Rental Housing
Information on Low-Income Veterans' Housing Conditions and Participation in HUD's Programs Gao ID: GAO-07-1012 August 17, 2007Veterans returning from service in Iraq and Afghanistan could increase demand for affordable rental housing. Households with low incomes (80 percent or less of the area median income) generally are eligible to receive rental assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) housing choice voucher, public housing, and project-based programs. However, because rental assistance is not an entitlement, not all who are eligible receive assistance. In response to a congressional mandate, GAO assessed (1) the income status and demographic and housing characteristics of veteran renter households, (2) how HUD's rental assistance programs treat veteran status (whether a person is a veteran or not) and whether they use a veterans' preference, and (3) the extent to which HUD's rental assistance programs served veterans in fiscal year 2005. Among other things, GAO analyzed data from HUD, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and the Bureau of the Census, surveyed selected public housing agencies, and interviewed agency officials and veterans groups. GAO makes no recommendations in this report. VA agreed with the report's findings. HUD objected to the characterization in the report regarding HUD's policies on veteran status and program eligibility and subsidy amounts.
In 2005, an estimated 2.3 million veteran renter households had low incomes. The proportion of veteran renter households that were low income varied by state but did not fall below 41 percent. Further, an estimated 1.3 million, or about 56 percent of these low-income veteran households, had housing affordability problems--that is, rental costs exceeding 30 percent of household income. Compared with other (nonveteran) renter households, however, veterans were somewhat less likely to be low income or have housing affordability problems. HUD's policies for its three major rental assistance programs generally do not take veteran status into account when determining eligibility or assistance levels, but eligible veterans can receive assistance. Also, HUD generally does not distinguish between income that is specific to veterans, such as VA-provided benefits, and other sources of income. The majority of the 41 largest public housing agencies that administer the housing choice voucher or public housing programs have no veterans' preference for admission. The 13 largest performance-based contract administrators that oversee most properties under project-based programs reported that owners generally did not adopt a veterans' preference. In fiscal year 2005, an estimated 11 percent of all eligible low-income veteran households (at least 250,000) received assistance, compared with 19 percent of nonveteran households. Although the reasons for the difference are unclear, factors such as differing levels of need for affordable housing among veteran and other households could influence the percentages.
GAO-07-1012, Rental Housing: Information on Low-Income Veterans' Housing Conditions and Participation in HUD's Programs
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-07-1012
entitled 'Rental Housing: Information on Low-Income Veterans' Housing
Conditions and Participation in HUD's Programs' which was released on
August 17, 2007.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Committees:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
August 2007:
Rental Housing:
Information on Low-Income Veterans' Housing Conditions and
Participation in HUD's Programs:
GAO-07-1012:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-07-1012, a report to congressional committees.
Why GAO Did This Study:
Veterans returning from service in Iraq and Afghanistan could increase
demand for affordable rental housing. Households with low incomes (80
percent or less of the area median income) generally are eligible to
receive rental assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development‘s (HUD) housing choice voucher, public housing, and project-
based programs. However, because rental assistance is not an
entitlement, not all who are eligible receive assistance.
In response to a congressional mandate, GAO assessed (1) the income
status and demographic and housing characteristics of veteran renter
households, (2) how HUD‘s rental assistance programs treat veteran
status (whether a person is a veteran or not) and whether they use a
veterans‘ preference, and (3) the extent to which HUD‘s rental
assistance programs served veterans in fiscal year 2005. Among other
things, GAO analyzed data from HUD, the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA), and the Bureau of the Census, surveyed selected public housing
agencies, and interviewed agency officials and veterans groups.
GAO makes no recommendations in this report. VA agreed with the
report‘s findings. HUD objected to the characterization in the report
regarding HUD‘s policies on veteran status and program eligibility and
subsidy amounts
What GAO Found:
In 2005, an estimated 2.3 million veteran renter households had low
incomes. The proportion of veteran renter households that were low
income varied by state but did not fall below 41 percent. Further, an
estimated 1.3 million, or about 56 percent of these low-income veteran
households, had housing affordability problems”that is, rental costs
exceeding 30 percent of household income. Compared with other
(nonveteran) renter households, however, veterans were somewhat less
likely to be low income or have housing affordability problems.
HUD‘s policies for its three major rental assistance programs generally
do not take veteran status into account when determining eligibility or
assistance levels, but eligible veterans can receive assistance. Also,
HUD generally does not distinguish between income that is specific to
veterans, such as VA-provided benefits, and other sources of income.
The majority of the 41 largest public housing agencies that administer
the housing choice voucher or public housing programs have no veterans‘
preference for admission. The 13 largest performance-based contract
administrators that oversee most properties under project-based
programs reported that owners generally did not adopt a veterans‘
preference.
In fiscal year 2005, an estimated 11 percent of all eligible low-income
veteran households (at least 250,000) received assistance, compared
with 19 percent of nonveteran households. Although the reasons for the
difference are unclear, factors such as differing levels of need for
affordable housing among veteran and other households could influence
the percentages.
Figure: Percentage of Low-Income Veteran Households With Housing
Affordibility Problems, by State, 2005.
[See PDF for image.]
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 American Community
Survey; Art Explosion (map).
[End of figure]
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1012].
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact David G. Wood at (202)
512-8678 or woodd@gao.gov
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1012].
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact David G. Wood at (202)
512-8678 or woodd@gao.gov
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
More Than Half of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households Had Housing
Affordability Problems:
HUD Rental Assistance Programs Do Not Take Veteran Status into Account
When Determining Eligibility or Subsidy Amounts:
Most Contacted Housing Agencies and Owners of Project-Based Properties
Did Not Offer a Veterans' Preference for Admission to HUD's Rental
Assistance Programs:
Veteran Households Were Less Likely to Receive HUD Rental Assistance
Than Other Low-Income Households:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Demographic and Housing Characteristics of Low-Income
Veteran Renters:
Appendix III: Information on HUD's Supportive Services Programs
Available to Veterans:
Appendix IV: HUD's Policies on Eligibility and Subsidy Amounts with
Respect to Veteran-Specific Income and Benefits:
Appendix V: Demographic and Housing Characteristics of HUD-Assisted
Low- Income Veteran Renters:
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development:
Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Veteran and Other Renter Households, by Income Category, 2005:
Table 2: Percentage of Renter Households That Were Elderly, by Income
Category, 2005:
Table 3: Percentage of Renter Households with a Disability, by Income
Category, 2005:
Table 4: Housing Affordability for Low-Income Renter Households, 2005:
Table 5: Number of Contacted PHAs That Used a Preference System in
Their Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher Programs:
Table 6: Estimated Number of Low-Income Veteran and Other Renter
Households, by HUD Assistance, 2005:
Table 7: Number of Low-Income Renter Households by Household
Characteristics, 2005:
Table 8: Number of Veteran Renter Households, by State, 2005:
Table 9: Number of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households with Moderate
or Severe Housing Affordability Problems, by State, 2005:
Table 10: Number of Low-Income Households with Housing Affordability
Problems for the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas, by Veteran Status,
2005:
Table 11: Description of HUD Supportive Services Programs Available to
Veterans:
Table 12: HUD's Treatment of Veteran Benefits in Determining Household
Income and Subsidy Amount:
Table 13: Number of HUD-Assisted Veteran Renter Households, by State,
2005:
Table 14: Number of HUD-Assisted, Elderly Veteran Renter Households, by
State, 2005:
Table 15: Number of HUD-Assisted, Disabled Veteran Renter Households by
State, 2005:
Figures:
Figure 1: Percentage of Veteran and Other Households Owning or Renting
Homes in 2005:
Figure 2: Number of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households, by State,
2005:
Figure 3: Percentage of Veteran Renter Households That Were Low-Income,
by State, 2005:
Figure 4: Percentage of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households with
Housing Affordability Problems, by State, 2005:
Figure 5: Number and Percentage of Low-Income Veteran Households
Assisted by the Voucher, Public Housing, and Project-Based Programs,
Fiscal Year 2005:
Abbreviations:
ACS: American Community Survey:
AMI: area median income:
BIRLS: Beneficiary Identification and Records Location Subsystem:
FSS: Family Self- Sufficiency:
