greater likelihood that Black VLI

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

households receive housing assistance.18 Among non-

Hispanic Black renters with very low incomes, 36.1 percent

The position of the markers in exhibit 1-5 reflects each racial/

report housing assistance, compared with only 23.9 percent

ethnic group’s share of VLI renter households and the rate

for non-Hispanic Whites, 21.7 percent for Hispanics, 20.9

at which they experience worst case needs. The vertical

percent for Asians, and 31.8 percent for all other races and

axis is the percentage of VLI renters for each group that

ethnicities (see exhibits A-9 and A-1A). Among other factors

experienced worst case needs in 2021. The horizontal axis

contributing to this disparity, the geographic distribution of

is the share of all VLI renters that each group represents.

housing assistance plays a prominent role, as discussed in

Groups account for a greater share of worst case needs

section 2.

as their markers move toward the upper-right quadrant.

16 In this section, race and ethnicity of households is based on the race and ethnicity of the householder as reported in the AHS data. People of color or households of color refers to households that are not non-Hispanic White. “Other” is used in several ways. In the finest analysis that is consistently feasible with the AHS data, “other races and ethnicities” is the fifth of five main categories, comprising households of color in subgroups not otherwise listed or in a combination of subgroups. In the more detailed breakout of exhibit 1-7, “Other race or ethnicity” has the same meaning but refers to a smaller residual category of households because the exhibit provides additional categories by breaking down the AHS data to the full extent feasible. Finally, some portions of the narrative use “other” in its plain sense of “ones not specified in the present context,” for example when groups of color are being compared to another group of color.

17 Similarly, the four largest race and ethnicity groups accounted for 96.3 percent of all VLI renter households nationally, and households of color accounted for 57.2 percent of VLI renter households. During the 2019-to-2021 period, both the share of minority households with very low incomes (57.22 percent) and the share of households of color with worst case needs (57.24 percent), coincidentally, constitute 57.2 percent of all households.

18 Although the prevalence of worst case needs among VLI renters is lower for non-Hispanic Black households than for other race and ethnicity groups, households with worst case needs represent a larger share of the overall non-Hispanic Black population than for other groups. Approximately 11.3 percent of all non-Hispanic Black households experience worst case needs, compared to 4.4 percent of all non-Hispanic White households, 11.8 percent of all Hispanic households, and 6.7 percent of all Asian households.

19 See exhibit A-9.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

5

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

As a share of VLI renter households, the subgroups based

with 334,000 additional cases, followed by an increase of

on race and ethnicity spanned a range of 39.1 percentage

246,000 additional cases among Hispanic renters, about

points, but the prevalence of worst case needs varied by only

110,000 additional cases among households of other races

13.3 percentage points. Asians, the other races/ethnicities

and ethnicities, and about 47,000 additional cases among

group, and Hispanic households are particularly more likely

Asians, compared to 23,000 additional cases among non-

to have worst case needs than other subgroups, relative

Hispanic Whites. The proportion of VLI renters receiving

to their share of the VLI renter population. Other race and

housing assistance mostly remained unchanged overall

ethnicity groups, not included in the four main race and

between 2019 and 2021. Non-Hispanic Black VLI renters

ethnicity categories (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic

was the only group to experience a decrease in the housing

Black, Hispanic, and Asian), represent a small proportion of

assistance rate, a reduction from 40.1 percent in 2019 to 36.1

VLI households (3.7 percent), thus appearing in the upper-

percent in 2021: the number of assisted renters remained the

left quadrant of the exhibit. About 45.0 percent of these

same while the number of non-Hispanic Black VLI renters

households, however, experienced worst case housing

increased by 11.2 percent.

needs. Non-Hispanic White households accounted for a

relatively large share of the VLI renter household population

Alongside the absolute changes in numbers, changes in

(42.8 percent) and had a relatively large prevalence of worst

the prevalence of worst case needs among VLI renters also

case needs (44.1 percent), thus appearing in the upper-

differed among racial and ethnic groups. Between 2019

right quadrant of the exhibit. Except for non-Hispanic Black

to 2021, the rate of worst case needs modestly worsened

households, all subgroups had equal or larger share of their

for VLI renters of color, except for Asians, whose high rate

VLI renter household population afflicted with worst case

remained unchanged at 52.6 percent. The prevalence of

needs than the national average of 44.1 percent.

worst case needs increased by 3.2 points (to 39.3 percent)

for non-Hispanic Blacks, by 2.3 points (to 47.4 percent) for

Exhibit 1-6. Growth in Worst Case Needs Among

Hispanics, and by 12.2 points (to 45.0 percent) among the

All Racial and Ethnic Groups, 2011–2021

“all other races and ethnicities” group. The rate of worst case

needs among non-Hispanic Whites minimally increased 0.4

9,000

points—from 43.7 to 44.1 percent—during this period.

8,000 587

601

621

620

788

633

Exhibit 1-6 also illustrates differences in the long-term growth

7,000

of worst case needs. Between 2011 (the previous high

2,166

6,000

1,971

2,104

point for worst case needs) and 2021, worst case needs

1,845

1,884

1,922

minimally increased 0.06 percent overall. However, worst

5,000

case needs expanded much more rapidly during these

4,000

1,820

1,657

1,800

1,578

1,588

1,922

10 years among people of color, with increases of 10.0

3,000

percent among Hispanics, 5.6 percent among non-Hispanic

orst case needs (thousands) W

Blacks, and 34.2 percent among renters of all other races

2,000

4,097

3,618

3,778

3,634

3,623

3,646

and ethnicities (including Asians).20 The largest subgroup

1,000

of VLI renter households, non-Hispanic Whites, was the

only group to experience a decline in worst case needs

0

since 2011, a reduction of 11.0 percent. In the most recent

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

biennial period, the population of non-Hispanic White VLI

renter households nominally decreased by 0.2 percent, while

Other Race/Ethnicity

Non-Hispanic Black

VLI renters of color grew more rapidly. The change among

Hispanic

Non-Hispanic White

minorities varied among subgroups; non-Hispanic Blacks

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

and Asians increased by 11.2 and 11.1 percent, respectively,

all other races and ethnicities increased by 10.6 percent, and

Note: The Worst Case Needs Report began desegregating Asian Households

Hispanic VLI renter households increased by 7.4 percent.

from the other race and ethnicity group in 2017. For the purposes of this chart, Asian households are included in the other race/ethnicity group.

Any reductions in VLI renter populations and worst case

needs rates experienced in previous periods were effaced

Exhibit 1-6 shows an increase in the number of households

during the most recent period.

with worst case needs among both households of color

and among non-Hispanic Whites between 2019 and

Although VLI renters of color who are not Hispanic, non-

2021. Non-Hispanic Black households had the greatest

Hispanic Black, or Asian make up a small share (3.8 percent)

incidence of worst case needs between 2019 and 2021,

of households with worst case needs, the American Housing

20 The Worst Case Needs Report began desegregating Asian households from the other race and ethnicity group in 2017. For the purposes of exhibit 1-6, Asian households are included in the other race/ethnicity group.

6

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Survey sample is large enough to provide detailed national

detail provides additional insight into the composition of the

estimates for some subgroups within this category. Beginning

small but growing group of “other race or ethnicity” renters

with the 2017 AHS, HUD has reported estimates of worst

(exhibit 1-7).

case needs for American Indian or Alaska Native and

Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander households. This

Exhibit 1-7. Worst Case Needs Among Detailed Race and Ethnicity Subgroups in 2021

Non-

Non-

Hispanic

Asian

American

Native

Other

Hispanic

Hispanic

Indian or

Hawaiian or

Race/

White

Black

Alaska

Other Pacific

Ethnicity

Native

Islander

0–30% AMI renter households

5,020

3,313

2,896

578

185

64

262

(thousands)

Worst case needs (thousands)

2,518

1,388

1,563

322

(D)

(D)

142

Percent with worst case needs

50.2

41.9

54.0

55.7

(D)

(D)

54.2

>30%–50% AMI renter households

3,253

1,575

1,677

310

65

25

114

(thousands)

Worst case needs (thousands)

1,128

535

605

145

(D)

(D)

51

Percent with worst case needs

34.7

34.0

36.1

46.8

(D)

(D)

44.7

Total very low-income renter

households (thousands)

8,273

4,888

4,573

888

250

89

376

Worst case needs (thousands)

3,646

1,923

2,168

467

91

37

193

Percent with worst case needs

44.1

39.3

47.4

52.6

36.4

41.6

51.3

AMI = area median income. Other race / ethnicity = racial or ethnic group not listed individually or consisting of multiple races or ethnicities. (D) = values suppressed to prevent disclosure.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Exhibit 1-7 shows that together, American Indian or Alaska

the largest shares of households experiencing worst case

Native, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and other

needs in 2021, accounting for 30.8 percent of households

race and ethnicity households accounted for 3.8 percent

with worst case needs each. Older adult households without

of all cases of worst case needs in 2021. Although those

children (hereafter, older adult households) accounted for

estimates provide one indication of the prevalence of

27.6 percent of households with worst case needs, and other

severe housing affordability and quality problems among

family households accounted for 10.8 percent (exhibit 1-8).22

those populations, HUD’s Native American Housing Needs

Study also found that overcrowding and doubling up were

As a share of VLI renter households, the subgroups based

far more common among Native American households

on household type span a range of 21.1 percentage points,

compared with other households in the United States.21 Thus,

but the prevalence of worst case needs varied by only

estimates of worst case housing needs should be viewed

9.9 percentage points. Exhibit 1-8 shows that VLI renter

as one component of a larger body of evidence on housing

households comprise similar proportions of families with

problems among American Indian or Alaska Native and

children (30.6 percent), older adult families (30.3 percent),

Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander households in tribal

and other nonfamily households (29.6 percent), while

and urban areas.

only 9.5 percent of VLI renter households are other family

households. “Other” nonfamily households and “other”

Worst Case Needs by Household

family households are somewhat more likely to have worst

Type

case needs than the other households types. Compared

with the national prevalence of 44.1 percent, 50.0 percent

The composition of different households reflects variations in

of other family households, 46.0 percent of other nonfamily

their stage of life, income and resources, and housing needs.

households, 44.4 percent of families with children, and 40.1

Families with children and other nonfamily households (single

percent of older adult households have worst case needs.

adults, unmarried couples, and roommates) constituted

The variations in the prevalence of worst case needs among

21 The series of reports produced by the Native American Housing Needs Study are available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-

research-022117.html.

22 See appendix E for more on the composition of household types. Families with children may include a parent with child and unmarried partner. Either family or nonfamily households may include same-sex partners. The Household Demographics table for AHS 2021 in the AHS Table Creator is illustrative: https://www.

census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs/data/interactive/ahstablecreator.html.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

7

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

these household types, although limited, may reflect the

Exhibit 1-9. Growth in Worst Case Needs Among

result of housing programs prioritizing families with children,

All Household Types, 2011–2021

older adults, and veterans.

9,000

Exhibit 1-8. Very Low-Income Renters from All

8,000

Household Types Experienced Worst Case Needs in 2021

2,969

2,758

2,629

7,000

2,676

2,497

2,535

6,000

cent) 50%

Other family

805

918

Other nonfamily

5,000

801

741

716

720

Families with children

4,000

40%

3,236

2,833

2,888

2,571

2,271

2,629

Older adults

3,000

orst case needs (thousands) W 2,000

30%

1,000

1,470

1,471

1,853

1,932

2,241

2,349

0

20%

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

oup VLIR with worst case needs (per 10%

Other nonfamily

Other family

Subgr

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Families with children

Older adults, no children

Subgroup share of all very low-income renters (percent)

VLIR = very low-income renters.

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

case needs occurred in such families.23

Families with Children. Families with children are the most

common household type among VLI renter households.

Older Adult Households. The second largest household

The number of families with children with worst case needs

type among VLI renters, older adults without children,

increased by 358,000 between 2019 and 2021 (exhibit 1-9).

was the only group that saw a marginal decrease in the

Despite this increase, worst case needs among families

proportion of worst case needs cases between 2019 and

with children remained 607,000 cases below the peak rate

2021. However, the number of older adult households

observed in 2011, yet above prerecession levels.

experiencing severe housing problems has steadily climbed

over the past decade with 879,000 additional cases since

The share of VLI renter households with children

2011.24 In 2021, 2.35 million older adult renters had worst

experiencing worst case needs increased by 4.2 percentage

case needs, an increase of 108,000 since 2019, even as

points from the 2019 level to 44.4 percent in 2021, and the

145,000 more of these households reported receiving rental

percentage reporting housing assistance declined from 25.6

assistance in 2021. The increase is largely attributable to

to 23.8 percent.

the growing population of older adult VLI renter households.

Without housing assistance, substantially more cases of

The proportion of older adult VLI renter households with

worst case needs would occur. Among the 5.92 million

worst case needs was 40.1 percent in 2021, representing a

VLI renter households with children, 1.41 million reported

0.2-point decline since 2019. Although nearly 4 in 10 older

having rental assistance in 2021 and, by definition, could

adult VLI households received housing assistance in 2021—

not have worst case needs. Only about one in four VLI renter

a 0.7-point increase since 2019—aging baby boomers are

households with children received housing assistance, which

likely to continue to be a key demographic facing housing

helps account for the fact that the greatest share of worst

problems in the years to come.25

23 Estimates of the number of rental households that reported receiving rental housing assistance are presented for various subgroups in the exhibits of appendix A. AHS estimates of assisted VLI renters in this report rely on self-reported data, which primarily include HUD-assisted households and may also include households assisted through other federal, state, or local programs, such as U.S. Department of Agriculture rental housing subsidies. As expected, HUD

administrative data matching procedures suggest that excluding households assisted by non-HUD programs reduces the number of households classified as receiving housing assistance. For the purposes of this report, however, households receiving assistance from a non-HUD program are not classified as having worst case housing needs. Because administrative data matching across several federal, state, and local agencies is not feasible, AHS self-reported assistance is the preferred measure of housing assistance for this report. The aggregate numbers of households served by HUD’s primary rental assistance programs, based on administrative records, are outlined in appendix C. Federal stimulus payments such as payments that were part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act were not included when calculating income in census surveys.

24 HUD defines older adult households as those having a household head or spouse who is at least age 62 and including no children younger than age 18.

25 Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies projects that aging baby boomers will swell the nation’s population aged 65 or older by 11.1 million over the next decade, fueling both the housing remodeling market and demand for smaller, accessible homes (JCHS, 2019). The number of households headed by people ages 75 and over is projected to double from 14 million to 28 million (JCHS, 2021).

8

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Other Family Households. After considering families with

with disabilities may have fewer employment options and

children and older adult households, other households

may have additional difficulties in finding suitable housing

can be divided into those that include multiple members

at reasonable cost because of a lack of accessible housing

of a given family (other family households) and those

and workplaces; features such as elevators that are luxury

that do not (other nonfamily households). Other family

amenities for some households may be necessities for

households include households such as married couples

people with disabilities. Additionally, Supplemental Security

who are childless, one or more parents with adult children

Income (SSI) benefits are inadequate to cover housing costs

at home, adult or minor siblings sharing an apartment, and

in many markets.29

householders boarding an older adult parent.26

Other family households constitute the smallest category

DISABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY IN THE

in exhibit 1-9, contributing 918,000 worst case households

AMERICAN HOUSING SURVEY

in 2021. The rate of worst case needs among VLI renter

households in this group was 50.0 percent, exceeding the

Since 2009, the American Housing Survey (AHS)

prevalence for either families with children or older adult

has collected information about the following types

households. The high rate of worst case needs among this

of disabilities:

group grew by 6.3 percentage points between 2019 and

• Deafness or serious difficulty hearing.

2021, more than for any other household type. An increase

• Blindness or difficulty seeing, even when

of 188,000 VLI households in this subgroup contributed to

wearing glasses.

the increment, although complex dynamics within this small,

• Serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or

diverse group are likely driving change.

making decisions because of a physical, mental,

or emotional condition.

Other Nonfamily Households. About 5.72 million VLI

• Serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.

renter households in 2021 were other nonfamily households,

• Serious difficulty dressing or bathing.

making this category the third largest after families with

• Difficulty doing errands alone because of a

children and older adults. Like most household types,

physical, mental, or emotional condition.

the number of VLI other nonfamily households increased

between 2019 and 2021.

The 2015 AHS introduced questions related to

the wheelchair accessibility of housing units

Worst case needs affected 2.63 million other nonfamily

and whether home modifications were made to

households in 2021, an increase of 94,000 since 2019 and

accommodate individuals with physical disabilities.

more than the number found among any other household

The 2019 AHS included a topical module of

type. The large number of VLI renters of this group continued

questions related to housing accessibility features.

to experience the highest prevalence of worst case needs,

which marginally increased from 45.9 percent in 2019 to

For further information, see the demographics

46.0 in 2021. Most other nonfamily households are single

and accessibility sections of the AHS Codebook

individuals, and the rest are unrelated people sharing a

interactive tool (Census-HUD, 2021b).

housing unit.27 One-person VLI households may be less

well-equipped to handle rent increases than those who share

housing costs with a roommate or, in family households, with

Beginning with the 2009 AHS, respondents have been

a family member. Income shocks may also affect one-person

asked directly whether household members have any of

households more severely than households in which two or

six types of disabilities, including four basic functional

more people contribute resources to the household.28

limitations—visual, hearing, cognitive, and ambulatory—and

two types of difficulties with activities of daily living—self-

Households Including People with Disabilities. Having

care and independent living. The most frequently reported

worst case needs can be especially difficult for renter

disabilities among VLI renter households in which a person

households that include people with disabilities. Individuals

under age 62 has a disability were cognitive limitations

26 Among “other family” VLI renter households, 41.6 percent include a married couple, 59.0 percent have a female householder, 66.5 percent have a householder of color, and the mean household size is 2.5 persons. See exhibit A-6A.

27 Among nonfamily VLI renter households, 85.2 percent were one-person households in 2021. See exhibit A-6A. The AHS does not include college students living in institutional housing, but it may include students sharing off-campus housing and other households in which individuals double up to share housing expenses.

28 In a similar vein, single adults, unaccompanied youth, or multiple-adult households are more prevalent within the population experiencing homelessness than are families with children (HUD-CPD, 2022a). Likewise, a recent study of community-level predictors of homelessness found that higher population rates of one-person households were associated with higher homelessness rates (Nisar et al., 2019).

29 For 2021, the SSI monthly federal benefit rate for an individual living alone is $794 (SSA, 2021).

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

9

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

(serious difficulties concentrating, remembering, or making

renter households with people younger than 62 who have

decisions), affecting 48.5 percent; ambulatory limitations

disabilities and the number of such households with worst

(walking or climbing stairs), 43.5 percent; and independent

case needs increased.

living limitations, 29.2 percent. These households often have

the added burden of worst case needs, which affected 50.5

Exhibit 1-10 shows that the prevalence of worst case needs

percent of those with cognitive limitations, 42.6 percent of

among VLI renter households with people younger than 62

those with ambulatory limitations, and 39.2 percent of those

who have disabilities varied somewhat by household type.

with independent living limitations.30

Prevalence ranged from 34.4 percent for other nonfamily

households to 48.1 percent for older adult households.

People with disabilities are found among all four household

Notwithstanding these differences in prevalence, the largest

types discussed previously. As exhibit 1-10 shows, 3.36

household categories accounted for most cases of worst

million VLI renter households (17.4 percent of VLI renter

case needs affecting people with disabilities. Of the 1.26

households) had people younger than 62 reporting at least

million households (with people younger than 62 who have

one of the six measures of disability.31 In 2021, 1.26 million

disabilities) with worst case needs, 44.6 percent are other

(37.4 percent) of these households experienced worst case

nonfamilies, 30.9 percent are families with children, and 18.4

needs, a modest increase from 1.05 million (36.1 percent)

percent are other family households.

in 2019. Between 2019 and 2021, both the number of VLI

Exhibit 1-10. Worst Case Needs Were Common Among People Younger Than 62 Who Had Disabilities in 2021

Families

Older Adult

Other Family

Other

Total

With

Households

Households

Nonfamily

Children

Households

Very low-income renter households (thousands)

5,923

5,858

1,837

5,719

19,337

Worst case needs (thousands)

2,629

2,349

918

2,629

8,526

Percentage with worst case needs

44.4

40.1

50.0

46.0

44.1

Percentage having people younger than 62 who have

disabilities

17.8

2.7

28.0

28.5

17.4

Very low-income renter households having people

younger than 62 who have disabilities (thousands)

1,056

160

514

1,629

3,359

Worst case needs (thousands)

389

77

231

560

1,257

Percentage with worst case needs

36.8

48.1

44.9

34.4

37.4

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Overcrowding and Worst Case

and educational outcomes and family dynamics (Solari and

Needs

Mare, 2012). For such reasons, it is useful to examine in detail

the extent of rental unit overcrowding and its overlap with

Overcrowding is defined as the condition of having more

worst case needs.

than one person per room in a residence, considering

only whole rooms such as bedrooms, living rooms, dining

In 2021, about 948,000 very low-income renter households,

rooms,32 kitchens, recreation rooms, lodger’s rooms, and

or 4.9 percent, were overcrowded (exhibit 1-11). Households

other finished rooms. HUD categorizes overcrowding as a

with worst case needs accounted for 390,000 (41.1 percent)

moderate housing problem rather than a severe problem

of the overcrowded VLI renter households.33 Cost burdens,

that in itself may trigger a worst case needs designation. A

however, were common among both overcrowded and

household’s decision to rent an undersized unit, however,

uncrowded VLI renter households. Among overcrowded

might be a way to avoid taking on the severe cost burdens or

households, 32.5 percent had moderate cost burdens and

severe physical inadequacies associated with appropriately

43.3 percent had severe cost burdens. Among uncrowded

sized units. Further, overcrowding can be harmful to health

households, only 25.5 percent had moderate cost burdens,

but severe cost burdens were more prevalent, at 53.6

30 The data about types of limitations are summarized in appendix A, exhibit A-15. Also see HUD-PD&R (2008).

31 The analysis is limited to people younger than 62 who have disabilities, because many older adults suffer from impairments and activity limitations in consequence of aging. Note, however, that people younger than 62 who have disabilities may be found in older adult households, as exhibit 1-10 demonstrates.

Households headed by an older adult with disabilities are not excluded if they also include people younger than 62 who have disabilities.

32 A dining room, to be counted, must be a separate room.

33 Overcrowding is considered a moderate problem rather than a severe problem that constitutes a potential worst case need.

10

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

percent. This pattern suggests that some households with

price of avoiding overcrowding.

worst case needs may accept severe cost burdens as the

Exhibit 1-11. Overcrowding Problems and Other Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters, 2021

Households (thousands)

Overcrowded

Not

Total

Percent

Overcrowded

Overcrowded

Worst Case Needs Status

Worst Case Needs

390

8,136

8,526

4.6%

Not Worst Case Needs

557

10,250

10,807

5.2%

Total

948

18,390

19,340

4.9%

Housing Cost Burden

NA (no income)

42

1,053

1,095

3.8%

No burden (costs 0–30% income)

187

2,801

2,988

6.3%

Moderate burden (costs 30–50% income)

308

4,682

4,990

6.2%

Severe burden (costs 50% or more of income)

410

9,854

10,264

4.0%

Total

947

18,390

19,337

4.9%

N = 19,340 million VLI renters. NA = not applicable.

Note: Totals across breakout groups do not equal total VLI renters or crowded households because of the difference in the weights of each variable used in this table.

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

In 2021, families with children were the most common

of overcrowding among families with children, 14.8 percent,

household type among VLI renters to experience

than among other household types. Other nonfamily

overcrowding, with 877,000 cases accounting for 92.5

households, which might include large households of

percent of overcrowded households (exhibit 1-12). This

unrelated individuals, only rarely experienced crowding at

preponderance reflects the substantially greater prevalence

0.6 percent.

