Recipient Housing - in the Housing Voucher and Certificate Programs - May 1990 Report

Sep 2, 2026

Recipient Housing analyzes how housing assistance operates across the Housing Voucher and Certificate Programs, focusing on rent outcomes for program recipients and comparing overall differences in recipient housing. The study evaluates recipient rents, housing quality, and price differences using hedonic indices and a rental cost function methodology. It details housing characteristics such as living space, unit condition, building amenities, and neighborhoods, supported by demonstration samples and inspection and census-based data sources.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages408

Reading Time17 h 8 min

AccessFree to download

Executive Summary

Chapter One - Introduction

Chapter Two - Recipient Rents

2.1 The Two Programs

2.2 Recipient Rents

Chapter Three - Overall Differences in Recipient Housing

3.1 Overal1 Differences in Recipient Housing (Hedonic Indices)

3.2 Further Examination of Price Differences in the Two Programs

3.3 The Rental Cost Function Methodology

Chapter Four - Details of Housing in the Two Programs

4.1 Living Space

4.2 Unit Condition

4.3 Characteristics of Buildings and Presence of Amenities

4.4 Neighborhoods

References

Appendix A - The Demonstration Sample

Appendix B - Data Sources and Definitions

Appendix C - Basic Estimation Methodology

Appendix D - Theoretical Differences in Shopping Behavior Between the Two Programs

Appendix E - Hedonic Indices and Other Measures of Housing Quality

Appendix F - Supplementary Tables

# Recipient Housing in the Housing Voucherand CertificatePrograms # Recipient Housing in the Housing Voucherand Certificate Programs Prepared for: U.S.Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopmentOffice of Policy Development and Research Prepared by: Mireille L.LegerStephen D.Kennedy Abt Associates,Inc.Cambridge,MA Contract HC-5716 May 1990 This report was produced by Abt Associates,Inc.for the United States Department ofHousing and Urban Development.The views and conclusions contained herein are thoseof the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official viewsor policies of the United States Government. TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………i List of Tables and Figures…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………iii Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………………………vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1 CHAPTER ONE- INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………7 CHAPTER TWO- RECIPIENT RENTS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………17 2.1 The Two Programs……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………17 2.2 Recipient Rents…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………24 CHAPTER THREE - OVERALL DIFFERENCES IN RECIPIENT HOUSING……………………………33 3.1 Overal1 Differences in Recipient Housing(Hedonic Indices)…………………35 3.2 Further Examination of Price Differences in the Two Programs…………40 3.3 The Rental Cost Function Methodology…52 CHAPTER FOUR- DETAILS OF HOUSING IN THE TWO PROGRAMS…………………………………………………57 4.1 Living Space…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………58 4.2 Unit Condition………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………58 4.2.1 Rating of Units by Evaluators………………………………………………………62 4.2.2 Rating of Units by Recipients………………………………………………………………………………69 4.2.3 Rating of Units by an Index of Housing Adequacy……………………………71 4.3 Characteristics of Buildings and Presence of Amenities…………………………79 4.4 Neighborhoods…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………79 References……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………99 APPENDIX A- THE DEMONSTRATION SAMPLE………………………………………………………………………………………101 A.1 The Sample of PHAs………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………101 A.2 Properties of the Bryant/Hartley/Jessen Procedure……………………………………103 A.3 Sampling Households…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………107 A.4 The Housing Evaluation Sample…………………………………………………………………………………………111 A.4.1 Selecting PHAs for Housing Evaluations…………………………………………………111 A.4.2 Samples of Recipients within PHAs………………………………………………………………112 , ## TABLEonE noeTENTS APPENDIX B- DATA SOURCES AND DEFINITIONS………………………………………119 B.1 Data from Demonstration Forms Submitted by PHAs…………………………………………119 B.2 Housing Inspections…………………………………………………………………………………………………………126 B.3 Census Tract Coding and Data Collection…………………………………………………………………128 Supplement to Appendix C: Housing Evaluation Form…………………131 APPENDIX C- BASIC ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………………………………159 C.1 National Projections……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………159 C.2 Estimate for Demographic Groups………………………………………………………………………………………177 APPENDIX D- THEORETICAL DIFFERENCES IN SHOPPING BEHAVIOR BETWEEN THE TWO PROGRAMS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………179 D.1 Theoretical Incentives of the Two Programs………………………………………………………179 D.2 Expected Differences in Behavior Under the Simple Model………………………188 D.3 Extending the Model to Take Account of Program Requirements………195 D.4 Extending the Model to Take Account of Stochastic Prices………………201 D.5 Some Caveats………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………213 APPENDIX E- HEDONIC INDICES AND OTHER MEASURES OF HOUSING QUALITY…217 E.1 Alternative Measures of Housing……………………………………………………………………………………217 E.2 Specification of the Hedonic Index………………………………………………………………………………227 E.2.1 AIternative Data Sources………………………………………………………………

FAQs

What is the main focus of this report on recipient housing?

The report compares recipient housing outcomes across the Housing Voucher and Certificate Programs, with emphasis on recipient rents and overall differences in housing characteristics and quality.

How does the report analyze differences between the two programs?

It uses hedonic indices to assess price differences, along with a rental cost function methodology to examine how housing costs relate to observed attributes and program conditions.

What housing aspects are examined in the detailed comparison?

The report evaluates living space, unit condition (including evaluator and recipient ratings), building characteristics and amenities, and neighborhood attributes.

Sep 2, 2026

Uploaded by Lucas Vance