GPD: Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem:
HOMEHOME: Investment Partnerships Program:
HOPWA: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS:
HUD: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development:
HUD- VASH: Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive
Housing:
IRS: Internal Revenue Service:
PBCA: performance-based contract administrator:
PHA: public housing agency:
PIC: Public and Indian Housing Information Center:
QHWRA: Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998:
ROSS: Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency:
TRACS: Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System:
VA: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs:
USDA: U.S. Department of Agriculture:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
August 17, 2007:
The Honorable Tim Johnson:
Chairman:
The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison:
Ranking Minority Member:
Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related
Agencies:
Committee on Appropriations United States Senate:
The Honorable Chet Edwards:
Chairman:
The Honorable Roger F. Wicker:
Ranking Minority Member:
Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related
Agencies:
Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives:
Disproportionately large numbers of military veterans have appeared
among the homeless population in recent years, raising concerns about
the incomes and housing conditions of veterans who rent, rather than
own, their homes. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA),
on any given night at least 194,000 veterans were homeless in fiscal
year 2005--about one-third of the adult homeless population--and many
veteran renters could be on the verge of homelessness if they have low
incomes or precarious living conditions in overcrowded or substandard
housing.[Footnote 1] The return of more veterans from service in Iraq
and Afghanistan--some with significant physical and psychological
challenges--could increase demand for affordable housing with
supportive services such as mental health and substance abuse
treatment. However, neither the VA nor other government agencies report
information specifically on the housing conditions or housing costs of
veterans who rent.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the primary
federal provider of rental housing assistance through its housing
choice voucher, public housing, and project-based programs. Vouchers,
which are annually renewable, enable about 2 million households to rent
units of their choice in the private market, while public housing and
project-based assistance is available to about 2.8 million households
in specifically designated units. These programs generally serve low-
income households--those with incomes that are 80 percent or less of
their local area median incomes (AMI). Assisted households generally
pay 30 percent of their monthly incomes, after certain adjustments, in
rent, and HUD pays the remainder. Third-party administrators manage the
programs on HUD's behalf--local public housing agencies (PHA) for the
voucher and public housing programs and individual private property
owners for the project-based programs. PHAs and property owners are
responsible for ensuring eligibility and for determining the amounts
that tenants contribute toward their rents. However, because the rental
assistance programs are not entitlement programs--the extent of
assistance is limited by the amount of appropriated funds--not all
renter households that are eligible receive assistance. In this report,
we refer to households that do not receive rental assistance as
"unassisted."
In 2005, an estimated 6 million unassisted low-income renter households
had what HUD termed "worst-case housing needs"--that is, they paid more
than half of their income in rent, lived in severely inadequate
housing, or both.[Footnote 2] Many PHAs and property owners have long
waiting lists of renters seeking subsidized housing. Within broad
program requirements, PHAs and property owners generally have the
discretion to use a system of "preferences" to give certain
populations--such as the elderly, veterans, or the homeless--priority
in receiving assistance as rental units or vouchers become available to
new program participants. HUD requires PHAs and property owners to
describe their preference policies in their administrative plans--
documents required for the voucher and public housing programs--or
their tenant selection plans, which are required for the project-based
programs. HUD also funds a limited number of supportive services
programs for which PHAs and property owners can apply that pay for
service coordinators, economic self-sufficiency initiatives for
tenants, and other activities.
The conference report accompanying the Fiscal Year 2006 Military
Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act mandated that
we conduct a study on housing assistance to low-income veterans. As
agreed with your Subcommittees, our study focuses on low-income
veterans who rent their homes. Specifically, this report discusses (1)
the income status and demographic and housing characteristics of
veteran renter households; (2) how HUD's rental assistance programs
treat veteran status (that is, whether a person is a veteran or not)
and veteran-specific benefits in determining eligibility and subsidy
amounts; (3) the extent to which PHAs and property owners participating
in HUD's rental assistance programs establish a veterans' preference in
their administrative and tenant selection plans; and (4) the extent to
which HUD's rental assistance programs served veteran households in
fiscal year 2005.
To determine the income status and demographic and housing
characteristics of veteran households, we utilized the Bureau of the
Census's (Census) 2005 American Community Survey (ACS), which
identified households' veteran status, income, and other demographic
characteristics, in conjunction with HUD's defined income categories--
low (80 percent of AMI or less), very low (50 percent of AMI or less),
and extremely low (30 percent of AMI or less). Using HUD's income
limits for calendar year 2005, we estimated, by geographic area, the
number of veteran households that were in each income
category.[Footnote 3] We also used information on veteran households in
ACS to describe certain demographic characteristics, and the cost and
quality of their housing. (Not included in the 2005 ACS survey universe
are individuals who live in group quarters--which include college
dormitories, correctional facilities, and certain types of nursing
facilities and hospitals--or homeless individuals.) Unless otherwise
noted, all reported numeric estimates derived from ACS are subject to
sampling errors of plus or minus 10 percent or less of the value of
those numeric estimates. To determine how HUD's rental assistance
programs treat households veteran status in determining eligibility and
subsidy amounts, we reviewed HUD's eligibility policies and regulations
on rental assistance programs and interviewed officials from HUD and
VA. To determine whether PHAs and property owners participating in
HUD's programs have established a veterans' preference for households,
we conducted interviews with officials from the 41 largest PHAs that
administer the public housing program (34 PHAs) and the voucher program
(40 PHAs), and from the 13 largest performance-based contract
administrators (PBCA) that oversee property management under project-
based rental assistance programs.[Footnote 4] The PHAs and PBCAs that
we interviewed were responsible for administering or overseeing more
than half of the roughly $28 billion in assistance provided through the
three programs in fiscal year 2005. However, information on preferences
is not statistically generalizable to the other PHAs and property
owners. Finally, to determine the extent to which HUD's rental
assistance programs served veteran households in fiscal year 2005, we
matched data from HUD on program participants with data from VA on
living veterans and used these matched data to estimate the percentage
of low-income veteran renter households that received HUD assistance.
For all of our research objectives, we consulted with officials from
various housing and veterans groups, including Harvard University's
Joint Center on Housing Studies, the National Low Income Housing
Coalition, the National Coalition of Homeless Veterans, the Corporation
for Supportive Housing, Vietnam Veterans of America, the American
Legion, and Volunteers of America.
Appendix I contains a more detailed description of our scope and
methodology. We conducted our work in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los
Angeles, and Washington, D.C., from March 2006 through July 2007 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Results in Brief:
In 2005, an estimated 2.3 million veteran renter households, or about
53 percent of all veteran renter households nationwide, were low income
(their household incomes were 80 percent or less of their areas' median
household incomes), and more than half of these low-income households
had problems affording their rent. The number of low-income veteran
renter households varied considerably by state, from a high of 236,000
in California (representing 10 percent of all low-income veteran
renters nationwide) to less than 6,000 in Wyoming. While the
percentages of renter households that were low income varied by state,
in no state did the proportion fall below 41 percent. In terms of
demographic characteristics, we found the following:
* A significant proportion of low-income veteran renter households
included a veteran who was elderly or had a disability.[Footnote 5]
Specifically, an estimated 816,000 (36 percent of these veteran
households) had at least one veteran who was elderly (that is, 62 years
of age or older); 887,000 (39 percent) had at least one veteran member
with a disability.
* An estimated 1.3 million, or about 56 percent of low-income veteran
renter households, had housing affordability problems--that is, their
rental costs exceeded 30 percent of their household incomes. The extent
of housing affordability problems varied significantly by state. For
example, Nevada had the highest percentage of low-income veteran
renters with affordability problems (about 70 percent), while North
Dakota had the lowest percentage (about 37 percent).
* Nationally, a small percentage (less than 3 percent) of low-income
veteran renters lived in overcrowded or inadequate housing.