Exhibit 1-12. Overcrowding Problems and Demographics of Very Low-Income Renters, 2021

Households (thousands)

Overcrowded

Not

Total

Percent

Overcrowded

Overcrowded

Household Type

Older Adults without Children

24

5,834

5,858

0.4%

Families with Children

877

5,046

5,923

14.8%

Other Family Households

41

1,796

1,837

2.2%

Other Nonfamily Households

6

5,714

5,720

0.1%

Total

948

18,390

19,338

4.9%

Household Size

1

0

9,290

9,290

0.0%

2–4

162

8,061

8,223

2.0%

5–7

669

1,017

1,686

39.7%

8+

117

22

139

84.2%

Total

948

18,390

19,338

4.9%

Race and Ethnicity

Non-Hispanic White

170

8,103

8,273

2.1%

Non-Hispanic Black

153

4,734

4,887

3.1%

Hispanic

516

4,058

4,574

11.3%

Asian

67

821

888

7.5%

Other

42

674

716

5.9%

Total

948

18,390

19,338

4.9%

N = 19,338 million VLI renters.

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

11

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Overcrowded households predictably tend to be those with

Summary

more members. Among VLI renters, 669,000 or 70.6 percent

of overcrowded households had from five to seven members,

Worst case needs for affordable rental housing were a

and another 117,000 or 12.3 percent had eight or more

serious national problem in 2019 and increased substantially

members. In the latter group, 84.2 percent of households

in 2021. Of the 19.34 million VLI renter households

were overcrowded, compared with 39.7 percent of five-to-

susceptible to severe rent burdens and severely inadequate

seven member households and only 2.0 percent of two-to-

housing in 2021, 8.53 million—44.1 percent—faced one or

four member households.

both problems without housing assistance. Between 2019

and 2021, the number of households with worst case needs

More than one-half of overcrowded VLI renter households

increased by 9.8 percent. In 2021, the number of worst

in 2021, 516,000 or 54.4 percent, were Hispanic (exhibit

case needs cases was the highest ever observed. The

1-12). Non-Hispanic Whites accounted for 17.9 percent of

data are a reminder of the enduring impact of the financial

overcrowded VLI renter households, non-Hispanic Blacks

crisis and recession that, a decade later, continue to affect

for 16.1 percent, Asians for 7.1 percent, and other races

personal finances, credit histories, and affordable housing

and ethnicities for 4.4 percent. Higher prevalence was

opportunities.

an important factor in the number of crowded Hispanic

households, as their overcrowding rate of 11.3 percent

Severely inadequate housing continues to be a relatively

substantially exceeded the rates of 7.5 percent among

minor cause of worst case needs. In 2021, severely

Asians, 5.9 percent among other races and ethnicities,

inadequate housing alone produced a mere 2.8 percent of

3.1 percent among non-Hispanic Blacks and 2.1 percent

worst case needs, whereas 97.2 percent of households with

among non-Hispanic Whites. Considering the frequency of

worst case needs had severe rent burdens, including 2.9

crowding among families with children, it is worth noting that

percent that had both types of housing problems. Reflecting

among VLI renters (like other households), mean family sizes

the importance of severe rent burdens as a cause of worst

among families with children did not vary greatly by race and

case needs, 7 out of 10 households with worst case needs

ethnicity: the mean number of children ranged only from 1.8

(71.0 percent) had extremely low incomes during 2021.

among Asian households to 2.1 among Hispanic households.

Although all racial and ethnic groups experienced an

Overcrowded households were those renting units with

increase in worst case needs between 2019 and 2021,

insufficient rooms to house all members of their household.

renter households of color experienced more rapid

Having more than two people per bedroom could be

increases than non-Hispanic White households. Worst case

a violation of the lease and cause for eviction. Across

needs increased by 334,000 among non-Hispanic Black

overcrowded VLI-occupied rental units in 2021, units with

households, by 246,000 among Hispanics, by 47,000 among

four or more rooms accounted for more than three-quarters

Asians, and by 110,000 among households of color who are

of crowded units (77.2 percent). Three-room units housed

not Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, or Asian (that is, “other”).

15.8 percent of crowded households, two-room units 3.1

Race and ethnicity subgroup analysis suggests that the small

percent, and one-room units 3.9 percent (exhibit 1-13).

group of “other” race and ethnicities group had the highest

rates of worst case needs, followed by Native Hawaiian-

Exhibit 1-13. Very Low-Income Renters with Overcrowding by

Pacific Islanders. Non-Hispanic White households accounted

Household Size and Number of Rooms, 2021

for 42.8 percent of all worst case needs in 2021; these

Households

1

2

3

4+

Crowded

households experienced the slowest increase in worst case

(thousands)

room

rooms rooms rooms

Total

needs with 23,000 more cases.

Household Size

Among VLI renter households, worst case needs affected

2–4

37

25

99

0

161

44.4 percent of families with children, 40.1 percent of older

5–7

0

4

51

614

669

adult households, 50.0 percent of other family households,

8+

0

0

0

117

117

and 46.0 percent of other nonfamily households (typically

one-person households). The number of worst case needs

Total

37

29

150

731

947

between 2019 and 2021 increased by 108,000 cases

Share of crowded 3.9%

3.1%

15.8%

77.2%

among older adults with no children, by 358,000 cases

units

among families with children, by 198,000 cases among

other family households and by 94,000 cases among other

N = 948,000 overcrowded VLI renters.

Note: Totals across breakout groups do not equal total crowded households

nonfamily households. In 2021, families with children and

because of rounding.

other nonfamily households accounted for the greatest share

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

of worst case needs—30.8 percent each—followed by older

adult households (27.6 percent).

12

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 1. ExTENT AND NATURE OF WORST CASE NEEDS

Worst case needs were common among households with

younger people with disabilities. For example, 37.4 percent

of VLI renter households with people younger than 62

with disabilities experienced worst case needs in 2021,

moderately less than the 44.1-percent prevalence among

VLI renter households overall. Households having people

younger than 62 who have disabilities accounted for 14.7

percent of worst case needs.

Approximately 948,000 VLI renters were underhoused or

lived in overcrowded units in 2021. About 41.1 percent of

these households had worst case needs (meaning they

also had a severe housing cost burden or lived in severely

inadequate housing, or both). Most overcrowded households

(92.5 percent) are families with children. More than one-half

(54.4 percent) of overcrowded households were Hispanic,

17.9 percent were non-Hispanic White, and 16.1 percent were

non-Hispanic Black. About 70.6 percent of overcrowded

households have five to seven members, and 17.1 percent

have from two to four members. Overcrowded households

with two to four members live in units with one to three rooms,

with 61.5 percent renting three-room units. Overcrowded

households with five to seven members live in units with

two or more rooms, with 91.8 percent renting units with four

or more rooms. Overcrowded households of eight or more

members live in units with four or more rooms.

Section 2 examines how the broad problem of worst case

needs is caused by shortages of affordable housing and is

mitigated by assisted housing on a national basis and within

regional markets.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

13

14

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

Section 2. Shortage of Affordable Housing

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Shortage of Affordable Housing

The United States faces a widespread shortage of rental units that are

affordable to very low-income (VLI) renter households. The supply of affordable units is especially insufficient to meet the needs of extremely low-income (ELI) households. In 2021, only 61 affordable units (including assisted units) existed 2 for every 100 ELI renter households nationwide. The presence of higher-income renters in units that are affordable to ELI renter households exacerbates this shortage. In 2021, only 36 of the 61 units affordable to ELI households

were available for occupancy by ELI households. A final factor is that a small but significant portion of the affordable and available stock continues to be Section

physically inadequate and may pose threats to occupants. In 2021, only one-

half of the affordable units (32 of 61 affordable units) were both physically adequate and available for occupancy for every 100 ELI renter households. The geography of worst case needs and housing assistance sets a foundation for

understanding the competition for affordable rental housing and its shortages.

Geography of Worst Case Needs

Housing markets are localized and often contain distinct submarkets. VLI and

ELI renter households are more likely than higher-income renters to find their choice of housing units limited to communities and neighborhoods where

poverty is more common. Such market segmentation and supply restrictions

can manifest differently across market types in terms of renters’ likelihood of experiencing worst case needs.

As a national survey of modest scale, the American Housing Survey (AHS)

does not support biennial estimates of worst case needs for most individual

metropolitan areas or for highly localized submarkets.34 It does, however,

support select estimates of worst case needs for certain large metropolitan

areas included in the survey sample.35 It also supports a national examination of four types of metropolitan locations—central cities, urban suburbs of central 34 HUD and the Census Bureau have traditionally conducted periodic AHS metropolitan surveys to supplement the national AHS. In 2015, the AHS was redesigned with a new national and metropolitan area longitudinal sample to account for changes in geography and attrition of housing units over time. In 2021, as in 2017, a supplemental sample of housing units in select metropolitan areas was combined with the national sample to produce metropolitan-level estimates. Stand-alone surveys were also conducted in some additional metropolitan areas.

35 The redesigned AHS includes a longitudinal sample of the 15 largest metropolitan areas every 2

years and an additional 10 metropolitan areas surveyed on a rotating basis every 4 years. Select estimates for the metropolitan areas sampled in 2021 are presented in exhibit 2-4 and exhibit A-11B. For more information on the 2015 AHS redesign, see appendix E.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

15

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

cities, rural suburbs of central cities, and nonmetropolitan

housing assistance. Examining the spatial distribution

areas36—and of four geographic regions—the Northeast,

of housing assistance and of worst case needs together

Midwest, South, and West. Analysis of AHS data by region

provides information about the extent to which rental

and metropolitan status adds considerable depth to the

assistance mitigates severe housing problems.37

national picture of worst case needs.

Exhibit 2-1 shows the distribution of the nation’s 19.34 million

Worst Case Needs and Housing

VLI renter households across the four census regions and four

Assistance by Region and

metropolitan categories in 2021. On a regional basis, more

than one-third of VLI renter households—6.73 million—lived

Metropolitan Location

in the South, 4.67 million lived in the West, 3.99 million lived in

the Northeast, and 3.95 million lived in the Midwest. Central

A key aspect of the definition of worst case needs is that it

cities were home to most (9.38 million) VLI renter households,

can be understood as an indicator of the need for affordable

followed by suburbs (7.69 million)38 and nonmetropolitan areas

housing. Because income-based rental assistance and other

(2.27 million).39 These geographic patterns did not change

deep public subsidies generally make housing affordable,

substantially between 2019 and 2021.

the definition of worst case needs excludes renters with

Exhibit 2-1. Very Low-Income Renters Experienced Worst Case Needs Across Every Region and Metropolitan Location in 2021

Metropolitan Location

Region

Central Cities

Suburbs,

Suburbs,

Nonmetro-

Total

Urban

Rural

politan Areas

Northeast (thousands)

2,134

1,462

167

231

3,994

Percentage with worst case needs

40.2

43.2

23.4

39.8

40.6

Percentage with housing assistance

36.3

30.8

33.4

39.6

34.4

Midwest (thousands)

1,741

1,239

293

674

3,947

Percentage with worst case needs

37.5

41.7

36.4

30.8

37.6

Percentage with housing assistance

29.8

21.4

20.5

31.7

26.8

South (thousands)

2,930

2,006

802

988

6,727

Percentage with worst case needs

46.0

58.2

42.0

32.0

47.1

Percentage with housing assistance

26.4

16.2

20.5

32.2

23.5

West (thousands)

2,569

1,479

242

379

4,670

Percentage with worst case needs

47.3

50.4

43.0

49.7

48.3

Percentage with housing assistance

25.7

21.9

21.2

24.9

24.2

Total (thousands)

9,375

6,187

1,504

2,273

19,338

Percentage with worst case needs

43.5

49.5

39.0

35.4

44.1

Percentage with housing assistance

29.1

22.1

22.0

31.6

26.6

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Like VLI renter households, worst case needs were common

households had worst case needs in 2021. The prevalence

in every region and metropolitan category across the

of worst case needs among VLI renter households was

nation. As a national average, 44.1 percent of VLI renter

greater than the national average in the South and West and

36 Both central cities and suburbs are located within metropolitan areas. A central city consists of the largest city within a metropolitan area. Suburbs are within etropolitan counties but outside central cities. For the purposes of this report, suburban areas are further distinguished as urban or rural based on their population density. Nonmetropolitan areas fall outside metropolitan counties and tend to be more rural in nature.

37 AHS questions about receipt of rental assistance are designed to focus on federal housing assistance programs. These data result in an estimate of 5.14 million self-reported VLI renter households with housing assistance, which is somewhat more than HUD’s program total. Other potential sources of housing assistance include the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Housing Service, other federal agencies, or other state or local programs. Also affecting this comparison, a small fraction of HUD-assisted renters may have incomes above the VLI threshold because they were admitted to programs under local policy preferences or their incomes increased after program admission. See the discussion of HUD’s rental assistance programs in appendix C and housing assistance status in appendix E.

38 Among suburban VLI renter households, most (80.4 percent) were concentrated in densely populated urban suburbs.

39 Changes in annual estimates of VLI renter households in nonmetropolitan areas should be viewed with caution because HUD assigns average income limits to less populated areas to accommodate AHS data suppression. See the discussion of income cutoffs in association with AHS geography in appendix E.

16

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

in urban suburbs. The Midwest, Northeast, central cities,

particularly low rates of assistance. These regional disparities

rural suburbs, and nonmetropolitan areas had smaller-than-

in the prevalence of housing assistance for VLI renter

average shares of VLI renter households with worst case

households were also evident nationally, ranging from 23.5

needs. The national total of 8.53 million worst case needs

percent assisted in the South to 34.4 percent assisted in

in 2021 consisted of 3.17 million households in the South,

the Northeast. Another region with a low rate of housing

2.25 million in the West, 1.62 million in the Northeast, and

assistance, the West, has had the highest rate of worst case

1.48 million in the Midwest. (See appendix exhibit A-10 for

needs for decades. Nearly one-half—48.3 percent—of

additional regional data.)

VLI renter households in the West experienced worst case

needs in 2021. Areas that developed during an earlier period

The data presented in exhibit 2-1 demonstrate the important

continue to draw benefits from an established but aging

role that housing assistance plays in reducing worst case

stock of public housing.

needs. Nationwide, 5.14 million VLI renter households

reported receiving housing assistance in 2021, compared

Exhibit 2-3 illustrates the vital role of housing assistance in

with the 8.53 million having worst case needs. Thus, 1.7

preventing households from experiencing worst case needs.

VLI renter households had worst case needs for every 1

In exhibit 2-3, central cities, suburbs, and nonmetropolitan

that received assistance, a slightly higher ratio than 1.5 to

areas are represented by purple, gold, and green bubbles,

1 in 2019. Put differently, among VLI renter households,

respectively. Larger bubbles represent a larger national

26.6 percent of households had rental assistance, and an

share of worst case needs households. Across regions

additional 44.1 percent had worst case needs for rental

and metropolitan locations, housing assistance is inversely

assistance or other affordable housing in 2021 (exhibit 2-2).

related to worst case needs. Locations indicated in the

The remaining residual (29.3 percent) rented in the private

upper-left quadrant of the chart fared better than the national

market without housing assistance and avoided severe

average because of higher rates of housing assistance and

housing problems. These data suggest that in 2021, the

lower prevalence of worst case needs among VLI renter

private rental market was working adequately for fewer than

households. The locations clustered in the middle of the

one in three VLI renter households (exhibit 2-2).

chart approximate average prevalence rates; the locations

in the lower-right quadrant fared worse than the national

average because of lower rates of housing assistance and

Exhibit 2-2. Housing Problem Status of Very Low-

Income Renter Households by Relative Income in 2021

higher rates of severe housing problems.

45%

Patterns in the suburbs tended to be worse than those in

nonmetropolitan areas nationally, whereas central cities

40%

12.8%

vary. Worst case needs affected a smaller share of very

35%

low-income renters in nonmetropolitan areas, where housing

enters

assistance was relatively more available. Central cities of the

30%

Northeast and Midwest also fared better—with higher rates

25%

of housing assistance and lower rates of worst case needs—

5.5%

than their counterparts in the South and West.

20%

18.0%

15%

31.3%

cent of very low-income r

21.1%

Per 10%

5%

11.3%

0% Unassisted without

Assisted

Unassisted with

Severe Problems

Severe Problems

0-30% AMI

>30-50% AMI

AMI = area median income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Nationally, housing assistance is relatively less common

in the suburbs, where less than 25 percent of VLI renter

households in 2021 were assisted. Rapidly expanding

central cities and suburbs in the South and West had

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

17

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Compared with their urban counterparts, the small

Exhibit 2-3. Prevalence of Worst Case Needs Was Inversely

populations of very low-income renters living in rural suburbs

Related to Prevalence of Housing Assistance in 2021

represented a small share of worst case households. Rural

suburbs of the West, however, do have low rates of housing

45%

Size of bubble is

proportional to share of

assistance coinciding with high rates of worst case needs.

Northeast nonmetro

national worst case needs

40%

(range 1% – 16%)

Correspondingly, many Western rural suburbs experienced

Northeast

high rates of homelessness in 2017 (Nisar et al., 2019).

South

Northeast central city

enters

35% suburb, rural nonmetro

Northeast suburb, urban

Not shown in exhibit 2-3 are changes in rates of VLI renter

Midwest

South central city

30%

nonmetro

households with worst case needs between 2019 and 2021.

West central city

Midwest central city

Increases in rates of worst case needs ranging from 1.4 to

25%

West nonmetro

3.5 percentage points were observed in all regions except

West suburb, urban

for the West, where the prevalence rate improved slightly—

20%

Midwest

suburb, rural

by less than 1 percentage point (exhibit A-10). During the

with housing assistance

cent of very low-income r

West suburb,

15%

South

rural

same period, rates of worst case needs decreased slightly,

Per

Midwest

suburb, urban

suburb, rural

South

suburb, urban

again by less than 1 percentage point, in central cities,

10%

while increasing by 4.6, 2.7, and 0.8 percentage points in

20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65%

urban suburbs, nonmetropolitan areas, and rural suburbs,

Percent of very low-income renters with worst case needs

respectively (exhibit A-11A).

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Variation in Worst Case Needs

Worst case needs were more prevalent in the West and the

Between Metropolitan Markets

South, especially in the suburbs, where housing assistance

An examination of the number of VLI renters and the

was scarcer—although high rents in the West also shape

prevalence of worst case needs across the largest

this picture.40 Several areas with a greater relative scarcity of

metropolitan areas offer additional insight into the variation

housing assistance and an abundance of worst case needs

of severe housing problems in central cities and suburbs.

account for substantial fractions of the national problem, as

With their densely populated urban cores connected to

shown by the size of the bubbles in the lower-right quadrant

surrounding counties through strong commuting ties,

of exhibit 2-3. The relative size and positioning of the bubbles

metropolitan areas reflect groupings of central cities

for central cities and urban suburbs also suggests that

and suburbs with a high degree of social and economic

denser urban areas contribute the largest shares of severe

integration. The redesigned AHS supports examining the

housing affordability problems. Together, central cities and

variation in worst case needs across some of the largest

urban suburbs of the South and West accounted for 53

metropolitan housing markets. Exhibit 2-4 shows the VLI

percent of worst case needs. In recent decades, housing

renter populations and the number and share experiencing

policy has not kept pace with geographic shifts in the

worst case needs in the nation’s 15 largest metropolitan

national population distribution and housing needs. Policy

areas in 2019 and 2021.

enhancements to improve geographic allocation of housing

resources could reduce such spatial disparities and their

impacts on community well-being.

Exhibit 2-4. Prevalence of Worst Case Needs Among Very Low-Income Renters Varied Across Metropolitan Markets in 2021

Metropolitan Area

2019

2021

Metropolitan Area

2019

2021

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-

MD-WV

Number of very low-income renters

1,769

1,825

Number of very low-income renters

333

339

(thousands)

(thousands)

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

724

799

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

123

154

Percent with worst case needs

40.9

43.8

Percent with worst case needs

36.9

45.4

(continued)

40 High rents introduce the question of whether enough rental units are available at Fair Market Rents (FMRs) to make housing vouchers an adequate policy response to affordable housing shortfalls. Appendix B, exhibit B-3 addresses the extent of the supply of below-FMR housing on a regional basis. Also see regional supply discussions later in this section.

18

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit 2-4. Prevalence of Worst Case Needs Among Very Low-Income Renters Varied Across Metropolitan Markets in 2021 (continued)

Metropolitan Area

2019

2021

Metropolitan Area

2019

2021

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA

San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA

Number of very low-income renters

976

1,167

Number of very low-income renters

291

311

(thousands)

(thousands)

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

508

599

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

125

129

Percent with worst case needs

52.0

51.3

Percent with worst case needs

43.0

41.5

Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA

Number of very low-income renters

(thousands)

476

523

Number of very low-income renters

(thousands)

263

304

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

160

219

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

132

159

Percent with worst case needs

33.6

41.9

Percent with worst case needs

50.2

52.3

Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar

Land, TX

Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA

Number of very low-income renters

(thousands)

337

410

Number of very low-income renters

(thousands)

193

239

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

179

227

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

81

97

Percent with worst case needs

53.1

55.4

Percent with worst case needs

42.0

40.6

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm

Beach, FL

Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI

Number of very low-income renters

356

381

Number of very low-income renters

235

221

(thousands)

(thousands)

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

177

217

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

111

91

Percent with worst case needs

49.7

57.0

Percent with worst case needs

47.2

41.2

Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH

Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ

Number of very low-income renters

347

373

Number of very low-income renters

185

190

(thousands)

(thousands)

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

99

139

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

99

107

Percent with worst case needs

28.5

37.3

Percent with worst case needs

53.5

56.3

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA

Number of very low-income renters

364

345

Number of very low-income renters

149

167

(thousands)

(thousands)

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

174

171

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

98

103

Percent with worst case needs

47.8

49.6

Percent with worst case needs

65.8

61.7

Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-

NJ-DE-MD

National

Number of very low-income renters

306

345

Number of very low-income renters

18,388

19,338

(thousands)

(thousands)

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

125

157

Number with worst case needs (thousands)

7,766

8,526

Percent with worst case needs

40.8

45.5

Percent with worst case needs

42.2

44.1

Notes: Estimates for the 15 largest metropolitan areas (by population ranking) are presented. The redesigned AHS samples these 15 metropolitan areas every 2

years. Estimates for 10 additional metropolitan areas surveyed in 2021 are presented in exhibit A-11B.

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Although 44.1 percent of VLI renter households had worst

households in each of the nation’s largest metropolitan

case needs nationally, local markets show a substantial

areas. Among the 15 metropolitan areas shown in exhibit

degree of variation beyond the macro-level trends observed

2-4, 44.6 percent of VLI renters had worst case needs in

across regions and types of metropolitan locations. Worst

2021, compared with 44.3 percent in 2019, representing

case needs affected substantial shares of VLI renter

an increase of 453,000 cases. Reflecting particularly

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

19

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

severe local conditions, more than one-half of the VLI

the mismatches between the number of rental units needed

renter households residing in and around Riverside (CA),

by renters of various income categories and the number of

Miami, Phoenix, Houston, Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Dallas

affordable units provided by the market to those renters lends

experienced worst case needs in 2021. The rates of worst

considerable insight into private rental market dynamics

case needs decreased in five of the 15 large metropolitan

and the persistence of worst case needs during periods of

areas between 2019 and 2021, with Detroit and Riverside

economic growth.

having the largest decreases of 6.1 and 4.1 points,

respectively. Local events, trends, and policies may account

How the Market Allocates Affordable

for changing rates of housing problems within metropolitan

areas.

