National Housing Law Project Housing Law Bulletin

Security deposit guarantees and applications by mail and fax are among the innovations in operation of the Section 8 Certificate and Voucher program highlighted in a recent study compiled by Abt Associates for HUD’s Offices of Policy Development and Research and Public and Indian Housing.¹ The study presents models of successful use of Section 8, with an emphasis on programs that simplify and streamline the application process by introducing new uses of technology and other innovations. It acknowledges Section 8’s importance as a supplement to other programs for those in need of housing assistance and supportive services.

Citing HUD’s earlier report on the worst case housing needs of the 5.3 million households in need of but not receiving housing assistance,² the study points out that 80 percent of these households pay more than half their incomes for rent. It repeats the Department’s claims of an 80-percent success rate for certificate users in large cities (87 percent if New York City is excluded). It also cites success rates of 87 percent for African American and 92 percent for Hispanic households. Families with children use over two-thirds of Section 8 tenant-based assistance, while the elderly and disabled use 16 percent and 17 percent respectively.³

The study suggests that the small number of families involved in crime or other lease violations damages the reputation of the entire program. The Department has launched on-site reviews and public information campaigns to correct public misconceptions about the program. It also indicates that oversubsidation or failure to abide by "rent reasonableness" rules saps resources that could be used to assist additional families.⁴

The suspension of "take-one, take all," good cause for eviction and the 90-day notice provisions through recent appropriations measures are hailed as significant steps in encouraging landlord participation, and the study supports their permanent repeal.⁵

The study acknowledges concern over the concentration of families in "fragile neighborhoods" that offer few opportunities for social and economic growth. The study also acknowledges the as yet unknown impacts that welfare reform will have on households currently receiving and those awaiting Section 8 as they lose income.⁶

The study sees HUD’s Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP) as the major innovation at the national level. This system, similar to Public Housing Management Assessment Program (PHMAP) for public housing, is designed to spot and address administrative deficiencies in the operation of the Section 8 program. A proposed rule is expected to be published soon.⁷

The study highlights innovations being used in several Section 8 programs across the country to improve administrative efficiency in, for example, applications processing, verifications, housing searches, and leasing. A few specific examples follow.

Applications Innovations

San Diego County, California, is served by the Housing Authority of the County of San Diego, and the San Diego Housing Commission which serves the City of San Diego. In the past, reapplication was required when families awaiting assistance in the county moved to the city. Such families lost their residency preference and place on the waiting list. With the introduction of the reciprocal waiting list agreement, when a family notifies the agency where it first made application of a move and that move is in an area administered by the other agency, applicants are advised of the residency preference and allowed to have their application moved to the other agency in order to retain their original application date.

Another advance introduced by the Housing Authority of the Country of Riverside (California) is a system for taking applications by mail or fax with automatic entry into the computer. The automated system eliminates the need for manual data entry for the 5,000 certificates and vouchers administered by the housing authority. It produces a confirmation letter which is sent to applicants who can respond by mail with corrections. The study indicates that the $25,000 cost for setting up the system was nearly recouped in two months of operation.

The Housing Authority of Jefferson County (Kentucky) introduced an interactive voice response system to handle inquiries from over 10,000 families on its waiting list. The system responds to more than 300 calls daily and operates around the clock.

Verification Innovations

The Housing Authority of the County of Merced (California) has reduced to one week the time required for obtaining income verification from the County Human Services Department for its Section 8 participants who are welfare clients. Once a month, the housing authority sends a computer file through a modem to the Department of Human Services, listing the Social Security numbers of those clients for whom annual or interim recertification is needed. Human Services processes the file through its own computer, affixing the required verification information. Ninety percent of verifications in the county are handled through this automated process.

Security Deposits

The Housing Authority of the County of Marin has initiated a Rental Deposit Guarantee (RDG) Program to assist Section 8 families as well as families not receiving housing assistance with move-in costs and security deposits. Although the program assists some families not receiving housing assistance, about three-quarters of assisted families were Section 8 participants. Demand for assistance from this program has increased since 1995 changes in the Section 8 program rules required payment of a full security deposit. This program, underwritten by a locally funded $50,000 guarantee fund, permits tenants to stretch out security deposit payments in installments for as long as six months. Although RDG program rules provide a maximum of $800, the average guarantee is $500 per household and the defaults in repayment are very low.

Mobility

Among the mobility counseling programs described in the study is one run by the Metropolitan Boston Housing Partnership (MBHP). This nonprofit agency subcontracts with agencies administering Section 8 in 33 cities and towns in the Boston area. The program provides:

Landlord Outreach

The study describes efforts of several housing authorities to improve relationships with landlords and thus increase participation in the program. These efforts, in Portland, Oregon, and elsewhere, include a service approach designed to encourage landlord participation in the Section 8 program, particularly in tight market areas where some landlords have not felt the economic need to participate. Portland’s 12-member Landlord Advisory Committee convenes monthly meetings with the Section 8 program administrators on eligibility and inspection issues. The Committee has played a role in marketing the programs to prospective owner participants.

The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles employs an ombudsperson for dissatisfied tenants, applicants and landlords. The study cites the ombudsperson service as a principal reason for the smooth handling of Section 8 assistance following the 1994 Northridge earthquake. The unit provides a single point of contact for Family Self Sufficiency social service providers and others.

The Metro Dade Housing Agency in Florida has established a Complaint Unit staffed by bilingual employees as a first point of contact for disgruntled tenants, landlords and the public.

Community Relations

The Fort Wayne (Indiana) Housing Authority, in conjunction with the city, produced a video on renters’ rights and responsibilities in order to address fears and misconceptions by homeowners about the Section 8 program. The video put a human face on Section 8 applicants and has been used as an educational tool at neighborhood association meetings and with local tenant organizations.

In addition to highlighting crime prevention strategies in several housing authorities, the study also features innovations by housing authorities administering three special Section 8 programs:

1.  United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Learning from Each Other: New Ideas for Managing the Section 8 Certificate and Voucher Programs (Sept. 1996).
2. HUD, Rental Housing Assistance at a Crossroads: A Report to Congress on Worst Case Housing Needs (Mar. 1996) (available from HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research, Washington, DC 20410-6000, for $5.00). This report was briefly summarized at 26 HOUS. L. BULL. 68 (May 1996).
3. Learning from Each Other, supra note 1, at 3.
4. Id. at 4.
5. Id. at 4-5.
6. Id. at 7.
7. Id.