How renters respond to economic hardship, and how landlords respond when tenants fail to make rent, are understudied questions, owing largely to limited data. We use experiences from the COVID-19 pandemic to begin answering these questions. Drawing on both new census data and two original surveys of renters in Los Angeles County, we test nine hypotheses about the sources of renter distress and landlord reactions to it. We find that lost work and lost income are the primary drivers of missed or late payments. Most tenants who fell behind entered into repayment plans with their landlords. Eviction threats were uncommon but increased as the pandemic persisted. Landlords were more likely to threaten eviction as tenants fell further behind, and smaller landlords were more likely than larger ones to cut tenant services and threaten or initiate evictions. Our evidence suggests that government income support helped tenants pay rent and thus helped stave off eviction threats. We also find that tenants took on other forms of debt, such as credit cards, loans from family, etc., to make rent. These debt burdens generally will not be relieved by housing assistance, and so require other policy responses.

Homeowners are significantly more prepared for disasters than renters. However, disaster preparedness among subsidized renters is an understudied topic despite their increased vulnerability to negative disaster outcomes. Previous research shows that one in three subsidized units is at risk for exposure to disasters, relative to one in four unsubsidized rental units, and one in seven owner-occupied units. Subsidized housing residents often fall into many vulnerable statuses that would make them less prepared than renters and owners. Using 2017 American Housing Survey data, we examine differences in household disaster preparedness by housing tenure, with and without controls for such factors. Logistic regression analyses indicate that subsidized renters are significantly less prepared than unsubsidized renters, and both renter types are significantly less prepared than homeowners, controlling for demographic and neighborhood characteristics. The policy implications of this research are considered as they relate to the location and management of subsidized housing in an era of climate change.

We performed a secondary analysis of the Moving To Opportunity (MTO) social experiment to investigate the impact of different types of housing assistance and neighborhood environments on long-term patterns of health care use for specific conditions and across different types of health care services. MTO participants, who were randomized at baseline, were linked to up to 21 years of all-payer hospital discharge and Medicaid data. Among the 9,170 children at the time of randomization, those who received a voucher had subsequent hospital admissions rates that were 36% lower for asthma and 30% lower for mental health disorders compared to the control group; rates of psychiatric services, outpatient hospital services, clinic services and durable medical equipment were also lower among the voucher groups. Findings for adults were not statistically significant. The results suggest that housing policies that reduce neighborhood poverty exposure as a child are associated with lower subsequent healthcare use for specific clinical conditions and types of services.

Gentrification is associated with decreases in neighborhood poverty and crime, increases in amenities and services, among other benefits-all identified as structural determinants of health. However, gentrification is also associated with population-level replacement of the existing community, or threats thereof. Combining census data from the ten largest MSAs in the U.S. with tract-level estimates from the CDC-PLACES Project from 2013-14 to 2017-18, we explore how the changing socioeconomic conditions in gentrifying neighborhoods correlate with changes in neighborhood health. We find significant differences between gentrifying and non-gentrifying neighborhoods in their associations with neighborhood health. The sociodemographic changes occurring in gentrifying neighborhoods generally correspond with simultaneous decreases in aggregate health risk behaviors and negative health outcomes. However, these changes are heterogeneous and complex. Whether and how neighborhood health changes alongside other components of neighborhood change depends on whether gentrification occurs in majority Black, Hispanic, or White neighborhoods. Our findings provide preliminary evidence that the changes accompanying gentrification extend to neighborhood health, but the direction of influence varies by neighborhood composition, type of sociodemographic change, specific health outcome, and spatial spillover. We discuss theoretical implications for future work addressing the mechanisms driving changes in neighborhood health, and potential approaches that differentiate policy responses.

This paper assesses the asset building of households that take part in shared-equity homeownership (SEH) models. The contribution of this paper is a comparison of outcomes for households participating in shared-equity programs to other low- and moderate-income households who rent or own properties without restrictions on appreciation. We matched participants in SEH programs to households with similar characteristics from the Panel Study of Income Dynamic (PSID) over the 1997-2017 period. The findings indicate that in real terms, median SEH homeowners accumulated about $1,700 in housing wealth annually or around $10,000 during their holding period. This amount is lower than the $2,100 median annual gain in home equity experienced by similar PSID owners but statistically and economically significantly larger than the $16 in annual gain experienced by similar PSID renters. The findings provide evidence that households participating in SEH programs experienced positive, but modest, wealth gains that were slightly lower than homeowners in unrestricted units but substantially higher than renters.

