Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Journal Article

Public Housing Transformation and Resident Relocation: Comparing Destinations and Household Characteristics in Chicago

Robert J. Chaskin, Mark L. Joseph, Sara Voelker and Amy Dworsky
Cityscape
Vol. 14, No. 1, American Housing Survey (2012), pp. 183-214
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41553090
Page Count: 32
Were these topics helpful?
See something inaccurate? Let us know!

Select the topics that are inaccurate.

Cancel
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Add to My Lists
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Public Housing Transformation and Resident Relocation: Comparing Destinations and Household Characteristics in Chicago
Preview not available

Abstract

Nearly a decade after the start of the Chicago Housing Authority's (CHA's) Plan for Transformation, more than 16,000 households have been relocated into a variety of housing contexts, including new mixed-income developments, private rental housing subsidized with vouchers, scattered-site public housing units, and rehabilitated 100-percent public housing developments. Using administrative data from the CHA and a number of state agencies, we compare the characteristics of residents who ended up in the different housing contexts and examine differences in their current well-being. Counter to expectations, our analysis reveals no evidence of any sorting of higher functioning households into new mixed-income developments or into the private market with housing choice vouchers, or of more challenged households being left behind in traditional public housing developments. On the contrary, we find that the households that ended up taking vouchers were relatively more challenged (as suggested, for example, by patterns of employment, income, and welfare receipt) in 1999 than other subgroups and even have relatively more troubling indicators of well-being in 2008. Furthermore, although the households living in scattered-site housing in 2008 seem to be faring quite well, those in mixed-income developments are surprisingly indistinguishable across most indicators from the households living in traditional public housing developments.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
183
    183
  • Thumbnail: Page 
184
    184
  • Thumbnail: Page 
185
    185
  • Thumbnail: Page 
186
    186
  • Thumbnail: Page 
187
    187
  • Thumbnail: Page 
188
    188
  • Thumbnail: Page 
189
    189
  • Thumbnail: Page 
190
    190
  • Thumbnail: Page 
191
    191
  • Thumbnail: Page 
192
    192
  • Thumbnail: Page 
193
    193
  • Thumbnail: Page 
194
    194
  • Thumbnail: Page 
195
    195
  • Thumbnail: Page 
196
    196
  • Thumbnail: Page 
197
    197
  • Thumbnail: Page 
198
    198
  • Thumbnail: Page 
199
    199
  • Thumbnail: Page 
200
    200
  • Thumbnail: Page 
201
    201
  • Thumbnail: Page 
202
    202
  • Thumbnail: Page 
203
    203
  • Thumbnail: Page 
204
    204
  • Thumbnail: Page 
205
    205
  • Thumbnail: Page 
206
    206
  • Thumbnail: Page 
207
    207
  • Thumbnail: Page 
208
    208
  • Thumbnail: Page 
209
    209
  • Thumbnail: Page 
210
    210
  • Thumbnail: Page 
211
    211
  • Thumbnail: Page 
212
    212
  • Thumbnail: Page 
213
    213
  • Thumbnail: Page 
214
    214