NSP  x 3  
 HUD's Neighborhood  Stabilization Program (NSP) helps localities address community problemsresulting from the nation's mortgage foreclosure crisis. Authorized under Title  III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, the program has received  three rounds of funding targeted specifically to neighborhood stabilization. The  Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 provided a first round of formula  funding (NSP1) in the amount of $3.92 billion to state and local governments. The  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided a second round of funds (NSP2), which awarded $2 billion by competition. In July 2010, Congress authorized the  third and most recent round of funding (NSP3), in the amount of $1 billion, as  part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and  Consumer Protection Act.  
                            The  NSP3 funds were distributed by formula to states and units of general  government for buying, rehabilitating, and reselling foreclosed and abandoned  homes that must remain affordable for the longest feasible amount of time. Recipients  may decide what activities to undertake as long as they are allowable under the  Act. Acceptable uses for NSP3 funds include the following: 
                            
                              - Financing mechanisms for foreclosed  properties;
 
                              - Purchasing and rehabilitating abandoned  or foreclosed homes and residential properties;
 
                              - Land banks for foreclosed properties;
 
                              - Demolition of blighted structures; and
 
                              - Redevelopment of demolished or vacant  properties.                            
 
                             
                             Neighborhood stabilization activities must also  benefit low-, moderate-, and middle-income households that do not exceed 120  percent of the area median income (AMI). Twenty-five percent of  the funds must help households with incomes below 50 percent of the AMI.  
                            Through  a partnership between HUD and the National Community Stabilization Trust, NSP3  offers grantees the First Look initiative, a sales method that allows grantees an  exclusive 12- to 14-day window to evaluate and bid on properties before others  can do so. By giving every NSP grantee a first chance to buy foreclosed and  abandoned properties in hard-hit neighborhoods, First Look allows grantees to  strategically choose their properties, rehabilitate, and resell foreclosed  homes more quickly. In addition, says Jessie Handsforth Kome, HUD Deputy  Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance, "We arestrongly encouraging  green and sustainable elements, in accordance with Energy Star standards, in  gut rehab and new construction to keep operating costs down over time to help  with the affordability of units." NSP also seeks to prevent future foreclosures  by requiring families who receive homebuyer assistance to go through housing  counseling and borrow from lenders who comply with sound lending practices.  
                            HUD  issued the NSP3 Notice of Formula Allocations and Program Requirements on  October 19, 2010, and grantees must submit their plans for the funds by March  1, 2011. Kome explained during a webinar (posted online at HUD's NSP Resource  Exchange) that at least half of the funds must be expended  within two years of funding, and total allocations must be used by the end of three  years. As grantees design their programs, Kome suggests that they give careful  thought to how they will address local housing market conditions, provide for  vicinity hiring in target neighborhoods, and create affordable rental  development preferences.                             
                               
                              
  
                            BACK TO THE TOP 
                              
                             Moving to Work 
                            With the 1999  implementation of HUD's Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration program, participating  public housing authorities (PHAs) have had greater leeway to design and test  strategies that fit local needs. In authorizing MTW in 1996, Congress sought  approaches for providing and administering housing assistance that are cost  effective, help low- and very low- income families with children become  financially self-sufficient, and expand the range of housing choices. At just over  halfway through the demonstration period that will end in 2018, researchers  have studied the experiences of 33 PHAs to learn what strategies might shape  future rental reform and public housing assistance policies. This inquiry found  a number of promising strategies enacted by individual agencies that fell into  four general categories.  
                            Preserve  and Revitalize Public Housing 
                              At the time MTW was  implemented, the public housing stock was in dire need of an estimated $22  billion in upgrades and preservation measures. Yet the growing need for capital  repairs was not adequately met with in the necessary federal capital funds, causing  a significant inventory loss of public housing units. With the preservation and  modernization of public housing, MTW agencies have been able to expand housing  choices for low-income families while also improving the appearance of their  communities and neighborhoods. The flexibility built into MTW allows PHAs to  use demonstration funds to develop new units, with greater freedom to  streamline processes, coordinate and intermingle funds, leverage investment, and  employ private-sector business practices while being responsive to area markets  and opportunities. For example, the Atlanta Housing Authority leveraged MTW to  revitalize its distressed public housing stock with mixed-income, mixed-finance  developments, resulting in additional market rate rentals, Tax Credit rentals, public  housing with Tax Credit units, Tax Credit with Project-Based Rental Assistance  units, market-rate homes for sale, and affordable homes for sale. 
                            Streamline  Operations 
                              No new allocations  accompany an MTW designation. Rather, these PHAs may combine their Housing  Choice Voucher (HCV), public housing capital, and public housing operating  funds for MTW activities. Thus, they avoid duplicated administrative costs,  save money, establish reserves, fund social services, and can add to a  development account. This streamlining appears to make obtaining housing  assistance an easier, less burdensome process for applicants. For example, the  Lawrence-Douglas County Housing Authority has been able to combine their public  housing and HCV program waiting lists, resulting in quicker turnaround times  and fewer revenue losses attributable to vacancies. 
                            Test  Rent Reform 
                              Public housing and HCV  rents are traditionally calculated at 30 percent of adjusted income, as  documented by residents and verified by PHAs. MTW allows innovative rent models  that disallow all or a portion of earned income in setting the rent amount,  turning employment and self-sufficiency into incentives. Alternative rent  systems are acceptable if they do not impose excessive burdens, costs, or  hardships on renters or administrators and are within program parameters. Researchers  found several promising approaches, tailored to local conditions, for future  rent reform design. One housing authority in Cambridge, Massachusetts uses a  tiered rent structure in which a flat rent is set at 30 percent of income at the  low end of an income range. As a household's income increases within that  range, the rent burden constitutes a smaller portion of a family's budget,  freeing money for other necessities. Other housing authorities are  experimenting with models featuring time limits, flat rents, minimum rents, and  minimum earned income requirements. The full effect of these alternative rent  systems, however, has not yet been determined, indicating a need for additional  research.  
                            Encourage  Self-Sufficiency 
                              MTW challenges housing  authorities to design supportive services for residents of public housing that take  a holistic approach to the issue and foster self-sufficiency. They may combine  federal funds, collaborate with community-based organizations, and otherwise be  innovative in how they help residents move beyond a need for housing  assistance. This might include combinations of services, case management,  classes in literacy and budgeting, work requirements, time limits, rent in  escrow accounts, and other activities. Among the many different practices  implemented, the researchers found vouchers for supportive services and programs  that serve special needs groups, such as prisoners reentering society and homeless  families.  
                            Because every MTW  project is unique, success was difficult to define and applicable outcome  measures were unavailable for this review. Yet from surveying these projects  and talking to participating housing authorities, the researchers came away  from this interim evaluation with a sense of the kind of agency best positioned  to achieve cost efficiency and self-sufficiency while increasing housing  choices for disadvantaged families. Such an organization would be innovative,  able to report on performance, practice strict fiscal controls, have (or have  access to) good evaluation tools, able to count on local community supports,  and understand its role in meeting community needs. 
                          
