NHPF-Authored Articles & Industry Reports

Positive Affordable Housing Policy Impacts

The survey found broad support for greater governmental involvement in facilitating affordable housing. Respondents were particularly supportive of approaches designed to increase its supply.

The highest ranked policies are compared in the chart below:

AVERAGE RATING (1–5 SCALE)

 Highest Ranked Policies During Three Eras

The Great Recession & Aftermath (2008–2011)

Tax Credit Assistance Program (TCAP) and Credit Exchange (2009)

3.91

Extended Unemployment Benefits (2008)

3.69

Neighborhood Stabilization Program (2008, 2009, 2010)

3.68

Rebuilding in a Divided US (2012–2019)

Rental Assistance Demonstration (2011)

3.55

National Housing Trust Fund (2016)

3.47

Capital Magnet Fund (revived 2016)

3.37

Pandemic & Social Upheaval (2020–2021)

Pandemic Direct Rental Assistance

4.06

Increase in Capital for Housing

4.06

Utility Cutoff Moratoria

3.72

Additionally, those questioned believe that several pandemic-era policies have had greater positive impacts than previous initiatives in supporting affordable housing. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being “outstanding,” respondents rate both the overall increase in housing funding as part of the various stimulus measures and the provision of direct rental assistance through the CARES Act slightly better than “good,” with average rankings of 4.1. Two other recent initiatives—the various federal and state moratoria on evictions and utility cutoffs of households delinquent on their rents/payments—received average ratings of 3.5 or higher. Collectively, the pandemic-era policies had higher average ratings than those implemented in either the Great Recession and Aftermath (2008–2011) or the period characterized as Rebuilding in a Divided US (2012–2109). Respondents believe that the pandemic-era policies have had an overall neutral to positive impact in reducing housing vulnerability (average 3.3 rating). In contrast, the policies of both the Great Recession and Rebuilding in a Divided US periods received negative to neutral ratings (2.6 and 2.7, respectively). The higher ratings for the pandemic era may reflect the adoption of better policies, but it also may be attributable to recency bias; those questioned are likely to be more aware of these newer policies than some of those enacted in the past.

A Decade of Rental Housing Vulnerability

15

Powered by