Housing on a National Basis

The competition for good-quality, affordable housing

Factors Limiting Access to

remains vigorous. Competition affects whether the neediest

households can live in the most affordable units, the vacancy

Affordable Rental Housing

rate at different rent levels, and how quickly new units are

occupied. Exhibit 2-5 shows the distribution of rental units and

Even with slightly more than one-fourth of VLI renter

their occupancy by their rents’ affordability relative to the area

households receiving housing assistance, the private

median income (AMI).41 For this analysis, a unit is considered

market’s affordable rental housing supply falls far short

affordable for a renter if the gross rent (rent plus utilities) does

of need. Nationally, less than one-third of VLI renter

not exceed 30 percent of the maximum income of their income

households could avoid severe housing problems in the

category. However, any given renter may live in a unit renting

unassisted private rental market in 2021. An examination of

for less than, the same as, or more than that threshold.42

Exhibit 2-5. Higher-Income Renters Occupied Many Affordable Units in 2021

Rental Units by Income Needed To Makethe Rent Affordable (thousands)

Occupancy Status

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80%

of AMI

of AMI

of AMI

of AMI

Total

Higher-income occupants

3,019

3,785

7,107

NA

13,911

Same-income or lower-income occupants

4,205

4,866

11,535

11,477

32,083

Vacant

275

707

1,511

1,591

4,084

Total

7,499

9,358

20,153

13,068

50,078

AMI = area median income. NA = not applicable.

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

The extent of competition for the most affordable housing

Variations in vacancy rates across the affordability categories

portrayed is striking. As shown in exhibit 2-5, higher-income

further demonstrate the competition for affordable units.

renters occupied 3.02 million, or 40.3 percent, of the units

The most affordable units are least likely to be vacant

affordable to ELI renter households. Similarly, higher-

(exhibit 2-6). Among the least costly units—those with rents

income renters occupied 40.4 percent of units affordable

affordable at incomes of 0 to 30 percent of AMI—only 3.7

at incomes of 30 to 50 percent of AMI and 35.3 percent of

percent were vacant in 2021. Vacancy rates were much

units affordable at incomes of 50 to 80 percent of AMI, which

greater at higher rent levels: 7.6 percent among units

is the largest category of units. Rental units that are more

affordable at incomes of 30 to 50 percent of AMI, 7.5 percent

affordable were both rarer and more likely to be occupied by

at 50 to 80 percent of AMI, and 12.2 percent among the

higher-income renters.

highest rent units. Overall, rental vacancy rates fell between

2017 and 2021—9.9 percent in 2017, 9.5 percent in 2019,

and 8.2 percent in 2021—reflecting steady absorption of

unoccupied rental housing stock.43

41 The method of assigning units to cost categories was modified in 2017 to also account for limited HUD administrative exceptions to program income limits.

Slight unit affordability adjustments were applied to outliner cases where AMI-determined affordability differed from administratively determined affordability categories.

42 Note that renters whose incomes place them at the bottom of an income range would not be able to afford rents at the top of their range. More detailed presentations of these data appear in appendixes A and B, where exhibit A-12 and exhibit B-2 show unit affordability and occupancy status using 10-point income breaks.

43 Comparable estimates of the rental vacancy rate based on the Current Population Survey are slightly lower in recent years: 8.3 percent in 2013, 7.1 percent in 2015, 7.2 percent in 2017, 6.8 percent in 2019, and 6.1 percent in 2021. See U.S. Housing Market Conditions charting data, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/

ushmc/hi_RentVac.html.

20

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

and physically adequate rental units were available for every

Exhibit 2-6. Vacancies Were Lowest Among the Most

100 households nationally.45 Increasing landlord participation

Affordable Rental Units, 2017 to 2021

in HUD’s voucher program could improve access to those

20%

units among very low-income households while also

improving voucher utilization rates in places where vouchers

are available but difficult to lease up.

15%

e vacant

From 2019 to 2021, the rental stock grew by 743,000 units,

or 1.5 percent, yet the number of vacant units decreased

10%

by 591,000, or 12.6 percent. Expansions of the overall

rental stock in preceding years were accompanied by

ental units that ar

small increases in vacant units, yet strong rental demand

5%

Vacancy rate, 2021

nationwide kept vacancy rates fairly constrained for renters

Vacancy rate, 2019

with median or lower incomes. The rental stock affordable

cent of r

Vacancy rate, 2017

Per

to VLI renters decreased by 792,000 units, or 4.5 percent,

0%

between 2019 and 2021, whereas the number of affordable

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80 90

100 110

vacant units declined much more sharply, by 18.6 percent.46

Affordability category

>110

(percent of Area Median Income needed

to afford the highest rent in the category)

Although vacancy rates provide a valuable indication of

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

the balance between supply and demand, they do not

directly compare the number of affordable units with the

Despite tightening markets, the gradient in national vacancy

number of renters. The remainder of section 2 makes

rates seen in exhibit 2-6 remained relatively flat among units

such comparisons, employing three increasingly rigorous

affordable to low-income renters earning between 50 and 80

concepts to assess the sufficiency of the rental housing stock

percent of AMI. Nevertheless, the market for units affordable

relative to need.

at ELI levels remained very tight. The somewhat higher

vacancy rate for the units affordable at only 10 percent of

Affordability, Availability, and

AMI is often ascribed to units with physical or locational

Adequacy of the National Rental

challenges and that may soon be removed from the housing

stock. Higher vacancy rates continue to be found at the

Stock

highest rent levels, including numerous vacation homes,44

The scarcity of affordable units is typically greatest for

and may reflect developer preferences to construct higher-

the poorest renters, but because of the rapid increase in

end rental units in recent years. Regulatory barriers that

renter households and greater competition since the Great

make affordable homebuilding difficult have exacerbated

Recession, scarcity has reached higher up the income scale.

labor shortages that constrain mid-range rental housing

Although the renter population expansion slowed somewhat

production needed to cope with large tenure shifts and

in 2021 and more renter households had very low incomes,

household formation. In many areas, the production of

rental units largely remained out of reach for households

housing for ELI renters is not profitable.

remaining at the lower end of local income distributions.

Exhibit 2-7 displays the rental housing stock in 2021. These

Compared with the market for the most affordable units, the

aggregate data portray how well the overall stock could meet

availability of vacant units at higher rent levels shows that

the need for affordable housing if location did not matter.47

in many markets, rental assistance in the form of vouchers

could reduce worst case needs to the extent that rents fall

within program limits and landlords are willing to participate.

The appendix exhibit B-3, which examines the availability

of units within HUD program rent limits (including all HUD-

assisted housing), shows that in 2021, about 78 affordable

44 According to 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25004, about one-third of vacant housing units in the United States are for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use.

45 Regional variation in the availability of units within FMR limits is further addressed in the “Rental Stock by Region” discussion later in this section.

46 See exhibits A-12 and A-13.

47 Measures of affordability, availability, and adequacy compare the entire housing stock with the entire renter population, and they do not reflect small-scale geographic detail or the complexities of local housing markets.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

21

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

The second (pink) line in exhibit 2-7 represents all affordable

Exhibit 2-7. The Supply of Affordable,

and available rental units in 2021, meaning that it considers

Available, and Adequate Rental Housing

Stock Was Insufficient in 2021

whether higher-income renters currently occupy affordable

units.49 Availability poses an important additional constraint

140

on renters seeking affordable units. The exhibit shows that, at

best, only 36 percent of ELI renters could find an affordable

120

and available unit, even if location were not a factor.

100

The paucity of affordable and available units is worsened

80

by the occupancy of a considerable proportion of the most

affordable housing stock by renters who could afford to

60

spend more but do not choose to do so (as shown previously

Affordable

in exhibit 2-5). Such renters may be cautious about their

40

Affordable & available

finances because of income instability, a desire to reduce

Rental units per 100 renters

Affordable, available,

debt burdens, or saving for a downpayment to buy a house.

20

& adequate

In 2021, the affordable stock was nominally sufficient to

0

house every renter with an income greater than 57 percent of

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

AMI, yet the affordable and available stock did not match the

Income as percent of Area Median Income

number of renters until household incomes reached about 97

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

percent of AMI.

The third (green) line in exhibit 2-7 adds a third criterion—that

The top (magenta) line in exhibit 2-7 represents all affordable

units should be physically adequate—which further reduces

units in 2021, regardless of whether higher-income

the supply of the rental housing stock. Even for renters with

households occupied them or whether they were adequate.

low incomes (up to 80 percent of AMI), only 83 adequate

The cumulative number of affordable units equaled the

units were available for every 100 renters. The physically

cumulative number of renters (that is, 100 units per 100

adequate stock did not fully match the need until it included

renters) only for incomes exceeding 57 percent of AMI.

units affordable only to renters with incomes exceeding 125

Beyond that threshold, more than 100 affordable units existed

percent of AMI, similar to 2019 levels.

per 100 renters—enough, with perfect allocation, to provide

affordable housing to every renter with a higher income. The

2021 threshold was 5 percentage points higher than the 2019

MEASURING WHETHER AFFORDABLE

level and 12 points higher than the 2007 level, indicating that

HOUSING STOCK IS SUFFICIENT FOR NEED

many households recovering from the recession remained

renters for longer periods as the economy recovered.

• Affordability measures the extent to which

enough rental housing units of different costs

The ratio of affordable units per renter peaked at 130 units

can provide each renter household with a unit it

per 100 renters at the income level of 95 percent of AMI.

can afford (based on the 30-percent-of-income

There was a substantial surplus of units affordable at higher

standard). Affordability, which is the broadest

levels of household income on a cumulative basis. As income

measure of the relative supply of the housing

increased, renters were increasingly likely to spend less than

stock, addresses whether sufficient housing

30 percent of their incomes on housing.48

units would exist if allocated solely on the basis

of cost. The affordable stock includes both

The situation was completely different at the low end of

vacant and occupied units.

the income scale. Enough affordable units—both naturally

• Availability measures the extent to which

affordable and assisted—existed to house only 61 percent

affordable rental housing units are available

of ELI renters in 2021, assuming those units somehow could

to renters within a particular income range.

have been perfectly allocated. That shortage was substantial

Availability is a more restrictive concept because

and critical, worsening from the ratio of 70 percent observed

units that meet the definition must be available

in 2019.

and affordable. Some renters choose to spend

48 Only 14.0 percent of renters with incomes above 80 percent of AMI had either moderate or severe rent burdens, compared with 69.5 percent of renters with lower incomes. See exhibit A-1A.

49 The availability measure also removes units from consideration if they have artificially low rents because they are occupied as a benefit of employment (for example, units provided for caretakers) or because relatives or friends of the occupants own the units. In 2021, 1.93 million renter households (4.2 percent) occupied their units while paying no rent. The AHS does not provide estimates of the number of households paying a positive but less-than-market rent because of employment or other reasons.

22

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

less than 30 percent of their incomes on rent,

Rental Stock by Income

occupying housing that is affordable to renters of

lower incomes. Those units thus are not available

Thus far, the analysis has shown that relatively few rental

to lower-income renters. A unit is available at a

units were affordable in 2021, and—because of occupancy

given level of income if (1) it is affordable at that

by higher-income renters and limited vacancies—even fewer

level, and (2) it is occupied by a renter either at

were available to renters with the lowest incomes. Exhibit 2-8

that income level or at a lower level or is vacant.

summarizes the availability of rental units for the standard

• Adequacy extends the concept of availability

income groups used in this report.

by considering whether sufficient rental

units are physically adequate (based on unit

A severe mismatch existed between the number of ELI renter

characteristics described in appendix E),

households and the number of affordable units available. For

affordable, and available. Adequacy thus is the

every 100 ELI renter households, only 61 affordable units

most restrictive of the three measures.

existed. Only 36 of those units were affordable and available,

and only 32 were affordable, available, and physically

adequate.50 About 13 percent of affordable and available

units for ELI renters had severe quality deficiencies.

Exhibit 2-8. Rental Housing Stock Was Scarcest for Extremely Low-Income Renters in 2021

Income Category

Affordable

Affordable and

Affordable, Available,

Rental Units

Available Rental

and Adequate Rental

per 100 Renter

Units per 100

Units per 100 Renter

Households

Renter Households

Households

Extremely low-income renter households (0–30% AMI)

60.9

36.4

31.7

Very low-income renter households

(0–50% AMI)

87.2

56.7

49.7

Low-income renter households

(0–80% AMI)

127.8

93.2

83.0

AMI = area median income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Renters with very low incomes found 87 affordable units,

Overall, affordable housing supply worsened for extremely

57 affordable and available units, and only 50 affordable,

low-income renters between 2019 and 2021, a decrease of

available, and physically adequate units per 100 renters.

757,000 units. Exhibit 2-9 shows that the supply of affordable

About 12 percent of the affordable and available units for this

housing stock for ELI renters decreased by 9 units per

larger group had severe quality deficiencies. Renters with low

100 households, from 70 in 2019 to 61 in 2021. The ratio of

incomes found that the affordable and available rental stock

affordable and available units decreased 4 units from 40

was nearly sufficient to house them all, although about 11

units per 100 ELI renter households in 2019 to only 36 units

percent of such units had severe quality deficiencies.

in 2021.

Exhibit 2-9. Fewer Affordable Units Were Available to Very Low-Income Renters in 2021

Income Category

2017

2019

2021

2017 to

2019 to

Rental Units

Rental

Rental Units

2019

2021

per 100

Units per

per 100

Change

Change

Renters

100 Renters

Renters

Extremely low-income renter households (0–30% AMI)

Affordable

69.1

70.3

60.9

1.1

-9.4

Affordable and available

39.8

40.3

36.4

0.5

-3.9

Very low-income renter households

(0–50% AMI)

Affordable

90.7

96.0

87.2

5.3

-8.8

Affordable and available

59.0

62.2

56.7

3.2

-5.5

AMI = area median income

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

50 Previous research based on the Residential Finance Survey indicated that 12 percent of units with gross rents of $400 or less produced negative net operating income, suggesting they were headed for demolition or conversion to nonresidential use (JCHS, 2006). More recent research based on the Housing Vacancy Survey suggests that more than 10 percent of vacant units held off-market are in need of repair, abandoned, condemned, or to be demolished (JCHS, 2016).

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

23

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

For very low-income renters, the housing supply decreased

in 2021 and that this shortage was worsened by the

substantially between 2019 and 2021. The supply of affordable

preference of higher-income renters for more affordable units

units for VLI households decreased by less than nine units per

and by the physical inadequacy of some of the stock.

100 renters, and the supply of affordable and available units

decreased by less than six units per 100 renters.

The following discussion sharpens that picture by showing

how shortages vary by geography.

Geography of Supply

Rental Stock by Region

The preceding discussion shows that worst case needs

Rental markets are constrained for ELI renters across the four

in 2021 were dispersed across the nation, although their

census regions despite substantial variation in the availability

concentration varied across geography. It further shows that

of affordable rental units.51 Exhibit 2-10 illustrates that the

spatial variation in worst case needs was affected in part by

Midwest had the best availability in 2021, with 72 units per

the availability and utilization of housing assistance.

100 VLI renter households. The West was worst off, with

43 units per 100 VLI renter households, compared with 55

Affordable rental housing includes both units that receive

units for the South and 61 for the Northeast. For ELI renters,

public rent assistance and units that for-profit and nonprofit

the availability of affordable units was far from sufficient in

housing providers offer at modest rents. The examination of

any region. Even low-income renters with incomes up to 80

affordable housing supply on a national basis revealed that

percent of AMI found that not enough affordable units were

the supply of rental units that are affordable to very low-

available in the West, South, and Northeast.

income and poorer households remained deeply insufficient

Exhibit 2-10. Rental Housing Stock Was Insufficient for Extremely Low-Income Renters Across All Regions in 2021

Region and

Affordable Housing

Affordable and Available

Affordable, Available,

Renter Income Category

Units per 100 Renters

Housing Units per 100

and Adequate Housing

Renters

Units per 100 Renters

Northeast

Extremely low-income (0–30% AMI)

62.7

41.0

35.4

Very low-income (0–50% AMI)

87.6

60.9

53.0

Low-income (0–80% AMI)

122.0

92.2

81.0

Midwest

Extremely low-income (0–30% AMI)

68.4

41.0

37.2

Very low-income (0–50% AMI)

116.0

71.9

64.1

Low-income (0–80% AMI)

144.9

102.9

93.3

South

Extremely low-income (0–30% AMI)

59.3

35.7

30.9

Very low-income (0–50% AMI)

82.8

54.7

47.5

Low-income (0–80% AMI)

131.5

95.2

83.8

West

Extremely low-income (0–30% AMI)

55.6

29.6

25.3

Very low-income (0–50% AMI)

68.7

43.3

37.9

Low-income (0–80% AMI)

113.3

83.2

75.1

AMI = area median income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

On a regional basis, adding the adequacy test restricted the

units per 100 VLI renter households. Even so, the West

estimated supply for VLI renters less in the West, eliminating

retains its regional disadvantage for such renters across all

five units, than in the other regions, which lost seven to eight

three measures of sufficiency.

51 For renters who could afford rents no greater than the FMR, appendix B, exhibit B-3 reveals that although enough affordable units existed in each region, the number of available units in each region was sufficient to house only 76 to 82 percent of those renters. For renters who attempt to find a unit with a housing choice voucher, the housing quality standards of that program imply that their success will depend on the prevalence of physically adequate units in their area—not merely affordable and available units. Across regions, there were only enough physically adequate, affordable, and available units to house 70 to 73

percent of renters who could not afford rents higher than FMR.

24

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

The primary point in exhibit 2-10 is that ELI renter households

metropolitan status showed market variation in 2021.

continued to face severely constrained markets across

Exhibit 2-11 demonstrates the primacy of urban areas

all four regions. The Northeast, Midwest, and South had

in terms of severe shortages of affordable units for VLI

affordable units available for only two in five ELI renter

renter households. As shown in exhibit 2-11, measures of

households, and the West for fewer than one in three.

affordability, availability, and adequacy for each income

Rental Stock by Metropolitan

group in central cities and urban suburbs were generally

lower than the national summary values presented in

Location

exhibit 2-8.

Similar analysis of affordable housing supply based on

Exhibit 2-11. Rental Housing Stock Was Insufficient for Extremely Low-Income Renters Across All Metropolitan Locations in 2021

Metropolitan Location and

Affordable Housing

Affordable and Available

Affordable, Available, and

Income Category

Units per 100 Renter

Housing Units per 100

Adequate

Households

Renter Households

Housing Units per 100

Renter Households

Central cities

Extremely low-income renters (0–30% AMI)

50.4

34.6

30.1

Very low-income renters (0–50% AMI)

77.4

55.2

47.7

Low-income renters (0–80% AMI)

124.4

94.0

82.6

Suburbs, urban

Extremely low-income renters (0–30% AMI)

51.5

30.2

27.5

Very low-income renters (0–50% AMI)

74.6

47.2

43.0

Low-income renters (0–80% AMI)

123.1

86.9

79.8

Suburbs, rural

Extremely low-income renters (0–30% AMI)

88.0

42.5

37.7

Very low-income renters (0–50% AMI)

120.9

71.5

64.0

Low-income renters (0–80% AMI)

142.6

99.8

88.6

Nonmetropolitan areas

Extremely low-income renters (0–30% AMI)

107.5

53.9

44.2

Very low-income renters (0–50% AMI)

139.3

78.9

66.5

Low-income renters (0–80% AMI)

144.6

102.7

89.4

AMI = area median income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Stock in rural suburbs and nonmetropolitan areas was not

the affordable housing crisis could be resolved simply by

as constrained as the stock for the nation as a whole. Exhibit

lower-income renters moving away from cities; the lack of

2-11 also highlights severe deficiencies in the availability and

affordable housing presents a mobility barrier for people who

adequacy of affordable units in rural areas. Among affordable

want to move for job opportunities or other reasons. Likewise,

units to VLI renter households in urban areas, 29 to 37

a greater share of units had severe quality deficiencies

percent were occupied by higher-income renters.52 In rural

in rural areas, where 11 to 16 percent of affordable units

areas, that figure ranged from 41 to 43 percent, suggesting

available to very low-income renters were inadequate.53

that higher-income renters consumed a larger share of the

These problems are less prevalent in urban areas—affecting

affordable housing stock in rural areas than those who live

9 to 14 percent of units affordable and available to very low-

closer to city centers. This evidence disrupts the notion that

income renters.

52 That is, 22 of the 77 units affordable for every 100 VLI renter households in central cities are not available; the same is true for 27 of 75 affordable units in urban suburbs.

53 Likewise, Divringi et al. (2019) found that aggregate repair costs were particularly high among single-family rental units, especially older units occupied by renters with incomes at or below the poverty line. Repair needs among those units accounted for about 20 percent of the aggregate estimated repair costs of all renter households in 2018. Those units are disproportionately clustered in nonmetropolitan areas.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

25

SECTION 2. SHORTAGE OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Summary

In addition, a substantial proportion of available units

are not in adequate physical condition. The number of

Worst case needs are commonplace in every region and

affordable, available, and adequate units in 2021 was 50 per

metropolitan category across the United States. The national

100 VLI renter households and only 32 per 100 ELI renter

total of 8.53 million worst case needs in 2021 was distributed

households.

on a regional basis, with 3.17 million households in the

South, followed by 2.25 million in the West, 1.62 million in the

Given the scarcity of affordable, available, and adequate

Northeast, and 1.48 million in the Midwest. Nationwide, 44.1

units for the renters with the lowest incomes, the efficacy

percent of very low-income renters had worst case needs in

of housing assistance in preventing worst case needs, and

2021, a rate higher than in 2019. Prevalence increased in all

the surplus of units available at higher rent levels, housing

regions, with increases above 10 percent in both the South

vouchers continue to offer an important policy option for

and Midwest regions since 2019. Both the South and West

addressing the growing problem of worst case needs

maintained greater-than-average rates of worst case needs

using the existing housing stock. Provided that physically

in 2021. Urban areas (urban suburbs and central cities) also

adequate units with rents within program limits are available

had higher prevalence rates and were home to about 84

on the market, vouchers could reduce worst case needs to

percent of worst case needs households.

the extent that landlords are willing to participate in HUD’s

voucher program. Increasing landlord participation could

Housing assistance, including HUD-provided assistance, is

improve access to those units among VLI households

an important preventer of worst case needs among very low-

while also improving voucher utilization rates in places

income renters. Nationwide, 26.6 percent of very low-income

where vouchers are available but difficult to lease up. HUD

renters, or 5.14 million households, reported receiving

continues to reach out to landlords and conduct program

housing assistance. For every VLI renter household assisted,

demonstrations to test incentives for greater landlord

another 1.7 renter households had worst case needs that

participation in HUD’s primary rent subsidy program with

could have been mitigated with such assistance.

the aim of making voucher-eligible units more accessible,

especially in higher-opportunity neighborhoods.54

Steady absorption of unoccupied rental housing stock has

reduced overall vacancy rates to consistently less than

10 percent since 2011. With 87 rental units affordable for

every 100 VLI renter households nationally, not all such

households could find an affordable unit in 2021, even if

allocations were perfect among households across the nation

(that is, if the lowest rent units were allocated to the lowest

income households first). Many fewer affordable units were

actually available to renters with the lowest incomes because

vacancy rates were lowest for the lowest rent units, and

many affordable units were rented to higher-income families.

In 2021, the vacancy rate was only 3.7 percent for units

affordable at extremely low incomes, compared with 12.2

percent for units affordable at more than 80 percent of AMI.

The slight expansion of rental stock to meet rental demand

between 2019 and 2021 mostly benefited higher-income

households, with fewer new units affordable to VLI renter

households.

