Atlanta Housing - Georgia Institute of Technology

More documents

Recommendations

Info

d. Examined the impact of the work/compliance requirements on employment and earnings. e. Linked family records longitudinally between 2004 — 2010. Use GIS software to geocode the addresses of families and to overly measures of community characteristics to census tracts. Spatially examined the characteristics of neighborhoods where Grady and University families lived in 2004. Compared the characteristics of neighborhoods where families lived in 2004 the characteristics of neighborhoods where they relocated by 2010. Used the CAI (Community Attribute Index) to spatially examine neighborhood quality. The CAI is a multidimensional index that measures community characteristics. It is analogous in design and application to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Human Development Index (HDI). The HDI is a composite score derived for each country by averaging separate index measures of the country’s population. The measures include life expectancy at birth, per capita household income, and educational attainment. Each index value is rescaled so that its ranges from 0 — 1, where 1 represents higher attainment of the human potential. Analogously, the CAI is a multidimensional index that is based on 16 separate index measures of community characteristics at the census tract level. The value of each index ranges from 0 — 1 and the average value of the 16 indexes is the CAI. Principal Component Analysis was used to reduce dozens of community measures to the 16 most essential ones that help define the characteristics of neighborhoods. Some of the index measures included in the CAI are the average price of a single-family home in the neighborhood, the national percentile ranking of elementary schools on standardized tests (where the school attendance zone is overlaid to a census tract), the rate of violent crime in the neighborhood (where the address of the crime incident is overlaid to a census tract), median family income (from 2005 midterm census estimates), educational attainment of the population, etc. This procedure allowed a CAI score to be developed for every census tract in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area. More importantly, because the CAI score and the address of a public housing family are assigned to census tract, the procedure allowed a measurement to be taken of the difference in neighborhood quality between origin and destination neighborhoods. f. Determine whether families, who relocated to better neighborhoods, experienced statistically significant gains in self-sufficiency in comparison to families who lived in less selective neighborhoods. Descriptive statistics and Linear Mixed Models with 38 | P a g e
39 | P a g e repeated measurements were used to control for selectivity effects and determine the effect that relocating to a better neighborhood had on resident self-sufficiency. g. Using three successive annual waves of focus group interviews (2007, 2008 and 2009), the research team gathered information on the perceptions of Grady families regarding the relocation process and relocation outcomes. The perceptions that families had of destination neighborhoods were compared to their perceptions of the Grady Homes community. Each focus group wave consisted of 10 different focus groups and each group contained approximately 10 participants. The focus groups allowed the research team to gather resident perceptions based on survey data and oral/anecdotal information and discussions/responses to focus group questions. h. Evaluated whether economic development has occurred in the neighborhood surrounding the mixed-income revitalization. i. Evaluated the net social benefit to society of revitalizing Grady and University Homes. Specifically, evaluated the financial/investment costs relative to income/social benefits such as rental revenue, contribution to total income from increased employment, and increases in social welfare resulting from a reduction in crime. Research Data This research is distinguished by its use of the full population of administrative records on every family that received housing assistance from the AHA between 1995 and 2010. Administrative records were linked longitudinally and snapshots were taken every three years (1995, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2007 and 2010). The primary range of investigation from the Grady revitalization is 2004 — 2010. Records for other years were analyzed to shed greater insight into the long-run housing assistance dynamics that revitalization of Grady was a part of. Observations on the characteristics and status of families were recorded in dozens of variables that were relevant to assessing their housing and socioeconomic status over time. Using the full population of data provided several unique advantages. First, it allowed a broader range of research questions to be answered and research methodologies to be employed that were not restrained by sample size. Second, it allowed more flexibility in the use of quasi-experimental research designs. This flexibility was very important because the AHA demolished all public housing developments during the timeframe of this research. Therefore,
Page 1 and 2: FINAL REPORT Impact of the Mixed-In
Page 3 and 4: Executive Summary Public housing 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: Antoine Graves Annex (Graves Annex)
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?