                               
                            BACK TO THE TOP                             
                              
                              
                              
                              Need for Housing Assistance in  the Suburbs 
                             Suburban  social service providers are seeing new clients and experiencing increased  
                               demand. The Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution found that from   
                               June 2009 to April 2010, 60 percent of nonprofit suburban providers from  jurisdictions  
                               outside of Chicago; Los Angeles; and Washington, DC, reported a  rising need for  
                               mortgage and rent assistance. Half of the sampled providers  help low-income  
                               households find affordable housing or make rent payments, and  one-third offer  
                               temporary shelter or housing. Go  to Strained  Suburbs: The Social Service Challenges 
                                 of Rising Suburban Poverty to see the full study by Scott  W.Allard and Benjamin Roth. 
                               
                               
                               
                                
  
                             The  Time to Preserve Affordable Rental Housing Is Now 
 A 2009 survey of 20 metropolitan areas by AARP, the National Housing Trust, and Reconnecting America  identified 250,000 privately owned, assisted apartments within walking distance  of public transportation. Such access is crucial for low-income families, who  spend an average of 57 percent of their income on housing and transportation. Low-income  households who must use a car spend nearly three times more on transportation  than those with access to public transit. 
Two-thirds of the  surveyed apartments were under federal housing contracts due to expire within five  years. If property owners choose to stop participating in assisted housing  programs, possibly for greater opportunity in the open market, the nation's  affordable housing stock will suffer even greater losses than it has already  experienced. The Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University reports  that between 1997 and 2007, the loss of low-cost housing stock escalated  dramatically. Demolition, disaster, abandonment, conversion to nonresidential  use, owner occupancy, and upgrades to higher rent ranges are among the reasons  for the loss of affordable rental units.  
With transit-oriented  development increasingly seen by urban planners as a catalyst for economic  growth, Enterprise Community Partners, the National Housing Trust, and Reconnecting  America conducted case studies to identify strategies, resources, and tools  that can help communities preserve affordable rental housing near transit.  Using the experiences of Atlanta, Denver, Seattle, and Washington, DC, the  study highlights opportunities for preservation and shows how each of the four  metro areas are successfully preserving affordable housing near transit.  
Despite regional  differences, the researchers found sufficient similarities across the community  approaches to be able to identify some immediate basic initiatives that all  four areas found necessary, beginning with an inventory of the properties and  locations of assisted, subsidized, and unsubsidized housing that would be  appropriate to target. The necessary and available resources for acquiring  targeted properties, such as financing tools and partnerships, had to be  identified. Finally, resources and opportunities to develop or redevelop  distressed properties were paired to be consistent with regional transit  planning and project funding strategies.  
Although  new challenges accompany transit-oriented development, these case studies  demonstrate that communities can strategically meet the critical need for  affordable housing near accessible transportation, while curtailing the loss of  rental units available to low-income families. 
    Leo  Quigley, ed., Enterprise Community Partners, National Housing Trust, and  Reconnecting America, Preserving Affordable Housing Near Transit: Case  Studies from Atlanta, Denver, Seattle and Washington, DC, 2010, released at the Partners in  Innovation national symposium and policy forum, Denver CO, September 27-28,  2010. 
 
    
      AARP, National  Housing Trust, and Reconnecting America, Preserving Affordability and Access in Livable  Communities: Subsidized Housing Opportunities Near Transit and the 50+  Population, September 2009.
 
  
  
BACK TO THE TOP 
                               |