Because of competition for affordable units, when a simple

ratio of affordable units per 100 VLI renter households was

made more stringent by adding availability as a constraint,

the ratio decreased from 87 affordable units to only 57

affordable and available units per 100 VLI renter households,

and it decreased from 61 to 36 per 100 ELI renter

households. Higher-income families occupied 40.3 percent

of units affordable to ELI renter households.

54 See https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/winter19/highlight1.html.

26

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

Section 3. Understanding the Trend in Worst Case Needs

SECTION 3. UNDERSTANDING THE TREND IN WORST CASE NEEDS

Understanding the Trend in Worst

Case Needs

Section 2 demonstrated that worst case needs were prevalent across the nation because of the limited availability of adequate, affordable rental units relative 3 to the number of very low-income (VLI) renter households who needed them.

Section 3 elaborates on how the changes in the number of rental units, the

number of renter households, and rental costs during the 2019-to-2021 period

contributed to the prevalence of worst case needs.

Section

In 2021, worst case needs had increased by an estimated 760,000 cases from

2019 levels. The analysis in this section attributes the increase in worst case needs to the ongoing formation of new households and increase in number of

VLI renters that was exacerbated by increasing competition for affordable units that made them less available to VLI renters.

Drivers of Affordable Housing Demand

The previous sections of this report have shown that the increase in the number of households with worst case needs reflects both changes in the population

vulnerable to worst case needs—unassisted VLI renter households—and

changes in the share of those renters experiencing the severe problems that

trigger worst case needs. As this section will show, the population of vulnerable renters is primarily affected by demographic factors (including their incomes and, to a small extent, HUD’s categorization of their incomes). This population, in turn, substantially determines the demand for affordable housing. The current rate of worst case needs among these vulnerable renters, by contrast, reflects the economic response of the housing market to these demographic changes.

The following analysis sorts out the factors driving the most recent change

in worst case needs. The analysis first distinguishes between the effects of

population change and the prevalence of worst case needs to estimate their

relative importance and then identifies how much various demographic factors

affected the population change.55

55 Any analysis of survey data faces limitations from both sampling error and nonsampling error.

Such errors are compounded when multiple survey years are compared. This analysis takes the American Housing Survey (AHS) estimates at face value, but the reader should recognize that multiple sources of potential error exist.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

27

SECTION 3. UNDERSTANDING THE TREND IN WORST CASE NEEDS

The population of unassisted VLI renters increased by 6.4

Household formation. The nation added 4.37 million

percent or 858,000 households between 2019 and 2021,

households between 2019 and 2021, explaining a

from 13.34 million to 14.19 million. The rate of worst case

proportional increase of 282,000 cases of worst case needs.

needs among this unassisted population increased by 1.8

The number of households increased by 3.5 percent during

points from 58.2 to 60.1 percent during this same period.

this 2-year period, exceeding biennial increases averaging

2.1 percent observed in the 2011 to 2019 AHS.

Based solely on the demographic increase of unassisted VLI

renters, one might expect to have recorded a net increase

Renter share of households. A decline in renters’ share

of 515,000 cases of worst case needs. Because of the tight

of households accounts for a small reduction of worst case

rental market, however, an additional 245,000 unassisted

needs by 43,000 cases, as the 3.0 percent increase in

VLI renters were unable to find affordable and available

renters fell behind the 3.5 percent increase in households

units, increasing the prevalence rate of worst case needs

overall. Correspondingly, the homeownership rate was 64.2

and bringing the total net increase in worst case needs to

percent in 2021, marginally greater than the 64.0 percent rate

760,000 between 2019 and 2021.56

in 2019. The 3.0 percent increase in renters is below biennial

increases averaging 4.8 percent reported since 2011.

The 515,000 increase in worst case needs resulting from

demographic shifts can be further broken down into four

Renter income changes. Income losses and shifts in

components, illustrated by the first four columns of exhibit

the income distribution affecting the very low-income

3-1 and discussed below. The columns of this chart are

category account for a 175,000-case increase in worst

cascading in the sense that each column begins where the

case needs.58 The number of renters with incomes below

previous one ends.57

the very low-income threshold increased by 950,000, or 5.2

percent, during the 2019-to-2021 period, which included

Exhibit 3-1. Worst Case Needs Markedly Increased as a

the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic disruption. The

Result of Household Formation, Changes in Income, the

increase exceeds biennial changes averaging 1.6 percent

Rental Assistance Gap, and Greater Competition for

Affordable Units from 2019 to 2021

since 2011—which includes two periods with significant

decreases in VLI renters (see exhibit A-13).

245,000

increase from

Rental assistance gap. Rental assistance did not increase

less affordable Net

and available change:

in proportion to very low-income renters from 2019 to 2021,

102,000 units for VLI 760,000

so a worsening rental assistance gap accounts for 102,000

increase

renters

increase

from

added cases of worst case needs. The 2-year increase

reduced

of 6.4 percent in unassisted VLI renters exceeded the 5.2

175,000 share of VLI

percent growth in VLI renters overall. By comparison, biennial

increase from renters

increases of unassisted VLI renters have averaged only 1.1

43,000 renter income receiving

282,000

decrease changes

assistance

percent since 2011.

increase

from adding to VLI

from

homeowner numbers

The demographic factors summarized above generated a

additions to increases

U.S.

relative to

net increase in the population of unassisted, very low-income

households renter share

renters sufficient to increase worst case needs by 515,000

between 2019 and 2021 in the absence of other factors. The

housing market’s limited capacity to change the supply of

VLI-affordable units, however, has an additional impact on

severe housing problems. The fifth column of exhibit 3-1,

labeled “Affordable unit competition,” represents the extent

Household

Renter

Renter

Rental

Affordable Net change

to which the market responded to quantitative changes in

formation

share

income

assistance

unit

in worst

demand for VLI-affordable rental units. The addition of more

changes

gap

competition case needs

than 800,000 renter households with low incomes of 50

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of America Housing Survey data

to 80 percent of AMI (see exhibit A-13) increased demand

56 The demographic effect equals the new prevalence rate times the numerical increase (or decrease) in renters, and the prevalence effect is the increase (or decrease) in the prevalence rate times the baseline number of renters.

57 Because of rounding, the demographic components shown in the chart sum to 516,000 rather than 515,000 and all components sum to 761,000 rather than 760,000.

58 Stimulus payments and other forms of one-time income that were part of the federal response to the COVID-19 pandemic are not counted by the AHS and may have lifted some households out of the very low-income category. An additional potential methodological factor is summarized in the sidebar, “Changes in Income Limits and Worst Case Needs.”

28

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 3. UNDERSTANDING THE TREND IN WORST CASE NEEDS

for both VLI-affordable and higher rent housing stock. As

(exhibit A-13). Other complementary data show that more

the increased demand for VLI-affordable units was not

than 580,000 unfurnished rental apartments were completed

matched by increased supply, competition for affordable

in 2019 and 2020, a substantially more robust pace than

units increased, the number of affordable and available units

seen during most of the past two decades.59 Even so, older

per 100 renters decreased, and the prevalence rate of worst

units continue to be removed from the stock, and renter

case needs among unassisted VLI renters increased. In

households continue to increase faster—by 1.33 million

sum, market factors account for another 245,000 worst case

between 2019 and 2021—than new rental units. Further,

needs beyond the 515,000 cases explained by demographic

added renter units tended not to be affordable and available

factors alone.

for the numerous new ELI and VLI households: the median

monthly rent of the newly completed units in 2021 was

An adequate market response to growing quantitative

$1,748, as totals of affordable and available units decreased

demand for affordable units would require increased

by 5.3 percent for ELI renters and 4.1 percent for VLI renters

construction of affordably priced units and reductions in

(exhibit 3-2).

rents (known as filtering down) of surplus or aging higher-rent

units. The next section further explores such market factors.

In 2021, as in most years, both supply and demand factors

were influential in shaping the extent of worst case needs.

Other Factors Affecting Affordable

Some of those trends are promising, and others reflect

Housing Supply and Demand

ongoing challenges. Median renter incomes increased by

a modest 2.5 percent between 2019 and 2021, reflecting

As previously shown (exhibit 2-9), the availability of affordable

strength in hiring despite the brief 2020 recession associated

rental units for VLI renters worsened by 5.5 units per

with the pandemic. This was far exceeded, however, by

100 renters between 2019 and 2021, and extremely low-

the median 10.6 percent increase in rents (exhibit 3-2).

income (ELI) renters experienced the loss of 3.9 available

Further, a comparison of income groups shows that rents

units per 100 renters from an already severely constrained

increased by an average of 11.7 percent for ELI households

market. Such affordability metrics are affected by multiple

and 15.8 percent for those with incomes 30–50 percent of

demographic and market factors. Exhibit 3-2 examines

AMI, exceeding the mean rent increase of 8.9 percent for all

the factors responsible for the change in the availability of

renters (exhibit A-14).

affordable units. AHS data show that a total of 739,000 rental

units (1.5 percent) were added between 2019 and 2021

Exhibit 3-2. Changes in Affordable Rental Housing Availability Driven by Income Gains Among Renters That Outpaced Rising Costs, 2019 to 2021

Extremely Low-

Very Low-Income

Low-Income

Totala

Income (0–30% AMI)

(0–50% AMI)

(0–80% AMI)

Cumulative affordable & available rental units

(thousands)

2019

4,732

11,432

26,441

49,335

2021

4,480

10,969

26,989

50,074

Percent change

-5.3

-4.1

+2.1

+1.5

Cumulative households (thousands)

2019

11,748

18,388

27,174

44,660

2021

12,319

19,338

28,969

45,991

Percent change

+4.9

+5.2

+6.6

+3.0

Income limit (median, current dollars)

2019

21,330

32,250

51,600

—

2021

21,960

34,150

54,600

—

Percent change

+3.0

+5.9

+5.8

—

(continued)

59 See U.S. Housing Market Conditions, “Unfurnished Rental Apartments–Completed. ” https://www.huduser.gov/portal/ushmc/hd_mul_fam.html.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

29

SECTION 3. UNDERSTANDING THE TREND IN WORST CASE NEEDS

Exhibit 3-2. Changes in Affordable Rental Housing Availability Driven by Income Gains Among Renters That Outpaced Rising Costs, 2019 to 2021 (continued)

Extremely Low-

Very Low-Income

Low-Income

Totala

Income (0–30% AMI)

(0–50% AMI)

(0–80% AMI)

Median household income (all renters, current

dollars)

2019

—

—

—

40,000

2021

—

—

—

41,000

Percent change

—

—

—

+2.5

Median monthly housing cost (all renters, current

dollars)

2019

—

—

—

1,071

2021

—

—

—

1,184

Percent change

—

—

—

+10.6

AMI = area median income.

a Total represents all units or renters, not the sum of the cumulative income categories.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

For VLI renters as a group, mean rent increases of 13.8

Exhibit 3-2 shows that, across the nation, the

percent between 2019 and 2021 nearly doubled their

income limits defining each income category

mean income increases of 7.6 percent (exhibit A-14).60

increased roughly in proportion to increases

Indeed, because U.S. households experienced 6.8 percent

in AMI between 2019 and 2021. The greatest

inflation from September 2019 to September 2021,61 their

income qualifying as extremely low income for

real purchasing power decreased.62 Increased housing

a four-person household increased by $10,050,

cost burdens reflect the worsening availability of affordable

to $54,800, in the San Francisco metropolitan

units and explain why the prevalence of worst case needs

area. The greatest income qualifying as very low

increased markedly even as the size of the VLI renter

income for a four-person household increased by

population increased. The increase in prevalence occurred

$10,750, to $91,350. Such changes in high-cost

even though the subset of VLI renters with extremely low

areas substantially exceed the median changes in

incomes expanded slightly less, 4.9 percent, than the subset

income limits shown in exhibit 3-2. As a result of

with incomes of 30–50 percent of AMI, 5.7 percent.

the higher thresholds, additional households were

captured within the extremely low-income and very

low-income categories in 2021. The latter would

CHANGES IN INCOME LIMITS AND WORST

have the effect of increasing the estimate of worst

CASE NEEDS

case needs.

A portion of the population change in renters with

extremely low and very low incomes between 2019

In addition to increasing incomes, another critical element

and 2021, who are susceptible to worst case needs,

to reducing worst case needs over time is improving the

may be explained by a shift in income limits. HUD

access VLI renter households have to an adequate supply of

calculates income limits on the basis of area median

affordable rental units. Exhibit 3-3 presents how the market

family incomes, which include both owners and

for rental units affordable to VLI households has responded

renters, and then uses the income limits to define

to demand trends over the past 10 years.

the boundaries of the extremely low-, very low-, and

low-income categories.

60 Those housing costs include rent, utilities, property insurance, land rent, and association fees but exclude any separate security deposit or parking fees.

61 The September dates correspond with the end of AHS data collection in those years. The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) began recording consistent price increases of 0.5 percent per month or more in February 2021. See Bureau of Labor Statistics, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/

CUUR0000SA0.

62 Real purchasing power decreased even beyond the inflation of housing costs. For the average urban consumer (including homeowners), shelter, energy services, and utility services together accounted for 37 percent of the CPI-U market basket in 2021.

30

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

SECTION 3. UNDERSTANDING THE TREND IN WORST CASE NEEDS

Exhibit 3-3. Trends in Housing Supply Mismatch

cases, and the inability of the tight rental market to meet the

and Worst Case Needs, 2011-2021

added demand explains another 245,000 cases.

100.0

10,000

Of the four demographic factors, the national household

9,000

formation would have been expected to increase worst

case needs by 282,000 cases. A shift from renting to

80.0

8,000

homeownership diminished that effect by an estimated

7,000

43,000 cases. Deterioration in renter incomes accounted

for 175,000 additional cases, and the widening of the rental

60.0

6,000

assistance gap added 102,000 cases. It should be noted

enter houseolds

5,000

that including this latter factor—the adequacy of public rental

assistance—among demographic factors reflects its direct

40.0

4,000

impact on the number of unassisted VLI renters subject to

3,000

orst case needs (thousads)

worst case needs. It reflects, as much as demographics,

Units per 100 r

W

a policy choice of whether to increase resources for rental

20.0

2,000

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

assistance in response to increases of VLI renter households.

Affordable and available units for ELI renters (per 100 households)

The inadequate market response to those demand-inducing

Affordable and available units for VLI renters (per 100 households)

demographic trends between 2019 and 2021 further

Worst Case Needs (thousands)

contributed to the demographic pressure on worst case

ELI = extremely low income. VLI = very low income.

needs. The 740,000 rental units added between 2019 and

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

2021 fell far short of the 1.33 million renter households added

Most years in which worst case needs increase are years

during the same period (exhibit A-13). Accordingly, the

in which the availability of affordable rental units for VLI

number of rental units affordable and available decreased

renters decreases; yet the experiences of the large and

by 5.3 percent for ELI renters and 4.1 percent for VLI renters,

more vulnerable subset of ELI renters may be sufficient to

causing the affordable and available ratios to decrease

drive overall changes. Between 2017 and 2019, increases

for both groups. Such metrics characterizing the housing

in affordable and available units for VLI renters were not

market do not convey their impact on families’ well-being. For

matched by greater availability for the ELI renters who faced

example, as median renter incomes increased by a modest

greater challenges, so worst case needs changed little.

2.5 percent, median rents increased by 10.6 percent, while

Between 2019 and 2021, in contrast, both ELI and VLI renters

inflation reduced the value of their dollars by 6.8 percent.

experienced tighter rental markets and reduced availability,

so worst case needs increased sharply.

Worst case housing needs are a national problem with

variations in severity across both demographic and

The effects of weak growth in the rental supply and of strong

geographic dimensions. The extent of severe housing

competition for available rental units from higher-income

problems affecting very low-income renters in 2021 reflects

renters continue to have greatest impact on the availability

the complicated influence of the COVID-19 pandemic,

of units affordable to renters with incomes at and below 30

including losses of earnings as well as public interventions

percent of AMI. Although higher-income renters may be

through income supports and housing stability protections

unlikely to compete for the units with the very cheapest rents

(eviction moratoria) that may not be fully captured by national

because of quality deficiencies typical of such units, the

surveys. The 8.53 million cases of worst case needs in

competition for marginally higher tiers of units both reduces

2021 surpassed the post-Great Recession peak of 8.48

availability directly and causes rents to increase. Therefore,

million observed in 2011. The nation’s modest production of

supplying a range of rental and homeownership options to

affordable rental units ensures that even with public rental

households with both lower and higher incomes is important

assistance, more than 6 of 10 ELI renter households and 4 of

for reducing the level of worst case needs.

10 VLI renter households do not have access to affordable

and available housing units. In 2021, the number of VLI renter

Concluding Summary

households with worst case needs increased to 1.7 for every

VLI renter with rental assistance.

In 2021, the number of worst case needs increased

In the context of continuing inflation and other

significantly, adding 760,000 cases to the 2019 number to

macroeconomic obstacles, comprehensive policy support

reach 8.53 million. An analysis decomposing demographic

for housing production, access to affordable homes, and

and market factors indicates that the demographic factors

rental assistance for the most vulnerable families is urgently

affecting the number of unassisted VLI renter households

needed to address the continuing challenge of worst case

were sufficient to exacerbate worst case needs by 515,000

housing needs.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

31

32

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Appendix A. Detailed Data on Housing Problems and Supply of Affordable Housing Detailed Data on Housing

Problems and Supply of

Affordable Housing

A ContentsExhibit A-1A. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Appendix

Exhibit A-1B. Housing Conditions of Owner Households by Relative

Income, 2019 and 2021

Exhibit A-2A. Housing Conditions of Renters and Owners, 2001–2021—

Number of Households

Exhibit A-2B. Housing Conditions of Renters and Owners, 2001–2021—

Percentage of Households

Exhibit A-3. Housing Conditions of Unassisted Renter Households by

Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Exhibit A-4. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Renters by Relative

Income, 2019 and 2021

Exhibit A-5A. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income

Renters by Household Type, 2019 and 2021

Exhibit A-5B. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income

Renter Households Containing People with Disabilities by Household Type,

2019 and 2021

Exhibit A-6A. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Very Low-Income

Renters by Household Type, 2021

Exhibit A-6B. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Extremely Low-

Income Renters by Household Type, 2021

Exhibit A-7. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Very Low-Income

Worst Case Renters by Household Type, 2021

Exhibit A-8. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Extremely Low-

Income Worst Case Renters by Household Type, 2021

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

33

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-9. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among

Very Low-Income Renters by Race and Ethnicity, 2019 and

2021—Number and Percentage

Exhibit A-10. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very

Low-Income Renters by Region, 2019 and 2021—Number

and Percentage

Exhibit A-11A. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very

Low-Income Renters by Metropolitan Location, 2019 and

2021—Number and Percentage

Exhibit A-11B. Housing Conditions of Renter Households

by Relative Income, Sampled Metropolitan Areas, 2019 and

2021

Exhibit A-12. Households Occupying Rental Units by

Affordability of Rent and Income of Occupants, 2019 and

2021

Exhibit A-13. Renters and Rental Units Affordable and

Available to Them by Relative Income, 2001–2021

Exhibit A-14. Average Income and Average Gross Rent of

Renter Households by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Exhibit A-15. Housing Conditions of Households Having

People Younger Than 62 Who Have Disabilities by Disability

Type, 2019 and 2021

The U.S. Census Bureau reviewed this data product for

unauthorized disclosure of confidential information and

approved the disclosure avoidance practices applied to this

release.

CBDRBFY230069.

34

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-1A. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median Family Income

2021

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120%

All Incomes

Total households (thousands)

12,319

7,019

9,631

7,775

9,247

45,991

Unassisted with severe problems

6,051

2,475

1,105

324

266

10,221

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,031

2,711

4,386

1,890

931

10,949

Unassisted with no problems

1,148

778

3,534

5,173

7,813

18,446

Assisted

4,089

1,055

606

388

236

6,374

Any with severe problems

7,920

2,669

1,160

348

273

12,370

Rent burden >50% of income

7,708

2,547

975

256

142

11,628

Severely inadequate housing

493

173

213

102

132

1,113

Any with nonsevere problems only

2,140

3,200

4,611

1,963

970

12,884

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,808

3,028

4,058

1,464

515

10,873

Moderately inadequate housing

392

311

480

418

355

1,956

Crowded housing

281

213

372

152

133

1,151

Any with no problems

2,260

1,150

3,860

5,464

8,004

20,738

2019

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120%

All Incomes

Total households (thousands)

11,748

6,640

8,786

7,583

9,902

44,659

Unassisted with severe problems

5,780

1,986

1,013

372

200

9,351

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

955

2,642

3,805

1,737

1,086

10,225

Unassisted with no problems

1,064

909

3,378

5,206

8,363

18,920

Assisted

3,950

1,103

590

268

253

6,164

Any with severe problems

7,537

2,157

1,041

380

206

11,321

Rent burden >50% of income

7,372

2,064

880

289

133

10,738

Severely inadequate housing

353

131

169

90

73

816

Any with nonsevere problems only

2,087

3,153

4,029

1,787

1,118

12,174

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,791

3,016

3,510

1,358

616

10,291

Moderately inadequate housing

336

274

479

289

351

1,729

Crowded housing

247

196

314

168

181

1,106

Any with no problems

2,124

1,329

3,715

5,417

8,578

21,163

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey data

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

35

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-1B. Housing Conditions of Owner Households by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median Family Income

2021

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120%

All Incomes

Total households (thousands)

8,997

6,777

12,575

14,982

39,183

82,514

Unassisted with severe problems

5,720

1,882

1,583

768

679

10,632

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,602

2,260

3,661

3,170

2,901

13,594

Unassisted with no problems

1,674

2,636

7,331

11,043

35,603

58,287

Any with severe problems

5,720

1,882

1,583

768

679

10,632

Cost burden >50% of income

5,592

1,841

1,464

660

518

10,075

Severely inadequate housing

254

58

135

109

164

720

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,602

2,260

3,661

3,170

2,901

13,594

Cost burden >30–50% of income

1,429

2,102

3,240

2,758

2,024

11,553

Moderately inadequate housing

191

188

310

338

717

1,744

Crowded housing

116

49

234

168

235

802

Any with no problems

1,674

2,636

7,331

11,043

35,603

58,287

2019

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120%

All Incomes

Total households (thousands)

8,265

6,355

11,741

14,516

38,599

79,476

Unassisted with severe problems

5,082

1,772

1,410

764

598

9,626

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,439

2,124

3,581

3,016

3,209

13,369

Unassisted with no problems

1,744

2,459

6,750

10,736

34,793

56,482

Any with severe problems

5,082

1,772

1,410

764

598

9,626

Cost burden >50% of income

4,974

1,722

1,322

626

467

9,111

Severely inadequate housing

215

58

98

138

133

642

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,439

2,124

3,581

3,016

3,209

13,369

Cost burden >30–50% of income

1,260

1,949

3,155

2,586

2,435

11,385

Moderately inadequate housing

196

188

372

353

610

1,719

Crowded housing

88

78

201

148

219

734

Any with no problems

1,744

2,459

6,750

10,736

34,793

56,482

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

36

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-2A. Housing Conditions of Renters and Owners, 2001–2021—Number of Households

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

Total households

(thousands)

105,435 105,868 108,901 110,719 111,861 115,076 116,032 118,290

121,560

124,135 128,504

Unassisted with severe

13,494

13,398

16,142

16,944

19,259

20,717

18,553

18,000

18,594

18,978

20,854

problems

Unassisted with

19,217

19,790

20,849

22,752

23,225

24,079

22,153

21,672

23,633

23,593

24,543

nonsevere problems

only

Unassisted with no

66,445

66,468

65,362

65,862

64,506

64,983

69,796

73,059

72,945

75,400

76,732

problems

Assisted

6,279

6,211

6,547

5,161

4,871

5,298

5,530

5,559

6,388

6,164

6,374

Cost burden >50% of

13,330

13,188

16,433

17,140

19,458

20,781

18,810

18,799

19,724

19,849

21,702

income

Cost burden >30–50%

16,923

17,856

19,403

21,153

21,818

22,369

20,884

19,252

21,606

21,676

22,425

of income

Severely inadequate

2,108

1,971

2,023

1,805

1,866

2,126

1,942

1,500

1,343

1,458

1,833

housing

Moderately inadequate

4,504

4,311

4,177

3,954

3,884

3,133

3,946

3,907

3,568

3,449

3,701

housing

Crowded housing

2,631

2,559

2,621

2,529

2,509

1,923

2,509

1,803

1,951

1,840

1,952

Renter households

(thousands)

