Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program Management Programmatic Reports are created from information collected from Housing Authorities across the nation on the use of HUD vouchers by the Housing Voucher Program Support Division.

NCHS has linked 1999-2018 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and 1999-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) to administrative data through 2019 for the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) largest housing assistance programs: the Housing Choice Voucher program, public housing, and privately owned, subsidized multifamily housing. Linkage of NCHS survey participants with HUD administrative records provides the opportunity to examine relationships between housing and health.

Housing Choice Vouchers by TractThis National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDA) dataset, shared as a Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) feature layer, displays the census tracts of those areas with residents who participate in the Housing Choice Voucher Program in the United States. Per HUD, "the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP) is the federal government's major program for assisting very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled with decent, safe, sanitary and affordable housing in the private market. Since housing assistance is provided on behalf of the family or individual, participants are able to find their own housing, including single-family homes, townhouses and apartments. The participant is free to choose any housing that meets the requirements of the program and is not limited to units located in subsidized housing projects. Housing choice vouchers (HCV) are administered locally by public housing agencies (PHAs). The PHAs receive federal funds from HUD to administer the voucher program".Census Tract 800609Data currency: current federal service (HCV by Tract)NGDAID: 121 (Assisted Housing - Housing Choice Vouchers by Tract - National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDA))OGC API Features Link: Not AvailableFor more information, please visit: Housing Choice Vouchers Fact Sheet; Housing Choice Vouchers by TractSupport Documentation: Housing Choice Vouchers by TractFor feedback please contact: Esri_US_Federal_Data@esri.comNGDA Data SetThis data set is part of the NGDA Real Property Theme Community. Per the Federal Geospatial Data Committee (FGDC), Real Property is defined as "the spatial representation (location) of real property entities, typically consisting of one or more of the following: unimproved land, a building, a structure, site improvements and the underlying land. Complex real property entities (that is "facilities") are used for a broad spectrum of functions or missions. This theme focuses on spatial representation of real property assets only and does not seek to describe special purpose functions of real property such as those found in the Cultural Resources, Transportation, or Utilities themes." For other NGDA Content: Esri Federal Datasets

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program assists very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled in obtaining decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market.

Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) receive federal funds from HUD to administer the voucher program, and housing subsidies are paid to the landlord directly by the PHA on behalf of the participating family. The voucher recipient remains responsible for paying any difference that exists between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program.

Voucher recipients are responsible for finding a suitable housing unit where the owner agrees to rent under the program. Because housing assistance is provided on behalf of the family or individual, participants are free to choose their own housing, including single-family homes, townhouses, and apartments provided that the chosen housing meets the requirements of the program, and is not limited to units located in subsidized housing projects. Qualified housing may also include the family's present residence. Furthermore, under certain circumstances, and if authorized by the PHA, a family may use its voucher to purchase a modest home. Please note that to restrict access to tenant information HCV locations are identified in public records by the owner, and not the tenant. Public data pertaining to the locations of HCV program participants are only available as U.S. Census Tract aggregations. Moreover, to protect the confidentiality of those receiving Housing Choice Voucher Program assistance, tracts containing 10 or fewer voucher holders have been omitted from this service. This dataset includes both tenant-based vouchers and project-based vouchers. HCV_PUBLIC_PCT are calculated using 2020 Census Demographic and Housing Characteristics File (DHC) table H4 Tenure Renter Occupied field. To learn more about the Housing Choice Voucher Program visit: https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/hcv/about/, for questions about the spatial attribution of this dataset, please reach out to us at GISHelpdesk@hud.gov. Data Dictionary: DD_Housing Choice Vouchers by Tract Date of Coverage: Up to 09/2023Last Updated: 11/2023

This service provides spatial data and information for Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) recipients aggregated to 2020 U.S. Census Tract geography. The HCV Program assists very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled in obtaining decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market. Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) receive federal funds from HUD to administer the voucher program, and housing subsidies are paid to the landlord directly by the PHA on behalf of the participating family. The voucher recipient remains responsible for paying any difference that exists between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program. Voucher recipients are responsible for finding a suitable housing unit where the owner agrees to rent under the program.

This dataset describes information related to the City of Mesa Housing Authority (MHA) which administers the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. The program assists low-income individuals or families living in Mesa with rental assistance according to their income. Information in this dataset is used to calculate the Utilization Rate (the percentage of vouchers that are leased up of the number of allocated vouchers from US Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) to MHA) and the Voucher Budget Authority (the percentage of the allocated funding dollars for rent payments on behalf of current housing voucher participants).

