Income limits used to determine the income eligibility of applicants for assistance under three programs authorized by the National Housing Act. These programs are the Section 221(d)(3) Below Market Interest Rate (BMIR) rental program, the Section 235 program, and the Section 236 program. These income limits are listed by dollar amount and family size, and they are effective on the date issued. Due to the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-289), Income Limits used to determine qualification levels as well as set maximum rental rates for projects funded with tax credits authorized under section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code) and projects financed with tax exempt housing bonds issued to provide qualified residential rental development under section 142 of the Code (hereafter referred to as Multifamily Tax Subsidy Projects (MTSPs)) are now calculated and presented separately from the Section 8 income limits.

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

The rental housing developments listed below are among the thousands of affordable units that are supported by City of Chicago programs to maintain affordability in local neighborhoods. The list is updated periodically when construction is completed for new projects or when the compliance period for older projects expire, typically after 30 years. The list is provided as a courtesy to the public. It does not include every City-assisted affordable housing unit that may be available for rent, nor does it include the hundreds of thousands of naturally occurring affordable housing units located throughout Chicago without City subsidies. For information on rents, income requirements and availability for the projects listed, contact each property directly. For information on other affordable rental properties in Chicago and Illinois, call (877) 428-8844, or visit www.ILHousingSearch.org.

Abstract

The Central Statistics Office conducted the fifth Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) from November 1993 to January 1995. As the title suggests, the main focus of the exercise was on household income and expenditure. Notwithstanding that, as a by-product, data on other socio-economic characteristics have been made available through the exercise.

Answers to economic questions such as: " Are households now spending more money on transport than on housing?", "Are the poor households getting poorer?" etc. - hinges on the results of the HIES. In the context of planning for economic development, studies of household income and expenditure are invaluable. These studies are helpful in evaluating the changes which occur, as a result of economic development, in household consumption patterns, levels of income, income distribution and the extent of the inequality, and trends in the preference of the different segments of the society. Viewed from another angle, the levels of these variables may be useful in determining the speed of socio-economic development in the foreseeable future.

Objectives and uses It is probably appropriate to start by defining a household income and expenditure survey. A household income and expenditure survey is a survey designed to collect information on various sources of income (money or in kind) received by the households and details as to how they dispose of this income (on expenditure, remittances etc.). In essence, all the details of receipts by the households and those relating to the acquisition of goods and services for own consumption are recorded within the given reference period. The reference period, like in the previous survey, was one month. The key words in this definition, i.e. Household, Income, and Expenditure are defined in details under the section dealing with concepts and definitions.

The main objectives of the 1993/94 Household Income and Expenditure Survey were: - i.) to determine household consumption expenditure patterns for urban towns, urban villages and rural areas so as to revise the weights used in the cost-of-living index. Information collected on itemized expenditure is useful for checking the existing basket-of-goods to ensure that the basket remains representative of national expenditure patterns. ii) To determine the sources of household income, estimate income levels and distribution hence ascertain the extent of the inequality. Combined with details of the household structure and other socio-economic variables, such data are invaluable to planners and policy makers. iii) to provide an independent source of information to estimate and improve the figures on "private final consumption" for National Accounts. iv) to provide consumption data that enable the construction of a "Poverty Datum Line". v) to provide business investors with information on consumption of specific products so as to determine potential consumer demand. vi) to provide a range of baseline data for researchers.

In brief, the objective of the survey was the provision of comprehensive data on household income and consumption patterns for socio-economic analysis and planning.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals

Universe

The survey covered all households living in private dwellings, apart from households of foreign diplomats and their families. Also excluded from the survey are hotels, army camps, nurses hostels and other institutional accommodation. It should be mentioned, however, that Botswana Defence Force families living in ordinary private dwellings were included. The Ngamiland delta was not covered because of the difficult terrain.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Survey Design Of the many factors that influence the sampling design of a particular survey, the nature of the subject is the most paramount. It is well known that the distribution of income among the households is uneven, with a few households accounting for a relatively large proportion of income. Botswana is no exception in this regard and indeed the 1985/86 survey revealed a high rate of inequality. There is a significant difference between income levels of urban towns, urban villages and the rural areas. Consumption expenditure depends, to a large extent, on income hence the arguments about income levels equally apply to consumption. The reason for going at length to elicit these problems is to give a background against which the 1993/94 Household Income and Expenditure Survey was conducted.

