DOCSLIB.ORG

Innovations in the Moving to Work Demonstration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Innovations in the Moving to Work Demonstration Innovations in the Moving to Work Demonstration December 2014 Sponsored by: Public and Affordable Housing Research Corporation, a HAI Group company Cheshire, CT Authors: Jill Khadduri Melissa Vandawalker Rebecca Cohen Jeffrey Lubell With: Larry Buron Lesley Freiman Eliza Kean Abt Associates Cambridge, MA and Bethesda, MD Acknowledgements Authors Jill Khadduri, Melissa Vandawalker, Rebecca Cohen, Jeffrey Lubell With Larry Buron, Lesley Freiman, Eliza Kean Document Collection Larry Buron, Lesley Freiman, Jill Hamadyk, Eliza Kean, Amar Patel, Louise Rothschild, Galen Savidge- Wilkins, Melissa Vandawalker Case Study Site Visitors Larry Buron, Eliza Kean, Jill Khadduri, Jeffrey Lubell, Melissa Vandawalker The authors would like to thank Keely Stater, the study’s project officer at HAI Group and the advisors from the public housing industry who helped shape this study. They would also like to thank the internal Abt Associates quality reviewer, Jennifer Turnham. CONTENTS Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 MTW Innovations ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Increasing Cost Effectiveness ................................................................................................................ 2 Increasing the Quality and Quantity of Affordable Housing ................................................................. 3 Increasing Self-Sufficiency .................................................................................................................... 4 Promoting Residential Stability for Targeted Households .................................................................... 5 Expanding the Geographic Scope of Assisted Housing ......................................................................... 6 Case Study PHAs ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Focus of Innovations at the Case Study PHAs ....................................................................................... 7 Evolution of Participation in MTW ........................................................................................................ 8 Changes to Agency Culture and Decision-Making ................................................................................ 8 Performance Measurement .................................................................................................................. 9 Next Steps ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 The Moving to Work Program .................................................................................................................. 2 MTW Statutory Provisions .................................................................................................................... 2 HUD Implementation of MTW .............................................................................................................. 3 Evaluations of MTW .............................................................................................................................. 4 Study Design ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Defining “Innovation” ........................................................................................................................... 6 Web Survey ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Document Review ................................................................................................................................. 8 Interviews with MTW Agency Staff ....................................................................................................... 9 MTW Case Studies .............................................................................................................................. 10 Chapter 2. Innovations that Increase Cost Effectiveness ........................................................................... 12 Changing the Timing of Recertification ................................................................................................... 13 Simplifying the Treatment of Income and Assets ................................................................................... 16 Asset Verification and Use in Income Calculations ............................................................................. 20 Income Deductions and Exclusions ..................................................................................................... 20 Simplified Rent Calculation ................................................................................................................. 21 Simplifying the Inspection Process ......................................................................................................... 23 Alternative Inspection Schedules ........................................................................................................ 26 Inspecting Project-Based Units Owned by the PHA ............................................................................ 27 Abt Associates Moving to Work Innovations Report ▌pg. i CONTENTS Landlord Self-Certification .................................................................................................................. 27 Alternative Inspection Standards ........................................................................................................ 28 Modifying the Rent Reasonableness Process ......................................................................................... 28 Simplifying Utility Allowances ................................................................................................................. 29 Documenting and Using Administrative Cost Savings ............................................................................ 30 Problems with Measuring Cost Savings .............................................................................................. 30 Offsets to Cost Savings ........................................................................................................................ 30 Using Cost Savings to Provide Better Service ..................................................................................... 31 Chapter 3. Innovations that Increase the Quality and Quantity of Affordable Housing ............................ 32 Increasing the Number of Households Served by Lowering Per-Unit Costs ........................................... 32 Increasing the Quality of Public Housing by Investing in Modernization and Revitalization Activities .. 