Worst Case Housing Needs

In my mailbox today comes HUD’s Worst Case Housing Needs report, which looks at what is called the-you guessed it-worst case housing needs.

Worst case housing needs (WCN) are experienced by unassisted very low-income renters who either (1) pay more than one-half of their monthly income for rent; or (2) live in severely inadequate conditions, or both. HUD defines “very low-income” as below 50 percent of the local area median income (AMI) and “extremely low-income” as below 30 percent of AMI.

Of interest given the recent backlash against affordable (tax-credit) housing in some suburban communities:

Most worst case needs renters in suburbs and non-metro areas lived in low poverty neighborhoods (reflecting both the overall proportion that such neighborhoods comprise in these areas and the lack of affordable housing options throughout these areas).

The report also notes that although there were enough affordable units available in many communities, there are not enough units available to people with low incomes. People with (relatively) higher income tend to rent down (renting a unit that is not necessarily the max they can afford), which reduces the number of units available to people with lower incomes. After all, if you were a landlord, which would you prefer-renting to someone with a low-paying job who has to struggle each month to pay the rent, or someone with a higher-paying job who can easily afford to pay the rent? So it's not enough to point to some (relatively) affordable market-rate housing and say, "there's plenty of housing," you have to look at who's occupying those units.

This goes a long way toward explaining the summary on people with disabilities, bolds mine:

In addition to the 602,000 non-elderly disabled households, there were an additional 404,000 families with children that also had an adult with disabilities present – bringing the combined total of these two types of house­holds with disabilities and worst case housing needs to more than 1 million. Disabled households were found to have the highest likelihood of having WCN among the four main family types (families with children, elderly, disabled and “other” households). Among unassisted very low-income households with disabilities, the likelihood of having worst case needs was 65.6 percent. This exceeds the second highest rate of elderly households (58 percent) and is far above the rates among families with children (47.8 percent) and “other” households (47.7 percent).

Many households with a member who has a disability depend on benefits, and are not able to "compete" for market-rate units to the same degree that others can. So many end up on less-than-ideal housing. This, in my opinion, is the strongest argument for subsidized and tax-credit affordable housing; to ensure that people with extremely low income do have access to some kind of decent housing. In Wisconsin, the tax-credit housing program does not do a good job of this-they mainly serve people with moderately low ("workforce") income, not those with extremely low income (defined as being under 30% of area median income).

It's easy for some people to say, "well, if you'd work harder, you'd be able to find something" but if you're the primary caregiver for someone, such as an elderly mother, a sibling with a disability, or a child, your options are limited. It's not easy to find time to go back to school. It's not easy to advance your career through promotions due to long hours. Even with retail and fast-food companies, some companies have the belief that if you want to be employed by them, you have to be available anytime they want you to work.

And if you have a serious disability, successfully advancing your career brings the risk of losing medical coverage that are income-based.