Finally, in general, veteran renter households were less likely to be
low income, have affordability problems, or live in overcrowded or
inadequate housing than were other (nonveteran) households.
HUD's policies for its three major rental assistance programs generally
do not take veteran status into account in determining eligibility or
assistance levels, but veterans who meet income and other eligibility
requirements can receive assistance. HUD is not required to collect,
and does not collect, any information that identifies the veteran
status of assisted households. When determining income eligibility and
subsidy amounts, HUD generally does not distinguish between income
sources that are specific to veterans, such as VA-provided benefits,
and other sources of income; rather, HUD takes into account the type of
income, such as whether it is recurring or not. For example, when
calculating applicants' incomes, HUD excludes most types of VA-provided
benefits, such as payments for training and education or health care
services, but it includes veterans' pensions, disability payments, and
survivor benefits, which are recurring payments. Finally, although HUD
rental assistance programs generally do not target veterans, HUD
allocated about 1,800 vouchers in the early 1990s for placing formerly
homeless veterans with severe psychiatric or substance abuse disorders
into affordable rental housing. However, usage of these vouchers has
been declining--as of the end of fiscal year 2006, about 1,000 vouchers
remained in use.
The majority of the 41 largest PHAs we contacted have no veterans'
preference for admission to their public housing or voucher programs,
and all of the 13 largest PBCAs we contacted told us that owners of
project-based properties that they oversee generally do not have a
veterans' preference. Specifically, according to our interviews with 34
of the largest PHAs that administer public housing programs, 14 (about
41 percent) offered a veterans' preference in fiscal year 2006.
Similarly, 13 of the 40 largest PHAs (about 33 percent) that administer
the housing choice voucher program offered a veterans' preference.
Finally, officials from all of the 13 largest PBCAs told us that owners
of project-based properties that they oversee generally do not employ a
veterans' preference when selecting tenants.
Low-income veteran households were less likely to receive HUD rental
assistance than other low-income households (that is, nonveteran
households). Specifically, of all low-income veteran households, an
estimated 11 percent received HUD rental assistance in fiscal year
2005, whereas an estimated 19 percent of other low-income households
received assistance. Although the reasons for the difference are
unclear, based on our analyses and discussions with HUD officials,
various factors could influence the percentage of eligible veteran
households that receive HUD rental assistance--for example, different
levels of need for affordable housing among veteran and other
households and PHAs' and property owners' use of a veterans'
preference. In fiscal year 2005, at least 250,000 low-income veteran
households received rental assistance under HUD's programs--
representing about 6 percent of all households that received such
assistance. Finally, compared with other (nonveteran) assisted
households, veteran-assisted households were as likely to be elderly
but were more likely to have a disability.
We provided HUD and VA with a draft of this report for review and
comment. In its response, VA agreed with the findings that related to
VA and offered no other comments. In a letter from the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Public Housing and Voucher Programs, HUD disagreed with
our report's characterization that its policies for its three major
rental assistance programs generally do not take veteran status into
account when determining eligibility or assistance levels, and stated
that "HUD cannot mandate that a PHA establish any particular type of
preference" for the voucher program. Our report does not state that HUD
can mandate preferences for any of the three major rental assistance
programs, but rather acknowledges that the Quality Housing and Work
Responsibility Act of 1998 repealed federally mandated preferences and
provided individual PHAs and property owners with the authority to
establish preferences, including a veterans' preference. Moreover, our
report distinguishes between how veteran/nonveteran status affects
eligibility for HUD programs and whether or not a preference is
extended once eligibility has been established. In reviewing HUD's
regulations and consulting with agency officials on HUD's policies we
found no evidence that veteran status is a factor in determining
eligibility for HUD's programs, and HUD's comment letter provided no
evidence. Accordingly, we did not make any changes to the report.
Background:
According to Census data, in 2005 an estimated 21.9 million households,
or 20 percent of the 111.1 million households nationwide, were "veteran
households"--that is, they had at least one member who was a military
veteran. As figure 1 shows, most veteran households--about 80 percent-
-owned their own homes, a significantly higher percentage than was the
case for other (nonveteran) households.
Figure 1: Percentage of Veteran and Other Households Owning or Renting
Homes in 2005:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
[End of figure]
Census data also show that renter households were more likely to be low
income than were owner-occupied households. In 2005, an estimated 36.8
million households nationwide rented homes, including about 4.3 million
veteran households. Approximately 66 percent of renter households were
low income; in contrast, 32 percent of homeowners were low income. Many
of these households must rent because they lack sufficient income and
savings to purchase a home. Furthermore, studies by HUD and others have
noted the difficulties many renters face in finding a place with
affordable rents because growth in household incomes has not kept pace
with rising rents in many markets.
VA, through a variety of programs, provides federal assistance to
veterans who are homeless, and also provides homeownership assistance,
but does not provide rental assistance. One of the agency's largest
programs for homeless veterans is the Homeless Providers Grant and Per
Diem (GPD) program, which provides funding to nonprofit and public
agencies to help temporarily shelter veterans. GPD funding can be used
for purposes such as paying for the construction or renovation of
transitional housing and reimbursing local agencies for operating the
program. In fiscal year 2005, the GPD program spent about $67 million
and had about 8,000 beds that were available to homeless veterans. VA
also administers eight other programs for outreach and treatment of
homeless veterans.[Footnote 6] In addition to its homelessness
programs, VA provides a variety of programs, services, and benefits to
veterans and their families.[Footnote 7] Included among them are
pension payments, disability payments, health care services, training
and education allowances, and burial expenses. The VA assists veterans
in becoming homeowners through its Home Loan Guaranty program, which
offers mortgages with favorable terms, including no down payment,
limitations on closing costs, no private mortgage insurance, and easier
credit standards to qualify for a loan.
HUD provides rental housing assistance through three major programs--
housing choice voucher, public housing, and project-based. In fiscal
year 2005, these programs provided rental assistance to about 4.8
million households and paid about $28 billion in rental subsidies.
These three programs generally serve low-income households--that is,
households with incomes less than or equal to 80 percent of AMI. Most
of these programs have targets for households with extremely low
incomes--30 percent or less of AMI. HUD-assisted households generally
pay 30 percent of their monthly income, after certain adjustments,
toward their unit's rent.[Footnote 8] HUD pays the difference between
the household's contribution and the unit's rent (under the voucher and
project-based programs) and the difference between the PHAs' operating
costs and rental receipts for public housing.
The housing choice voucher program provides vouchers that eligible
families can use to rent houses or apartments in the private housing
market. Voucher holders are responsible for finding suitable housing,
which must meet HUD's housing quality standards. The subsidies in the
voucher program are connected to the household (that is, tenant-based),
so tenants can use the vouchers in new residences if they move. The
approximately 2,500 PHAs that administer the voucher program are
responsible for ensuring that tenants meet program eligibility
requirements and that tenant subsidies are calculated properly. PHAs
also are required to develop written policies and procedures to
administer the program consistently with HUD regulations.
The public housing program subsidizes the development, operation, and
modernization of government-owned properties and provides units for
eligible tenants in these properties. In contrast to the voucher
program, the subsidies in the public housing program are connected to
specific rental units (that is, project-based), so tenants receive
assistance only when they live in these units. Approximately 3,300 PHAs
manage the public housing program on behalf of HUD. PHAs are
responsible for ensuring tenant eligibility for the program, properly
calculating tenant subsidies, and ensuring that their policies and
procedures conform to HUD regulations.
Finally, through a variety of project-based programs, HUD provides rent
subsidies in the form of multiyear housing assistance payments to
private property owners and managers on behalf of eligible
tenants.[Footnote 9] Tenants may apply for admission to these
properties with project-based rental assistance contracts. About 22,000
property owners and managers currently participate in the programs and,
similar to PHAs, must ensure tenants meet eligibility requirements,
calculate subsidies correctly, and develop administrative policies and
procedures that are consistent with HUD regulations.[Footnote 10] For
most of these project-based properties, HUD contracts with PBCAs--
typically state and local housing agencies--to oversee property
management and process requests for payments from property owners. The
PBCAs are also responsible for conducting annual management and
occupancy reviews, which include reviewing property owners' tenant
selection plans.
