The HOPE VI Resident Tracking Study A Snapshot of the Current Living Situation of Original Residents from Eight Sites November 2002 Prepared for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Public Housing Investments 451 Seventh St, SW Washington DC, 20410 Prepared by Larry Buron,a Susan Popkin,b Diane Levy,b Laura Harris,b Jill Khadduria With the Assistance of Jennifer Comey,b Satyendra Patrabansh,a Wenjing Song,a William Woodleyb aAbt Associates Inc. bUrban Institute Table of Contents Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... i Chapter 1: Introduction.............................................................................................................1 1.1 The HOPE VI Program ..............................................................................................2 1.2 Study Background .....................................................................................................4 1.3 Research Objectives and Methods .............................................................................5 Chapter 2: Case Studies of Eight HOPE VI Sites ....................................................................11 2.1 Quigg Newton, Denver, Colorado (1994) ..................................................................11 2.2 Archbishop Walsh, Newark, New Jersey (1994) ........................................................17 2.3 John Hay Homes, Springfield, Illinois (1994) .............................................................24 2.4 Hayes Valley, San Francisco, California (1995).........................................................30 2.5 Cotter and Lang Homes, Louisville, Kentucky (1996) .................................................37 2.6 Connie Chambers, Tucson, Arizona (1996)...............................................................44 2.7 Christopher Columbus Homes, Paterson, New Jersey (1997) ....................................50 2.8 Edwin Corning, Albany, New York (1998)..................................................................56 Chapter 3: Housing Assistance and Housing Conditions.......................................................63 3.1 Housing Assistance Status after HOPE VI Award ......................................................63 3.2 Resident Characteristics..........................................................................................69 3.3 Housing Conditions .................................................................................................71 3.4 Conclusion..............................................................................................................76 Chapter 4: Neighborhood Poverty Rate and Resident Perceptions of their Current Neighborhood ...........................................................................................................................78 4.1 Poverty Rate and Race/Ethnic Composition of Current Neighborhood Compared to Original Neighborhood .............................................................................................78 4.2 Crime and Safety ....................................................................................................84 4.3 Collective Efficacy ...................................................................................................88 4.4 Interactions with Neighbors ......................................................................................90 4.5 Conclusion..............................................................................................................92 Chapter 5: Employment, Hardship, and Health.......................................................................93 5.1 Employment and Other Sources of Income ...............................................................93 5.2 Material Hardship....................................................................................................98 5.3 Health .................................................................................................................. 104 5.4 Conclusion............................................................................................................ 106 Chapter 6: Summary and Conclusions................................................................................. 107 6.1 Summary of Major Findings ................................................................................... 107 6.2 Implications for Policy............................................................................................ 114 6.3 Future Research ................................................................................................... 115 References.............................................................................................................................. 119 Appendix A: Sample Selection and Data Collection Methodology Appendix B: Resident Survey for HOPE VI Tracking Study Table of Contents Executive Summary The HOPE VI Resident Tracking Study represents the first systematic look at what has happened to original residents of distressed public housing developments targeted for revitalization under the HOPE VI program. It provides a snapshot of the living conditions and well-being of former residents of eight properties as of the spring of 2001—between two and seven years after the PHA was awarded a HOPE VI grant. At that time, the redevelopment process was still under way in six of the eight study sites, so the results describe a “work in progress.” Created by Congress in 1992, the HOPE VI Program represents the federal government’s most ambitious effort to date to address the problem of severely distressed public housing. The goals of the program are to improve the living environment for residents of distressed public housing, to revitalize the site and contribute to improvements in the surrounding neighborhood, to decrease (or avoid) the concentration of very low-income households, and to build sustainable communities. To achieve these goals, the program combines physical revitalization with management improvements and supportive services for the public housing residents. As the program has evolved, it has increased its emphasis on providing mixed- income housing, leveraging HOPE VI money to raise other funding, and broadening the focus of revitalization beyond the original public housing site to incorporate neighborhood revitalization goals. Between 1993 and 2001, a total of 165 revitalization grants were funded, representing $4.5 billion in HOPE VI funds for redevelopment and supportive service activities. This study focuses on a single aspect of the HOPE VI experience: What has happened to original residents of eight HOPE VI properties since revitalization got under way and how their living situations have changed. The study includes some residents who have returned to the HOPE VI sites and some who are living in other locations, either as a temporary or permanent relocation. The study findings are based on a survey of 818 residents who lived in one of eight study developments at the time of the HOPE VI award. While the eight study sites were selected to reflect a range of HOPE VI initiatives and relocation strategies, they are not expected to be representative of the program as a whole. Moreover, since each HOPE VI site is unique in some respects, a major focus of this report is on understanding the survey results in the context of the individual sites, their revitalization strategies, and the local housing market. Although this summary focuses on cross-site findings, readers are encouraged to delve into the individual case studies, which provide a rich source of information about the current situation of original HOPE VI residents at each site. Summary of Major Findings The findings of this study fall into three broad domains: the type and quality of housing now occupied by the original HOPE VI residents; their current neighborhood and social Executive Summary for Hope VI Resident Tracking Study i environments; and their employment, material hardship, and health. The living conditions of former HOPE VI residents are of interest because of the program’s goals of improving conditions for public housing residents of severely distressed public housing regardless of where they choose to relocate. Indeed, the results indicate that different housing environments offer relocatees different opportunities and challenges. Housing Type and Household Characteristics At the time of the resident survey in the spring of 2001, two of the eight study sites were completed and fully reoccupied, four of the sites were partially reoccupied, and two sites were in the midst of on-site construction and had not yet begun reocuppying the site. At this point, we do not know how many residents in the eight study sites may ultimately return to the HOPE VI property or what additional changes in their housing situation they may make before the redevelopment programs are completed. This study reflects their housing assistance status and living conditions as of the spring of 2001. · Of the 818 households in our sample, 19 percent now live in a revitalized HOPE VI development, 29 percent live in other public housing properties, 33 percent are renting units using housing vouchers, and 18 percent have left assisted housing altogether. Nationally, a larger share of original residents relocated to other public housing developments (37 percent) or are using a housing voucher (35 percent) than in this study sample, and a smaller share now live