Osypuk Theresa L, Gailey Samantha, Schmidt Nicole M, Garcia Dolores Acevedo
University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, and Director of the Minnesota Population Center.
University of Minnesota, Minnesota Population Center; Assistant Professor, Michigan State University, Departments of Public Health and Forestry.
Hous Policy Debate. 2024;34(4):508-537. doi: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2301336. Epub 2024 Feb 1.
Housing mobility programs and housing choice vouchers provide low-income families with a potentially-transformative opportunity to move to low-poverty neighborhoods. However, families often face barriers to attaining upward residential mobility; poor health may be one important barrier, although few studies have examined this hypothesis. We used the experimental Moving to Opportunity (MTO) Study, constructed residential trajectories, and linked neighborhood opportunity measures to over 14,000 addresses of 3526 families across 7 years. We used latent growth curve longitudinal models to test how baseline health modified effects of MTO housing voucher treatment on neighborhood opportunity trajectories. Results show that poor baseline health adversely influenced how the voucher induced upward mobility. Voucher receipt strongly promoted residential mobility if families were healthy; moreover the low-poverty neighborhood voucher plus counseling treatment promoted higher opportunity neighborhood attainment compared to controls, regardless of the baseline health of the family. However families with health vulnerabilities did not retain the same initial neighborhood gains conferred by the housing choice voucher treatment, as families without health vulnerabilities. These results suggest that housing counseling may be one necessary element to expand neighborhood choice into higher opportunity neighborhoods for families with health challenges. Providing housing vouchers alone are insufficient to promote low-income family high opportunity moves, for families who have disabilities or special needs. The implications of these results point to scaling up housing mobility programs, to provide tailored support for low-income families to use housing choice vouchers to make high opportunity moves, which is particularly necessary for families with health challenges.
住房流动性计划和住房选择券为低收入家庭提供了一个潜在的变革性机会,使其能够搬到贫困率低的社区。然而,家庭在实现向上的居住流动性方面往往面临障碍;健康状况不佳可能是一个重要障碍,尽管很少有研究检验这一假设。我们利用了“搬到机会”(MTO)实验研究,构建了居住轨迹,并将社区机会指标与7年里3526个家庭的14000多个住址相关联。我们使用潜在增长曲线纵向模型来测试基线健康状况如何改变MTO住房券治疗对社区机会轨迹的影响。结果表明,基线健康状况不佳会对住房券促使向上流动产生不利影响。如果家庭健康,获得住房券会有力地促进居住流动性;此外,与对照组相比,获得低贫困社区住房券并接受咨询治疗的家庭实现了更高机会社区的居住,无论家庭的基线健康状况如何。然而,与没有健康问题的家庭相比,有健康问题的家庭并没有保持住房选择券治疗带来的相同初始社区收益。这些结果表明,住房咨询可能是一个必要因素,能够让面临健康挑战的家庭扩大社区选择范围,搬到机会更高的社区。仅提供住房券不足以促进有残疾或特殊需求的低收入家庭向高机会社区迁移。这些结果的意义在于扩大住房流动性计划,为低收入家庭提供量身定制的支持,以利用住房选择券实现高机会迁移,这对面临健康挑战的家庭尤为必要。