First up is a state-by-state summary of federal rental assistance. The Wisconsin fact sheet points out that only a small number of Wisconsin's renters are assisted by federal assistance, and with that comes additional risk:
When housing costs consume more than half of household income, low-income families are at greater risk of becoming homeless. Point-in-time surveys suggest that at least 6,525 people are homeless in Wisconsin.The housing voucher data for Wisconsin shows that 91% of vouchers were used in Wisconsin, in line with the national average. But that missing 9% means that 1,824 less families received assistance. This page shows data over the past few years for each public housing authority.
The top public housing authorities in terms of voucher usage for 2010:
- Chippewa County at 100% (382 Vouchers)
- Eau Claire at 100% (405 Vouchers)
- Fond Du Lac County at 100% (430 Vouchers)
- Eau Claire County at 99% (219 of 221 Vouchers)
- Dodge County at 99% (151 of 152 Vouchers)
- Beloit Community Development at 97% (577 of 598 Vouchers)
- WHEDA at 97% (1,326 of 1,366 Vouchers)
- Winnebago County at 97% (401 of 413 Vouchers)
- Portage County at 97% (242 of 250 Vouchers)
- Platteville at 79% (101 of 128)
- Oconto County at 78% (57 of 73 Vouchers)
- Marshfield Community Deveopment at 76% (72 of 95 Vouchers)
- Sauk County at 74% (220 of 298 Vouchers)
- Burnett County at 73% (24 of 33 Vouchers)
- Taylor County at 70% (21 of 30 Vouchers)
- Dodgeville at 70% (56 of 80 Vouchers
- Wausau at 61% (265 of 435 Vouchers)
Wausau's 61% is simply horrenous when there is so much demand for vouchers, and all the more puzzling since they were at 98% in 2004 and kept utilizing less and less each year. Same with Sauk County, going from 100% in 2004 to 74% in 2010. Taylor from 97% to 70%. What's going on with those and other housing authorities?
Update: I'm getting some pushback on this, pointing out that the budget authority for the vouchers can be very different than the number "allocated". A few years ago, HUD changed to a different system in which PHAs are given a specific budget number rather than a commitment to fund the assigned number of vouchers. I'm trying to follow up with CBPP on this, and I should have a fuller explanation on this in the near future.
Update 2: New blog post on this.
Posts
2 comments:
Do you think the agencies in the areas where the vouchers aren't being used are having a harder time finding landlords who are willing to accept vouchers? Can landlords get more profit when they don't accept vouchers?
Keep tuned...there's some pushback from people on this, and I plan to do a follow-up in the near future.
But to answer your question, I don't think it's necessarily due to landlords. Landlords CAN charge more without a voucher as HUD limits how high a rent can be with a voucher with the "Fair Market Rent" limit. But again, I doubt this is the issue, especially after feedback from some.
Post a Comment