The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program was a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. This Restricted Access Dataset (RAD) includes data from the 3,273 adults interviewed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation and is comprised of variables analyzed for the article "Neighborhood Effects on the Long-Term Well-Being of Low-Income Adults" that was published in the journal Science on September 21, 2012. The article focused on subjective well-being, physical and mental health, social networks, neighborhoods, housing, and economic self-sufficiency. Families were tracked from the baseline survey (1994-1998) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-2010) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families from five United States cities. Households were randomly assigned to one of three groups: The low-poverty voucher (LPV) group (also called the experimental group) received Section 8 rental assistance certificates or vouchers that they could use only in census tracts with 1990 poverty rates below 10 percent. The families received mobility counseling and help in leasing a new unit. One year after relocating, families could use their voucher to move again if they wished, without any special constraints on location.The traditional voucher (TRV) group (also called the Section 8 group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling.The control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled.The dataset contains all outcomes and mediators analyzed for the Science article, as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis. Demographic information includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, employment status, and education level.

This dataset and map service provides information on Fair Market Rents (FMRs). FMRs are primarily used to determine payment standard amounts for the Housing Choice Voucher program, initial renewal rents for some expiring project-based Section 8 contracts, initial rents for housing assistance payment (HAP) contracts in the Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy program (Mod Rehab), and to serve as a rent ceiling in the HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) for rental assistance. HUD annually estimates FMRs for 530 metropolitan areas and 2,045 nonmetropolitan county FMR areas. By law the final FMRs for use in any Fiscal Year must be published and available for use at the start of that Fiscal Year, on October 1.

The dataset contains current data on low rent and Section 8 units in PHA's administered by HUD. The Section 8 Rental Voucher Program increases affordable housing choices for very low-income households by allowing families to choose privately owned rental housing. Through the Section 8 Rental Voucher Program, the administering housing authority issues a voucher to an income-qualified household, which then finds a unit to rent. If the unit meets the Section 8 quality standards, the PHA then pays the landlord the amount equal to the difference between 30 percent of the tenant's adjusted income (or 10 percent of the gross income or the portion of welfare assistance designated for housing) and the PHA-determined payment standard for the area. The rent must be reasonable compared with similar unassisted units.

Measures the ability of housing voucher holders to find housing in the private rental market. The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program is the federal government's largest low-income housing assistance program where people can seek housing in the private market. The maximum housing assistance is generally the lesser of the payment standard minus 30% of the family's monthly adjusted income or the gross rent for the unit minus 30% of monthly adjusted income. Source: Picture of Subsidized Housing, HUD Years Available: 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019

Through its data linkage program, NCHS has been able to expand the analytic utility of the data collected from the 2014 and 2016 National Hospital Care Surveys (NHCS) by linking patient records with up to three years of administrative housing data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) largest housing assistance programs: the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, Public Housing (PH) , and privately owned, subsidized Multifamily housing (MF). These innovative linked data will support a wide array of patient outcomes studies, including the opportunity to study complex relationships between housing and health.

Since passage of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, the federal government has provided housing assistance to low-income renters. Most of these housing subsidies were provided under programs administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or predecessor agencies. All programs covered in this report provide subsidies that reduce rents for low-income tenants who meet program eligibility requirements. Generally, households pay rent equal to 30 percent of their incomes, after deductions, while the federal government pays the remainder of rent or rental costs. To qualify for a subsidy, an applicant’s income must initially fall below a certain income limit. These income limits are HUD-determined, location specific, and vary by household size. Applicants for housing assistance are usually placed on a waiting list until a subsidized unit becomes available.Assistance provided under HUD programs falls into three categories: public housing, tenant-based, and privately owned, project-based.In public housing, local housing agencies receive allocations of HUD funding to build, operate or make improvements to housing. The housing is owned by the local agencies. Public housing is a form of project-based subsidy because households may receive assistance only if they agree to live at a particular public housing project.Currently, tenant based assistance is the most prevalent form of housing assistance provided. Historically, tenant based assistance began with the Section 8 certificate and voucher programs, which were created in 1974 and 1983, respectively. These programs were replaced by the Housing Choice Voucher program, under legislation enacted in 1998. Tenant based programs allow participants to find and lease housing in the private market. Local public housing agencies (PHAs) and some state agencies serving as PHAs enter into contracts with HUD to administer the programs. The PHAs then enter into contracts with private landlords. The housing must meet housing quality standards and other program requirements. The subsidies are used to supplement the rent paid by low-income households. Under tenant-based programs, assisted households may move and take their subsidy with them. The primary difference between certificates and vouchers is that under certificates, there was a maximum rent which the unit may not exceed. By contrast, vouchers have no specific maximum rent; the low-income household must pay any excess over the payment standard, an amount that is determined locally and that is based on the Fair Market Rent. HUD calculates the Fair Market Rent based on the 40th percentile of the gross rents paid by recent movers for non-luxury units meeting certain quality standards.The third major type of HUD rental assistance is a collection of programs generally referred to as multifamily assisted, or, privately-owned, project-based housing. These types of housing assistance fall under a collection of programs created during the last four decades. What these programs have in common is that they provide rental housing that is owned by private landlords who enter into contracts with HUD in order to receive housing subsidies. The subsidies pay the difference between tenant rent and total rental costs. The subsidy arrangement is termed project-based because the assisted household may not take the subsidy and move to another location. The single largest project-based program was the Section 8 program, which was created in 1974. This program allowed for new construction and substantial rehabilitation that was delivered through a wide variety of financing mechanisms. An important variant of project-based Section 8 was the Loan Management Set Aside (LMSA) program, which was provided in projects financed under Federal Housing Administration (FHA) programs that were not originally intended to provide deep subsidy rental assistance. Projects receiving these LMSA “piggyback” subsidies were developed under the Section 236 program, the Section 221(d)(3) Below Market Interest Rate (BMIR) program, and others that were unassisted when originally developed.Picture of Subsidized Households does not cover other housing subsidy programs, such as those of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Housing Service, unless they also receive subsidies referenced above. Other programs such as Indian Housing, HOME and Community Develo

