Discrimination in Metropolitan Housing Markets: Phase 1
For convenience, the report is available for download in PDF format. Your options for downloading are as follows:
- Executive Summary Only (.pdf 128KB)
- The Full Phase 1 Report without Annexes (.pdf 2.79MB)
The Executive Summary provides a general overview of the
major findings and the methods used to develop the estimates.
This is the full report, including the Executive Summary.
- Chapter 1 provides a description of the paired testing
methodology generally along with an overview of the scope
of the study.
- Chapter 2 presents the methodology implemented in Phase
I of HDS2000, including the sample of metropolitan areas
in which tests were conducted, the procedures used to
draw a sample of available housing units in each of these
metropolitan areas, the paired testing protocols implemented
for both rental and sales housing, and the statistical
procedures used to estimate the incidence of adverse treatment.
- Chapter 3 presents current national estimates of adverse
treatment against African American and Hispanic renters
and homebuyers, as well as estimates of change in differential
treatment since 1989.
- Chapter 4 presents metropolitan-level estimates of
adverse treatment against African Americans and Hispanics
compared to the national level for each of the twenty
large metropolitan areas in our sample, highlighting metropolitan
areas with significantly higher or lower rates of adverse
treatment. Chapter 4 also presents results from exploratory
testing for adverse treatment against Asians and Native
- Chapter 5 uses multivariate analysis methods to test
hypotheses about potential sources of random and systematic
differences in treatment, and addresses some of the major
methodological criticisms that have been leveled at paired
- Chapter 6 presents expanded measures of geographic
steering in the sales market.
- Chapter 7 explores systematic variations in the incidence
of adverse treatment, and assesses the extent to which
they support hypotheses about the causes of discrimination.
- Chapter 8 reviews all the findings from Phase I of HDS2000 and discusses their implications, both for future paired testing research and for ongoing enforcement efforts.
Annex 1 of the HDS 2000 report includes the Test Assignment Guides, Forms and Instructions used by the organizations that conducted the paired tests for HDS 2000.
Annex 2 of the HDS 2000 report includes the Test Report Forms used for the Rental and Sales paired tests. After meeting with an agent, each tester independently completed these forms to record the treatment that they received. The data from these forms were then used by the analysts to construct the treatment variables.
Annex 3: This annex describes the tests for statistical significance used in the report. Annex 4: This annex describes the methodology for and presents preliminary results from triad tests that were conducted in two metropolitan areas in Phase II of HDS2000. Triad tests involve visits by three testers to inquire about each randomly selected advertisement. Two of the visits in each test involve testers of the same race. A comparison of the experiences of the two same-race testers provides a direct measure of random differences in treatment during the testing process. Annex 5: This annex describes how and why the treatment measures reported in 2000 from the 1989 HDS paired test data are different from the treatment measures reported as part of the 1989 study. Annex 6: For comparability, Phase I of HDS2000 implemented the same weekly ad-sampling methodology that was used in 1989. However, the 1989 HDS found that some geographic areas within many metropolitan housing markets were under-represented in the major metropolitan newspaper. In order to learn more about this issue, two additional samples of available housing units were selected for a subset of sites in HDS2000. First, additional advertisements for units in under-represented communities were drawn from the major metro newspaper. And second, additional units available for sale or rent were identified from other sources for the most under-represented communities. In this annex, we stratify tests based on whether the advertised unit was located in a well-represented community or an under-represented community to determine whether patterns of treatment vary. Annex 7: This annex includes tables which show how each individual treatment variable contributes to the two overall composite indexes, the consistency composite and the hierarchical composite, for both 1989 and 2000.
Annex 8 includes estimates on every treatment variable for each Metropolitan area that was included as part of the 2000 sample. Statistical significance of the net measure is also shown.
Annex 9 provides the methodology for the multinomial logit estimations and simulations that were reported in Chapter 5 of the main report. Annex 10 provides the methodology for the fixed effect logit estimation reported in Chapter 7 of the main report. Annex 11 provides the detailed results from the fixed effect logit estimation reported in Chapter 7 of the main report.
The Phase 1 Supplement used data collected in Phase 2 to
provide additional metropolitan estimates of discrimination
for African Americans in the Baltimore and Miami MSAs as
well as statewide estimates for Alabama, California, Georgia,
and New York. The supplement provides additional estimates
of discrimination for Hispanics in Miami and the state of
California. The supplement also provides an updated national
estimate using data from the additional metropolitan areas.