HUD rental assistance programs are not entitlements, and as a result,
the amount of funding HUD requests and Congress provides annually
limits the number of households that these programs can assist.
Historically, funding for these programs has not been sufficient to
assist all eligible households. Because the demand for rental
assistance outstrips available resources, many PHAs and property owners
have waiting lists of applicants seeking rental assistance. PHAs and
property owners can use a system of preferences for giving certain
populations--such as the elderly, veterans, or the homeless--priority
in receiving assistance as units or vouchers become available.
In addition to rental assistance, HUD funds a limited number of
supportive services programs. The programs offer counseling, education
and job training, mental health services, transportation, and child
care, among other services. Generally, PHAs and property owners must
apply for funding under these programs. Supportive services not funded
by HUD can be made available through partnerships between individual
properties, local organizations, and other federal agency programs.
HUD administers other programs that help low-income households,
including eligible veteran households, obtain access to affordable
rental housing. Our review did not focus on these programs because they
make up a relatively small percentage of HUD's funding when compared
with the three major rental assistance programs. Further, they are not
solely rental assistance programs, but rather serve multiple purposes;
for example, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) provides
formula grants to states and localities to build, acquire, and
rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or homeownership. In addition,
other federal agencies administer programs that provide forms of rental
assistance to eligible populations, such as the Internal Revenue
Service's (IRS) Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program and U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Housing Service programs. The
tax credit program funds the development of rental units that are
restricted to low-income households for a number of years, while USDA's
programs (which are small relative to HUD's programs) fund the
development of low-income rental units or subsidize rents in rural
areas.
More Than Half of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households Had Housing
Affordability Problems:
Based on our analysis of ACS data, an estimated 2.3 million veteran
renter households had low incomes in 2005. The numbers of low-income
veteran renter households varied considerably by state, as did the
percentages of veteran renter households that were low income. In terms
of demographic characteristics, we found that a significant proportion
of low-income veteran renter households had a veteran member who was
elderly or had a disability.[Footnote 11] In addition, about 56 percent
of low-income veteran renter households had problems affording their
rents--that is, their housing costs exceeded 30 percent of household
income. Finally, a small percentage of low-income veteran renters lived
in overcrowded or inadequate housing.
More Than Half of Veteran Renter Households Had Low Incomes:
According to our analysis of ACS data, of the 4.3 million veteran
households that rented their homes, an estimated 2.3 million, or about
53 percent were low income in 2005. As shown in table 1, the largest
share of these 2.3 million households was concentrated in the highest
low-income category--that is, 50.1 to 80 percent of AMI--with somewhat
small shares in the two lower categories. The table also shows that
other renter households (that is, households without a veteran member)
were even more likely to be low income than veteran renter households.
Specifically, an estimated 22 million, or 68 percent, of the 32.5
million other renter households were low income. Further, the largest
share of the 22 million households was concentrated in the lowest
income category--that is, 30 percent or less of AMI.
Table 1: Veteran and Other Renter Households, by Income Category, 2005:
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): All low income (80% or less);
Veteran household: Number: 2,282,720;
Veteran household: Percentage: 53%;
Other household: Number: 22,012,930;
Other household: Percentage: 68%.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 50.1 to 80%;
Veteran household: Number: 966,865;
Veteran household: Percentage: 22;
Other household: Number: 6,774,065;
Other household: Percentage: 21.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 30.1 to 50%;
Veteran household: Number: 674,085;
Veteran household: Percentage: 16;
Other household: Number: 6,101,435;
Other household: Percentage: 19.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 30% or less;
Veteran household: Number: 641,770;
Veteran household: Percentage: 15;
Other household: Number: 9,137,430;
Other household: Percentage: 28.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): Not low income (greater than
80%);
Veteran household: Number: 2,023,755;
Veteran household: Percentage: 47;
Other household: Number: 10,452,230;
Other household: Percentage: 32.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): Total renter households;
Veteran household: Number: 4,306,475;
Veteran household: Percentage: 100%;
Other household: Number: 32,465,160;
Other household: Percentage: 100%.
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
[End of table]
The estimated numbers of low-income veteran renter households in 2005
varied greatly by state, as shown in figure 2. The estimated median
number of low-income veteran renters in any state was about 34,000.
California had significantly more low-income veteran renter households
than any other state--more than 236,000, or about 10 percent of all
such households nationwide--followed by Texas with about 142,000, and
New York with about 135,000. The states with the smallest number of low-
income veteran households were Vermont, Delaware, and Wyoming with less
than 6,000 each.[Footnote 12]
Figure 2: Number of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households, by State,
2005:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS; Art Explosion
(map).
Note: Twenty-two states had margins of error of more than 10 percent,
and two states and the District of Columbia had margins of error that
were 20 percent or more (see table 8 in app. II for the reported
margins of error).
[End of figure]
As shown in figure 3, the percentages of veteran renter households that
were low income in 2005 also varied considerably by state. Michigan had
the highest percentage--about 65 percent of its veteran renter
households were low income, while Virginia had the lowest--about 41
percent. Table 8 in appendix II contains more detailed information
about the number and percentages of low-income veteran renters in each
state and the District of Columbia.
Figure 3: Percentage of Veteran Renter Households That Were Low-Income,
by State, 2005:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS; Art Explosion
(map).
[End of figure]
More Than One-Third of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households Were
Elderly or Had a Disability:
Households with at least one veteran member who was elderly (that is,
62 years of age or older) or had a disability constituted a significant
share of all low-income veteran renter households in 2005.
Specifically, of the 2.3 million low-income veteran renter households,
an estimated 816,000 (36 percent) had a member who was elderly. As
shown in table 2, the incomes of these elderly veteran households
generally were distributed fairly evenly across the three low-income
categories.
In comparison, other (nonveteran) low-income households had a lower
percentage of elderly households. About 4 million (18 percent) of the
22 million other low-income renter households were elderly, with most
of their income concentrated in the lowest income category.
Table 2: Percentage of Renter Households That Were Elderly, by Income
Category, 2005:
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): All low income (80% or less);
Veteran household: Number: 816,475;
Veteran household: Percentage: 65%;
Other household: Number: 4,024,625;
Other household: Percentage: 82%.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 50.1 to 80%;
Veteran household: Number: 287,170;
Veteran household: Percentage: 23;
Other household: Number: 784,940;
Other household: Percentage: 16.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 30.1 to 50%;
Veteran household: Number: 279,880;
Veteran household: Percentage: 22;
Other household: Number: 1,197,810;
Other household: Percentage: 24.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 30% or less;
Veteran household: Number: 249,425;
Veteran household: Percentage: 20;
Other household: Number: 2,041,875;
Other household: Percentage: 41.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): Not low income (greater than
80%);
Veteran household: Number: 442,875;
Veteran household: Percentage: 35;
Other household: Number: 914,510;
Other household: Percentage: 19.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): Total renter households;
Veteran household: Number: 1,259,350; Veteran household: Percentage:
100%; [Empty]; Other household: Number: 4,939,135; Other household:
Percentage: 100% .
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
[End of table]
In 2005, an estimated 887,000, or 39 percent, of low-income veteran
renter households had at least one veteran member with a disability.
Similar to the elderly veteran renter households, the incomes of these
households generally were distributed evenly across the different low-
income categories (see table 3). In comparison, an estimated 6.8
million, or 31 percent, of other low-income households had a member
with a disability. In marked contrast to veteran renter households with
a disability, other such renters had household incomes that were
considerably more concentrated in the lowest income category.
