In October 2020, the Senate Majority Staff issued a report titled, "Housing Programs - The Need for One Roof." The purported purpose of the report is to "begin a needed conversation about reforming our housing system." As noted in the report, "An important first step would be consolidating some of these programs under one roof." As made clear in the report, the "roof" that the Senate Majority Staff is referring to is the Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD).
Following are some of the major findings and recommendations from the report.
Examples of Housing Overlap Outlined in the Report
HUD’s and USDA’s Loan Guarantee and Rental Assistance Programs overlap. GAO’s report on opportunities for collaboration and consolidation in housing programs identified a total of 88 HUD housing programs and 18 USDA housing programs.
HUD’s Rental Assistance Programs Serve Similar Populations
HUD has three primary rental assistance programs: (1) Public Housing - HUD provides aid to local public housing agencies (PHAs) that manage properties for low-income residents at affordable rents; (2) Housing Choice Vouchers - local PHAs administer these "portable" vouchers; and (3) Project-Based Section 8 - subsidies go directly to the owners of multifamily housing subsidizing the rent for specific rental units.
Somewhat surprisingly, Public Housing serves the highest average incomes, with an average household income of $15,738, compared to $15,373 for vouchers and $13,301 for Project-Based Section 8. The Housing Choice Voucher program serves more elderly and disabled households than any other HUD rental assistance program. Public housing tenants are most concentrated in the Northeast but about 1/3 of all HUD-assisted housing is in the South.
Why Are There So Many Rental Assistance Programs?
Public housing was the only major form of housing assistance until the 1960s, and a majority of currently occupied units were built before 1969. Privately-owned and subsidized housing production accelerated after 1974 when Section 8 project-based rental assistance was created. Tenant-based assistance also started in 1974, and the voucher program is now HUD’s largest low-income housing subsidy program.
Many housing policy experts have argued that tenant-based vouchers that directly subsidize low-income renters are in many ways superior to programs subsidizing the production and operation of low-income housing. This is highly debatable since such a position assumes there is an adequate supply of rental housing to serve all those with vouchers.
The HOME Program & the Housing Trust Fund (HTF) Overlap
The HTF and the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), both within HUD, are overlapping programs that the Staff Report suggests should be consolidated or streamlined.
The HTF was created under HERA 2008 and provides funds to states to use for affordable housing, particularly for rental housing for extremely low-income households. The program provides formula-based grants to states to use for affordable housing. Each state and Washington DC receives a minimum annual grant of $3 million.
The HOME program was authorized in 1990 and provides funding to states and localities for affordable housing activities benefitting low-income households - also by formula. These "block grant" funds are used for four purposes: (1) the rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing; (2) assistance to home-buyers; (3) the acquisition, rehabilitation, or construction of rental housing; and (4) tenant-based rental assistance. The funds are disbursed by HUD - 40% to states and 60% to localities.
There is admittedly a great deal of redundancy and overlap in these two programs and very little doubt that they could be consolidated.
Major Findings & Conclusions
Conclusion
As with most Congressional Staff reports, this one will gather as much dust sitting on shelves as it will action from elected officials. However, the recommendations relating to consolidation are likely to get some attention - especially with regard to moving the rural housing programs to HUD. It is also possible that an increase in funding for vouchers, along with an increase in the amount allocated to the LIHTC program, could result in serving significantly more of our lowest-income families than is currently possible. It is also likely that the new incoming administration will be more favorable to increased funding for affordable housing, and some of the recommendations made in this report could become part of the new administration’s affordable housing recommendations.
Subscribe to our news articles to stay up to date.
We care about the protection of your data. Read our Privacy Policy.