34 Preserving Subsidized Rental Housing that is At-Risk ............................................................................. 36 Using Project-Based Vouchers to Expand the Supply of Dedicated, Quality Affordable Rental Housing ................................................................................................................................................................ 38 Using MTW Single-Fund Flexibility to Invest in Other Forms of Affordable Housing ............................. 42 Serving More Households over Time by Adopting Self-Sufficiency or Time Limit Policies .................... 42 Chapter 4. Innovations that Increase Self-Sufficiency ................................................................................ 43 Rent Reform and Incentivizing Work ...................................................................................................... 45 Work Requirements ............................................................................................................................ 49 Time Limits .......................................................................................................................................... 50 Other Changes to the Rules of Housing Subsidies .............................................................................. 51 Services Supporting Work ....................................................................................................................... 51 Modifications to the Family Self-Sufficiency Program’s Escrow Policies ................................................ 53 Designing New Self-Sufficiency Policies .................................................................................................. 55 Aligning Housing Assistance with Welfare Reform ............................................................................. 55 Creating Exemptions for Households Not Expected to Work ............................................................. 55 Serving More Households with the Same Budget .............................................................................. 55 Protecting the Housing Authority’s Budget ........................................................................................ 56 Addressing Hardships for Particular Households ................................................................................ 56
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Planning the Housing Opportunity and Services Together Demonstration Challenges and Lessons Learned Susan J
    BrIe f# 0I Housing Opportunity fe B. 2012 and Services Together www.urban.org InSIDe THIS ISSue •The HOST demonstration will implement and test strategies that use housing as a platform to deliver services to vulnerable populations in two cities. •Both sites will employ case management and dual-generation interventions. •The formative evaluation plan consists of a process evaluation, an outcome evaluation, and a detailed cost analysis. Planning the Housing Opportunity and Services Together Demonstration Challenges and Lessons Learned Susan J. Popkin, Molly M. Scott, Joe Parilla, Elsa Falkenburger, Marla McDaniel, and Shinwon Kyung The multisite Housing Opportunity and Services Together (HOST) demonstration is an ambitious effort to test strategies that use housing as a platform for services to improve the life chances of vulnerable children, youth, and adults. This brief provides an overview of the project’s early challenges and successes to offer practitioners insights on the planning and design of “dual-generation” interventions and to inform policy supporting comprehensive place-based initiatives. aunched in December 2010 with the Urban Institute and the Chicago Housing support of the Open Society Authority (CHA) piloted from 2007 –2010 During its two-year Foundations’ (OSF) Special Fund for with residents of Dearborn Homes and the Poverty Alleviation, the multisite Madden/Wells development. While this implementation, the LHOST demonstration tests innovative, two- model showed promising gains for even the generation service models to improve the life highest-risk adults, the benefits did not HOST demonstration chances of vulnerable low-income families extend to their children. Parents reported that living in public and mixed-income housing their teens were struggling in school, engag - will identify strategies communities.
    [Show full text]
  • MTW Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Innovations
    MTW Family Self-Sufficiency Innovations The Moving to Work (MTW) Demonstration allows for various flexibilities in implementing the Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) program. Agencies have used this flexibility to design and test better ways to serve families in their FSS programs. This document outlines some of the ways in which MTW agencies have utilized authorizations in the MTW Agreement to implement innovations around the FSS program or to create local self-sufficiency programs. The information and data in this summary are pulled directly from MTW agency submitted Annual MTW Plans and Reports, all of which can be found on HUD’s website here. Highlighted Innovations Alaska Housing Finance Corporation: Jumpstart Program Page 2 Cambridge Housing Authority: Financial Stability and Savings Plus (FSS+) Page 4 Housing Authority of Champaign County: Mandatory Local Self-Sufficiency Program Page 5 Charlotte Housing Authority: Moving Forward Supportive Services Page 8 Chicago Housing Authority: Modified FSS Program for HCV and Public Housing Participants Page 9 Fairfax County Housing and Redevelopment Authority: Modifications to FSS Program Page 11 Home Forward: GOALS – Home Forward’s FSS Program Page 16 Keene Housing: Resident Self-Reliance Program Page 18 King County Housing Authority: FSS Program Modifications Page 20 Louisville Metropolitan Housing Authority: FSS Program Enhancements Page 21 Massachusetts Dept of Housing and Community Development: FSS Program Enhancements Page 23 Housing Authority of the City of New Haven: FSS Program Page
    [Show full text]
  • Change Is in the Air: an Action Guide for Establishing Smoke-Free
