Housing and Neighborhoods
Across the country, people are struggling to find high-quality affordable housing in socially and economically vibrant neighborhoods. The source of the problem is complex – ranging from challenges maintaining an aging and deteriorating legacy housing stock to rising costs of construction for new homes to discriminatory zoning and financing policies and practices. Solutions must be equally multi-faceted and creative.
What 4Action funded research says:
- Affordable housing in higher-income areas has been shown to significantly improve birth outcomes, particularly for Black individuals, and foster long-term health and economic benefits. Massachusetts' Chapter 40B policy exemplifies how bypassing exclusionary zoning can create affordable housing in neighborhoods that offer greater economic mobility and better health opportunities. (See Sportiche et al., 2023).
- A housing health index, developed using health insurance claims data, enables city governments to proactively identify substandard buildings and prioritize inspections. This approach shifts the focus from reactive, complaint-driven housing code enforcement to a more strategic method that addresses health risks associated with poor housing conditions, ultimately improving public health outcomes. (See Chakraborty et al., 2024).
- Green space goes hand-in-hand with cardiovascular health, with tree planting as a possible strategy to improve health; areas with more plants and trees (greenness) are associated with lower incidence of cardiovascular disease (See Brown et. al., 2024) and Alzheimer's Disease (See Brown et. al., 2024).
- Promotion of local initiatives that enhance supportive neighborhood environments and social factors are of great importance to mitigate psychological distress, particularly in times of crisis. (See Kondo et al., 2022).
- An asset-framing narrative that highlights the benefits of mobility vouchers has the potential to increase small-scale landlords' participation in voucher programs. By focusing on the positive impact, this approach can help expand low-income residents’ access to high-opportunity neighborhoods, offering a pathway to greater economic mobility and improved living conditions. (See Ortiz et al., 2024).
- Portland's N/NE Preference Policy, designed to restore housing access for displaced communities of color, has helped residents reconnect with a historically Black neighborhood and improved aspects of well-being. However, persistent challenges related to housing quality, neighborhood conditions, and affordability indicate that a more comprehensive approach is needed to fully address community development and racial equity goals. (See Thurber & Bates findings).
- Evictions can severely disrupt healthcare access by increasing the risk of Medicaid disenrollment, while also driving up healthcare costs due to higher rates of acute care visits. This highlights the critical intersection between housing stability and healthcare, emphasizing the need for policies that address both to ensure better health outcomes and cost efficiency. (See Schwartz et al., 2022).
- Most state Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) programs address specific health-related housing issues, such as indoor air quality, but few programs incentivize comprehensive measures needed to improve overall health outcomes. Expanding program criteria to include air quality, toxic substances, and neighborhood amenities could significantly enhance efforts to promote healthier affordable housing and better long-term health outcomes. (See Ahrentzen & Dearborn, 2020).
- Renovations and ownership transfers in New York City public housing under the RAD program have led to improvements in housing-sensitive health conditions, indicating that such interventions can effectively reduce the overall disease burden. This demonstrates the potential health benefits of investing in public housing improvements. (See Ellen et al., 2020).
- Simplifying and streamlining administrative processes for housing subsidy recipients can significantly reduce barriers to access, making it easier for low-income families to benefit from housing assistance programs. This approach enhances the overall effectiveness of these programs, ensuring that more eligible recipients can take advantage of available resources. (See Stacy et al., 2024).
- Rent control policies that prioritize tenant protections, exemptions, and strong administrative capacity can result in more effective and equitable outcomes. Crafting these policies with attention to their nuanced components is essential for addressing housing affordability while minimizing unintended consequences for the housing market. (See Stacy et al., 2021).
- The Fair Housing Land Use Score (FHLUS) allows policymakers to more accurately assess the inclusivity of local zoning and housing plans. The tool shows that many existing land use policies may unintentionally reinforce segregation, underscoring the need for reforms to promote fair and inclusive neighborhoods. (See Monkkonen et al., 2023).
- The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) aims to avoid concentrating poverty and entrenching segregation by requiring states to allocate credits to projects in high-poverty locations that are part of a "concerted community revitalization plan" (CCRP). However, an analysis of Connecticut's applications over ten years reveals that nearly all lack meaningful revitalization planning. This indicates that the CCRP process may not be effectively enforced or leveraged for broader neighborhood gain, highlighting the need for reforms to better fulfill its Congressional mandate. (See Kazis & O'Regan, 2023).
