Vouchers in Wisconsin-Responses

A while ago I blogged about some data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).  To summarize, CBPP published data on Housing Choice Vouchers ("Section 8 Vouchers") that Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) have, showing that many vouchers are being unused.  While some PHAs were using all, or nearly all, of their vouchers, others had relatively low voucher usages.

This provoked a response from two housing authority directors (not of the PHAs that CBPP listed as among the lowest voucher usage), who correctly pointed out that just because a PHA had the authority to issue X number of vouchers doesn't mean they have funding for those vouchers.  They point out that a few years ago, HUD changed their policies so that instead of authorizing a PHA to issue X number of vouchers, HUD now says "here's a pot of money that 'should' give you X number of vouchers."  The problem is, that pot of money is an estimate, and when you have rising rents (higher rents) and families needing even more housing assistance (lower income = more voucher needed to cover the rent), that pot of money may not be enough.

I asked Barbara Sard, Vice President for Housing Policy, to comment on those responses.  Below is her response:

Your blog using our data is excellent.  It’s great to see the data used so effectively, and obviously you got some PHAs to take notice.  We’re going to post a background piece that will help provide context for the data.  But the short answer to your question is that it is correct that some PHAs do not receive enough funding to use all their authorized vouchers.  At the same time, many agencies do receive sufficient funding, or have sufficient funding in reserves, to assist more families.  That’s the point of the third bullet at the top of the state fact sheet, which says that Wisconsin agencies had sufficient funds available in 2010 to use 1,276 of the approximately 2,800 total vouchers that were unused.  This estimate is based on a calculation that Wisconsin agencies had unspent funding reserves of close to $10 million at the end of 2010.  While we agree (as noted on the sheet) that it is prudent for agencies to hold modest funds in reserve to meet unanticipated costs, it is also the case that a significant portion of these funds could be used to assist additional families.  Let me know if you have additional questions.

I don't see the background piece she mentions on the CBPP site, but I will post it when I see it.