Annual and monthly program statistics about the Australian Government Hearing Services Voucher Program, including claiming information, hearing devices and vouchers issued, number of practitioners and number of calls processed by the Client Contact Line.

The monthly statistics provides current information on hearing services vouchers issued and vouchers serviced which is updated on a monthly basis.

The Annual statistics provides current information across a broad range of areas of the Voucher Program including number of clients, devices, business sites, hearing service providers and business sites. This information is updated on a six monthly basis.

The Previous statistics section provides statistical information for previous reporting periods.

Abstract (en): Nearly 9 million Americans live in extreme-poverty neighborhoods, places that also tend to be racially segregated and dangerous. Yet, the effects on the well-being of residents of moving out of such communities into less distressed areas remain uncertain. Moving to Opportunity (MTO) is a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas in five cities the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. Families were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) the low-poverty voucher (LPV) group (also called the experimental group) received Section 8 rental assistance certificates or vouchers that they could use only in census tracts with 1990 poverty rates below 10 percent. The families received mobility counseling and help in leasing a new unit. One year after relocating, families could use their voucher to move again if they wished, without any special constraints on location; (2) the traditional voucher (TRV) group (also called the Section 8 group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling; (3) the control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and whatever other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled. Families were tracked from baseline (1994-1998) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-2010) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families. This data collection includes data from the 3,273 adult interviews completed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation. Using data from the long-term evaluation, the associated article reports that moving from a high-poverty to lower-poverty neighborhood was associated in the long-term (10 to 15 years) with modest, but potentially important, reductions in the prevalence of extreme obesity and diabetes. The data contain all outcomes and mediators analyzed for the associated article (with the exception of a few mediator variables from the interim MTO evaluation) as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis. All analysis of the data should be weighted using the total survey weight. The cell-level file includes a separate weight for each outcome and mediator measure that is the sum of weights for all observations in the cell with valid data for the measure (for example, wt_f_db_hba1c_diab_final is the weight for the glycated hemoglobin measure, mn_f_db_hba1c_diab_final). In the pseudo-individual file, mn_f_wt_totsvy is the average of the total survey weight variable for all observations in the cell. In the original individual-level file, the total survey weight (f_wt_totsvy) is calculated as the product of three component weights: (1) Randomization ratio weight -- At the start of the MTO program, random assignment (RA) ratios were set to produce equal numbers of leased-up families in the low-poverty and traditional voucher groups based on expected leased-up rates. The initial ratios were "8 to 3 to 5": eight low-poverty voucher group families to three traditional voucher families to five control families. During the demonstration program, these RA ratios were adjusted to accommodate higher than anticipated leased-up rates among low-poverty voucher group families. This weight ensures that the proportion of families in a given site is the same across all three treatment groups. This component weight value ranges from 0.59 to 2.09. (2) Survey sample selection weight -- For budgetary reasons, adults from only a random two-thirds of traditional voucher group households were selected for the long-term survey interview sample (while adults from all low-poverty voucher and control group families were selected), so this component weights up the selected traditional voucher group adults so that they are representative of all traditional voucher group adults. This weight component is equal to the inverse probability of selection into the subsample (~1.52). (3) Phase 2 subsample weight -- The long-term survey data collection was completed as a two-phase process. In the first phase, we sought to interview all selected respondents. Phase 2 of fielding was triggered when the response rate reached approximately 74 percent. In the second phase, we su...

