New York's MTO program NMIC works extensively with group sessions for families MTO Families in New York One of the few long-distance movers in MTO used her certificate to move from northern Manhattan to the suburban town of Silver Spring, Maryland to be near her sister. Both she and her youngest child, who is now ten years old, wanted very much to live in a safer area. She had some experience in the catering business in New York and already has a job interview lined up in the DC area with a catering firm known to one of the staff working at the Northern Manhattan Improvement Corporation. who have moved and for those who are actively looking. NMIC also works closely with each individual family on a variety of social and economic issues that affect their ability to move through MTO. The New York demonstration began its outreach in August 1994, when NYCHA mailed letters to about 2,000 potentially eligible families. After additional outreach was conducted, NMIC received its first families for counseling in December 1994. Enrollment has grown steadily since then, and 309 New York families have enrolled in the MTO demonstration to date. Of the 157 families assigned to the MTO experimental group, there have been 34 leaseups. The lease-up rate in New York is 25 percent, while the rate in the comparison group is 16 percent. Previous research on the implementation of Section 8 tenant-based assistance in New York city consistently yields success rates significantly below the national average, due, at least in part, to the complex and tight rental housing market.15 New York's MTO operating costs per assigned family average $590, or $2,501 per family leased-up. V. THE MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY DEMONSTRATION Two years into the MTO demonstration, all five sites have conducted family outreach, processed applications, created waiting lists, and enrolled families. Over 1,600 families have been randomly assigned to one of the three MTO groups. Out of the targeted 666 families scheduled to lease-up as part of the MTO experimental group, 319 (47.9 percent) are already living in their new homes in low-poverty communities. PHAS have forged close working relationships with the non-profit housing counseling agencies with whom they are working and these non-profits continue to counsel eligible families at all five sites. Some of the PHAS may consider contributing a limited number of their certificates and vouchers to the MTO demonstration in the next year, potentially increasing the demonstration's sample size and ensuring more useful and robust findings in the future. A large proportion of MTO experimental group families have been successful in obtaining rental housing in low-poverty communities with the Section 8 certificates and vouchers issued through the demonstration. Indeed, preliminary data currently show that MTO has been able to improve upon the accomplishments of Chicago's Gautreaux program, achieving higher rates of lease-ups in most of the sites. The high MTO lease-up rates are even more impressive given the difficulty facing families moving into low-poverty census tracts, which are often distant and unfamiliar. The MTO demonstration has already begun to return benefits as a source of reliable data and policy insights. Early baseline surveys provide useful information on the aspirations and needs of public housing families. And the experience of the five demonstration sites has expanded HUD's knowledge about the design and implementation of housing mobility counseling programs in different market environments. During the next two years HUD expects to publish findings on the content and costs of MTO mobility counseling programs, on differences between successful and unsuccessful MTO recipients, and on the characteristics of neighborhoods in which MTO families locate. In addition, the Office of Policy Development and Research has awarded eight small grants to university researchers who are examining the immediate social, employment, and educational impacts in the lives of the parents and children who moved into low-poverty communities (Appendix C lists these research projects and their principal investigators). Results from these studies will be published over the course of the next two years. This ongoing research and information gathering will enable HUD to develop more sensible and effective mobility strategies for recipients of tenant-based housing assistance in metropolitan areas throughout the nation. Although it is too early to determine in quantitative terms what effects residential mobility is having upon MTO families, the demonstration has already helped numerous public housing families, formerly living in deeply poor, crime-ridden communities to escape inner-city isolation and find decent homes in low-poverty neighborhoods. Both parents and children report deep satisfaction at having escaped the fear and limited futures associated with their former developments. APPENDIX A: ELIGIBLE CITIES AND APPLICANTS FOR THE MTO DEMONSTRATION The FY 1993 NOFA for the Moving to Opportunities for Fair Housing (MTO) demonstration was issued by the Office of Public and Indian Housing on August 16, 1993 and closed on November 15, 1993. Twenty-one cities were eligible to apply: Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Fort Worth, Houston, Kansas City, MO, Long Beach, CA, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, New York, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Seattle, and Washington, DC. Sixteen applications were submitted jointly by PHAS and non-profits: 1. Baltimore/Community Assistance Network 2. Boston/Metropolitan Boston Housing Partnership. 3. Chicago/Leadership Council for Metropolitan Open Communities. 4. Cleveland/Cuyahoga Plan of Ohio. 5. Dallas/Dallas Urban League. 6. Denver/No NPO selected. 7. Detroit/Operation Get Down. 8. Fort Worth/Housing Opportunities, Inc. 9. Houston/Harris County Hospital. 10. Kansas City, MO/Greater Kansas City Housing Information Center. 11. Los Angeles/Fair Housing Congress/Beyond Shelter. 12. New York/Northern Manhattan Improvement Corp. 13. Philadelphia/Housing Association of Delaware Valley. 14. San Diego Housing Commission/Fair Housing Council of San 15. San Francisco/Catholic Charities, Project Homeward 16. Washington, D.C./Apartment Improvement Program/Housing Counseling Services. |