Submitted by user on
Study Name
Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) Rent Reform
Study Sharepoint ID
27880
Evaluation name
Evaluating the Effects of Santa Clara County Housing Authority’s (SCCHA's) Rent Reform
Count age
0
Count Young Adults
0
Count Hard-to-employ
0
Count Disability
0
Count chronically ill
0
Count mentally ill
0
Count substance dependent
0
Count formerly incarcerated
0
Count Justice involved
0
Count limited work history
0
Count homeless
0
Count immigrants
0
Count refugees
0
Count veterans
0
Count female
0
Count Male
0
Count Any postsecondary education
0
Count With a high school diploma or GED
0
Count No high school diploma or GED
0
Count Married
0
Count Parents
0
Count Single Parents
0
Count Non-Custodial Parents
0
Count Employed
0
Count Self employed
0
Count Unemployed
0
Count Disconnected/discouraged workers
0
Count general low-income population
0
Count Very low income (as classified by the authors)
0
Count welfare population
0
Count long-term welfare recipients
0
Count Asian
0
Count Black or African American
0
Count Hispanic or Latino of any race
0
Count American Indian or Alaska Native
0
Count Pacific islander
0
Count White
0
Count More than one race
0
Count Unknown race
0
Count another race
0
Percent Disability
0.00
Percent female
65.16
Percent Male
34.84
Percent general low-income population
100.00
Percent Asian
27.59
Percent Black or African American
28.34
Percent Hispanic or Latino of any race
29.71
Percent White not Hispanic
13.24
Percent another race
1.12
Mean age
35.50
Group formation formatted

The intervention group consisted of 16,133 non-elderly, nondisabled adults who were affected by the Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) rent reform, across 7,111 households. (Elderly or disabled adults were also potentially affected but were not examined because their employment and earnings behaviors were assumed to be less flexible to the policy change). The comparison group consisted of 17,942 non-elderly, nondisabled adults representing 8,388 households selected from three other public housing authorities bordering Santa Clara County that had not implemented the rent reform as of July 2013 but might have been otherwise similar. These were the Housing Authority of the County of Alameda, the Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo, and the San Francisco Housing Authority. Evaluators compared employment and earnings outcomes before and after the onset of the policy change between SCCHA Housing Choice Voucher recipients and comparison Housing Choice Voucher recipients pooled together across the three comparison public housing authorities. The analysis relied on earnings and employment data from both groups dating back four years before the SCCHA rent reform and extending four years after the SCCHA rent reform. The intervention and comparison groups included those who had available administrative data on quarterly employment and earnings during this period.

Study timing formatted

The intervention was implemented in September 2013; evaluators measured outcomes through June 2017.

Implementing organization formatted

SCCHA

Treatment condition formatted

Beginning in September 2013, tenant contribution rates for families receiving Housing Choice Vouchers through SCCHA increased from about 27 percent to 35 percent of unadjusted income. (SCCHA subsequently reduced this rate to 32 percent one year later.) In addition, the new rent policy eliminated all allowances and deductions (for example, child care and medical expenses) for determining required contributions, and reduced the number of bedrooms on a household's voucher for some families. (Before the intervention, separate bedrooms were provided for household members older than age 5 in different generations, genders, or family relations; after the reform, one bedroom was allocated to the head of household plus partner and an additional bedroom was allocated for every two additional household members.) SCCHA offered a hardship exemption policy that allowed households to temporarily include child care or medical deductions in their tenant contribution for up to 90 days after the start of the rent reform. In addition, SCCHA provided financial assistance to cover rental payments or security deposits and free legal services to prevent eviction that might have resulted from the policy change.

Comparison condition formatted

The comparison group participants were selected from families receiving housing vouchers from the Housing Authority of the County of Alameda, the Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo, and the San Francisco Housing Authority. These neighboring county public housing authorities did not alter tenant contribution rate policies (which remained at about 27 percent of unadjusted income) during the intervention period.

Mandatory services formatted

None

Setting details formatted

The study took place in four neighboring counties in California: Santa Clara County, Alameda County, San Mateo County, and San Francisco County.

Delivered by public or private entity?
Public
Earliest publication year
2020
Most recent publication year
2020
Manuscripts
Check edits flag
No
Primary Service
Financial incentives