- Individuals experiencing homelessness face significant gaps in access to healthcare services, which leads to heavy reliance on acute emergency services and high rates of hospitalization for preventable conditions, thus increasing health care costs. (See Palimaru et al., 2020 and Davila & Buchanan, 2021).
- When people with complex needs are offered stable housing AND supportive services, they quickly enter housing and stay there. These individuals also experience long term benefits, like reduced jail time. The costs of providing supportive housing also reduces costs of other services, such as jail stays, court costs, police time, and local emergency services. Additionally, permanent supportive housing leads to increases in psychiatric care office visits and fewer emergency department visits.(See What We Learned from the Evaluation of the Denver Supportive Housing Social Impact Bond Initiative, Urban Institute and Hanson & Gillepsie, 2024).
- Federal housing support is provided to low-income families through public housing projects or subsidies (either to families or to developers or landlords). One strategy is not inherently better than another in improving housing quality or family health and well-being. Each approach has limitations and benefits recipients differently, but in general, any kind of housing support improves housing stability. There are currently insufficient resources to support all the families who are eligible. Allocating additional funding and focusing on improving surrounding neighborhood conditions could benefit millions of American families. (See Farquhar et al., 2018).
- Comprehensive community development efforts, such as redevelopment strategies for publicly subsidized housing communities, can increase low-income, ethnically diverse resident’s perception of safety. It can also reduce perceptions of problems with drugs, alcohol, or violent activity, as well as contribute to community social cohesion. (See E4A Project Page, Seattle's Yesler Terrace Redevelopment).
- Families who live in homes that have been weatherized experience improved health and are better able to afford energy bills. Expansion of weatherization programs through cross-sector partnerships with energy, healthcare and public health agencies can help improve families’ physical and financial wellbeing, and may reduce health care costs. (See Tonn et al., 2021).
- Remediation of abandoned lots has been the target of efforts in multiple municipalities to decrease crime and improve health. The theoretical basis of these efforts is that remediation changes the urban landscape in a way that promotes residents’ willingness and confidence to act in the service of their own security and improves neighborhood functioning which can enhance social engagement and well-being. (See Hohl et al., 2019).
- Policies that reduce required information on housing applications have had mixed results in the labor market and limited results in the housing market. Following the implementation of a policy that restricted the use of background checks, eviction history, income minimums, and credit history in rental housing applications in Minneapolis, discrimination against African American and Somali American men increased. (See Gorzig & Rho 2021).
- Opportunity Zones (OZs) were implemented by the federal government and some state and local governments to attract new investments to distressed communities in urban and rural areas in the United States, but some OZ neighborhoods can receive more investments than others.
- Among the OZ designated census tracts, gentrifying tracts attract more investments for commercial and residential development.
- Higher gentrification rates are associated with lower vacancy rates and the impact of gentrification on business vacancies is even stronger. This implies that gentrified neighborhoods receive a larger share of OZ investments.
- The administrative tax and income data from the DC government shows a clear pattern between gentrification and out migration of residents with lower incomes. (See Kurban et al., 2022).
- Pay-for-success financing programs provide housing to individuals experiencing chronic homelessness, people with mental or behavioral disorders, and adults recently released from prison. These programs deliver a range of supportive services to address the complex psychosocial, behavioral, and medical needs of the people they are meant to benefit. Success payments to the private investors are contingent on some measure of sustained housing. (See Lantz & Iovan 2017).
- Evictions worsen material deprivation, sort families into lower-quality housing in more disadvantaged neighborhoods, disrupt social networks, erode mental health, and have negative impacts on healthcare utilization and health outcomes.
- In New York City, eviction increased the likelihood of losing Medicaid coverage and decreased pharmaceutical prescription fills.
- Among patients who generated healthcare spending, average spending was 20% higher for those who had been evicted. (See Schwartz et al., 2022).
- The pace of gentrification has accelerated in cities across the US, potentially displacing families and impacting quality of life for children.
- Children who start out in a gentrifying area experience larger improvements in some aspects of their residential environment than children who start out in persistently low-socioeconomic status areas. Children moving from gentrifying areas also tend to move to lower-quality buildings. (See Dragan, Ellen, & Glied 2019a).
- The experience of gentrification is associated with moderate increases in diagnoses of anxiety or depression—which are concentrated among children living in market-rate housing.(See Dragan, Ellen, & Glied 2019b).
- Source of income laws prohibiting landlords from discriminating against tenants based on their income source can help increase access to low-poverty neighborhoods for families with lower incomes. A dataset that includes details on these laws shows that source of income protections help families access low-poverty neighborhoods but these laws take five years, on average, to make an impact. (See Galvez et al., 2020).