Table 3: Percentage of Renter Households with a Disability, by Income
Category, 2005:
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): All low income (80% or less);
Veteran household: Number: 887,130;
Veteran household: Percentage: 69%;
Other household: Number: 6,838,515;
Other household: Percentage: 81%.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 50.1 to 80%;
Veteran household: Number: 280,340;
Veteran household: Percentage: 22;
Other household: Number: 1,410,350;
Other household: Percentage: 17.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 30.1 to 50%;
Veteran household: Number: 279,925;
Veteran household: Percentage: 22;
Other household: Number: 1,791,390;
Other household: Percentage: 21.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): 30% or less;
Veteran household: Number: 326,865;
Veteran household: Percentage: 25;
Other household: Number: 3,636,775;
Other household: Percentage: 43.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): Not low income (greater than
80%);
Veteran household: Number: 397,785;
Veteran household: Percentage: 31;
Other household: Number: 1,623,495;
Other household: Percentage: 19.
Income category (as a percentage of AMI): Total renter households;
Veteran household: Number: 1,284,915;
Veteran household: Percentage: 100%;
Other household: Number: 8,462,010;
Other household: Percentage: 100%.
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
[End of table]
In addition to the elderly and disability status of veteran households,
we also analyzed information on selected other demographic
characteristics--including race and ethnicity--of low-income veteran
renter households nationally and at the state level. We include these
results in appendix II.
More Than Half of Low-Income Veteran Renters Had Housing Affordability
Problems:
According to our analysis of ACS data, an estimated 1.3 million low-
income veteran households, or about 56 percent of the 2.3 million such
households, had rents that exceeded 30 percent of their household
income in 2005 (see table 4). These veteran renter households had what
HUD terms "moderate" or "severe" problems affording their
rent.[Footnote 13] Specifically, about 31 percent of low-income veteran
renter households had moderate affordability problems, and about 26
percent had severe affordability problems. The remainder either paid 30
percent or less of their household income in rent, reported zero
income, or did not pay cash rent. In comparison, a higher proportion of
other low-income renter households had moderate or severe housing
affordability problems. Specifically, of the 22 million other low-
income renter households, an estimated 13.9 million, or about 63
percent, had a housing affordability problem, with these households
somewhat evenly distributed between those with moderate and severe
affordability problems.
Table 4: Housing Affordability for Low-Income Renter Households, 2005:
Affordability category: Affordability problem;
Veteran household: Number: 1,284,540;
Veteran household: Percentage: 56%;
Other household: Number: 13,855,530;
Other household: Percentage: 63%.
Affordability category: Moderate;
Veteran household: Number: 699,470;
Veteran household: Percentage: 31;
Other household: Number: 6,260,495;
Other household: Percentage: 28.
Affordability category: Severe;
Veteran household: Number: 585,070;
Veteran household: Percentage: 26;
Other household: Number: 7,595,035;
Other household: Percentage: 35.
Affordability category: No affordability problem;
Veteran household: Number: 763,640;
Veteran household: Percentage: 33;
Other household: Number: 6,264,690;
Other household: Percentage: 28.
Affordability category: Zero income/no cash rent;
Veteran household: Number: 234,535;
Veteran household: Percentage: 10;
Other household: Number: 1,892,710;
Other household: Percentage: 9.
Affordability category: Total;
Veteran household: Number: 2,282,720;
Veteran household: Percentage: 100%;
Other household: Number: 22,012,930;
Other household: Percentage: 100%.
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding.
[End of table]
The extent of housing affordability problems among low-income veteran
renter households varied significantly by state in 2005 (see fig. 4).
The median percentage of low-income veteran renters with affordability
problems nationwide was 54 percent. California and Nevada had the
highest proportions of affordability problems among low-income veteran
renter households--about 68 and 70 percent, respectively. North Dakota
and Nebraska had the smallest--about 37 and 41 percent, respectively.
Table 9 in appendix II contains detailed information on the percentage
of low-income veterans with affordability problems by state.
Figure 4: Percentage of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households with
Housing Affordability Problems, by State, 2005:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS; Art Explosion
(map).
Note: Three states and the District of Columbia had margins of error of
more than 10 percentage points (see table 9 in app. II for more
detail).
[End of figure]
Small Percentage of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households Lived in
Inadequate Housing:
A relatively small percentage of veteran households lived in
overcrowded or substandard housing in 2005. Specifically, an estimated
73,000, or 3 percent, of low-income veteran renter households lived in
overcrowded housing--housing with more than one person per room--and
less than 18,000, or about 1 percent, lived in severely overcrowded
housing--housing with more than one and a half persons per
room.[Footnote 14] In contrast, an estimated 1.5 million, or 7 percent,
of other low-income renter households lived in overcrowded housing, and
about 423,000, or 2 percent, lived in severely overcrowded housing.
Finally, ACS data indicate that a very small share of low-income
veteran renters lived in inadequate housing. ACS provides very limited
information about the quality of the housing unit; the survey
classifies a unit as inadequate if it lacks complete plumbing or
kitchen facilities, or both.[Footnote 15] In 2005, an estimated 53,000,
or 2 percent, of low-income veteran renter households lived in
inadequate housing. In comparison, an estimated 334,000, or 2 percent,
of other households lived in inadequate housing.
HUD Rental Assistance Programs Do Not Take Veteran Status into Account
When Determining Eligibility or Subsidy Amounts:
HUD's rental assistance programs do not take veteran status into
account when determining eligibility or calculating subsidy amounts,
and HUD does not collect any information identifying whether assisted
households have members who are veterans. Veterans can participate in
these programs if they meet eligibility requirements. Further, HUD
policies generally do not distinguish between income sources that are
specific to veterans, such as VA-provided benefits, and other sources
of income. Instead, HUD takes into account the type of income, such as
whether it is recurring or not. When calculating applicants' incomes,
we found that HUD excludes most types of income and benefits that
veterans may receive from VA, with the exception of recurring income,
such as veterans' pension, disability payments, and survivor benefits.
Although HUD's major programs do not take veteran status into account
for determining eligibility and subsidy amount, HUD allocated almost
1,800 vouchers that were specifically targeted to formerly homeless
veterans in the early 1990s, but the number of vouchers in use has been
declining.
HUD's Rental Assistance Programs Are Not Required to Take Veteran
Status into Account:
HUD's major rental assistance programs are not required to take a
household's veteran status into account when determining eligibility
and calculating subsidy amounts. Consequently, HUD does not collect any
information that identifies the veteran status of assisted households.
As with other households, veterans can benefit from HUD rental
assistance provided that they meet all of the programs' income and
other eligibility criteria. For example, assisted households must meet
U.S. citizenship requirements and, for some of the rental assistance
programs, HUD's criteria for an elderly household or a household with a
disability.
In addition to rental assistance, HUD makes available limited
supportive services to some assisted households, typically through
separate programs, but like rental assistance, none of these supportive
services programs take veteran status into account when determining
eligibility. An example is HUD's Multifamily Housing Service
Coordinator grant program, which pays for coordinators to assist
residents (at properties designated for the elderly and persons with
disabilities) in obtaining supportive services from community agencies.
(See table 11 in app. III for a description of other programs through
which HUD makes supportive services available.) While the programs
disregard veteran status, they may provide services to veterans who
receive HUD rental assistance. HUD does not collect information
identifying veteran households that its supportive services programs
serve, but agency officials stated that HUD's supportive services
programs likely assist a small number of veterans because the programs
serve a relatively small percentage of all assisted households.
HUD Generally Does Not Distinguish Between Income Sources That Are
Veteran-Specific and Other Types of Income Sources:
When determining income eligibility and subsidy amounts, HUD generally
does not distinguish between income sources that are specific to
veterans, such as VA-provided benefits, and other types of income. HUD
policies define household income as the anticipated gross annual income
of the household, which includes income from all sources received by
the family head, spouse, and each additional family member who is 18
years of age or older. Specifically, annual income includes, but is not
limited to, wages and salaries, periodic amounts from pensions or death
benefits, and unemployment and disability compensation.[Footnote 16]
HUD policies identify 39 separate income sources and benefits that are
excluded when determining eligibility and subsidy amounts. These
exclusions relate to income that is nonrecurring or sporadic in nature,
health care benefits, student financial aid, and assistance from
certain employment training and economic self-sufficiency
programs.[Footnote 17]
We found that, based on HUD's policies on income exclusions, most types
of income and benefits that veteran households receive from VA would be
excluded when determining eligibility for HUD's programs and subsidy
amounts. (See table 12 in app. IV for a detailed listing of these
benefits). Many of the excluded benefits relate to payments that
veteran households receive under certain economic self-sufficiency
programs or nonrecurring payments such as insurance claims. Of the
benefits included, most are associated with recurring or regular
sources of income, such as disability compensation, pensions, and
survivor death benefits.
