Atlanta Housing - Georgia Institute of Technology

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Researchers Dr Thomas D Boston is a Prof. of Economics at Georgia Institute of technology (Georgia Tech). He served as the principal investigator on this research project. The co-principle investigator was Dr. Catherine L Ross, the Harry West Professor of City and Regional Planning and Director of the Center for Quality Growth and Regional Development (CQGRD) at Georgia Tech. Major research support was also provided by Jason Barringer and Dr. Myungje Woo, research scientist at CQGRD; Mr. Linje Boston, a statistician and COO of EuQuant; and numerous graduate research assistants. Ms. Elke Davidson facilitated the 2007 focus group sessions and Dr. Thomas D Boston facilitated the 2008 in 2009 focus group sessions. All focus groups were facilitated with the assistance of the staff at CQGRD. Acknowledgments The research team wishes to thank the staff at the Atlanta Housing Authority for the tremendous support and assistance provided during the conduct of this research. We particularly thank Ms. Renée Glover, President and Chief Executive Officer of AHA; Mr. Lenny Koltochnik, Policy Research Director; and Dr. E. Mike Proctor, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Policy Officer. We also thank the many staff persons who facilitated our numerous requests for data and information. This report would not have been possible without their assistance. While their assistance was indispensable, the research team takes full responsibility for all errors and omissions. 2 | P a g e
Executive Summary Public housing in Atlanta no longer exists, as we once knew it. Only two of AHA’s original 25 low income public housing family projects were not demolished between 1995 and 2010. LIPH developments have been replaced by public housing eligible units in mixed-income communities, tenant-based housing choice vouchers (HCVs), and project based rental assistance (PBRA). The Grady Homes Revitalization Master Plan involved the demolition and revitalization of Grady Homes and University Homes (LIPH family developments) as well as Antoine Graves and Antoine Graves Annex (LIPH senior developments). This evaluation examined the impact of Grady Homes Revitalization. To accurately assess the impact of Grady Revitalization, the report examined major aspects of AHA's CATALYST Plan -which is the authority’s blueprint for transforming all low income housing in Atlanta. Research Objectives The evaluation sought to determine whether or not the revitalization of Grady helped AHA achieve the goals of CATALYST which are as Follows: 3 | P a g e 1. End the practice of concentrating the poor in distressed neighborhoods 2. Create healthy sustainable communities 3. Create market competitive mixed-income communities with affordable housing opportunities seamlessly integrated. 4. Create new housing developments through public/private partnerships 5. Assist residents in attaining their life goals and in achieving self-sufficiency The report first established the baseline socioeconomic conditions and neighborhood characteristics of families who lived at Grady Homes, University Homes, Antoine Graves Annex and Antoine Graves in 2004. For convenience, these four properties are referred to as the Grady Revitalization. Several advanced econometric models were used to evaluate the impact of the revitalization. The data analysis framework included all households that received housing
Page 1: FINAL REPORT Impact of the Mixed-In
Page 5 and 6: Finding 2 Evidence Finding 3 Eviden
Page 7 and 8: Finding 4 Evidence Average rent pai
Page 9 and 10: who received housing vouchers had o
Page 11 and 12: them much more flexibility to choos
Page 13 and 14: Comparing Grady to other communitie
Page 15 and 16: Section 1 Purpose and Background Pu
Page 17 and 18: In exchange for MTW designation, HU
Page 19 and 20: Total 48 48 71 These radical change
Page 21 and 22: Section 2 AHA’s Rationale for Rev
Page 23 and 24: During focus group interviews, long
Page 25 and 26: AHA’s Mixed-income Revitalization
Page 27 and 28: Figure 6 Veranda at Auburn Pointe,
Page 29 and 30: To be eligible to move back into a
Page 31 and 32: Section 3 Grady Revitalization Mast
Page 33 and 34: the city. The development was also
Page 35 and 36: Section 4 Methodology and Definitio
Page 37 and 38: Antoine Graves Annex (Graves Annex)
Page 39 and 40: 39 | P a g e repeated measurements
Page 41 and 42: Section 5 2004 Baseline Characteris
Page 43 and 44: Figure 9 Number of Householders and
Page 45 and 46: G2 consisted of Antoine Graves and
Page 47 and 48: Figure 13 Number of Householders an
Page 49 and 50: Figure 16 Household income characte
Page 51 and 52: Figure 19 Household Employment Char
Page 53 and 54:
single-family home was $193,095 and
Page 55 and 56:
Section 6 Change in the Type of Hou
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 27 Figure 28 57 | P a g e
Page 59 and 60:
Figure 30b CHANGE IN TYPE OF ASSIST
Page 61 and 62:
Section 7 Change in the Indicators
Page 63 and 64:
Figure 34 HOUSEHOLD INCOME FOR ALL
Page 65 and 66:
Figure 37 AVERAGE RENT PAYMENTS FOR
Page 67 and 68:
Figure 40 Figure 41 AVERAGE PUBLIC
Page 69 and 70:
Section 8 Impact of CATALYST on Emp
Page 71 and 72:
Figure 44 Figure 44 EMPLOYMENT RATE
Page 73 and 74:
Figure 46 AVERAGE HOURS WORKED PER
Page 75 and 76:
public assistance have a much lower
Page 77 and 78:
Correlated Data Summary Number of L
Page 79 and 80:
Tests of Model Effects Type III Wal
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 51 EARNINGS OF HOUSEHOLDERS
Page 83 and 84:
Other Services Rehabilitation and C
Page 85 and 86:
Figure 51 Figure 52 NEIGHBORHOOD PO
Page 87 and 88:
percent of the population with only
Page 89 and 90:
89 | P a g e Map 1: Location of Ori
Page 91 and 92:
Poverty Deconcentration One effecti
Page 93 and 94:
Figure 58 POVERTY RATE OF ORIGIN AN
Page 95 and 96:
clearly how these families made a s
Page 97 and 98:
MAP 6 Map 7 illustrates that in 201
Page 99 and 100:
the CAI scores at the point of orig
Page 101 and 102:
Householders who are in a Port Out
Page 103 and 104:
Case Processing Summary N Percent C
Page 105 and 106:
o In 2009 there were 84 HOHs who pa
Page 107 and 108:
A minority of householders moved in
Page 109 and 110:
A majority of persons moved out of
Page 111 and 112:
Total Participants 97 94 69 Partici
Page 113 and 114:
Figure 63 Number of Years since Mov
Page 115 and 116:
Regarding the difficulty of finding
Page 117 and 118:
Figures 68, 69 and 70 record indivi
Page 119 and 120:
Figures 71, 72, and 73 record respo
Page 121 and 122:
Figures 74 and 75 record responses
Page 123 and 124:
Figure 77 Feeling about Children's
Page 125 and 126:
4. When you first heard you had to
Page 127 and 128:
4. What other kind of help did you
Page 129 and 130:
participants who have moved multipl
Page 131 and 132:
• Apartments: too small, mold/mil
Page 133 and 134:
o Assigned counselor Housing enviro
Page 135 and 136:
11.20.08 13h Demolition and mov
Page 137 and 138:
Most of the participants reported r
Page 139 and 140:
environment. However, householders
show all

Atlanta Housing - Georgia Institute of Technology

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?