Local regulations that restrict residential growth are a key driver of California's affordable housing crisis. Scholars have argued these growth controls were implemented in the late 20th century by cities intending to exclude Black households. However, growth controls may also have plausibly been driven by a desire to exclude growing Hispanic, Asian, and foreign-born populations; by increased concern about the negative environmental consequences of population growth; or by homeowners' or cities' fiscal motivations. I jointly test these competing explanations using time-varying data on the adoption of a variety of residential growth controls covering California cities from 1970-1992. I find that, all else equal, cities with a lower share of Black residents-both in absolute terms, and relative to their metropolitan area-were more likely to pass residential growth controls. I also find some evidence that growth controls were more likely to be passed in areas experiencing greater Black population growth and in cities more supportive of White-Black segregation. Finally, I find strong evidence that, net of other factors, cities in areas more supportive of policies to protect the environment were more likely to pass residential growth controls.

Although non-experimental studies find robust neighborhood effects on adults, such findings have been challenged by results from the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) residential mobility experiment. Using a within-study comparison design, this paper compares experimental and non-experimental estimates from MTO and a parallel analysis of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID). Striking similarities were found between non-experimental estimates based on MTO and PSID. No clear evidence was found that different estimates are related to duration of adult exposure to disadvantaged neighborhoods, non-linear effects of neighborhood conditions, magnitude of the change in neighborhood context, frequency of moves, treatment effect heterogeneity, or measurement, although uncertainty bands around our estimates were sometimes large. One other possibility is that MTO-induced moves might have been unusually disruptive, but results are inconsistent for that hypothesis. Taken together, the findings suggest that selection bias might account for evidence of neighborhood effects on adult economic outcomes in non-experimental studies.

While scholars have acknowledged that shrinking federal resources for low-income housing programs increase economic inequality across U.S. society as a whole, the question of how the allocation of these resources affects inequality among the poor has received little attention. Using a mixed methods approach, this study examines local administrative practices of distributing scare housing resources and the potential redistributive effects of those choices. Analyses of administrative and qualitative data collected from local housing agencies suggest that local administrative practices of managing a waitlist disadvantage residentially unstable applicants. Juxtaposing this finding with results from the Survey of Income and Program Participation suggests that among those who are income-eligible for program participation, poorer individuals have a greater likelihood of experiencing residential instability, thus compounding their disadvantage in the competition for a housing voucher.

The effects of homelessness and permanent supportive housing (PSH) on health care utilization have been well documented. Prior research on the association between PSH entry and Medicaid expenditures have indicated that such housing support could result in savings to Medicaid programs; however, whether changes occur in health care use and expenditures after individuals exit PSH is unknown. If efficiency gains from PSH persist after the individual leaves PSH, the savings to payers such as Medicaid may continue even after the costs to provide housing for a PSH recipient have ended. We used linked Medicaid and housing data from Pennsylvania to examine changes in the level and composition of Medicaid expenditures for 580 adult enrollees during the 12 months before and after exit from PSH adjusting for relevant covariates. In adjusted analyses, we estimated that monthly spending declined by $200.32 (95% CI: $323.50, $75.15) in the first quarter post-exit and by $267.63 (95% CI: $406.10, $127.10) in the third quarter. Our findings suggest that PSH may have sustained budgetary benefits to state Medicaid agencies even for beneficiaries exiting the program. However, more research is needed to understand if these reductions in expenditures last beyond 12 months and do not reflect under-use of care that may be important for managing health over the long-term.

Online platforms have become an integral component of the housing search process in the United States and other developed contexts, but recent studies have demonstrated that these platforms offer uneven representation of different neighborhoods. In this study, we use listings covering the largest 50 U.S. metropolitan areas to assess how GoSection8, a platform uniquely focused on affordable housing and voucher-assisted households, compares with "mainstream" alternatives of Craigslist, Apartments.com and Zillow. Through descriptive and regression analyses of the housing and neighborhoods represented on these websites and a new way of measuring the distribution of rental housing opportunities, we advance a multisource perspective on the role of online information exchanges in housing search processes. Specifically, we find that GoSection8 and mainstream alternatives capture spatially-segmented information about housing markets, with GoSection8 ads representing units that are more affordable but also more constrained to higher-poverty neighborhoods where assisted households are already concentrated. The findings suggest that disadvantaged households are potentially funneled toward high-poverty, isolated neighborhoods by the operation of stratified information systems available for online housing searches.

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals experience high rates of homelessness and criminal justice system involvement, underscoring the need for supportive housing services. To explore the service needs of this population, we interviewed providers (n = 11) and clients (n = 10) from eight supportive housing organizations working with SGM populations in Los Angeles County, USA. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to synthesize interview responses into themes (by domain and cross-cutting). Take-aways included the need for investment in systems of care for vulnerable SGM populations; the particular marginalization of Trans individuals and providers that serve them; the roles of supportive housing staff, residents, and leadership in cultivating an affirming environment; prevalence of discrimination and stigma within supportive housing programs and broader society; and the complex interrelationships among SGM identity, homelessness, and criminal justice system involvement. These findings have important implications for supportive housing services and related policy.

