Responding to a Crisis: The National Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling Program, 2008-2018: A Capstone Evaluation. Urban Institute. Corianne Payton Scally et al. February 13, 2019
In 2007, as the scale and urgency of the housing crisis became clear, Congress authorized an emergency program to help Americans in danger of losing their homes. Between 2008–18, the National Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling (NFMC) program helped homeowners in need by substantially boosting the nation’s capacity for foreclosure counseling. Implemented by NeighborWorks America®, the program served more than 2 million homeowners, helped standardize foreclosure counseling practices, and fostered stronger relationships among program administrators, housing counseling agencies, and loan servicers. The NFMC program’s its impact on homeowners, housing counseling providers, and the housing counseling field will continue to be felt for years to come. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 52 pages].
Family Residential Instability: What Can States and Localities Do? Urban Institute. Brett Theodos, Sara McTarnaghan, Claudia J. Coulton. May 3, 2018
Residential instability can disrupt employment, finances, health, education, social networks, and more. And yet, too little policy attention has been devoted to the issue. States and localities have critical roles to play in creating integrated solutions to a complex challenge, but to date, their strategies have largely been confined to specific sectors and institutions, when more cross-cutting and holistic approaches are needed. This brief details steps that states and localities can take in several areas, including affordable housing, education, law, health, and human services, to minimize the occurrence or mitigate the consequences of residential instability. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 24 pages].
The Federal-State Higher Education Partnership: Lessons from Other Federal-State Partnerships. Urban Institute. Kristin D. Conklin, Sandy Baum. May 16, 2017
Lessons from federal-state partnerships in other public policy areas might inform efforts to strengthen the partnership in higher education. This paper looks to the forms of cooperation between these levels of government in transportation, housing, and elementary through secondary education as examples. The federal role should have clearly defined goals, including strengthening the social norm of equitable access to high quality postsecondary education. Preserving flexibility for the states is a critical component of effective federal policy. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 25 pages, 292.37 KB].
Pay for Performance: A New Solution for Vulnerable Homeless Adults. American Enterprise Institute. Kevin C. Corinth. April 26, 2016.
An emerging consensus has formed among advocates, nonprofit organizations, and the federal government that we have discovered the best solution for vulnerable homeless adults—Housing First. While the Housing First model has rightly been celebrated for increasing housing stability among the most vulnerable, evidence for claims that it reduces homeless populations, saves money, and improves well-being is much weaker. According to the author, there’s a need for a new solution that builds on the success of Housing First in housing the most vulnerable but also pushes progress forward on other outcomes. I propose a “pay-for-performance” system that unconditionally accepts vulnerable individuals into medium-term or long-term supportive housing, but rather than mandate a specific service model, holds service providers accountable for performance: keeping people out of homelessness, minimizing costs, and improving well-being. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 10 pages, 283.6 KB].
A Theoretical Framework for Two-Generation Models: Lessons from the HOST Demonstration. Urban Institute. Molly M. Scott et al. January 15, 2016.
Two-generation models target low-income children and their parents in hopes of interrupting the cycle of poverty. These models vary widely, and policymakers and practitioners need guidance on how best to design them. The brief uses insights from the Housing Opportunities and Services Together Demonstration to present an updated theoretical framework for these models. The framework emphasizes the importance of using family goals to target individual family members, setting individual goals, and aligning tailored and appropriate solutions. This lens also emphasizes prioritizing relationship-building over programs and designing flexible evaluation approaches, while working for systems change to support families in their efforts. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 11 pages, 311.6 KB].
Developing Housing and Education Partnerships. Urban Institute. Megan Gallagher. April 9, 2015.
Assisted-housing providers are in a unique position to support educators, low-income students, and their caregivers outside the school day. By partnering with schools and school districts, housing providers can help address challenges outside school that can become barriers to learning—such as housing instability, truancy, and health problems. Their roles as developers and landlords create opportunities to connect housing and education. The report summarizes key elements that shape and strengthen the partnerships in three diverse settings: Akron, Ohio, New Haven, Connecticut, and Vancouver Washington. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 30 pages, 309.17 KB].
A Brief Look at the Early Implementation of Choice Neighborhoods. The Urban Institute. Rolf Pendall and Leah Hendey. October 25, 2013.
The Choice Neighborhoods Initiative, a signature program in the Obama Administration’s Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative, aims to redevelop distressed assisted housing developments and improve their neighborhoods. The brief introduces the first five implementation sites, in Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, San Francisco, and Seattle, and the plans for rebuilding them. Ranging from a few blocks to over two square miles, the sites vary greatly in their challenges, programs, and key actors. All five are making progress in this new phase of federal housing and community development and are addressing the challenge of coordination in their ambitious attempts to build mixed-income neighborhoods. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
[PDF format, 14 pages, 202.1 KB].