33,727

33,614

33,951

35,054

35,396

38,867

40,273

43,930

43,993

44,660

45,991

Unassisted with severe

5,758

5,887

6,860

6,993

8,085

9,548

8,874

9,651

9,198

9,352

10,222

problems

Unassisted with

7,283

7,557

7,303

8,445

8,229

9,194

9,233

10,455

10,181

10,225

10,949

nonsevere problems

only

Unassisted with no

14,407

13,958

13,240

14,455

14,211

14,828

16,636

18,265

18,226

18,919

18,445

problems

Assisted

6,279

6,211

6,547

5,161

4,871

5,298

5,530

5,559

6,388

6,164

6,374

Cost burden >50% of

6,412

6,477

7,891

7,793

9,000

10,391

9,744

10,988

10,757

10,738

11,627

income

Cost burden >30–50%

6,916

7,468

7,502

8,340

8,240

9,124

9,292

10,118

10,215

10,291

10,873

of income

Severely inadequate

1,168

1,038

1,100

1,073

998

1,204

1,155

828

826

816

1,112

housing

Moderately inadequate

2,508

2,525

2,542

2,400

2,264

1,830

2,508

2,027

1,708

1,730

1,956

housing

Crowded housing

1,658

1,615

1,635

1,511

1,499

1,072

1,652

1,120

1,245

1,106

1,151

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

37

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-2A. Housing Conditions of Renters and Owners, 2001–2021—Number of Households (continued)

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

Owner households

(thousands)

71,708

72,254

74,950

75,665

76,465

76,209

75,759

74,360

77,567

79,475

82,513

Unassisted with severe

7,736

7,511

9,282

9,951

11,174

11,169

9,679

8,349

9,396

9,626

10,632

problems

Unassisted with

11,934

12,233

13,546

14,307

14,996

14,885

12,920

11,217

13,452

13,368

13,594

nonsevere problems

only

Unassisted with no

52,038

52,510

52,122

51,407

50,295

50,155

53,160

54,794

54,719

56,481

58,287

problems

Cost burden >50% of

6,918

6,711

8,542

9,347

10,458

10,390

9,066

7,811

8,967

9,111

10,075

income

Cost burden >30–50%

10,007

10,388

11,901

12,813

13,578

13,245

11,592

9,135

11,391

11,385

11,552

of income

Severely inadequate

940

933

923

732

868

922

787

673

517

642

721

housing

Moderately inadequate

1,996

1,786

1,635

1,554

1,620

1,303

1,438

1,881

1,860

1,719

1,745

housing

Crowded housing

973

944

986

1,018

1,010

851

857

683

706

734

801

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

38

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-2B. Housing Conditions of Renters and Owners, 2001–2021—Percentage of Households

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

Total households

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

12.8

12.7

14.8

15.3

17.2

18.0

16.0

15.2

15.3

15.3

16.2

Unassisted with nonsevere problems

18.2

18.7

19.1

20.5

20.8

20.9

19.1

18.3

19.4

19.0

19.1

only

Unassisted with no problems

63.0

62.8

60.0

59.5

57.7

56.5

60.2

61.8

60.0

60.7

59.7

Assisted

6.0

5.9

6.0

4.7

4.4

4.6

4.8

4.7

5.3

5.0

5.0

Cost burden >50% of income

12.6

12.5

15.1

15.5

17.4

18.1

16.2

15.9

16.2

16.0

16.9

Cost burden >30–50% of income

16.1

16.9

17.8

19.1

19.5

19.4

18.0

16.3

17.8

17.5

17.5

Severely inadequate housing

2.0

1.9

1.9

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.7

1.3

1.1

1.2

1.4

Moderately inadequate housing

4.3

4.1

3.8

3.6

3.5

2.7

3.4

3.3

2.9

2.8

2.9

Crowded housing

2.5

2.4

2.4

2.3

2.2

1.7

2.2

1.5

1.6

1.5

1.5

Renter households

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

17.1

17.5

20.2

19.9

22.8

24.6

22.0

22.0

20.9

20.9

22.2

Unassisted with nonsevere problems

21.6

22.5

21.5

24.1

23.2

23.7

22.9

23.8

23.1

22.9

23.8

only

Unassisted with no problems

42.7

41.5

39.0

41.2

40.1

38.2

41.3

41.6

41.4

42.4

40.1

Assisted

18.6

18.5

19.3

14.7

13.8

13.6

13.7

12.7

14.5

13.8

13.9

Cost burden >50% of income

19.0

19.3

23.2

22.2

25.4

26.7

24.2

25.0

24.5

24.0

25.3

Cost burden >30–50% of income

20.5

22.2

22.1

23.8

23.3

23.5

23.1

23.0

23.2

23.0

23.6

Severely inadequate housing

3.5

3.1

3.2

3.1

2.8

3.1

2.9

1.9

1.9

1.8

2.4

Moderately inadequate housing

7.4

7.5

7.5

6.8

6.4

4.7

6.2

4.6

3.9

3.9

4.3

Crowded housing

4.9

4.8

4.8

4.3

4.2

2.8

4.1

2.6

2.8

2.5

2.5

Owner households

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

10.8

10.4

12.4

13.2

14.6

14.7

12.8

11.2

12.1

12.1

12.9

Unassisted with nonsevere problems

16.6

16.9

18.1

18.9

19.6

19.5

17.1

15.1

17.3

16.8

16.5

only

Unassisted with no problems

72.6

72.7

69.5

67.9

65.8

65.8

70.2

73.7

70.5

71.1

70.6

Cost burden >50% of income

9.6

9.3

11.4

12.4

13.7

13.6

12.0

10.5

11.6

11.5

12.2

Cost burden >30–50% of income

14.0

14.4

15.9

16.9

17.8

17.4

15.3

12.3

14.7

14.3

14.0

Severely inadequate housing

1.3

1.3

1.2

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.0

0.9

0.7

0.8

0.9

Moderately inadequate housing

2.8

2.5

2.2

2.1

2.1

1.7

1.9

2.5

2.4

2.2

2.1

Crowded housing

1.4

1.3

1.3

1.3

1.3

1.1

1.1

0.9

0.9

0.9

1.0

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

39

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-3. Housing Conditions of Unassisted Renter Households by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median Family Income

2021

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120%

All Incomes

Total unassisted households (thousands)

8,230

5,964

9,025

7,387

9,010

39,616

Any with severe problems

6,051

2,475

1,105

324

266

10,221

Rent burden >50% of income

5,915

2,373

938

239

141

9,606

[Rent above FMR]

2,099

1,432

761

228

141

4,661

Severely inadequate housing

331

150

189

95

125

890

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,031

2,711

4,386

1,890

931

10,949

Rent burden >30–50% of income

844

2,590

3,886

1,416

499

9,235

Moderately inadequate housing

232

247

452

402

341

1,674

Crowded housing

195

196

333

140

122

986

Any with no problems

1,148

778

3,534

5,173

7,813

18,446

2019

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120%

All Incomes

Total unassisted households (thousands)

7,799

5,537

8,196

7,315

9,650

38,497

Any with severe problems

5,780

1,986

1,013

372

200

9,351

Rent burden >50% of income

5,672

1,896

863

283

128

8,842

[Rent above FMR]

2,065

1,047

658

280

128

4,178

Severely inadequate housing

247

127

157

89

72

692

Any with nonsevere problems only

955

2,642

3,805

1,737

1,086

10,225

Rent burden >30–50% of income

764

2,541

3,327

1,322

610

8,564

Moderately inadequate housing

213

216

427

278

335

1,469

Crowded housing

175

178

306

165

172

996

Any with no problems

1,064

909

3,378

5,206

8,363

18,920

FMR = Fair Market Rent.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

40

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-4. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Renters by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Renter households (thousands)

44,659

45,991

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

9,351

10,221

20.9

22.2

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

10,225

10,949

22.9

23.8

Unassisted with no problems

18,920

18,446

42.4

40.1

Assisted

6,164

6,374

13.8

13.9

Any with severe problems

11,321

12,370

25.3

26.9

Rent burden >50% of income

10,738

11,628

24.0

25.3

Severely inadequate housing

816

1,113

1.8

2.4

[Rent burden only]

9,743

10,455

21.8

22.7

Any with nonsevere problems only

12,174

12,884

27.3

28.0

Rent burden >30–50% of income

10,291

10,873

23.0

23.6

Moderately inadequate housing

1,729

1,956

3.9

4.3

Crowded housing

1,106

1,151

2.5

2.5

[Rent burden only]

9,402

9,867

21.1

21.5

Any with no problems

21,163

20,738

47.4

45.1

Income 0–30% HAMFI (thousands)

11,748

12,319

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

5,780

6,051

49.2

49.1

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

955

1,031

8.1

8.4

Unassisted with no problems

1,064

1,148

9.1

9.3

Assisted

3,950

4,089

33.6

33.2

Any with severe problems

7,537

7,920

64.2

64.3

Rent burden >50% of income

7,372

7,708

62.8

62.6

Severely inadequate housing

353

493

3.0

4.0

[Rent burden only]

6,601

6,834

56.2

55.5

Any with nonsevere problems only

2,087

2,140

17.8

17.4

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,791

1,808

15.2

14.7

Moderately inadequate housing

336

392

2.9

3.2

Crowded housing

247

281

2.1

2.3

[Rent burden only]

1,523

1,499

13.0

12.2

Any with no problems

2,124

2,260

18.1

18.3

Income >30–50% HAMFI (thousands)

6,640

7,019

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

1,986

2,475

29.9

35.3

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

2,642

2,711

39.8

38.6

Unassisted with no problems

909

778

13.7

11.1

Assisted

1,103

1,055

16.6

15.0

Any with severe problems

2,157

2,669

32.5

38.0

Rent burden >50% of income

2,064

2,547

31.1

36.3

Severely inadequate housing

131

173

2.0

2.5

[Rent burden only]

1,900

2,370

28.6

33.8

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

41

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-4. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Renters by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Any with nonsevere problems only

3,153

3,200

47.5

45.6

Rent burden >30–50% of income

3,016

3,028

45.4

43.1

Moderately inadequate housing

274

311

4.1

4.4

Crowded housing

196

213

3.0

3.0

[Rent burden only]

2,692

2,690

40.5

38.3

Any with no problems

1,329

1,150

20.0

16.4

Income >50–80% HAMFI (thousands)

8,786

9,631

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

1,013

1,105

11.5

11.5

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

3,805

4,386

43.3

45.5

Unassisted with no problems

3,378

3,534

38.4

36.7

Assisted

590

606

6.7

6.3

Any with severe problems

1,041

1,160

11.8

12.0

Rent burden >50% of income

880

975

10.0

10.1

Severely inadequate housing

169

213

1.9

2.2

[Rent burden only]

837

882

9.5

9.2

Any with nonsevere problems only

4,029

4,611

45.9

47.9

Rent burden >30–50% of income

3,510

4,058

39.9

42.1

Moderately inadequate housing

479

480

5.5

5.0

Crowded housing

314

372

3.6

3.9

[Rent burden only]

3,248

3,785

37.0

39.3

Any with no problems

3,715

3,860

42.3

40.1

Income >80–120% HAMFI (thousands)

7,583

7,775

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

372

324

4.9

4.2

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,737

1,890

22.9

24.3

Unassisted with no problems

5,206

5,173

68.7

66.5

Assisted

268

388

3.5

5.0

Any with severe problems

380

348

5.0

4.5

Rent burden >50% of income

289

256

3.8

3.3

Severely inadequate housing

90

102

1.2

1.3

[Rent burden only]

274

244

3.6

3.1

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,787

1,963

23.6

25.2

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,358

1,464

17.9

18.8

Moderately inadequate housing

289

418

3.8

5.4

Crowded housing

168

152

2.2

2.0

[Rent burden only]

1,335

1,405

17.6

18.1

Any with no problems

5,417

5,464

71.4

70.3

Income >120% HAMFI (thousands)

9,902

9,247

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

200

266

2.0

2.9

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,086

931

11.0

10.1

Unassisted with no problems

8,363

7,813

84.5

84.5

Assisted

253

236

2.6

2.6

(continued)

42

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-4. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Renters by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Any with severe problems

206

273

2.1

3.0

Rent burden >50% of income

133

142

1.3

1.5

Severely inadequate housing

73

132

0.7

1.4

[Rent burden only]

131

125

1.3

1.4

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,118

970

11.3

10.5

Rent burden >30–50% of income

616

515

6.2

5.6

Moderately inadequate housing

351

355

3.5

3.8

Crowded housing

181

133

1.8

1.4

[Rent burden only]

604

488

6.1

5.3

Any with no problems

8,578

8,004

86.6

86.6

HAMFI = HUD area median family income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

Exhibit A-5A. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Household Type, 2019 and 2021

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

Household type

2019

2021

2019

2021

All household types (thousands)

18,388

19,337

100.0

100.0

Older adults without children (thousands)

5,567

5,858

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

2,241

2,349

40.3

40.1

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

743

805

13.3

13.7

Unassisted with no problems

590

566

10.6

9.7

Assisted

1,993

2,138

35.8

36.5

Any with severe problems

3,002

3,131

53.9

53.4

Rent burden >50% of income

2,930

3,066

52.6

52.3

Severely inadequate housing

131

145

2.4

2.5

[Rent burden only]

2,636

2,757

47.4

47.1

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,394

1,472

25.0

25.1

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,320

1,399

23.7

23.9

Moderately inadequate housing

142

162

2.6

2.8

Crowded housing

(D)

(D)

(D)

(D)

[Rent burden only]

1,252

1,302

22.5

22.2

Any with no problems

1,172

1,255

21.1

21.4

Families with children (thousands)

5,654

5,923

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

2,271

2,629

40.2

44.4

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,463

1,417

25.9

23.9

Unassisted with no problems

470

465

8.3

7.9

Assisted

1,450

1,412

25.6

23.8

Any with severe problems

2,865

3,250

50.7

54.9

Rent burden >50% of income

2,797

3,118

49.5

52.6

Severely inadequate housing

131

251

2.3

4.2

[Rent burden only]

2,509

2,772

44.4

46.8

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

43

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-5A. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Household Type, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

Household type

2019

2021

2019

2021

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,975

1,868

34.9

31.5

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,760

1,607

31.1

27.1

Moderately inadequate housing

194

246

3.4

4.2

Crowded housing

420

462

7.4

7.8

[Rent burden only]

1,383

1,200

24.5

20.3

Any with no problems

813

805

14.4

13.6

Other family households (thousands)

1,649

1,837

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

720

918

43.7

50.0

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

432

398

26.2

21.7

Unassisted with no problems

196

208

11.9

11.3

Assisted

301

313

18.3

17.0

Any with severe problems

821

1,065

49.8

58.0

Rent burden >50% of income

795

1,034

48.2

56.3

Severely inadequate housing

45

74

2.7

4.0

[Rent burden only]

719

920

43.6

50.1

Any with nonsevere problems only

520

492

31.5

26.8

Rent burden >30–50% of income

489

455

29.7

24.8

Moderately inadequate housing

70

69

4.2

3.8

Crowded housing

15

21

0.9

1.1

[Rent burden only]

436

406

26.4

22.1

Any with no problems

308

280

18.7

15.2

Other nonfamily households (thousands)

5,518

5,719

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

2,535

2,629

45.9

46.0

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

958

1,120

17.4

19.6

Unassisted with no problems

716

688

13.0

12.0

Assisted

1,309

1,282

23.7

22.4

Any with severe problems

3,006

3,142

54.5

54.9

Rent burden >50% of income

2,913

3,038

52.8

53.1

Severely inadequate housing

177

195

3.2

3.4

[Rent burden only]

2,636

2,754

47.8

48.2

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,351

1,508

24.5

26.4

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,238

1,375

22.4

24.0

Moderately inadequate housing

206

226

3.7

4.0

Crowded housing

(D)

(D)

(D)

(D)

[Rent burden only]

1,145

1,281

20.8

22.4

Any with no problems

1,161

1,069

21.0

18.7

(D) = value suppressed in accord with Census Bureau disclosure prevention requirements.|

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

44

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-5B. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renter Households Containing People with Disabilities* by Household Type, 2019 and 2021

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

Household type

2019

2021

2019

2021

All household types (thousands)

2,895

3,359

100.0

100.0

Older adults without children (thousands)

105

160

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

42

77

40.0

48.1

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

20

34

19.0

21.3

Unassisted with no problems

8

15

7.6

9.4

Assisted

36

34

34.3

21.3

Any with severe problems

57

87

54.3

54.4

Rent burden >50% of income

49

86

46.7

53.8

Severely inadequate housing

10

15

9.5

9.4

[Rent burden only]

41

66

39.0

41.3

Any with nonsevere problems only

33

50

31.4

31.3

Rent burden >30–50% of income

32

49

30.5

30.6

Moderately inadequate housing

3

12

2.9

7.5

Crowded housing

(D)

(D)

(D)

(D)

[Rent burden only]

30

37

28.6

23.1

Any with no problems

15

23

14.3

14.4

Families with children (thousands)

892

1,056

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

336

389

37.7

36.8

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

228

206

25.6

19.5

Unassisted with no problems

33

78

3.7

7.4

Assisted

295

383

33.1

36.3

Any with severe problems

437

555

49.0

52.6

Rent burden >50% of income

416

527

46.6

49.9

Severely inadequate housing

45

58

5.0

5.5

[Rent burden only]

346

429

38.8

40.6

Any with nonsevere problems only

340

330

38.1

31.3

Rent burden >30–50% of income

298

273

33.4

25.9

Moderately inadequate housing

71

68

8.0

6.4

Crowded housing

51

83

5.7

7.9

[Rent burden only]

219

196

24.6

18.6

Any with no problems

116

170

13.0

16.1

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

45

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-5B. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renter Households Containing People with Disabilities*

by Household Type, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

Household type

2019

2021

2019

2021

Other family households (thousands)

403

514

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

164

231

40.7

44.9

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

80

86

19.9

16.7

Unassisted with no problems

46

55

11.4

10.7

Assisted

114

142

28.3

27.6

Any with severe problems

204

294

50.6

57.2

Rent burden >50% of income

195

284

48.4

55.3

Severely inadequate housing

13

36

3.2

7.0

[Rent burden only]

166

238

41.2

46.3

Any with nonsevere problems only

113

120

28.0

23.3

Rent burden >30–50% of income

95

112

23.6

21.8

Moderately inadequate housing

32

21

7.9

4.1

Crowded housing

(D)

10

(D)

1.9

[Rent burden only]

80

93

19.9

18.1

Any with no problems

86

100

21.3

19.5

Other nonfamily households (thousands)

1,495

1,629

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

503

560

33.6

34.4

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

238

254

15.9

15.6

Unassisted with no problems

110

81

7.4

5.0

Assisted

644

735

43.1

45.1

Any with severe problems

730

831

48.8

51.0

Rent burden >50% of income

703

783

47.0

48.1

Severely inadequate housing

64

93

4.3

5.7

[Rent burden only]

577

673

38.6

41.3

Any with nonsevere problems only

439

491

29.4

30.1

Rent burden >30–50% of income

391

428

26.2

26.3

Moderately inadequate housing

102

90

6.8

5.5

Crowded housing

(D)

(D)

(D)

(D)

[Rent burden only]

337

401

22.5

24.6

Any with no problems

326

307

21.8

18.8

(D) = value suppressed in accord with Census Bureau disclosure prevention requirements.

* Older adults with disabilities were excluded.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

46

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-6A. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Very Low-Income Renters by Household Type, 2021

Total

Older Adults, Families with

Other

Other

No Children

Children

Families

Nonfamily

Households

Renter households (thousands)

19,337

5,858

5,923

1,837

5,719

Number of children

12,192

NA

12,192

NA

NA

Number of persons

42,135

7,600

23,188

4,583

6,764

Children/household

2.06

NA

2.06

NA

NA

Persons/household

2.18

1.30

3.91

2.49

1.18

Unassisted with severe problems

8,525

2,349

2,629

918

2,629

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

3,740

805

1,417

398

1,120

Unassisted with no problems

1,927

566

465

208

688

Assisted

5,145

2,138

1,412

313

1,282

Any with severe problems

10,588

3,131

3,250

1,065

3,142

Rent burden >50% of income

10,256

3,066

3,118

1,034

3,038

Severely inadequate housing

665

145

251

74

195

[Rent burden only]

9,203

2,757

2,772

920

2,754

Any with nonsevere problems only

5,340

1,472

1,868

492

1,508

Rent burden >30–50% of income

4,836

1,399

1,607

455

1,375

Moderately inadequate housing

703

162

246

69

226

Crowded housing

494

(D)

462

21

(D)

[Rent burden only]

4,189

1,302

1,200

406

1,281

Any with no problems

3,409

1,255

805

280

1,069

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

47

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-6A. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Very Low-Income Renters by Household Type, 2021 (continued)

Total

Older Adults, Families with

Other

Other

No Children

Children

Families

Nonfamily

Households

Other characteristics

19,337

5,858

5,923

1,837

5,719

One person in household

9,289

4,419

NA

NA

4,870

Two-spouse household

3,638

807

2,066

765

NA

Female householder

11,967

3,727

4,147

1,083

3,010

Householder of color

11,065

2,584

4,254

1,221

3,006

Welfare/SSI income

3,573

1,234

1,121

292

926

Social Security income

5,391

4,262

410

197

522

Income below 50% poverty

4,512

1,237

1,496

336

1,443

Income below poverty

9,939

2,818

3,556

800

2,765

Income below 150% of poverty

14,710

4,329

5,082

1,305

3,994

High school graduate

14,715

4,287

4,195

1,419

4,814

2+ years post-high school

4,446

1,296

1,058

426

1,666

Earnings at minimum wage: At least half time

7,968

576

3,753

1,075

2,564

Earnings at minimum wage: At least full time

6,410

402

3,104

901

2,003

Earnings main source of income

8,425

562

3,848

1,144

2,871

Housing rated poor

1,166

271

467

125

303

Housing rated good+

14,460

4,716

4,260

1,283

4,201

Neighborhood rated poor

1,279

287

472

141

379

Neighborhood rated good+

14,371

4,697

4,302

1,286

4,086

In central cities

9,375

2,685

2,755

972

2,963

Suburbs, urban

6,188

1,931

1,997

550

1,710

Suburbs, rural

1,504

474

504

168

358

Nonmetropolitan

2,274

769

668

148

689

Northeast

3,994

1,340

1,131

407

1,116

Midwest

3,947

1,255

1,030

280

1,382

South

6,726

1,876

2,205

627

2,018

West

4,670

1,387

1,558

523

1,202

NA = not applicable. (D) = value suppressed in accord with Census Bureau disclosure prevention requirements.