Of the 39 exclusions, we found that two income exclusions specifically
applied to certain veteran households but, according to HUD, these
exclusions are rarely used. These income exclusions are (1) payments
made to Vietnam War-era veterans from the Agent Orange Settlement Fund
and (2) payments to children of Vietnam War-era veterans who suffer
from spina bifida. The two exclusions are identified in federal
statutes that are separate from those authorizing the three major
rental assistance programs.[Footnote 18]
HUD Allocated a Limited Number of Vouchers Targeted to Certain Veterans
Starting in 1992, but the Number of Vouchers in Use Has Been Declining:
Under the Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive
Housing program (HUD-VASH), HUD provides rental assistance vouchers
specifically to veterans, but the number of veterans served is
extremely small and has been declining in recent years. Established in
1992, HUD-VASH is jointly funded by HUD and VA and offers formerly
homeless veterans an opportunity to obtain permanent housing, as well
as ongoing case management and supportive services. HUD allocated these
special vouchers to selected PHAs that had applied for funding, and VA
was responsible for identifying participants based on specific
eligibility criteria, including the veteran's need for treatment of a
mental illness or substance abuse disorder.[Footnote 19] After
selecting eligible veterans, VA and the PHA worked together to help the
veterans use the vouchers to rent suitable housing, and VA provided
ongoing case management, health, and other supportive services.
Under the HUD-VASH initiative, HUD allocated 1,753 vouchers from fiscal
years 1992 through 1994. HUD funded these vouchers for 5 years and, if
a veteran left the program during this period, the PHA had to reissue
the voucher to another eligible veteran.[Footnote 20] VA officials
stated that, after the 5-year period ended, PHAs had the option of
continuing to use their allocation of vouchers for HUD-VASH, or could
discontinue participation whenever a veteran left the program (that is,
the PHA would not provide the voucher to another eligible veteran upon
turnover). According to VA and HUD officials, after the 5-year period
ended, many PHAs decided not to continue in HUD-VASH after assisted
veterans left the program; instead, PHAs exercised the option of
providing these vouchers to other households under the housing choice
voucher program.[Footnote 21] As a result, the number of veterans that
receive HUD-VASH vouchers has declined. Based on VA data, about 1,000
veterans were in the program as of the end of fiscal year 2006, and
this number is likely to decline. Specifically, VA officials estimated
that the number of veterans served could drop to 400 because PHAs
responsible for more than 600 vouchers have decided not to continue
providing these vouchers to other veterans as existing participants
leave the program.
Congress permanently authorized HUD-VASH as part of the Homeless
Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act of 2001.[Footnote 22] Under the
act, Congress also authorized HUD to allocate 500 vouchers each fiscal
year from 2003 through 2006--a total of 2,000 additional vouchers. In
December 2006, Congress extended this authorization through fiscal year
2011--allocating a total of 2,500 vouchers or 500 each year. However,
HUD has not requested, and Congress has not appropriated, funds for any
of the vouchers authorized from fiscal years 2003 through
2007.[Footnote 23]
Most Contacted Housing Agencies and Owners of Project-Based Properties
Did Not Offer a Veterans' Preference for Admission to HUD's Rental
Assistance Programs:
Less than half of the 41 largest PHAs we contacted employed a veterans'
preference for admission to their public housing or voucher programs,
while the 13 largest PBCAs we contacted reported that owners of project-
based properties that they oversee generally did not use a veterans'
preference. HUD allows, but does not require, PHAs and property owners
to establish preferences to better direct resources to families with
the greatest housing needs in their area. HUD does not aggregate
information on the extent to which PHAs and property owners use
preferences. Our review showed that 29 of the 34 largest PHAs that
administered public housing programs in fiscal year 2006 offered
preferences and, of these, 14 offered a veterans' preference.
Similarly, 34 of the 40 largest PHAs that administered the housing
choice voucher program in fiscal year 2006 offered preferences and, of
these, 13 offered a veterans' preference. Finally, officials from the
13 largest PBCAs told us that, in their experience, owners of project-
based properties that they oversee generally did not employ a veterans'
preference when selecting tenants.
Public Housing Agencies and Property Owners May Establish Preferences
to Meet Local Needs but Are Not Required to Do So:
Currently, HUD's policies give PHAs and owners of project-based
properties the discretion to establish preferences for certain groups
when selecting households for housing assistance. Preferences affect
only the order of applicants on a waiting list for assistance; they do
not determine eligibility for housing assistance. Before 1998, federal
law required PHAs and property owners to offer a preference to eligible
applicants to their subsidized housing programs who (1) had been
involuntarily displaced,[Footnote 24] (2) were living in substandard
housing,[Footnote 25] or (3) were paying more than half their income
for rent. PHAs were required by law to allocate at least 50 percent of
their public housing units and 90 percent of their housing choice
vouchers to applicants who met these criteria. Similarly, project-based
owners had to allocate 70 percent of their units to newly admitted
households that met these criteria. The Quality Housing and Work
Responsibility Act of 1998 (QHWRA) gave more flexibility to PHAs and
project-based property owners to administer their programs, in part by
eliminating the mandated housing preferences.[Footnote 26] Although it
gave PHAs and owners more flexibility, QHWRA required that PHAs and
owners target assistance to extremely low-income households.[Footnote
27]
Under QHWRA, PHAs and owners of project-based properties may, but are
not required to, establish preferences to better direct resources to
those with the greatest housing needs in their areas. PHAs can select
applicants on the basis of local preferences provided that their
process is consistent with their administrative plan.[Footnote 28] HUD
policy requires PHAs to specify their preferences in their
administrative plans, and HUD reviews these preferences to ensure that
they conform to nondiscrimination and equal employment opportunity
requirements. Similarly, HUD policy allows owners of project-based
properties to establish preferences as long as the preferences are
specified in their written tenant selection plans.[Footnote 29]
While HUD requires PHAs and property owners to disclose their
preferences in their administrative or tenant selection plans, HUD
officials said the department does not compile or systematically track
this information because PHAs and property owners are not required to
have preferences. However, HUD may examine the use of preferences as
part of specific studies or reports. For example, HUD discussed the use
of preferences by PHAs in its November 2000 report on the use of
discretionary authority in the housing choice voucher program. HUD
reported that about 71 percent of the 1,684 PHAs that were reviewed
used admission preferences for the housing choice voucher
program.[Footnote 30] Further, the study also found that PHAs offered
need-based preferences, as well as other local preferences, including
those for households achieving self-sufficiency, but the report did not
discuss whether the PHAs used a veterans' preference.
While HUD's policies give PHAs the discretion to establish preferences
for certain groups when selecting households (including those with
veterans) for housing assistance, recent proposed legislation would
develop and expand permanent housing opportunities for very low-income
veterans.[Footnote 31] Specifically, legislation introduced in the
Senate requires that, among other things, PHAs and states and
localities include veterans as a special needs population in their PHA
plans and comprehensive housing affordability strategies.
Although Most Contacted PHAs Offered Preferences for Admission to
Subsidized Housing, Less Than Half Offered a Veterans' Preference:
Most of the 41 PHAs we contacted used a preference system for admission
to their public housing and housing choice voucher programs, but less
than half offered a veterans' preference. As shown in table 5, of the
34 largest PHAs that administered the public housing program, 29
established preferences for admission to the program and 14 used a
veterans' preference. Similarly, of the 40 PHAs that administered the
housing choice voucher program, 34 used admission preferences, and 13
employed a preference for veterans. According to PHA officials, the
most common preferences used for both programs were for working
families, individuals who were unable to work because of age or
disability, and individuals who had been involuntarily displaced or
were homeless. Of course, veterans could benefit from these admission
preferences if they met the criteria.