    U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes CHANGE IS IN THE AIR An Action Guide for Establishing Smoke-Free Public Housing and Multifamily Properties October 2014 CHANGE IS IN THE AIR An Action Guide for Establishing Smoke-Free Public Housing and Multifamily Properties Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................3 Action Plan for Smoke-Free Housing.........................................................................................4 Part I: HUD Supports Smoke-Free Housing 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................5 2. Who Is This Guide for? ............................................................................................................ 7 3. What’s the Purpose of This Guide? ....................................................................................8 Part II: Five Leading Reasons to Adopt a Smoke-Free Policy 1. Protect the Health and Safety of Residents and Staff ............................................. 10 2. Cost Savings ..............................................................................................................................12 3. Movement of Secondhand Smoke between Units Cannot Be Controlled ........ 14 4. Residents Prefer Smoke-Free Housing ........................................................................... 16 5. Smoke-Free Policies
    [Show full text]
  • Aging in Place: Housing Authorities Confront the Nation’S Quiet Crisis Facing Seniors
    Aging in Place: Housing Authorities Confront the Nation’s Quiet Crisis Facing Seniors WWW.CLPHA.ORG Housing Authorities Confront the Nation’s Quiet Crisis FacingSeniors Maintaining Independence A NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED MODEL MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN 10 HOUSING TRANSFORMED: A PLATFORM FOR HEALTH 12 BREAKING BARRIERS TO AGING IN PLACE AUSTIN, TEXAS 14 WHAT SERVICE COORDINATORS DO 16 AN APPROACH WORTH BUILDING ON ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 18 Creating Communities REALIZING A VISION FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 22 THE SENIOR HOUSING CRISIS AHEAD: FROM BAD TO WORSE 24 GRANDPARENTS AND GRANDCHILDREN, TOGETHER KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 26 CREATING A CONTINUUM OF CARE CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 28 BRIDGING THE AGE DIVIDE BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 30 Staying Engaged and Connected SENIORS LEAD THE WAY VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON 34 HIGH TECH, HIGH TOUCH ATLANTA, GEORGIA 36 VIEWING AGING DIFFERENTLY PATERSON, NEW JERSEY 38 HELPING SENIORS TAKES A TEAM CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 40 Coordinating Care NURSING SENIORS TO HEALTHIER LIVES AKRON, OHIO 44 THE FUN BUS MAKES A DIFFERENCE OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 46 ASSISTED HOUSING’S VITAL ROLE IN 48 THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT’S SUCCESS NAVIGATING TOWARD WELLNESS PORTLAND, OREGON 50 SERVING THOSE WHO SERVED LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 52 www. .org 3 A message from Sunia Zaterman: In September 2008, the Council of Large Public Housing Authorities (CLPHA) convened a wide range of aff ordable housing stakeholders for a summit to develop a shared policy framework for confronting the challenges facing public housing. The resulting “Future of Public Housing Policy Framework” specifi cally cited the need to get ahead of the “inevitable trend” of explosive growth in the nation’s senior population. The Framework states: Public housing will address this issue by incorporating the social and physical needs of seniors into its modernization plans and by looking for opportunities to enter partnerships with organizations that will create resident support programs for the elderly to enable them to age in their communi- ties.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of MTW on the Per Household Costs of Federal Housing Assistance
    Moving to Work Retrospective A Picture of Moving to Work Agencies’ Housing Assistance Moving to Work Agencies’ Use of Funding Flexibility Housing Choice and Self Sufficiency Outcomes at Moving to Work Agencies The Impact of the Moving to Work Demonstration on the Per Household Costs of Federal Housing Assistance Evaluating the Effects of Santa Clara County Housing Authority’s Rent Reform Moving to Work Agencies’ Use of Project-Based Voucher Assistance U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Policy Development and Research Visit PD&R’s website www.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. The Impact of the Moving to Work Demonstration on the Per Household Costs of Federal Housing Assistance Prepared for: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Prepared by: Christina Stacy Josh Leopold Daniel Teles Ruth Gourevitch Alyse D. Oneto Yipeng Su Matthew Gerken URBAN INSTITUTE June 2020 Acknowledgments Acknowledgments This report was funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). We are grateful to HUD and to all our funders, who make it possible for Urban to advance its mission. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.
    [Show full text]
  • More Than a Roof: Case Studies of Public Housing Agency Initiatives to Increase Residents’ Economic Security
    for Housing Policy Ideas and Practice INTRODUCTION JANUARY 2012 I MAYA BRENNAN AND JEFFREY LUBELL More Than a Roof: Case Studies of Public Housing Agency Initiatives to Increase Residents’ Economic Security Nationwide, public housing agencies (PHAs) back their efforts to help families make progress toward provide affordable rental housing to roughly three million economic security. households1 through the public housing and Section 8 housing choice voucher programs funded by the U.S. Department of Other PHAs, however, are continuing their efforts to use Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Nearly half — about affordable housing as a platform for helping residents make 47 percent — are families with children. Despite the fact that progress toward economic security. With housing assistance most non-elderly non-disabled households include an employed currently available to only about one in four families who member,2 the average income for assisted households is need it, and no prospects for increased federal funding on less than $13,000 per year. The widespread poverty found the horizon, many of these PHAs see economic security among residents of assisted housing suggests a need for efforts as essential for expanding the number of families both traditional safety net programs to help residents avoid able to benefit from rental assistance. By helping families hunger and meet basic health care needs as well as innovative that currently receive housing assistance to make progress initiatives to help residents build assets, increase earnings, and toward economic security, the PHAs that run these initiatives make progress toward economic security. hope to free up rental assistance for other families.