SSI = Supplemental Security Income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

(continued)

48

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-6B. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Extremely Low-Income Renters by Household Type, 2021

Total

Older Adults,

Families

Other

Other

No Children

with

Families

Nonfamily

Children

Households

Renter households (thousands)

12,319

3,907

3,980

1,028

3,404

Number of children

8,643

NA

8,643

NA

NA

Number of persons

27,371

4,937

15,885

2,553

3,996

Children/household

2.17

NA

2.17

NA

NA

Persons/household

2.22

1.26

3.99

2.48

1.17

Unassisted with severe problems

6,051

1,662

2,062

612

1,715

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,030

233

526

76

195

Unassisted with no problems

1,148

315

247

107

479

Assisted

4,090

1,697

1,145

233

1,015

Any with severe problems

7,921

2,373

2,630

745

2,173

Rent burden >50% of income

7,707

2,328

2,552

725

2,102

Severely inadequate housing

492

114

174

53

151

[Rent burden only]

6,835

2,072

2,260

627

1,876

Any with nonsevere problems only

2,140

687

854

128

471

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,808

627

703

114

364

Moderately inadequate housing

393

108

121

23

141

Crowded housing

281

(D)

266

8

(D)

[Rent burden only]

1,499

575

496

98

330

Any with no problems

2,259

847

496

155

761

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

49

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-6B. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Extremely Low-Income Renters by Household Type, 2021 (continued)

Total

Older Adults,

Families

Other

Other

No Children

with

Families

Nonfamily

Children

Households

Other characteristics

12,319

3,907

3,980

1,028

3,404

One person in household

5,995

3,058

NA

NA

2,937

Two-spouse household

2,113

460

1,242

411

NA

Female householder

7,859

2,532

2,844

620

1,863

Householder of color

7,299

1,913

2,876

692

1,818

Welfare/SSI income

2,875

1,047

859

203

766

Social Security income

3,511

2,700

299

117

395

Income below 50% poverty

4,512

1,237

1,496

336

1,443

Income below poverty

9,901

2,817

3,533

799

2,752

Income below 150% of poverty

11,901

3,698

3,951

985

3,267

High school graduate

8,955

2,728

2,648

806

2,773

2+ years post-high school

2,557

804

638

243

872

Earnings at minimum wage: At least half time

3,414

192

2,038

403

781

Earnings at minimum wage: At least full time

2,190

103

1,475

263

349

Earnings main source of income

4,189

243

2,249

506

1,191

Housing rated poor

846

211

345

81

209

Housing rated good+

9,036

3,118

2,779

699

2,440

Neighborhood rated poor

928

207

344

96

281

Neighborhood rated good+

8,995

3,098

2,830

739

2,328

In central cities

6,120

1,896

1,873

559

1,792

Suburbs, urban

3,695

1,234

1,235

269

957

Suburbs, rural

934

291

350

107

186

Nonmetropolitan

1,568

486

521

92

469

Northeast

2,567

957

742

212

656

Midwest

2,365

739

669

140

817

South

4,461

1,297

1,606

364

1,194

West

2,928

915

963

312

738

NA = not applicable. SSI = Supplemental Security Income. (D) = value suppressed in accord with Census Bureau disclosure prevention requirements.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

50

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-7. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Very Low-Income Worst Case Renters by Household Type, 2021

Total

Older Adults,

Families

Other

Other

No Children

with

Families

Nonfamily

Children

Households

Renter households (thousands)

8,525

2,349

2,629

918

2,629

Number of children

5,168

0

5,168

NA

NA

Number of persons

19,062

3,195

10,310

2,326

3,231

Children/household

1.97

NA

1.97

NA

NA

Persons/household

2.24

1.36

3.92

2.53

1.23

Unassisted with severe problems

8,525

2,349

2,629

918

2,629

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

—

—

—

—

Unassisted with no problems

—

—

—

—

—

Assisted

—

—

—

—

—

Any with severe problems

8,525

2,349

2,629

918

2,629

Rent burden >50% of income

8,289

2,313

2,528

896

2,552

Severely inadequate housing

481

92

191

49

149

[Rent burden only]

7,458

2,068

2,259

806

2,325

Any with nonsevere problems only

—

—

—

—

—

Rent burden >30–50% of income

—

—

—

—

—

Moderately inadequate housing

—

—

—

—

—

Crowded housing

—

—

—

—

—

[Rent burden only]

—

—

—

—

—

Any with no problems

—

—

—

—

—

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

51

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-7. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Very Low-Income Worst Case Renters by Household Type, 2021 (continued)

Total

Older Adults,

Families

Other

Other

No Children

with

Families

Nonfamily

Children

Households

Other characteristics

8,525

2,349

2,629

918

2,629

One person in household

3,825

1,649

NA

NA

2,176

Two-spouse household

1,812

391

1,018

403

NA

Female householder

5,094

1,428

1,776

500

1,390

Householder of color

4,879

942

1,897

627

1,413

Welfare/SSI income

1,263

366

423

132

342

Social Security income

2,193

1,744

192

89

168

Income below 50% poverty

2,185

629

735

175

646

Income below poverty

4,811

1,210

1,805

480

1,316

Income below 150% of poverty

6,912

1,787

2,414

733

1,978

High school graduate

6,627

1,809

1,755

764

2,299

2+ years post-high school

2,221

610

515

256

840

Earnings at minimum wage: At least half time

3,611

246

1,571

525

1,269

Earnings at minimum wage: At least full time

2,630

185

1,155

421

869

Earnings main source of income

4,108

271

1,670

602

1,565

Housing rated poor

445

102

204

29

110

Housing rated good+

6,490

1,891

1,956

669

1,974

Neighborhood rated poor

457

100

161

47

149

Neighborhood rated good+

6,509

1,904

2,006

682

1,917

In central cities

4,073

1,026

1,144

500

1,403

Suburbs, urban

3,062

870

1,043

294

855

Suburbs, rural

586

183

198

75

130

Nonmetropolitan

805

271

244

49

241

Northeast

1,620

479

487

173

481

Midwest

1,484

460

360

105

559

South

3,168

800

1,030

341

997

West

2,255

611

752

299

593

NA = not applicable. SSI = Supplemental Security Income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

52

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-8. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Extremely Low-Income Worst Case Renters by Household Type, 2021

Total

Older Adults,

Families

Other

Other Nonfamily

No Children

with

Families

Households

Children

Renter households (thousands)

6,051

1,662

2,062

612

1,715

Number of children

4,220

NA

4,220

NA

NA

Number of persons

14,147

2,283

8,203

1,544

2,117

Children/household

2.05

NA

2.05

NA

NA

Persons/household

2.34

1.37

3.98

2.52

1.23

Unassisted with severe problems

6,051

1,662

2,062

612

1,715

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

—

—

—

—

Unassisted with no problems

—

—

—

—

—

Assisted

—

—

—

—

—

Any with severe problems

6,051

1,662

2,062

612

1,715

Rent burden >50% of income

5,915

1,643

2,004

600

1,668

Severely inadequate housing

331

66

125

30

110

[Rent burden only]

5,246

1,442

1,788

522

1,494

Any with nonsevere problems only

—

—

—

—

—

Rent burden >30–50% of income

—

—

—

—

—

Moderately inadequate housing

—

—

—

—

—

Crowded housing

—

—

—

—

—

[Rent burden only]

—

—

—

—

—

Any with no problems

—

—

—

—

—

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

53

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-8. Housing Problems and Characteristics of Extremely Low-Income Worst Case Renters by Household Type, 2021 (continued)

Total

Older Adults,

Families

Other

Other Nonfamily

No Children

with

Families

Households

Children

Other characteristics

6,051

1,662

2,062

612

1,715

One person in household

2,571

1,152

NA

NA

1,419

Two-spouse household

1,318

274

777

267

NA

Female householder

3,690

1,014

1,411

345

920

Householder of color

3,532

724

1,508

406

894

Welfare/SSI income

1,085

318

362

109

296

Social Security income

1,547

1,197

151

62

137

Income below 50% poverty

2,185

629

735

175

646

Income below poverty

4,801

1,210

1,795

480

1,316

Income below 150% of poverty

5,833

1,574

2,046

589

1,624

High school graduate

4,541

1,234

1,312

517

1,478

2+ years post-high school

1,432

378

378

169

507

Earnings at minimum wage: At least half time

2,065

124

1,098

274

569

Earnings at minimum wage: At least full time

1,209

80

729

183

217

Earnings main source of income

2,680

159

1,252

365

904

Housing rated poor

361

91

164

24

82

Housing rated good+

4,522

1,315

1,512

438

1,257

Neighborhood rated poor

353

78

130

39

106

Neighborhood rated good+

4,521

1,331

1,530

457

1,203

In central cities

2,909

758

922

338

891

Suburbs, urban

2,077

584

788

165

540

Suburbs, rural

428

133

146

69

80

Nonmetropolitan

637

187

206

39

205

Northeast

1,134

357

376

107

294

Midwest

1,102

290

307

79

426

South

2,253

600

825

234

594

West

1,561

415

553

191

402

NA = not applicable. SSI = Supplemental Security Income.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

54

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-9. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Race and Ethnicity, 2019 and 2021—Number and Percentage

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Non-Hispanic White (thousands)

8,290

8,273

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

3,623

3,646

43.7

44.1

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,628

1,672

19.6

20.2

Unassisted with no problems

1,063

982

12.8

11.9

Assisted

1,977

1,974

23.8

23.9

Any with severe problems

4,263

4,386

51.4

53.0

Rent burden >50% of income

4,158

4,284

50.2

51.8

Severely inadequate housing

161

206

1.9

2.5

[Rent burden only]

3,752

3,876

45.3

46.9

Any with nonsevere problems only

2,346

2,304

28.3

27.8

Rent burden >30–50% of income

2,170

2,140

26.2

25.9

Moderately inadequate housing

285

277

3.4

3.3

Crowded housing

127

102

1.5

1.2

[Rent burden only]

1,940

1,931

23.4

23.3

Any with no problems

1,682

1,583

20.3

19.1

Non-Hispanic Black (thousands)

4,393

4,887

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

1,588

1,922

36.1

39.3

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

671

846

15.3

17.3

Unassisted with no problems

373

356

8.5

7.3

Assisted

1,761

1,762

40.1

36.1

Any with severe problems

2,341

2,669

53.3

54.6

Rent burden >50% of income

2,279

2,592

51.9

53.0

Severely inadequate housing

134

185

3.1

3.8

[Rent burden only]

2,046

2,309

46.6

47.2

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,182

1,362

26.9

27.9

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,054

1,245

24.0

25.5

Moderately inadequate housing

174

195

4.0

4.0

Crowded housing

76

98

1.7

2.0

[Rent burden only]

942

1,075

21.4

22.0

Any with no problems

870

856

19.8

17.5

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

55

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-9. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Race and Ethnicity, 2019 and 2021—Number and Percentage (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Hispanic (thousands)

4,258

4,573

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

1,922

2,168

45.1

47.4

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,029

984

24.2

21.5

Unassisted with no problems

382

427

9.0

9.3

Assisted

924

994

21.7

21.7

Any with severe problems

2,333

2,578

54.8

56.4

Rent burden >50% of income

2,275

2,477

53.4

54.2

Severely inadequate housing

133

192

3.1

4.2

[Rent burden only]

2,061

2,228

48.4

48.7

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,314

1,300

30.9

28.4

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,208

1,128

28.4

24.7

Moderately inadequate housing

103

180

2.4

3.9

Crowded housing

212

253

5.0

5.5

[Rent burden only]

1,008

902

23.7

19.7

Any with no problems

611

695

14.3

15.2

Asian (thousands)

888

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

—

467

—

52.6

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

133

—

15.0

Unassisted with no problems

—

102

—

11.5

Assisted

—

186

—

20.9

Any with severe problems

—

547

—

61.6

Rent burden >50% of income

—

538

—

60.6

Severely inadequate housing

—

19

—

2.1

[Rent burden only]

—

511

—

57.5

Any with nonsevere problems only

—

191

—

21.5

Rent burden >30–50% of income

—

167

—

18.8

Moderately inadequate housing

—

14

—

1.6

Crowded housing

—

32

—

3.6

[Rent burden only]

—

145

—

16.3

Any with no problems

—

150

—

16.9

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

56

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-10. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Region, 2019 and 2021—Number and Percentage Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Northeast (thousands)

3,950

3,994

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

1,507

1,620

38.2

40.6

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

720

667

18.2

16.7

Unassisted with no problems

416

335

10.5

8.4

Assisted

1,307

1,373

33.1

34.4

Any with severe problems

2,029

2,172

51.4

54.4

Rent burden >50% of income

1,958

2,082

49.6

52.1

Severely inadequate housing

166

189

4.2

4.7

[Rent burden only]

1,726

1,828

43.7

45.8

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,141

1,067

28.9

26.7

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,080

975

27.3

24.4

Moderately inadequate housing

112

165

2.8

4.1

Crowded housing

75

81

1.9

2.0

[Rent burden only]

969

831

24.5

20.8

Any with no problems

779

755

19.7

18.9

Midwest (thousands)

3,715

3,947

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

1,346

1,484

36.2

37.6

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

877

954

23.6

24.2

Unassisted with no problems

387

450

10.4

11.4

Assisted

1,106

1,059

29.8

26.8

Any with severe problems

1,690

1,860

45.5

47.1

Rent burden >50% of income

1,656

1,804

44.6

45.7

Severely inadequate housing

66

94

1.8

2.4

[Rent burden only]

1,521

1,656

40.9

42.0

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,239

1,306

33.4

33.1

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,145

1,187

30.8

30.1

Moderately inadequate housing

124

168

3.3

4.3

Crowded housing

81

97

2.2

2.5

[Rent burden only]

1,042

1,048

28.0

26.6

Any with no problems

786

781

21.2

19.8

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

57

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-10. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Region, 2019 and 2021—Number and Percentage (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

South (thousands)

6,413

6,727

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

2,796

3,168

43.6

47.1

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,246

1,312

19.4

19.5

Unassisted with no problems

780

664

12.2

9.9

Assisted

1,592

1,582

24.8

23.5

Any with severe problems

3,428

3,811

53.5

56.7

Rent burden >50% of income

3,331

3,703

51.9

55.0

Severely inadequate housing

152

244

2.4

3.6

[Rent burden only]

2,978

3,274

46.4

48.7

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,727

1,803

26.9

26.8

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,549

1,652

24.2

24.6

Moderately inadequate housing

270

224

4.2

3.3

Crowded housing

150

121

2.3

1.8

[Rent burden only]

1,310

1,471

20.4

21.9

Any with no problems

1,258

1,112

19.6

16.5

West (thousands)

4,310

4,670

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

2,118

2,254

49.1

48.3

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

754

808

17.5

17.3

Unassisted with no problems

390

477

9.0

10.2

Assisted

1,048

1,130

24.3

24.2

Any with severe problems

2,548

2,745

59.1

58.8

Rent burden >50% of income

2,491

2,666

57.8

57.1

Severely inadequate housing

100

140

2.3

3.0

[Rent burden only]

2,275

2,445

52.8

52.4

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,133

1,163

26.3

24.9

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,033

1,022

24.0

21.9

Moderately inadequate housing

105

146

2.4

3.1

Crowded housing

137

195

3.2

4.2

[Rent burden only]

894

839

20.7

18.0

Any with no problems

630

761

14.6

16.3

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

(continued)

58

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11A. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Metropolitan Location, 2019 and 2021—

Number and Percentage

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Central cities (thousands)

8,936

9,375

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

3,904

4,073

43.7

43.4

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,629

1,767

18.2

18.8

Unassisted with no problems

850

806

9.5

8.6

Assisted

2,553

2,729

28.6

29.1

Any with severe problems

4,996

5,209

55.9

55.6

Rent burden >50% of income

4,867

5,037

54.5

53.7

Severely inadequate housing

273

376

3.1

4.0

[Rent burden only]

4,347

4,491

48.6

47.9

Any with nonsevere problems only

2,386

2,609

26.7

27.8

Rent burden >30–50% of income

2,172

2,329

24.3

24.8

Moderately inadequate housing

296

370

3.3

3.9

Crowded housing

240

249

2.7

2.7

[Rent burden only]

1,873

2,014

21.0

21.5

Any with no problems

1,554

1,557

17.4

16.6

Suburbs, urban (thousands)

5,625

6,187

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

2,524

3,062

44.9

49.5

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,213

1,195

21.6

19.3

Unassisted with no problems

511

564

9.1

9.1

Assisted

1,377

1,366

24.5

22.1

Any with severe problems

3,048

3,603

54.2

58.2

Rent burden >50% of income

3,023

3,536

53.7

57.2

Severely inadequate housing

77

116

1.4

1.9

[Rent burden only]

2,768

3,251

49.2

52.5

Any with nonsevere problems only

1,684

1,616

29.9

26.1

Rent burden >30–50% of income

1,565

1,509

27.8

24.4

Moderately inadequate housing

163

162

2.9

2.6

Crowded housing

123

169

2.2

2.7

[Rent burden only]

1,403

1,306

24.9

21.1

Any with no problems

893

967

15.9

15.6

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

59

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11A. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Metropolitan Location, 2019 and 2021—Number and Percentage (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

Suburbs, rural (thousands)

1,552

1,504

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

594

587

38.3

39.0

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

327

346

21.1

23.0

Unassisted with no problems

288

239

18.6

15.9

Assisted

343

331

22.1

22.0

Any with severe problems

716

701

46.1

46.6

Rent burden >50% of income

675

663

43.5

44.1

Severely inadequate housing

51

68

3.3

4.5

[Rent burden only]

615

583

39.6

38.8

Any with nonsevere problems only

452

461

29.1

30.7

Rent burden >30–50% of income

416

430

26.8

28.6

Moderately inadequate housing

44

49

2.8

3.3

Crowded housing

33

53

2.1

3.5

[Rent burden only]

375

360

24.2

23.9

Any with no problems

384

342

24.7

22.7

Nonmetropolitan (thousands)

2,276

2,273

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

744

805

32.7

35.4

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

427

433

18.8

19.0

Unassisted with no problems

324

317

14.2

13.9

Assisted

781

718

34.3

31.6

Any with severe problems

935

1,076

41.1

47.3

Rent burden >50% of income

870

1,019

38.2

44.8

Severely inadequate housing

82

105

3.6

4.6

[Rent burden only]

770

879

33.8

38.7

Any with nonsevere problems only

718

653

31.5

28.7

Rent burden >30–50% of income

654

569

28.7

25.0

Moderately inadequate housing

107

122

4.7

5.4

Crowded housing

47

23

2.1

1.0

[Rent burden only]

564

508

24.8

22.3

Any with no problems

623

544

27.4

23.9

(continued)

60

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11A. Prevalence of Housing Problems Among Very Low-Income Renters by Metropolitan Location, 2019 and 2021—Number and Percentage (continued)

Number

Number

Percentage

Percentage

2019

2021

2019

2021

U.S. Total (thousands)

18,388

19,338

100.0

100.0

Unassisted with severe problems

7,767

8,526

42.2

44.1

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

3,596

3,742

19.6

19.4

Unassisted with no problems

1,972

1,926

10.7

10.0

Assisted

5,053

5,144

27.5

26.6

Any with severe problems

9,694

10,589

52.7

54.8

Rent burden >50% of income

9,435

10,255

51.3

53.0

Severely inadequate housing

484

666

2.6

3.4

[Rent burden only]

8,500

9,204

46.2

47.6

Any with nonsevere problems only

5,240

5,340

28.5

27.6

Rent burden >30–50% of income

4,807

4,836

26.1

25.0

Moderately inadequate housing

612

703

3.3

3.6

Crowded housing

444

494

2.4

2.6

[Rent burden only]

4,216

4,189

22.9

21.7

Any with no problems

3,454

3,410

18.8

17.6

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

61

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11B. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, Sampled Metropolitan Areas, 2019 and 2021

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median

Family Income

2019

2021

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA

Total households (thousands)

263

795

304

822

Unassisted with severe problems

132

159

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

56

51

Unassisted with no problems

25

32

Assisted

50

61

Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH

Total households (thousands)

347

754

373

791

Unassisted with severe problems

99

139

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

53

52

Unassisted with no problems

42

26

Assisted

153

156

Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI

Total households (thousands)

476

1,237

523

1,262

Unassisted with severe problems

160

219

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

118

119

Unassisted with no problems

62

65

Assisted

136

119

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX

Total households (thousands)

364

1,076

345

1,158

Unassisted with severe problems

174

171

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

79

88

Unassisted with no problems

54

33

Assisted

56

53

Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI

Total households (thousands)

235

494

221

514

Unassisted with severe problems

111

91

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

38

47

Unassisted with no problems

26

18

Assisted

60

66

Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX

Total households (thousands)

337

898

410

1,046

Unassisted with severe problems

179

227

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

85

86

Unassisted with no problems

29

29

Assisted

44

68

(continued)

62

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11B. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, Sampled Metropolitan Areas, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median

Family Income

2019

2021

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA

Total households (thousands)

976

2,310

1,167

2,474

Unassisted with severe problems

508

599

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

200

232

Unassisted with no problems

88

125

Assisted

180

211

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL

Total households (thousands)

356

874

381

856

Unassisted with severe problems

177

217

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

60

41

Unassisted with no problems

36

40

Assisted

82

83

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA

Total households (thousands)

1,769

3,732

1,825

3,745

Unassisted with severe problems

724

799

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

261

264

Unassisted with no problems

215

145

Assisted

569

618

Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD

Total households (thousands)

306

718

345

805

Unassisted with severe problems

125

157

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

53

71

Unassisted with no problems

42

28

Assisted

86

89

Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ

Total households (thousands)

185

607

190

631

Unassisted with severe problems

99

107

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

26

29

Unassisted with no problems

20

20

Assisted

40

33

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA

Total households (thousands)

149

478

167

488

Unassisted with severe problems

98

103

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

10

15

Unassisted with no problems

12

15

Assisted

29

34

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

63

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11B. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, Sampled Metropolitan Areas, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median

Family Income

2019

2021

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA

Total households (thousands)

291

778

311

793

Unassisted with severe problems

125

129

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

43

53

Unassisted with no problems

36

34

Assisted

87

96

Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA

Total households (thousands)

193

596

239

658

Unassisted with severe problems

81

97

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

24

41

Unassisted with no problems

21

30

Assisted

68

71

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV

Total households (thousands)

333

853

339

909

Unassisted with severe problems

123

154

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

78

63

Unassisted with no problems

40

35

Assisted

92

87

Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD

Total households (thousands)

—

—

304

674

Unassisted with severe problems

—

157

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

39

Unassisted with no problems

—

28

Assisted

—

81

Birmingham-Hoover, AL

Total households (thousands)

—

—

145

274

Unassisted with severe problems

—

58

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

31

Unassisted with no problems

—

10

Assisted

—

47

Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN

Total households (thousands)

200

491

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

51

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

79

—

Unassisted with no problems

17

—

Assisted

54

—

(continued)

64

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11B. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, Sampled Metropolitan Areas, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median

Family Income

2019

2021

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

Cleveland-Elyria, OH

Total households (thousands)

341

724

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

157

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

51

—

Unassisted with no problems

20

—

Assisted

114

—

Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, CO

Total households (thousands)

249

748

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

115

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

65

—

Unassisted with no problems

18

—

Assisted

50

—

Kansas City, MO-KS

Total households (thousands)

268

638

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

100

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

70

—

Unassisted with no problems

24

—

Assisted

73

—

Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise, NV

Total households (thousands)

—

—

286

860

Unassisted with severe problems

—

182

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

46

Unassisted with no problems

—

27

Assisted

—

30

Memphis, TN-MS-AR

Total households (thousands)

185

437

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

72

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

35

—

Unassisted with no problems

33

—

Assisted

45

—

Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI

Total households (thousands)

194

483

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

78

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

51

—

Unassisted with no problems

17

—

Assisted

47

—

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

65

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11B. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, Sampled Metropolitan Areas, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median

Family Income

2019

2021

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI

Total households (thousands)

—

—

413

898

Unassisted with severe problems

—

133

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

108

Unassisted with no problems

—

33

Assisted

—

139

New Orleans-Metairie, LA

Total households (thousands)