Research examining the relationship between a neighborhood's built-environment and resident health or health-related outcomes has largely either focused on static characteristics using a cross-sectional research design or focuses on the neighborhood in its entirety. Such an approach makes it difficult to understand how specific dynamic neighborhood characteristics are associated with individual well-being. In this analysis, we use longitudinal data from the Pittsburgh Research on Neighborhood Change and Health (PHRESH) studies to assess the relationship between publicly funded neighborhood investments occurring across seven years (2011-2018) on five health-related outcomes: food insecurity, stress, perceived neighborhood safety, neighborhood satisfaction, and dietary quality. We additionally utilize this dataset to determine whether the distance between an individual's place of residence and the investment, as measured at the neighborhood, 1 mile, and ½ mile level, effects the magnitude of associations. Using individual and year fixed effects models, we find that when measured at the neighborhood level, a one standard deviation increase in investments (about $130 million dollars) is associated with decreased food insecurity (-0.294 sd), increased safety (0.231 sd), and increased neighborhood satisfaction (0.201 sd) among adults who remain in the study for at least two waves of data collection. We also analyze specific investment types and find that commercial investments are largely driving the changes in food insecurity, safety, and neighborhood satisfaction, while business investments are correlated with the decrease in stress. We find no relationship between investments and dietary quality.

Housing mobility programs and housing choice vouchers provide low-income families with a potentially-transformative opportunity to move to low-poverty neighborhoods. However, families often face barriers to attaining upward residential mobility; poor health may be one important barrier, although few studies have examined this hypothesis. We used the experimental Moving to Opportunity (MTO) Study, constructed residential trajectories, and linked neighborhood opportunity measures to over 14,000 addresses of 3526 families across 7 years. We used latent growth curve longitudinal models to test how baseline health modified effects of MTO housing voucher treatment on neighborhood opportunity trajectories. Results show that poor baseline health adversely influenced how the voucher induced upward mobility. Voucher receipt strongly promoted residential mobility if families were healthy; moreover the low-poverty neighborhood voucher plus counseling treatment promoted higher opportunity neighborhood attainment compared to controls, regardless of the baseline health of the family. However families with health vulnerabilities did not retain the same initial neighborhood gains conferred by the housing choice voucher treatment, as families without health vulnerabilities. These results suggest that housing counseling may be one necessary element to expand neighborhood choice into higher opportunity neighborhoods for families with health challenges. Providing housing vouchers alone are insufficient to promote low-income family high opportunity moves, for families who have disabilities or special needs. The implications of these results point to scaling up housing mobility programs, to provide tailored support for low-income families to use housing choice vouchers to make high opportunity moves, which is particularly necessary for families with health challenges.

Research on the effects of major federal housing assistance programs on children's outcomes has produced mixed results. Although housing assistance programs provide one of the few sources of affordable and stable housing for low-income families, there remains concern that living in public housing developments increases the risk of poor health for children. This paper uses a unique survey-administrative linked dataset to examine the effect of living in public housing on children's risk of health problems, including frequent diarrhea, frequent headaches, skin allergies, asthma, and fair/poor health status. Children living in public housing have substantially more health problems than children who do not live in public housing. However, the analysis develops several additional comparison groups to demonstrate that the excess health problems reflect unobserved selection into public housing. The main selection adjustment compares children living in public housing to children who enter public housing in the near future. Results indicate that public housing does not increase the risk of child health problems, and it is important to consider the substantial selection into public housing on factors that are likely to be correlated with children's outcomes. The broad effects of public housing may be mixed, but policymakers should not confuse the economic and health challenges of public housing residents for the effects of the program itself.

There is inconsistent evidence as to whether gentrification, the increase of affluent residents into low-income neighborhoods, is detrimental to health. To date, there is no systematic evidence on how gentrification may matter for a range of birth outcomes across cities with varying characteristics. We utilize California's Birth Cohort File (2009-2012), Decennial Census data, and the American Community Survey (2008-2012) to investigate the relationship of gentrification to: preterm birth, low birthweight, and small-for-gestational-age across California. We find that socioeconomic gentrification is uniformly associated with better birth outcomes. Notably, however, we find that only places specifically experiencing increases in non-White gentrification had this positive impact. These associations vary somewhat by maternal characteristics and by type of gentrification measure utilized; discrepancies between alternative measurement strategies are explored. This study provides evidence that socioeconomic gentrification is positively related to birth outcomes and the race-ethnic character of gentrification matters, emphasizing the continued need to examine how gentrification may impact a range of health and social outcomes.