    [Show full text]
  • Alcohol, Drug, and Criminal History Restrictions in Public Housing
    Alcohol, Drug, and Criminal History Restrictions in Public Housing Marah A. Curtis University of Wisconsin-Madison Sarah Garlington Boston University Lisa S. Schottenfeld Mathematica Policy Research Abstract Housing assistance programs are a crucial resource for poor households. Access for families who include a member with a history of alcohol or drug use or a criminal record, however, varies considerably across public housing authorities (PHAs), because alcohol, drug, and criminal history restrictions in the housing assistance programs determine access to this scarce benefit. Very little is known about the specific rules facing poor families who apply for or use public housing. This article analyzes the alcohol, drug, and criminal history provisions governing access to or eviction from public housing using data from 40 PHAs across the country. The data show that nearly all PHAs institute more stringent bans than required by federal law and that individual PHAs exercise a great deal of discretion in setting ban lengths and defining individual problematic behavior. As a result, similar households may encounter radically different rules when attempting to access or retain housing assistance, even within a single PHA. The decision to define those with alcohol, drug, or criminal histories as categorically undeserving of housing assistance undermines other important public policy goals to treat similar populations equitably and to support ex-offenders and their families. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research • Volume 15,
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Sustainable Partnerships Between Public Housing Authorities
    From the Ground Up: Creating Sustainable Partnerships between Public Housing Authorities and Workforce Investment Boards U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development | Office of Public and Indian Housing U.S. Department of Labor | Employment Training Administration Office of Workforce Investment Spring 2014 1 Acknowledgements This collaborative effort was made possible by staff members from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Labor. We would like to recognize Jessica Rosenberg, Sarah Sunderlin and Pauline Sze for their leadership and hard work in the development of this joint publication. We are also particularly appreciative of the Boston Housing Authority and Boston Private Industry Council; Home Forward and Worksystems, Inc. in Portland, Oregon; the Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee and the Milwaukee Area Workforce Investment Board for contributing towards this project and providing valuable case studies and sample documents. 2 Table of Contents Opening Message 4 Executive Summary 5 Overview of the U.S. Department of Labor 7 Overview of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 13 The Current Status: Barriers and Opportunities 18 Case Studies: Boston, Portland, Milwaukee 19 Promising Strategies and Lessons Learned 24 Next Steps 26 Appendix 27 Supplemental Resources 27 Exhibit A – MOU Between BHA and BPIC 32 Exhibit B – MOU Between BPIC and BHA Amending Previous MOU 39 Exhibit C – MOA between BHA and Asian American Civic Association 41 Exhibit D – Participant Release Form for Job Training Program 48 Exhibit E – MOU Between Home Forward and Worksystems, Inc. 49 Notes 52 3 Beginning with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the Secretaries of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • PHA Guidebook to Ending Homelessness
    November 2013 PHA Guidebook to Ending Homelessness Introduction Across the country, a growing number of public housing authorities (PHAs) have become integral to their community’s efforts to prevent and end homelessness. This willingness to partner and engage in collaborative planning is critical to both local and national success in ending homelessness. The guidebook is composed of three major sections. First, the Planning section gives guidance to PHAs on how to collaborate and align resources to best prevent and end homelessness. The Programs and Policies section provides a detailed summary of best practices and policies for PHAs to increase access to housing. Finally, the Partnership section details how partnering with a variety of organizations can make a substantial impact on ending homelessness. Each section contains information on where PHAs can implement the specific practice being discussed and who exactly PHAs can aid with that practice. Also, each section contains actual examples of the discussed practice in action by organizations across the United States. Additional Resources For more information on how PHAs can help end homelessness, visit the following resources: • HUD Public and Indian Housing: Ending and Preventing Homelessness: HUD’s webpage consolidates guidance and resources for PHAs on how they can help end and prevent homelessness. • CSH’s PHA Toolkit: The Corporation for Supportive Housing’s PHA Toolkit is a guide to how PHAs can work with service providers to create supportive housing opportunities for the people who need them most. • Housing Authorities: Essential Partners in Ending Homelessness: The Council of Large Public Housing Authorities’ publication demonstrates exactly how PHAs are essential to ending homelessness through a variety of practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Housing Trade Associations Letter to Congress on COVID-19