138

327

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

49

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

26

—

Unassisted with no problems

15

—

Assisted

48

—

Oklahoma City, OK

Total households (thousands)

—

—

190

406

Unassisted with severe problems

—

119

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

35

Unassisted with no problems

—

6

Assisted

—

29

Pittsburgh, PA

Total households (thousands)

290

590

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

94

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

79

—

Unassisted with no problems

37

—

Assisted

79

—

Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA

Total households (thousands)

249

657

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

128

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

43

—

Unassisted with no problems

9

—

Assisted

69

—

Raleigh, NC

Total households (thousands)

125

411

—

—

Unassisted with severe problems

63

—

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

26

—

Unassisted with no problems

9

—

Assisted

28

—

(continued)

66

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-11B. Housing Conditions of Renter Households by Relative Income, Sampled Metropolitan Areas, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Household Income as Percentage of HUD Area Median

Family Income

2019

2021

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

0–50%

HAMFI

All Incomes

Richmond, VA

Total households (thousands)

—

—

127

330

Unassisted with severe problems

—

57

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

30

Unassisted with no problems

—

15

Assisted

—

25

Rochester, NY

Total households (thousands)

—

—

177

344

Unassisted with severe problems

—

65

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

27

Unassisted with no problems

—

32

Assisted

—

53

San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX

Total households (thousands)

—

—

259

723

Unassisted with severe problems

—

116

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

69

Unassisted with no problems

—

26

Assisted

—

47

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA

Total households (thousands)

—

—

217

686

Unassisted with severe problems

—

99

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

37

Unassisted with no problems

—

16

Assisted

—

65

Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL

Total households (thousands)

—

—

261

876

Unassisted with severe problems

—

137

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

—

49

Unassisted with no problems

—

23

Assisted

—

51

Note: Each of the 15 largest metropolitan areas, listed first, are part of the American Housing Survey longitudinal panel surveyed every 2 years. The remaining 10

metropolitan areas represent a subset of the 16th to 50th largest metropolitan areas surveyed on a rotating basis every 4 years.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

67

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-12. Households Occupying Rental Units by Affordability of Rent and Income of Occupants, 2019 and 2021

Relative Income of

Occupied and Vacant Rental Units (thousands) by Unit Affordability Category (percent of HAMFI needed Households

to afford the highest rent in the category)

2021

10*

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

>110

Total

Extremely low income

797 2,096

1,847

853

1,127

326

232

247

554

1,664

1,744

834 12,321

(<30% HAMFI)

Very low income

193 1,338

1,456

768

829

269

221

216

407

235

488

598

7,018

(30–50%)

Low income (50–80%)

200 1,516

1,712 1,259

1,684

642

363

345

652

287

433

538

9,631

Middle income or higher

257 1,355

2,200 2,072

2,835 2,025

1,177

1,548 2,253

425

501

376 17,024

(>80%)

Vacant units for rent

102

453

552

441

518

304

260

332

695

75

98

254

4,084

Total units vacant and

1,549 6,758

7,767 5,393

6,993 3,566

2,253

2,688

4,561 2,686 3,264 2,600 50,078

occupied

2019

10*

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120+

Total

Extremely low income

735 1,647

2,024

922 1,810 1,654

818

904

342

144

231

517 11,748

(<30% HAMFI)

Very low income

185

369

542

521 1,471 1,288

657

776

212

105

196

317

6,639

(30–50%)

Low income (50–80%)

192

331

485

499 1,479 1,578

1,195

1,322

507

291

395

512

8,786

Middle income or higher

299

475

646

388 1,422 2,325

2,030

2,736 1,775 1,308 1,724 2,359 17,487

(>80%)

Vacant units for rent

91

81

154

246

635

757

490

583

325

294

372

647

4,675

Total units vacant and

1,502 2,903

3,851 2,576 6,817 7,602

5,190

6,321 3,161 2,142 2,918 4,352 49,335

occupied

HAMFI = HUD area median family income.

* The 10-percent-of-HAMFI category includes units occupied with no cash rent.

Notes: The method of assigning units to cost categories was modified in 2017 to account for limited HUD administrative exceptions to program income limits.

Slight unit affordability adjustments were applied to outlier cases for which area median income-determined affordability differed from administratively determined affordability categories.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

68

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-13. Renters and Rental Units Affordable and Available to Them by Relative Income, 2001–2021

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

Renter households

(thousands)

34,042

33,614

33,951

35,054 35,396 38,867

40,294

43,930 43,993 44,660

45,991

Extremely low-income

8,739

9,077

9,729

9,243

9,961

11,774

11,163

11,290

11,548

11,748

12,319

(<30% HAMFI)

Very low-income (30–50%)

6,315

6,581

6,342

6,697

7,157

7,492

7,375

7,945

6,519

6,640

7,019

Low-income (50–80%)

7,251

7,460

7,488

7,650

7,168

7,750

7,795

8,696

8,637

8,786

9,631

Middle-income or higher

11,737

10,496

10,392

11,464

11,110

11,850

13,961

15,999

17,289

17,486

17,022

(>80%)

Affordable units

37,197

37,577

37,924

39,330

39,744 43,075

43,992

48,670 48,820 49,335

50,075

Extremely low-income

6,870

7,098

6,747

7,280

6,265

6,854

7,294

7,117

7,982

8,256

7,498

(<30% HAMFI)

Very low-income (30–50%)

12,366

12,863

12,368

11,071 10,938

10,947

10,727

9,643

8,404

9,393

9,358

Low-income (50–80%)

13,634

13,518

14,044

15,063 16,228

17,995

17,904

19,326

19,674

19,112

20,153

Middle-income or higher

4,328

4,099

4,765

5,916

6,313

7,279

8,067

12,584

12,760

12,574

13,066

(>80%)

Affordable and available

units

37,197

37,577

37,924

39,330

39,744 43,075

43,992

48,670 48,820 49,335

50,074

Extremely low-income

3,803

3,996

3,982

4,224

3,665

4,220

4,354

4,278

4,595

4,732

4,480

(<30% HAMFI)

Very low-income (30–50%)

8,132

8,744

8,549

7,786

8,045

8,225

7,734

7,576

6,066

6,700

6,489

Low-income (50–80%)

11,665

12,396

12,865

13,196 14,004

15,361

14,529

15,862 15,353 15,009

16,020

Middle-income or higher

13,597

12,441

12,528

14,123 14,029

15,270

17,375

20,955 22,806 22,894

23,085

(>80%)

HAMFI = HUD area median family income.

Notes: Income categories in this exhibit do not overlap and therefore differ from the standard definitions. The method of assigning units to cost categories was modified in 2017 to account for limited HUD administrative exceptions to program income limits. Slight unit affordability adjustments were applied to outlier cases for which area median income-determined affordability differed from administratively determined affordability categories.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

69

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-14. Average Income and Average Gross Rent of Renter Households by Relative Income, 2019 and 2021

Household Income as Percentage of HUD-Adjusted Area Median Family

Income

2021

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120%

All Incomes

Total households (thousands)

12,319

7,019

9,631

7,775

9,247

45,991

Unassisted with severe problems

6,051

2,475

1,105

324

266

10,222

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

1,031

2,711

4,386

1,890

931

10,949

Unassisted with no problems

1,148

778

3,534

5,173

7,813

18,445

Assisted

4,089

1,055

606

388

236

6,374

Average monthly income

$972

$2,490

$3,949

$5,519

$12,130

$4,839

Unassisted with severe problems

$1,022

$2,378

$3,780

$4,395

$9,478

$1,976

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

$1,513

$2,656

$3,984

$5,528

$9,885

$4,191

Unassisted with no problems

$521

$2,494

$3,970

$5,611

$12,530

$7,780

Assisted

$888

$2,323

$3,880

$5,197

$10,500

$2,028

Average gross rent

$992

$1,248

$1,330

$1,479

$1,897

$1,366

Unassisted with severe problems

$1,342

$1,881

$2,691

$4,399

$5,643

$1,827

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

$728

$1,034

$1,406

$1,808

$2,338

$1,399

Unassisted with no problems

$631

$487

$854

$1,172

$1,730

$1,285

Assisted

$641

$876

$1,068

$1,537

$1,474

$806

2019

0–30%

>30–50%

>50–80%

>80–120%

>120% All Incomes

Total households (thousands)

11,748

6,640

8,786

7,583

9,902

44,660

Unassisted with severe problems

5,780

1,986

1,013

372

200

9,352

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

955

2,642

3,805

1,737

1,086

10,225

Unassisted with no problems

1,064

909

3,378

5,206

8,363

18,919

Assisted

3,950

1,103

590

268

253

6,164

Average monthly income

$887

$2,359

$3,636

$5,235

$12,100

$4,871

Unassisted with severe problems

$904

$2,275

$3,502

$4,527

$10,500

$1,826

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

$1,414

$2,508

$3,674

$5,184

$10,520

$4,146

Unassisted with no problems

$557

$2,397

$3,651

$5,334

$12,380

$7,739

Assisted

$823

$2,118

$3,536

$4,625

$10,860

$1,891

Average gross rent

$887

$1,078

$1,218

$1,393

$1,731

$1,254

Unassisted with severe problems

$1,216

$1,669

$2,611

$4,071

$5,558

$1,670

Unassisted with nonsevere problems only

$648

$981

$1,299

$1,695

$2,293

$1,329

Unassisted with no problems

$536

$462

$766

$1,103

$1,578

$1,190

Assisted

$559

$755

$898

$1,347

$1,355

$693

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

70

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-15. Housing Conditions of Households Having People Younger than 62 Who Have Disabilities by Disability Type, 2019 and 2021

Functional Limitations

ADL/IADL Limitations

2021

Any

Limitation

Hearing

Visual

Cognitive

Ambulatory

Self-Care

Independent

Living

Households (thousands)

13,135

3,410

2,927

5,593

4,970

1,667

3,519

Renter households

7,051

2,068

1,501

2,743

2,481

864

1,801

Owner households

6,084

1,342

1,426

2,849

2,489

802

1,718

Renters (thousands)

6,084

1,342

1,426

2,849

2,489

802

1,718

Unassisted with severe

1,420

276

377

690

631

260

455

problems

Unassisted with nonsevere

1,406

339

329

605

538

136

331

problems only

Unassisted with no problems

1,741

446

427

694

545

125

365

Assisted

1,517

281

293

860

775

282

567

Very low-income renters

(thousands)

1,382

273

291

670

601

173

403

Unassisted with severe

291

57

60

147

124

52

114

problems

Unassisted with nonsevere

632

120

130

310

289

69

163

problems only

Unassisted with no problems

175

35

54

66

69

17

39

Assisted

284

61

48

146

120

34

88

Any with severe problems

339

66

71

172

146

59

127

Rent burden >50% of income

287

57

45

140

120

41

109

Severely inadequate housing

57

11

29

34

30

21

21

[Rent burden only]

268

47

37

129

114

38

101

Any with nonsevere problems

only

745

150

154

380

327

82

193

Rent burden >30–50% of

675

126

132

339

288

74

170

income

Moderately inadequate housing

113

29

16

75

50

11

50

Crowded housing

51

19

29

22

12

5

6

[Rent burden only]

586

102

109

287

265

65

137

Any with no problems

298

57

67

118

128

32

84

(continued)

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

71

AppENDIx A. DETAIlED DATA ON HOUSING pROblEmS AND SUpply OF AFFORDAblE HOUSING

Exhibit A-15. Housing Conditions of Households Having People Younger than 62 Who Have Disabilities by Disability Type, 2019 and 2021 (continued)

Functional Limitations

ADL/IADL Limitations

2019

Any

Limitation

Hearing

Visual

Cognitive

Ambulatory

Self-Care

Independent

Living

Households (thousands)

10,947

2,927

2,238

4,533

4,709

1,570

3,029

Renter households

5,092

1,133

1,130

2,337

2,377

733

1,562

Owner households

5,855

1,794

1,108

2,196

2,332

836

1,466

Renters (thousands)

5,092

1,133

1,130

2,337

2,377

733

1,562

Unassisted with severe

1,145

243

241

527

549

202

353

problems

Unassisted with nonsevere

1,208

288

331

539

504

147

320

problems only

Unassisted with no problems

1,501

365

314

590

601

145

342

Assisted

1,237

237

245

681

723

239

547

Very low-income renters

(thousands)

1,100

207

252

538

475

156

305

Unassisted with severe

212

40

40

93

89

34

56

problems

Unassisted with nonsevere

483

89

136

231

202

68

118

problems only

Unassisted with no problems

174

38

36

77

74

20

39

Assisted

231

40

40

136

110

33

93

Any with severe problems

247

45

49

115

111

43

73

Rent burden >50% of income

221

38

46

106

102

43

73

Severely inadequate housing

29

10

(D)

9

9

(D)

(D)

[Rent burden only, adequate

206

33

44

104

94

37

66

housing]

Any with nonsevere problems

only

580

109

153

285

248

84

154

Rent burden >30–50% of

income

523

89

135

248

228

75

147

Moderately inadequate housing

97

28

25

52

43

10

23

Crowded housing

39

(D)

17

30

(D)

(D)

(D)

[Rent burden only]

446

78

112

204

200

66

126

Any with no problems

273

53

49

138

116

29

77

ADL = Activities of Daily Living. IADL = Instrumental Activities of Daily Living.

(D) = value suppressed in accord with Census Bureau disclosure prevention requirements.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of the American Housing Survey

72

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

Appendix B. Supplemental Exhibits

AppENDIx b. SUpplEmENTAl ExHIbITS

Supplemental

Exhibits

Exhibit B-1. Bird’s-Eye View of Worst Case

b Housing Needs in 2021

Worst case needs,

8.53 million

Unassisted very

low-income renters

14.19 million

Appendix

Other renters,

31.80 million

0.24

8.05

million

0.24

million

million

0.50

3.21

million

0.13

million

million

Renters with

severe

Renters with severely

rent burden,

inadequate housing,

11.63 million

1.11 million

Note: Not to scale.

Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

73

AppENDIx b. SUpplEmENTAl ExHIbITS

Exhibit B-2. Affordable Rental Units

Occupied by Higher-Income Renters, 2021

9

Renters with incomes of >80% AMI

8

Renters with incomes of 50–80% AMI

7

Renters with incomes of 30–50% AMI

2.20

Renters with incomes of 0–30% AMI

1.36

6

Vacant units for rent

2.84

5

1.52

1.71

2.07

4

2.25

1.34

1.46

1.68

3

0.50

0.43

1.26

0.43

0.38

2.03

0.29

0.49

0.83

2

0.24

0.54

1.55

0.65

2.10

1.18

0.26

1.85

0.77

0.60

0.41

0.64

1

0.19

0.20

1.66

1.74

1.13

0.85

0.36

0.35

0.55

0.27

0.80

0.83

0.33

0.22

0.22

0.23

0.25

0.25

0.45

0.55

0.44

0.52

0.30

0.26

0.33

0.70

0

0.10

0.08

0.10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

>110

Unit affordability: percent of Area Median Income needed to afford the highest rent in the category Source: HUD-PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

Exhibit B-3. Rental Stock of Below-Fair Market Rent Units by Region and Metropolitan Location, 2021

Households Affordable Affordable

Affordable,

Affordable

Affordable

Affordable,

(thousands)

Housing

and

Available,

Housing

and Available

Available,

Units

Available

and

Units

Housing Units

and

(thousands)

Housing

Adequate

per 100

per 100

Adequate

Units

Housing

Households

Households

Housing

(thousands)

Units

Units

(thousands)

per 100

Households

All

27,967

29,979

21,921

19,947

107.2

78.4

71.3

Northeast

5,668

5,929

4,620

4,128

104.6

81.5

72.8

Midwest

4,754

5,367

3,603

3,320

112.9

75.8

69.8

South

10,013

10,620

7,756

7,021

106.1

77.5

70.1

West

7,533

8,064

5,941

5,478

107.0

78.9

72.7

Central cities

13,451

13,852

10,606

9,517

103.0

78.8

70.8

Suburbs, urban

9,538

9,806

7,050

6,597

102.8

73.9

69.2

Suburbs, rural

2,049

2,603

1,780

1,657

127.0

86.9

80.9

Nonmetropolitan areas

2,929

3,719

2,485

2,175

127.0

84.8

74.3

Source: HUD PD&R tabulations of American Housing Survey data

74

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx C. FEDERAl HOUSING ASSISTANCE AND AFFORDAblE HOUSING pROGRAmS

Appendix C. Federal Housing Assistance and Affordable Housing Programs

Federal Housing

Assistance and

Affordable Housing

CPrograms

Appendix

HUD provides rental housing assistance through three key programs.63

1. Public housing. This program provides assisted housing to approximately 800,000 households through units owned or managed by local public

housing agencies. Families are generally required to pay 30 percent of

their incomes for rent.

2. Project-based assisted housing. Various assisted multifamily housing programs provide assisted housing to approximately 1.2 million

households living in privately owned rental housing. The assistance is

attached to the units reserved for low-income families who are generally

required to pay 30 percent of their incomes for rent.

3. Tenant-based rental assistance. The Housing Choice Voucher program supplements the rent payments of 2.4 million households in the private

rental market. The program is administered through public housing

agencies. Families are generally required to pay 30 percent of their

incomes for rent. They may choose to pay larger percentages, however, to

obtain units with higher rents.

Several other federal housing programs produce affordable housing, typically

with shallower subsidies. Although these units are often more affordable than market-rate units, without additional rent subsidies (such as vouchers), extremely low-income families would often have to pay much more than 30 percent of their incomes under these programs.

63 The number of households assisted by key programs based on HUD administrative records are available through the Picture of Subsidized Households query tool at https://www.huduser.gov/

portal/datasets/assthsg.html. The data presented here are from the 2022 Picture tool, “number reported” field, which reflects the number of households assisted.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

75

AppENDIx C. FEDERAl HOUSING ASSISTANCE AND AFFORDAblE HOUSING pROGRAmS

Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program. Tax

credits offered to investors by the U.S. Department of the

Treasury subsidize the capital costs of units that have rents

affordable to households with incomes not exceeding 60

percent of area median income (AMI).

HOME Investment Partnerships Program. This

program provides annual formula grants to state and local

governments that can be used to assist homeowners,

first-time homebuyers, or renters. Qualifying rents must

be affordable to households with incomes not exceeding

65 percent of AMI or must be less than the local Fair Market

Rent (FMR), whichever is less.

Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA).

HOPWA provides annual formula and competitive grants

available to state and local governments and nonprofits for

rental assistance targeted to a special-needs population.

Older rental subsidy programs. Programs named for

sections of the National Housing Act, primarily the Section

221(d)(3) Below Market Interest Rate Program and the

Section 236 mortgage assistance program, were active from

the early 1960s through the early 1970s. They were designed

to produce affordable housing for families with incomes

higher than the public housing income limits.

For further detail on HUD program requirements, see HUD

(2023).

76

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx D. pREvIOUS REpORTS TO CONGRESS ON WORST CASE NEEDS

Appendix D. Previous Reports to Congress on Worst Case Needs

Previous Reports to

Congress on Worst

Case Needs

D - Priority Problems and “Worst Case” Needs in 1989

(June 1991, HUD-1314-PDR).

Appendix

- 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 (February 2008).

- Worst Case Housing Needs 2007: A Report to Congress (May 2010).

- Worst Case Housing Needs 2009: Report to Congress (February 2011).

- Worst Case Housing Needs 2011: Report to Congress (August 2013).

- Worst Case Housing Needs: 2015 Report to Congress (April 2015).

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

77

AppENDIx D. pREvIOUS REpORTS TO CONGRESS ON WORST CASE NEEDS

- Worst Case Housing Needs: 2017 Report to Congress

(August 2017).

- Worst Case Housing Needs: 2019 Report to Congress

(June 2020).

- Worst Case Housing Needs: 2021 Report to Congress

(July 2021).

- These publications are available online at

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/home.html.

78

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

Appendix E. Data and Methodology

AppENDIx E. DATA AND mETHODOlOGy

E Data and Methodology

A report such as this one requires researchers to use a number of specialized concepts, definitions, and assumptions when analyzing and presenting the data.

This appendix documents such elements for those who wish to understand the

results more fully or replicate and extend the results in their own research.

Using the American Housing Survey Data

This report uses data from the most recently available American Housing Survey (AHS), conducted in 2021. The AHS, which is the only detailed periodic national Appendix

housing survey in the United States, is sponsored by HUD and conducted by

the Census Bureau. It provides nationally representative data on a wide range of housing subjects, including apartments, single-family homes, mobile homes, vacant homes, family composition, income, housing and neighborhood quality,

housing costs, equipment, fuel type, size of housing units, and recent moves.64

The AHS collects national data every 2 years, originally from a sample of about 84,400 housing units (Census-HUD, 2013) and currently from a new, redesigned

sample of about 85,400 housing units begun in 2015 (Census-HUD, 2017).

The survey, which started in 1973, sampled the same housing units between

1985 and 2013—with occasional adjustments and supplements—plus samples

of newly constructed units to ensure the data’s continuity and timeliness. To address many challenges in maintaining the AHS longitudinal sample for nearly 30 years, including attrition of housing units, response burden, changes in

geography, and disclosure avoidance and mitigation, HUD and the Census

Bureau undertook a major redesign for the 2015 AHS. The redesign included a

selection of a new national and metropolitan area longitudinal sample, changes to weighting methodologies and imputation processes, and a reevaluation of

variables. Information from the worst case needs reports has helped inform

public policy decisions, including decisions on targeting existing resources, determining the need for additional resources, and choosing the form that

housing assistance should take.

To accurately estimate worst case needs for federal rental assistance from AHS

data, it is essential to determine whether household incomes fall below HUD’s official very low-income limits (50 percent of HUD area median family income

[HAMFI], also termed area median income [AMI]), whether a household already

receives housing assistance, and whether an unassisted income-eligible

household has one or more of the priority problems that formerly conferred

preference in tenant selection for assistance (rent burdens exceeding 50

percent of income, substandard housing, or being involuntarily displaced).

64 An online codebook that documents all variables available in all American Housing Survey years is available at https://www.census.gov/data-tools/demo/codebook/ahs/ahsdict.html.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

79

AppENDIx E. DATA AND mETHODOlOGy

HUD and the Census Bureau provide a Table Creator for the

are reviewed, and values are suppressed as necessary, to

2011 to 2021 AHS surveys. The Table Creator enables users

comply with Census disclosure prevention requirements

to create customized tabulations of AHS data without the

under the authority of the Data Review Board. The U.S.

difficulties and special skills needed to analyze microdata

Census Bureau reviewed this data product for unauthorized

Public Use Files. Content includes variables similar to those

disclosure of confidential information and approved the

provided in this report.65 A national data source that is a

disclosure avoidance practices applied to this release:

reasonable alternative to the AHS for measuring housing

CBDRB FY23 0069.

needs is the American Community Survey (ACS). The ACS

has the advantage of a larger sample size that supports

Statistical Significance. Assessments of statistical

estimates for small geographic areas. Disadvantages of

significance in this report are made regarding 95-percent

the ACS include addressing housing assistance status

confidence intervals. Standard errors associated with

less comprehensively and providing much less information

estimates are estimated using the AHS replicate weights and

about housing unit characteristics. For example, the ACS no

Fay “Balanced Repeated Replication” method in the SAS

longer ascertains whether units contain complete plumbing

SurveyMeans statistical procedure. Changes between survey

systems. HUD also sponsors special tabulations of ACS data

years are judged to be statistically significant if the difference

that have HUD income limits information and can be used by

between estimated values exceeds a critical value based on

the public to estimate housing needs similar to those in this

the square root of the sum of squared variances. A limitation

report for various small geographies.66

of this method is that it is not robust to nonindependent

samples inherent to the AHS panel design.