This service denotes estimated PHA service area boundaries in an effort to provide critical data to those responsible (HUD staff, researchers, and external partners) for the evaluation and monitoring of HUD’s rental assistance programs. This is an experimental dataset that is designed to aid researchers in studying the HUD-funded Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs. The methodology and the service areas themselves have not been validated by HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) or the Public Housing Agencies. PD&R welcomes engagement from internal and external stakeholders on the continued refinement and development of this dataset.

This dataset has been added to HDX from the Cash Atlas. The Cash Atlas is an interactive global mapping tool aiming to visually represent cash transfer programmes at a global level. It is envisioned to be an advocacy and learning tool. By demonstrating the use and utility of CTPs across different sectors and contexts, the Cash Atlas provides a tool that can be used in advocacy to promote consideration and appropriate use of CTP in humanitarian response. It also aims to be a learning tool for organisations willing to share their experiences.

This project has been developed by CaLP and supported by American Red Cross, ECHO and USAID/OFDA

The Private Security Camera Voucher Program Program provides a private security camera system to eligible residents free of charge. District residents—either owners or tenants—who receive public assistance may be eligible to have a camera system installed at their home. Questions about the rebate or voucher program, please contact us at security.cameras@dc.gov or 202-727-5124. For more information, visit ovsjg.dc.gov.

The data provided here denotes the authors’ revised service areas for a subset of 377 Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) for which HUD previously estimated service areas. Using HUD administrative data on the location of Housing Choice Voucher holders, HUD’s estimated service areas were revised to better capture voucher activity. Specifically, the authors developed two different tests and correction procedures. The first assesses if the estimated service area omits a sizable share of voucher holder locations (so is “too small”), and if so, adjusts to include census designated places or counties containing at least 5 percent of a PHA’s voucher holders. The second test checks whether the estimated service boundary includes areas the PHA does not appear to serve and that are clearly served by another PHA (so is “too large”), in this case adjusting by removing those areas. 148 of the 377 PHA estimated service areas were found to be too small, too large, or both, and so have revised service areas that differ from HUD’s estimated service areas. The detailed methodology is provided below. Additionally, a spreadsheet is supplied that identifies geographies that were added to and dropped from HUD’s estimated services to create the revised service areas for affected PHAs.

This is an experimental dataset that is designed to aid researchers in studying the HCV program. The methodology and the service areas themselves have not been validated by HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) or the Public Housing Agencies. For additional discussion of the approach, see Tauber et al. (2024); please contact the authors with any questions or comments.Data Dictionary: DD_Extensions to Estimated Housing Authority Service Areas MethodologyMethodology: Extensions to Estimated Housing Authority Service Areas Methodology

Reference:Tauber, Kristen, Ingrid Gould Ellen, and Katherine O’Regan. 2024. “Whom Do We Serve? Refining Public Housing Agency Service Areas.” Cityscape 26(1) (2024): 395-400.

Regional (4-B, 6, 7, 8) Households under the 4P

This data provides information on the households under the 4P (Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program) - a conditional cash transfer scheme run by the government of the Philippines. All personally information on individuals has been removed. Data has been aggregated at the household level. For each household in the database, the geographic information is provided as is data on the approximate income of the the household, whether they are identified as "poor" and whether or not they are receiving 4P assistance.

Data for Region 4-B, 6, 7 is from 1 Jan 2014, Data for Region 8 is from 1 Aug 2013

Rent estimates at the 50th percentile (or median) are calculated for all Fair Market Rent areas. Fair Market Rents (FMRs) are primarily used to determine payment standard amounts for the Housing Choice Voucher program, to determine initial renewal rents for some expiring project-based Section 8 contracts, to determine initial rents for housing assistance payment (HAP) contracts in the Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy program (Mod Rehab), and to serve as a rent ceiling in the HOME rental assistance program. FMRs are gross rent estimates. They include the shelter rent plus the cost of all tenant-paid utilities, except telephones, cable or satellite television service, and internet service. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) annually estimates FMRs for 530 metropolitan areas and 2,045 nonmetropolitan county FMR areas. Under certain conditions, as set forth in the Interim Rule (Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 191, Monday October 2, 2000, pages 58870-58875), these 50th percentile rents can be used to set success rate payment standards.