Federal rental assistance is an important source of affordable housing for low income households, given a growing and severe affordable housing crisis. However, few studies have examined the extent to which rental assistance may improve housing access. This paper examines associations between rental assistance receipt and four dimensions of housing: quality, stability, autonomy and affordability. We draw on data from a longitudinal cohort study of low-income adults in New Haven, Connecticut and use Generalized Estimating Equations to examine associations between rental assistance receipt and housing measures. We find that participants receiving rental assistance had lower odds of reporting housing instability, low quality housing, lack of autonomy related to housing, and some measures of housing unaffordability compared to those not receiving assistance. The large and highly significant effects remain after adjusting for demographic variables and factors that can impact access to rental assistance.

While advocates argue that gentrification changes the neighborhood food environment critical to children's diet and health, we have little evidence documenting such changes or the consequences for their health outcomes. Using rich longitudinal, individual-level data on nearly 115,000 New York City children, including egocentric measures of their food environment and BMI, we examine the link between neighborhood demographic change ("gentrification"), children's access to restaurants and supermarkets, and their weight outcomes. We find that children in rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods see increased access to fast food and wait-service restaurants and reduced access to corner stores and supermarkets compared to those in non-gentrifying areas. Boys and girls have higher BMI following gentrification, but only boys are more likely to be obese or overweight. We find public housing moderates the relationship between gentrification and weight, as children living in public housing are less likely to be obese or overweight.

This study analyzes the COVID-19 homelessness response in King County, Washington, in which people were moved out of high-density emergency shelters into hotel rooms. This intervention was part of a regional effort to de-intensify the shelter system and limit the transmission of the virus to protect vulnerable individuals experiencing homelessness. This study used quantitative and qualitative methods to describe the experiences of and outcomes on individuals who were moved from shelters to noncongregate hotel settings. The study highlights a new approach to shelter delivery that not only responded to the public health imperatives of COVID-19, but also indicated positive health and social outcomes compared to traditional congregate settings. The findings establish an evidence base to help inform future strategic responses to homelessness as well as to contribute to the broader policy conversations on our nation's response to homelessness.

This study uses individual level consumer trace data for 2006 residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods for the principal cities of the 100 largest metropolitan regions in the US using their location in 2006 and 2019 to examine exposure to the following four cSDOH: healthcare access (Medically Underserved Areas), socioeconomic condition (Area Deprivation Index), air pollution (NO2, PM 2.5 and PM10), and walkability (National Walkability Index). The results control for individual characteristics and initial neighborhood conditions. Residents of neighborhoods classified as gentrifying were exposed to more favorable cSDOH as of 2006 relative to residents of low- and moderate-income neighborhoods that were not gentrifying in terms of likelihood to be in a MUA, and level of local deprivation and walkability while experiencing similar level of air pollution. As a result of changes in neighborhood characteristics and differential mobility pattern, between 2006 and 2019, individuals who originally lived in gentrifying neighborhoods experienced worse changes in MUAs, ADI, and Walkability Index but a greater improvement in exposure to air pollutants. The negative changes are driven by movers, while stayers actually experience a relative improvement in MUAs and ADI and larger improvements in exposure to air pollutants. The findings indicate that gentrification may contribute to health disparities through changes in exposure to cSDOH through mobility to communities with worse cSDOH among residents of gentrifying neighborhoods although results in terms of exposure to health pollutants are mixed.

The lack of sufficient affordable housing in Los Angeles, California burdens many renter households with the threat of an eviction. Research has identified individual- and neighborhood-level sociodemographic correlates of eviction, but the uneven distribution of sociodemographic characteristics and housing conditions across neighborhoods likely produces broader patterns of spatial clustering in eviction prevalence across local areas. We use spatial autoregressive models to explain the spatial concentration and spillover effects for two types of formal eviction filings-court-based and no-fault Ellis Act petitions-within and across census tracts in Los Angeles. Court-based filings show greater and more persistent spatial concentration, particularly in neighborhoods with higher percentages of Black residents. We find evidence of spatial correlation for both types of eviction, however, suggesting that identifying the spatial distribution of eviction prevalence across local areas is important to understanding how location shapes eviction risk in metropolitan areas.

Research on racial-ethnic COVID-19 disparities has yet to employ housing variables measured at the individual level, limiting our understanding of housing's role in determining early exposure to the virus. To address this gap, we linked data from SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests within the Duke University Health System between March 12, 2020, and July 31, 2020 ( = 23,057 individuals), with housing parcel data. We then analyzed how housing, neighborhood, and health insurance explain disparities in case positivity between and within racial-ethnic groups in Durham County, North Carolina. We find that 55% of the Black-White disparity and 25% of the Hispanic-White disparity in positive cases are explained by these social-contextual variables. Neighborhood-fixed effects explained the largest portion (27%) of the Black-White disparity, whereas health insurance type explained the largest portion (14%) of the Hispanic-White disparity. We conclude that housing, neighborhood, and health insurance had a significant role in producing racial-ethnic disparities in COVID-19 case positivity.