Weighting. Because the AHS is based on a sample of

housing units rather than a census of all housing units,

Household and Family Types

estimates based on the data must be “weighted up” so that

totals for each year match independent estimates of the total

In this report, the terms family and household are not

housing stock and better represent the full housing stock.

interchangeable because not all households are families.

The Census Bureau weights up responses to account for

The term families refers only to a subset of households that

undercoverage of households and household nonresponse

have one or more people in the household related to the

(about 15 percent). The weights for 2001-through-2009 AHS

householder (the first household member aged 18 years or

data used in this report are based on the 2000 Census of

older who is listed as an owner or renter of the housing unit)

Housing, with adjustments for estimated change since then.

by birth, marriage, or adoption.

Since 2011, AHS data have been weighted to 2010 census

Families with children. Households with a child younger

benchmarks. AHS datasets for recent years are provided

than age 18 present are presumed to meet the definition

with multiple “replicate” weights for each observation that can

of family through relation by birth or adoption (including

be used to estimate standard errors and evaluate statistical

grandparents as parents).

significance without knowledge of stratification and cluster

sampling parameters of complex sample designs. See

Older adult households without children. Households in

Statistical Significance below.

which the householder or spouse is age 62 or older and no

children are present. Older adult households may be either

Exclusions. Households reporting incomes that are zero or

family or nonfamily households.

negative are excluded from estimates of worst case needs.

However, they are included in counts of total households.

Other family households. Households with people younger

If such households pay rents greater than the Fair Market

than 62 as a householder and no children, in which either (1)

Rent and report zero or negative incomes, then their income

one or more people are related to the householder by birth,

situation is presumably temporary, and so they are included

marriage, or adoption; or (2) one or more subfamilies reside

and higher incomes are imputed to them.

there who have members related to each other by birth,

marriage, or adoption.

Disclosure Review. The local income limits and HAMFI

values that are required to estimate worst case needs are

Other nonfamily households. Households with single

linked to local geographies and therefore pose a risk of

people, younger than 62, living alone or with only

disclosing AHS respondents. Accordingly, the analysis

nonrelatives. Most of these households consist of a single

relies on restricted access Internal Use files maintained at

person living alone rather than unrelated people sharing

the Census Bureau’s Research Data Center. Tabulations

housing.

65 The AHS Table Creator tool is found at https://www.census.gov/data/data-tools/ahs-table-creator.html.

66 The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) datasets can be downloaded from https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/cp.html.

80

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx E. DATA AND mETHODOlOGy

Households with people with disabilities. Before 2009,

extent that respondents underreport total income, the AHS

no questions in the AHS were designed to directly ascertain

estimates may overcount the number of households with

whether individuals had disabilities. Worst case needs

a cost burden. A severe cost burden exceeds 50 percent

reports for 2007 and earlier identified households containing

of reported income. A moderate cost burden exceeds 30

people with disabilities using various forms of income-based

percent but is less than or equal to 50 percent of reported

proxies. Households with disabilities (1) were not families

income. Cost burdens only qualify as potential worst case

with children, (2) were not older adult households, and (3)

needs if they are severe. Households reporting zero or

received some form of income or government assistance

negative income are defined as having no cost burden.

that is very likely to indicate that an adult with disabilities is

present in the household. The 2009 AHS and subsequent

Inadequate housing. Housing with severe or moderate

surveys ask direct questions about impairments and

physical problems, as defined in the AHS since 1984 and

difficulties with activities of daily living for each household

modified from time to time to reflect changes in the survey.

member, including children older than 5 years old. This

Severe inadequacies constitute potential worst case needs,

report, therefore, addresses disability based on people

but moderate inadequacies do not. The 2007 AHS eliminated

reported with these problems, except that older adults who

the questions about hallways (common stairways and light

have disabilities do not increase the number of households

fixtures) in multiunit structures in the section on selected

counted with disabilities because so many disabilities are

physical problems, which affects the classification of units

associated with aging.

having severe or moderate physical problems. Briefly, a unit

is defined as having severe physical inadequacies if it has

Housing Assistance Status

any one of the following four problems.

In 1997, the AHS questions intended to identify households

1. Plumbing. Lacking piped hot water or a flush toilet or

receiving rental assistance were changed in both content

lacking both bathtub and shower, all for the exclusive

and order from those used previously. After careful review,

use of the unit.

HUD and the Census Bureau adopted the following

procedure to identify assisted households in a way that

2. Heating. Having been uncomfortably cold during the

produces results that are more comparable with pre-1997

past winter for 24 hours or more, or three times for at

data. Those questions were further refined in 2007 as a result

least 6 hours each, because of broken-down heating

of additional cognitive research. In this report, therefore,

equipment.

receipt of rental assistance is based on respondent reports

designed to determine the following:

3. Electrical. Having no electricity or having all of the

following three electrical problems: exposed wiring,

• Whether the household must recertify to determine the

a room with no working wall outlet, and three or more

rent it pays.

blown fuses or tripped circuit breakers in the past 90

days.

• Whether the rent is less because of a federal, state, or

local government housing program.

4. Upkeep. Having any five of the following six

maintenance problems: leaks from outdoors, leaks from

• Whether the household has a housing voucher and, if so,

indoors, holes in the floor, holes or open cracks in the

whether it can be used to move to another location.

walls or ceilings, more than 1 square foot of peeling

paint or plaster, and rats in the past 90 days.

• Whether the housing authority is the household’s

landlord.

A housing unit has moderate physical inadequacies if it has

any of the following four problems but none of the severe

An alternative approach of identifying HUD-assisted

problems listed previously.

households using an administrative data match is not used

to determine housing assistance status for the purposes of

1. Plumbing. Having all toilets break down simultaneously

this report because such an approach excludes assistance

at least three times in the past 3 months for at least 3

received from other federal, state, or local agencies.

hours each time.

Housing Problems

2. Heating. Having unvented gas, oil, or kerosene heaters

as the main source of heat (because those heaters

Rent or cost burden. A ratio of housing costs (including

may produce unsafe fumes and unhealthy levels of

utilities) to household income that exceeds 30 percent, which

moisture).

is a conventional standard for housing affordability. To the

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

81

AppENDIx E. DATA AND mETHODOlOGy

3. Upkeep. Having any three of the six upkeep problems

Household income. Reported income from all sources for

associated with severe inadequacies.

all household members aged 18 and older.

4. Kitchen. Lacking a sink, range, or refrigerator for the

Income Categories

exclusive use of the unit.

HAMFI and official income limits. HUD is required by law

Overcrowding. The condition of having more than one

to set income limits each year that determine the eligibility

person per room in a residence. Overcrowding is counted

of applicants for assisted housing programs. In 1974,

as a moderate problem rather than a severe problem that

Congress defined low income and very low income for

constitutes a potential worst case need.

HUD rental programs as incomes not exceeding 80 and 50

percent, respectively, of HAMFI. HAMFI is more commonly

Crowding is measured as the ratio of persons to total rooms.

referred to as AMI, although the latter term may be subject

Total rooms is defined as the sum of whole rooms, including

to misinterpretation. Note that income limits are based on

bedrooms, kitchens, dining rooms (if separate), and other

median family income (MFI), not on median household

finished rooms including living rooms, family rooms, great

income. HUD determines base income limits for a household

rooms, TV rooms, recreation rooms, dens, and libraries.

of four and adjusts them further by household size: one

Spaces that are not counted in total rooms include full

person, 70 percent of base; two people, 80 percent; three

baths, half baths, laundries, utility rooms, garages, hallways,

people, 90 percent; five people, 108 percent; six people,

closets, and porches.

116 percent; and so on. Each household is assigned to an

income category using the HUD-determined income limit for

“Priority” problems. Problems qualifying for federal

its geographic area and number of household members.67

preference in admission to assisted housing programs

The Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998

between 1988 and 1996, including paying more than one-

(Pub. Law 105–276) first applied an extremely low income

half of income for rent (severe rent burden), living in severely

standard based on 30 percent of HAMFI for admissions

substandard housing (including being homeless or in a

targeting in public housing and the tenant-based Section 8

homeless shelter), or being involuntarily displaced. These

program. (See extremely low income below.)

problems informed the original definition of worst case

needs. Because the AHS sample tracks housing units and

Income cutoffs in association with AHS geography. The

thus cannot count people experiencing homelessness, AHS

Census Bureau matches AHS survey addresses with HUD

estimates of priority problems are limited to the two severe

income limit geography and assigns the appropriate income

problems described previously: (1) rent burdens greater

limits to each case, making the appropriate adjustments for

than 50 percent of income or (2) severe physical problems.

household size.

In accordance with the intention to estimate the number of

unassisted very low-income renters with priority problems,

Because developing estimates of official income limits for

the exhibits in appendix A classify households with a

the geography identified in the AHS microdata was time

combination of moderate problems and severe problems as

consuming, before the 2003 AHS release, HUD prepared

having severe problems.

income limits to use with AHS geography for only 3 years:

1978, 1986, and 1995. Income cutoffs for the 2003 AHS

Income Measurement

release and each subsequent dataset have been based on

HUD’s current income limits for those years, weighted by

Income sources. Income means gross income reported by

AHS weights. The Census Bureau included those cutoffs in

AHS respondents for the 12 months preceding the interview.

the AHS public use file through 2013. To protect respondent

For each person in the household, the AHS questionnaire

confidentiality, income limit variables were restricted to the AHS

collects the amounts of several different types of income.

internal use file (IUF) in 2015. Additional detail about income

Income includes amounts reported for wage and salary

limits can be found in the housing costs-affordability section of

income, net self-employment income, Social Security or

the

railroad retirement income, public assistance or welfare

AHS Codebook interactive tool (Census-HUD, 2021b).

payments, and all other money income before deductions

Categorizing households by income. For this report,

for taxes or any other purpose. Imputed income from equity

when households are categorized using the extremely low-,

is not included as income in this report. Following HUD rules

very low-, and low-income cutoffs, the cutoffs are adjusted

for determining income eligibility for HUD programs, the

for household size using the same adjustment factors that

earnings of teenagers aged 17 and younger are not counted

HUD programs use. (See additional considerations under

as income for this report.

extremely low income below.)

67 For details about how HUD sets income limits, see http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/il.html.

82

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

AppENDIx E. DATA AND mETHODOlOGy

In addition, households reporting negative income are

- Poverty. Household income of less than the U.S.

attributed incomes of slightly more than AMI if their monthly

national poverty guidelines for that household size. As

housing costs exceed the Fair Market Rent (FMR) and they

discussed in appendix A of the Census Bureau’s AHS

lived in adequate and uncrowded housing. The justification

publications, AHS poverty estimates differ from official

for imputing higher incomes is that many households in this

poverty estimates made from the Current Population

situation live in housing with amenities such as dining rooms,

Survey (Census-HUD, 2021a). AHS poverty estimates

balconies, and off-street parking and thus may be reporting

are based on the income of households rather than

temporary accounting losses.

the income of families or individuals, and AHS income

questions are much less detailed and refer to income

- Extremely low income (ELI). Income not in excess of

during the past 12 months rather than during a fixed

30 percent of HAMFI, as determined by the extremely

period. The poverty guidelines for a family of four

low-income cutoff used for Section 8 programs. In 2014,

approximate 33 percent of HAMFI. Comparisons of

Congress required HUD to begin setting ELI cutoffs for

income limits with poverty thresholds are presented in

each area to the greater of 30 percent of HAMFI or the

exhibits A-6A, A-6B, A-7, and A-8.

federal poverty guidelines, but necessarily capped by

the very low-income (VLI) cutoff.

- Earnings at minimum wage. Households with incomes

68 Because of this requirement, 78 percent of geographic

from salary or wages totaling at least as much as one

areas had four-person ELI cutoffs set above 30 percent

could earn working full-time (40 hours per week for 50

of HAMFI in 2019. The average increase in the cutoff

weeks per year) at the federal minimum wage of $7.25

among such areas was 32 percent, and for 3 percent of

per hour are defined as having at least full-time earnings

areas that were capped by the VLI cutoff, the increase

at minimum wage. Thus, the sum of salary and wage

was 67 percent. Because federal poverty guidelines use

income earned by all persons in the household totals at

larger household size adjustments than HUD income

least $14,500 annually. Households with incomes from

limits, increases in the ELI cutoffs were both more likely

salary or wages totaling at least one-half that amount

and more substantial for large households than for small

($7,250 annually) are defined as having at least half-time

households.

earnings at minimum wage. Comparisons of household

earnings characteristics are presented in exhibits A-6A,

- Very low income. Income not in excess of 50 percent

A-6B, A-7, and A-8.

of HAMFI, as determined by the very low-income cutoff.

Very low income thus includes extremely low income,

Location

although the term sometimes is used loosely in specific

contexts, such as mismatch analysis, to mean incomes

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). From 1973 to

of between 30 and 50 percent of HAMFI.

1983, the definitions of metropolitan locations in AHS data

corresponded to the 243 Standard MSAs used in the 1970

- Low income. Reported income not in excess of 80

census. From 1984 to 2013, a metropolitan location in the

percent of HAMFI, as determined by the low-income

AHS has referred to the MSAs defined in 1983, based on the

cutoff.

1980 census. The 2015 AHS redesign that selected a new

national and metropolitan area longitudinal sample for the

- Middle income. For this report, income exceeding 80

first time since 1985 brought metropolitan area definitions

percent and less than 120 percent of HAMFI.

up to date with the most current Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) delineations based on the 2010 census,

- Upper income. For this report, income exceeding 120

percent of HAMFI.

which, at the time the 2015 AHS sample design took place,

was February 2013.

HUD allows some jurisdictions exceptions in the

Region. The four census regions are the Northeast, Midwest,

definition of the ELI and VLI cutoffs. Those exceptions

South, and West.

are intended to prevent loss of benefits to assisted

households caused by improvement in local economic

conditions. Thus, the official income limits for ELI and

VLI are, in some cases, set above 30 or 50 percent of

HAMFI, respectively. The AHS (and thus this report) uses

those official income limits in all its measures.

68 See Frequently Asked Question 4, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html#2015_faq.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

83

AppENDIx E. DATA AND mETHODOlOGy

Mismatch of Supply and Demand for

three bedrooms, 104 percent; four bedrooms, 116 percent;

Affordable Rental Housing

and plus, 12 percent of base for every additional bedroom.

This formula assumes that an efficiency unit houses one

Mismatch. HUD assesses the state of the housing market

person, a one-bedroom unit houses 1.5 people, and each

by examining the extent of mismatch between the supply of

additional bedroom houses another 1.5 people.

the rental housing stock and the number of renters whose

household incomes fall below specified thresholds. Three

Availability. For mismatch analysis, housing units that are

summary measures are used to characterize the extent of

affordable at a specified income level are further assessed

mismatch at selected income levels:

for whether they are currently available to households at that

income level. A unit is available if it is either already occupied

1. Affordable units per 100 renters.

by a household of that income level or currently vacant and

available for rent. Units that are occupied by households of

2. Affordable and available units per 100 renters.

higher income groups are not “available.”

3. Affordable, available, and adequate units per 100

Adequacy. For mismatch analysis, housing units that are

renters.

found to be both affordable and available at a specified

income level are further assessed for whether they are free

These mismatch measures can be understood as measuring

of severe physical inadequacies, as discussed under the

the sufficiency of the quantity of housing supplied relative to

Housing Problems heading.

the quantity of housing demanded. The italicized terms are

defined and discussed below.

Categorization of rental units and households for

mismatch analysis. To analyze the mismatch between

Affordability. Several federal rental programs define

affordability and income, HUD compares household incomes

affordable rents as those requiring not more than 30 percent

and housing unit rents with the current income limits (for

of an income cutoff defined concerning HAMFI. Under

income and rent categories up to and including 80 percent

the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, for

of HAMFI) and to a ratio of HAMFI (for categories exceeding

example, housing units with rents up to 30 percent of 60

80 percent of HAMFI). As in the analysis of household

percent of HAMFI qualify as affordable and eligible for the

income, households reporting negative income are redefined

credit.

as having incomes slightly greater than MFI if their monthly

This report generalizes the approach developed to define

housing costs were more than the FMR and they lived in

LIHTC maximum rents for units of different sizes to define

adequate and uncrowded housing. Units reported as having

three categories of affordability (ELI, VLI, and low income)

“no cash rent” are categorized solely on the basis of utility

based on incomes that are sufficient for the rents: at or less

costs. Utility costs are allocated to vacant units through hot-

than 30 percent of HAMFI, more than 30 percent and not

deck imputation based on units that are comparable based

more than 50 percent of HAMFI, and more than 50 percent

on cost, number of units in the structure, region, and tenure.

of HAMFI. Units are assigned to affordability categories by

comparing their gross rent, including payments for utilities,

Race and Ethnicity

with affordability thresholds calculated as 30 percent of the

In 2003, the AHS began using revised Census Bureau

income cutoffs for the corresponding income group. Units

categories of race and ethnicity that are not directly

with gross rents above those thresholds are not affordable

comparable with the categories used in the AHS from 2001

because they would cause moderate or severe cost burdens

and earlier. Survey respondents may now select more than

even for the highest income renters of the income group.

one racial group, causing slight but meaningful decreases in

Thus, unit affordability depends on the percent of HAMFI

the size of previously monolithic categories.

needed to afford the highest rent in each income category

(ELI, VLI, and so on). For example, to be affordable to ELI

The 2017 AHS supports producing estimates of worst case

renters, a unit’s gross rent would have to be 30 percent

housing needs for more detailed race and ethnicity categories

or less (affordability threshold) of 30 percent of HAMFI

than were included in previous reports. In addition to non-

(ELI threshold). The method of assigning units to cost

Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic renters,

categories was modified in 2017 to account for limited HUD

households experiencing worst case housing needs previously

administrative exceptions to program income limits.

enumerated in an “other” race category are now reported for

Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian

The income limits used to define rent affordability are

or other Pacific Islander renters in exhibit 1-7.

adjusted for the number of bedrooms using the formula

codified at 26 U.S.C. 42(g)(2)(C): no bedrooms, 70 percent of

base; one bedroom, 75 percent; two bedrooms, 90 percent;

84

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

lITERATURE CITED

Literature Cited

Divringi, Eileen, Eliza Wallace, Keith Wardrip, and Elizabeth Nash. 2019.

Measuring and Understanding Home Repair Costs: A National

Literature

Typology of Households. Philadelphia, PA: Federal Reserve Bank of

Philadelphia. https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/frbp/assets/

community-development/reports/measuring-and-understanding-home-

Cited

repair-costs/0919-home-repair-costs-national-report.pdf.

Eggers, Frederick J., and Fouad Moumen. 2016. American Housing Survey

Components of Inventory Change: 2011–2013. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy

Development and Research. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/

cinch/cinch13/cinch11-13.pdf.

Joint Center for Housing Studies (JCHS) of Harvard University. 2006. The State of the Nation’s Housing: 2006. Cambridge, MA: JCHS of Harvard

University. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/media/imp/

son2006.pdf.

———. 2016. The State of the Nation’s Housing: 2016. Cambridge, MA: JCHS

of Harvard University. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/

media/imp/jchs_2016_state_of_the_nations_housing_lowres_0.pdf.

———. 2019. The State of the Nation’s Housing: 2019. Cambridge, MA: JCHS

of Harvard University. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/

reports/files/Harvard_JCHS_State_of_the_Nations_Housing_2019%20

%281%29.pdf.

———. 2021. The State of the Nation’s Housing: 2021. Cambridge, MA: JCHS

of Harvard University. https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/

reports/files/Harvard_JCHS_State_Nations_Housing_2021.pdf.

Nisar, Hiren, Mallory Vachon, Charles Horseman, and Jim Murdoch. 2019.

Market Predictors of Homelessness: How Housing and Community

Factors Shape Homelessness Rates Within Continuums of Care.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,

Office of Policy Development and Research. https://www.huduser.gov/

portal/sites/default/files/pdf/Market-Predictors-of-Homelessness.pdf.

Social Security Administration (SSA). 2021. Understanding Supplemental

Security Income – 2021 Edition. Woodlawn, MD: Social Security Administration. https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-17-008.pdf.

Solari, Claudia D., and Robert D. Mare. 2012. “Housing Crowding Effects

on Children’s Wellbeing,” Social Science Research 41 (2): 464–76.

doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2011.09.012.

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

85

lITERATURE CITED

U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Housing

Wallace, Eliza, Eileen Divringi, and Keith Wardrip. 2019. “A

and Urban Development (Census-HUD). 2013.

New Cost-Based Index of Housing Quality and

“Appendix B. 2013 AHS National Sample Design

Repair Needs,” Cityscape 21 (3): 299–309.

and Weighting.” In American Housing Survey for

the United States: 2013. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau.

https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs/

tech-documentation/def-errors-changes.2013.html.

———. 2017. 2015 AHS Integrated National Sample:

Sample Design, Weighting, and Error Estimation.

Washington, DC: Department of Commerce, U.S.

Census Bureau and HUD. https://www2.census.

gov/programs-surveys/ahs/2015/2015%20AHS%20

National%20Sample%20Design,%20Weighting,%20

and%20Error%20Estimation.pdf.

———. 2021a. “Appendix A. Subject Definitions and Table

Index.” American Housing Survey for the United

States: 2021. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. https://www2.

census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs/2021/2021%20

AHS%20Definitions.pdf.

———. 2021b. AHS Codebook. Interactive Tool. Washington,

DC: U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/

data-tools/demo/codebook/ahs/ahsdict.html.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

(HUD). 2023. Programs of HUD: Major Mortgage,

Grant, Assistance, and Regulatory Programs: 2023.

Washington, DC: HUD. https://www.hud.gov/sites/

dfiles/Main/documents/HUDPrograms2023.pdf.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office

of Community Planning and Development (HUD-

CPD). 2022a. The 2019-2020 Annual Homeless

Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress: Part 2:

Estimates of Homelessness in the United States.

Washington, DC: HUD-CPD. https://www.huduser.

gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2020-AHAR-Part-2.

pdf.

———. 2022b. The 2022 Annual Homeless Assessment

Report (AHAR) to Congress: Part 1: Point-in-Time

Estimates of Homelessness. Washington, DC: HUD-

CPD. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/

files/pdf/2022-AHAR-Part-1.pdf.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office

of Policy Development and Research (HUD-PD&R).

2008. Housing Needs of Persons With Disabilities:

Supplemental Findings to the Affordable Housing

Needs 2005 Report. Washington, DC: HUD-PD&R.

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/Publications/pdf/

Affhsgneedsdis.pdf.

86

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

WORST CASE HOUSING NEEDS 2023 REPORT TO CONGRESS

87

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Office of Policy Development and Research

Washington, DC 20410-6000

September 2023

Document Outline

- Acknowledgments

- Foreword

- Contents

- Executive Summary

- Section 1. Extent and Nature of Worst Case Needs

- Section 2. Shortage of Affordable Housing

- Section 3. Understanding the Trend in Worst Case Needs

- Appendix A. Detailed Data on Housing Problems and Supply of Affordable Housing

- Appendix B. Supplemental Exhibits

- Appendix C. Federal Housing Assistance and Affordable Housing Programs

- Appendix D. Previous Reports to Congress on Worst Case Needs

- Appendix E. Data and Methodology

- Literature Cited

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments

Foreword

Contents

Executive Summary

Section 1. Extent and Nature of Worst Case Needs

Section 2. Shortage of Affordable Housing

Section 3. Understanding the Trend in Worst Case Needs

Appendix A. Detailed Data on Housing Problems and Supply of Affordable Housing

Appendix B. Supplemental Exhibits

Appendix C. Federal Housing Assistance and Affordable Housing Programs

Appendix D. Previous Reports to Congress on Worst Case Needs

Appendix E. Data and Methodology

Literature Cited