As in the 1985/86 survey, a two-stage stratified sample design was adopted. All surveys conducted under "The Household Survey Programme" have been two-stage stratified design. The multiple stages have been for ease of sample selection as well as for the fact that up-to-date sampling frame of the elementary units (households) are not available. On the other hand stratification is employed to provide separate estimates for the stratification factors as well as for gain in precision. Precision is gained when there is a reduction in the variance of the estimates.

Stratification Factors In the 1985/86 Household Income and Expenditure Survey, the sampling frame which comprised the 1981 census was sorted into five strata. - Urban - Lands - Villages - Cattleposts - Freehold farms.

Following the 1991 census, nineteen of Botswana's villages are now classified as "urban", i.e. fewer than 25 percent of their workforce are working in traditional agriculture. Nonetheless, other characteristics of these villages may still be markedly different from the more established urban areas such as Gaborone, Lobatse, Francistown etc. Consequently, it was proposed that, for the 1993/94 HIES, an "urban-village" stratum, comprising these villages be created. The remaining villages were combined with lands areas, cattleposts and freehold farms into a "rural" stratum. For most practical purposes the difference in income levels between the areas constituting the rural stratum does not justify splitting the group into separate strata. Therefore, for the 1993/94 HIES the strata are: - Urban - Urban villages - Rural

Unlike before, these stratification groups allow for presentation of separate results for each stratum.

Note: See detailed sampling procedure which is presented in the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Although the main theme of the survey was income and expenditure a whole range of topics were covered, as a by-product. Information collected in the HIES falls naturally into two categories: 1. that which could be collected from single interviews (Book 1), and 2. that collected on a day-to-day basis over a period of one month (Book 2).

The questionnaires and other forms used in collecting auxiliary data are presented in the appendix.

The single interview questionnaires (Book 1) comprised: 1. i) Demographic data, and ii) Economic activities and employment (Section A) 2. Sources of household income (Section B) 3. Housing data (Section C) 4. Household enterprises (Section D) 5. Crops and livestock (Section E) 6. Employment earnings and deduction (Section F) 7. Major expenditure during past 12 months (Section G) 8. Regular monthly and annually payment (Section H) 9. Miscellaneous (Section I)

The day-to-day questionnaires were combined into the daily notebook (Book 2) which is subdivided into the following schedules: 1. Daily expenditure and other disbursements (Schedule D-1) 2. Cash receipts (Schedule D-2) 3. Goods and services received (Schedule D-3a)/given (Schedule D-3b) 4. Business receipts (Schedule D-2) 5. Business expenditure (Schedule D-5) 6. Own produce consumed (Schedule D-6) Schedules D-1 to D-5 covered the full survey round of 30 days. On the other hand schedule D-6 covered a period of seven consecutive days within the survey month.

Cleaning operations

Data entry The in-house Data Processing Unit was responsible for data entry, maintenance of data entry and validations systems, and the production of tables. As for data entry, questionnaires were entered by one data entry operator and verified by another.

Manual editing The fact that the HIES is a very difficult exercise to undertake cannot be overemphasized. A number of the questionnaires contained inconsistent data and this was not wholly attributable to the field staff. The complexity of the survey also had a bearing on that. Besides inconsistencies and cases of item non-response which of course were expected, records for items dealing with income were often not true. Editing teams had the enormous task of sorting out these problems. In addition, they had to contend with hundreds of records - up to a maximum of 500 records for one household in some cases.

Editing was done in two stages. The first stage involved checks for consistencies and completeness. Questionnaires whose data were not comprehensible were referred to the field supervisors for correction. The second stage needed more care as it involved some calculations and transcribing of records from one section to another since not all sections were entered directly. Care had to be exercised in transcribing data moreover that some items (e.g. rent) may have been recorded in three sections. Editors undertook limited imputations particularly in the case of missing price quotes for small items. Transcribing records from the daily notebook was rather cumbersome in that records were first grouped and then summed by item type. At the validation stage checks were made to ensure that information transferred was not duplicated.

Manual editing and coding began four months after the start of field work. The delay