    April 8, 2020 The Honorable Nancy Pelosi The Honorable Mitch McConnell Speaker of the House Majority Leader United States House of Representatives United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.C. 20510 The Honorable Kevin McCarthy The Honorable Charles Schumer Republican Leader Democratic Leader United States House of Representatives United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader McConnell, Republican Leader McCarthy, Democratic Leader Schumer: Thank you for the nearly $3 billion for public housing, housing choice vouchers and project based rental assistance under the CARES Act. The CARES Acts provided the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) with statutory and regulatory waiver authority which will be enormously helpful to housing authorities. While we are grateful for the immediate infusion of emergency resources, it is not nearly enough to cover the needs of public housing authorities (“PHAs”) for the duration of this crisis. Public housing and Section 8 housing choice vouchers play a critical role in our nation's infrastructure and social safety net, providing families with a stable home and assisting them with opportunities for upward mobility. Across the United States, public housing provides 1.2 million units of housing to over 2.2 million people, including 800,000 children, and more than half the population in public housing is elderly and disabled. The 2.2 million Section 8 housing choice vouchers house an additional 5.3 million people including 2.2 million children. The Novel Coronavirus COVID-19 poses a major threat to public housing communities which house vulnerable at-risk populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Moving to Work and Neighborhood Opportunity a Scan of Mobility Initiatives by Moving to Work Public Housing Authorities
    METROPOLITAN HOUSING AND COMMUNITIES POL ICY CENTER RESEARCH REPORT Moving to Work and Neighborhood Opportunity A Scan of Mobility Initiatives by Moving to Work Public Housing Authorities Martha Galvez Jasmine Simington Mark Treskon December 2016 (updated July 2018) ABOUT THE URBAN INSTITUTE The nonprofit Urban Institute is dedicated to elevating the debate on social and economic policy. For nearly five decades, Urban scholars have conducted research and offered evidence-based solutions that improve lives and strengthen communities across a rapidly urbanizing world. Their objective research helps expand opportunities for all, reduce hardship among the most vulnerable, and strengthen the effectiveness of the public sector. Copyright © December 2016. Urban Institute. Permission is granted for reproduction of this file, with attribution to the Urban Institute. Cover image by Tim Meko. Contents Contents iii Acknowledgments iv Errata v Moving to Work and Neighborhood Opportunity 1 Background 1 Summary of Approach 4 Findings: Overview of Key Interventions 7 Activities that Limit Mobility 15 Conclusion 15 Appendix A. Moving to Work Housing Authorities 17 Appendix B. Inventory of Mobility-Related Initiatives by Moving to Work Agencies 18 Appendix C. Inventory of Initiatives Identified by Moving to Work Agencies as Promoting Housing Choice 27 Notes 45 References 46 About the Authors 48 Statement of Independence 49 Acknowledgments This report was funded by the Urban Institute in support of the Creating Moves to Opportunity (CMTO) project. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. Funders do not determine research findings or the insights and recommendations of Urban experts.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Moving to Work?
    MTW AMERICA’S HOUSING POLICY LAB MTW AMERICA’S HOUSING POLICY LAB www.HUD.gov/MTW MTW What Is Moving To Work? 1 AMERICA’S reated by Congress in 1996, Moving to Work (MTW) is a Cost Savings andHOUSING CDepartment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) POLICY LAB demonstration program that allows housing authorities to Effectiveness: design and test innovative, locally-designed strategies for • Moving to biennial, instead of providing low-income families with affordable housing and annual, rent determinations for new paths to economic independence. some households (this MTW innovation was adopted by HUD for all agencies). What are MTW’s “MTW is currently the • Simplifying rent calculations. Goals? only HUD program through which public • Utilizing funding flexibility Congress established three housing authorities can (“fungibility”) to support security, statutory goals for MTW: self-sufficiency, and development wholly transform their activities without the burdensome 1 Reduce costs and achieve operations, programs accounting required by multiple greater cost effectiveness in and housing. The restricted funding allocations. Federal expenditures; broad flexibility to waive statute and • Replacing inefficient systems for 2 Give incentives to families with regulations allows ensuring housing quality standards children where the head of these agencies to and rent reasonableness with household is working, is seeking better serve and house risk-based, technologically work, or is preparing for work by driven solutions. participating in job training, their residents and educational programs, or broader communities • A host of other administrative programs that assist people to while streamlining their reforms, both large and small, obtain employment and become internal operations.” that are increasing efficiency economically self-sufficient; and From: HUD’s August 2010 and reducing overhead.
    [Show full text]