Table 5: Number of Contacted PHAs That Used a Preference System in
Their Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher Programs:
PHAs' use of preferences: PHAs with a preference system;
Public housing: 29;
Vouchers: 34.
PHAs' use of preferences: With a veterans' preference;
Public housing: 14;
Vouchers: 13.
PHAs' use of preferences: Without a veterans' preference;
Public housing: 15;
Vouchers: 21.
PHAs' use of preferences: PHAs with no preference system;
Public housing: 5;
Vouchers: 6.
PHAs' use of preferences: Total PHAs;
Public housing: 34;
Vouchers: 40.
Source: GAO.
Note: Of the 41 PHAs we contacted or visited, 7 did not administer a
public housing program, and 1 did not administer a voucher program.
[End of table]
Some of the PHAs we contacted offered a veterans' preference because
their states required them to do so. Other PHA officials told us they
offered a veterans' preference because they believed it was important
to serve the needs of low-income veterans since they had done so much
for the well-being of others. PHAs that we contacted that did not offer
a veterans' preference gave various reasons for their decisions. Some
officials told us that the PHA did not need a veterans' preference
because veteran applicants generally qualified under other preference
categories, such as elderly or disabled. One PHA official we contacted
said a veterans' preference was not needed because of the relatively
small number of veterans in the community.
Because PHAs can employ multiple preferences, many of the PHAs that
have a preference system weight or rank the preferences they use--that
is, they give greater weight to an applicant who falls within a
particular category--to determine position on the waiting list. Almost
two-thirds of the PHAs we contacted that administer a preference system
for their public housing programs weight or rank preferences.
Nevertheless, only four of these weighted systems allow for veterans to
receive priority over other populations who received other preferences.
Similarly, a little more than half of the PHAs who use preferences for
their housing choice voucher programs weighted or ranked preferences.
But only three of these PHAs gave priority to veterans over other
populations that also were eligible to receive a preference. The
remaining PHAs that have a preference system for their public housing
or housing choice voucher programs told us that they either assigned
equal weight to the preferences they offered, or used date and time or
a lottery system to determine the order in which they selected
applicants from waiting lists.
In a 2004 examination of PHAs' waiting lists, the National Low Income
Housing Coalition found that more than three-quarters of the agencies
that it reviewed used preferences for specific categories of applicants
to order waiting lists for their public housing and housing choice
voucher programs.[Footnote 32] In addition, the study found that less
than one-quarter of the agencies used a veterans' preference to
determine the order of their waiting lists. Specifically, a little less
than 25 percent of the PHAs that administered a public housing program
had a veterans' preference, while 20 percent of the PHAs that ran
housing choice voucher programs used such a preference. Furthermore,
the study found that PHAs most commonly gave preferences to applicants
who were employed, involuntarily displaced from previous housing,
victims of domestic violence, or residents of the PHA's jurisdiction.
PBCAs Said That Owners of Project-Based Properties Generally Did Not
Use a Veterans' Preference When Selecting Tenants:
According to all of the PBCAs we contacted, owners of project-based
properties that they oversee generally did not employ a veterans'
preference when selecting tenants. Ten of the 13 largest PBCAs told us,
based on their review of property owners' tenant selection plans, that
owners of project-based properties generally did not employ preferences
for any specific population.[Footnote 33] Officials from the remaining
three PBCAs said they were aware of some property owners offering
preferences to individuals who had been involuntarily displaced,
working families, or those unable to work because of age or disability.
However, all the PBCAs we contacted either said that property owners
did not use preferences or agreed that the use of preferences,
including a veterans' preference, among owners of properties with
project-based assistance was limited. HUD officials to whom we spoke
also stated, based on their experience with tenant selection plans,
that the use of preferences at project-based properties likely was
infrequent.
Although most PBCAs stated that property owners did not generally
employ preferences, the use of such preferences can vary significantly
even within one PBCA's portfolio of properties. For example, a PBCA
official said that the demand for subsidized housing can influence
whether owners use preferences. Properties in communities with a high
demand for subsidized housing may need to establish preferences to
manage waiting lists, and those in communities with low demand may not
need to use preferences.
Veteran Households Were Less Likely to Receive HUD Rental Assistance
Than Other Low-Income Households:
Our analysis of ACS, HUD, and VA data shows that, in 2005, low-income
veteran renter households were less likely to receive rental assistance
than other low-income households. An estimated 11 percent of all low-
income veteran renter households received HUD rental assistance,
compared with 19 percent of other low-income households. Although the
reasons for this difference are unclear, various factors--such as
different levels of need for affordable housing among veteran and other
households--could contribute to the disparity. In 2005, at least
250,000 low-income veteran households received rental assistance under
HUD's programs--representing about 6 percent of all households that
received such assistance. The demographic characteristics of these
veteran-assisted households differed somewhat from those of other
(nonveteran) assisted households; for example, veteran-assisted
households were more likely to have a disability compared with other
assisted households.
Eleven Percent of All Low-Income Veteran Households Received HUD Rental
Assistance Compared with 19 Percent of Other Low-Income Households:
Low-income veteran renter households were less likely to receive HUD
rental assistance than other households. As shown in table 6, of the
total 2.3 million veteran renter households with low incomes, at least
250,000 (or 11 percent) received HUD assistance. In comparison, of the
22 million other renter households with low incomes, 4.1 million (about
19 percent) received HUD assistance.[Footnote 34] (As noted previously,
although HUD is the largest provider of federal rental housing
assistance to low-income households, it is not the sole source of such
assistance. Thus, these percentages likely understate the actual share
of all eligible veteran renter households that receive federal rental
assistance.)
Table 6: Estimated Number of Low-Income Veteran and Other Renter
Households, by HUD Assistance, 2005:
Households in thousands.
HUD assisted;
Veteran household: Number: 254;
Veteran household: Percentage: 11%;
Other household: Number: 4,147;
Other household: Percentage: 19%.
Unassisted;
Veteran household: Number: 1,794;
Veteran household: Percentage: 78;
Other household: Number: 15,933;
Other household: Percentage: 73.
With an affordability problem;
Veteran household: Number: 1,285;
Veteran household: Percentage: 56;
Other household: Number: 13,856;
Other household: Percentage: 63.
Without an affordability problem[A];
Veteran household: Number: 509;
Veteran household: Percentage: 22;
Other household: Number: 2,117;
Other household: Percentage: 10.
Other[B];
Veteran household: Number: 235;
Veteran household: Percentage: 10;
Other household: Number: 1,893;
Other household: Percentage: 9.
Total[C];
Veteran household: Number: 2,283;
Veteran household: Percentage: 100%;
Other household: Number: 22,013;
Other household: Percentage: 100%.
Sources: GAO analysis of VA's Beneficiary Identification and Records
Location Subsystem, HUD's Public Housing Information Center and Tenant
Rental Assistance Certification System, and sample survey data from
2005 ACS.
[A] ACS does not identify households that receive federal rental
assistance. Therefore, to determine the number of unassisted low-income
households without an affordability problem, we took the difference
between the number of HUD-assisted households derived from HUD data
systems and ACS' reported number of low-income renter households
without an affordability problem. We assumed that HUD-assisted
households were included in ACS data among those households that did
not have an affordability problem.
[B] "Other" includes households that reported zero income or paid no
cash rent.
[C] Household counts and percentages may not add due to rounding.
[End of table]
The reasons why other households were nearly twice as likely as veteran
households to receive HUD assistance are unclear. But, based on our
analyses and discussions with agency officials, some potential
explanations include (1) differences in the extent of housing needs
between veteran and other households, (2) infrequent use of a veterans'
preference by PHAs and property owners, and (3) statutory requirements
for targeting extremely low-income households. First, as discussed
earlier in this report, although a significant proportion of low-income
veteran households face affordability problems, an even larger
proportion of other (nonveteran) households face more severe
affordability problems. Thus, the level of veteran demand for rental
assistance may be lower than that of nonveteran households. Second, and
again as discussed earlier in this report, HUD rental assistance
programs do not take veteran status into account when determining
eligibility, and most PHAs and property owners do not offer a veterans'
preference. As a result, these policy decisions likely focus resources
on other types of low-income households with housing needs. Third,
although low-income households generally are eligible to receive rental
assistance from HUD's three programs, statute requires that a certain
percentage of new program participants must be extremely low income.
These targeting requirements may lead to a higher share of HUD rental
assistance going to nonveteran households because veteran households
generally are less likely to fall within the extremely low-income
category.
According to HUD, other federal rental assistance programs (such as
IRS's Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, HUD's HOME, and USDA's rental
assistance programs) also can provide assistance to veterans. Thus, the
share of veterans receiving HUD rental assistance does not reflect the
share of veterans that receive some other form of federal rental
assistance. Furthermore, according to HUD, veterans may be more likely
to receive rental assistance from some of these other programs, in part
because these other programs do not target extremely low-income
households as do HUD's voucher, public housing, and project-based
programs. However, data are not available to determine the extent to
which veterans may be benefiting from other forms of federal rental
assistance.
An Estimated 6 Percent of All HUD-Assisted Households Were Veteran
Households:
In fiscal year 2005, HUD's rental assistance programs reached an
estimated 250,000 low-income veteran households, which constituted
approximately 6 percent of all HUD-assisted households. The housing
choice voucher program served the largest number of veteran households,
followed by the project-based program, and the public housing program
(see fig. 5). However, a slightly higher proportion of veteran
households participated in the public housing program (6.9 percent)
than participated in the voucher (5.7 percent) and project-based (5.2
percent) programs.
Figure 5: Number and Percentage of Low-Income Veteran Households
Assisted by the Voucher, Public Housing, and Project-Based Programs,
Fiscal Year 2005:
[See PDF for image]
Sources: GAO analysis of VA's Beneficiary Identification and Records
Location Subsystem and HUD's Public Housing Information Center ans
Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System.
[End of figure]
Compared with Other Households, Veterans Who Received HUD Assistance
Were as Likely to Be Elderly but More Likely to Have a Disability:
We found some similarities in the demographic characteristics of
veterans and other assisted households we analyzed. For example,
compared with other assisted households, HUD-assisted veteran
households were as likely to be elderly. Specifically, in fiscal year
2005, about 75,000, or 30 percent, of assisted veteran households were
elderly, and about 1.3 million, or 31 percent, of other assisted
households were elderly. About 40,000, or 54 percent, of these elderly
veteran households received assistance through project-based programs.
Public housing provided rental assistance to about 20,000 elderly
veteran households and vouchers to about 15,000.
HUD-assisted veteran households were more likely to have a disability.
In fiscal year 2005, HUD provided assistance to about 88,000 veteran
households with a disability, or about 34 percent of assisted veteran
households. In comparison, 1.2 million or 28 percent of other assisted
households had a disability. Among veteran households with a
disability, about 41,000 (or 46 percent) received assistance from
vouchers. Public housing and project-based programs each provided
rental assistance to less than one-third of these households with a
disability (about 24,000 and 23,000, respectively). Appendix V contains
more detailed information about the number and percentages of HUD-
assisted veteran households in each state and the District of Columbia.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We provided VA and HUD with a draft of this report for review and
comment. In an e-mail from its Office of Congressional and Legislative
Affairs, VA agreed with the findings that related to VA and offered no
other comments. HUD provided comments in a letter from the Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Public Housing and Voucher Programs, Office of
Public and Indian Housing; this letter is reprinted in appendix VI.
The Assistant Secretary's letter states that "HUD objects to the
characterization that policies for its three major rental assistance
programs generally do not take veteran status into account when
determining eligibility or assistance levels[,]" and notes that "HUD
cannot mandate that a PHA establish any particular type of preference"
for their voucher program. Our report does not state that HUD can
mandate preferences for any of the three major rental assistance
programs but rather acknowledges that the Quality Housing and Work
Responsibility Act of 1998 repealed federally mandated preferences and
provided individual PHAs and property owners with the authority to
establish preferences, including a veterans' preference. Furthermore,
how veteran/nonveteran status affects eligibility for HUD programs is
distinct from whether or not a preference is extended once eligibility
has been established. As our report states, our reporting objectives
addressed both of these issues: (1) how HUD's rental assistance
programs treat veteran status (that is, whether a person is a veteran
or not) and veteran-specific benefits in determining eligibility and
subsidy amounts and (2) the extent to which PHAs and property owners
participating in HUD's rental assistance programs establish a veterans'
preference in their administrative and tenant selection plans. In our
review of program eligibility policies and regulations and interviews
with agency officials, we found no evidence that veteran status is a
factor in determining eligibility for HUD's programs, and HUD's comment
letter did not provide any evidence. Accordingly, we did not change our
report in this regard.
Our report states that, in determining eligibility for its programs,
HUD generally does not distinguish between income that is specific to
veterans and other sources of income. In its comments, HUD stated that
the department's policies exclude specific types of benefits that some
veterans may receive, such as health care benefits and income from job
training programs. Our report acknowledges that certain types of
veteran-specific income sources are considered as income for
determining eligibility and subsidy amounts, but notes that it is the
type of income that matters--such as whether or not it is recurring--
not the source. Our report specifically states that "when calculating
applicants' incomes, HUD excludes most VA-provided benefits, such as
payments for training and education or health care services, but
includes veterans' pensions, disability payments, and survivor
benefits, which are recurring payments." Accordingly, we did not change
our report in response to HUD's comment.
HUD also commented on our methodology for estimating the extent of
veterans being served in HUD's programs. Specifically, HUD noted that
since information for all veterans in VA's database may not be
complete, our estimate of 250,000 veterans assisted by HUD's programs
in 2005 would be affected. As our report states, we matched data from
HUD on program participants with data from VA on living veterans using
unique identifying information and used these matched data to estimate
the percentage of low-income veteran renter households that receive HUD
rental assistance. Our report notes that this could be an underestimate
of the actual number of veteran households in the programs because of
incomplete or erroneous data in either VA's or HUD's databases. In
cases where we had incomplete information, such as missing Social
Security numbers, we attempted alternate ways of identifying HUD-
assisted veteran households, including matching records using both
names and date of birth only. We continue to believe that our estimate
is a reasonable measure of the extent to which HUD-assisted households
are veteran households. However, in response to HUD's comment, we
changed our report to say "at least 250,000" in order to acknowledge
the possible undercount.
We are sending copies of this report to interested Members of Congress,
the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs. We also will make copies available to others upon
request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge on the
GAO Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
Please contact me at (202) 512-8678 or woodd@gao.gov if you or your
staff has any questions about this report. Contact points for our
Office of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on
the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are
listed in appendix VII.
Signed by:
David G. Wood:
Director, Financial Markets and:
Community Investment:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) housing
assistance programs in our scope include the three major rental
assistance programs--housing choice voucher (voucher), public housing,
and project-based programs (including the project-based Section 8,
Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly, and Section 811
Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities programs).
To determine the income status and demographic and housing
characteristics of veteran households, we analyzed data from the U.S.
Bureau of the Census's (Census) 2005 American Community Survey (ACS),
which identified households' veteran status, income, and other
demographic characteristics, in conjunction with HUD's defined income
categories: low (80 percent or less of area median income or AMI), very
low (50 percent or less of AMI), and extremely low (30 percent or less
of AMI).
ACS is an annual survey conducted by Census to obtain current
information about the demographic, socioeconomic, and housing
characteristics of all U.S. communities nationwide. ACS is scheduled to
replace the traditional long-form survey in the decennial census,
beginning in 2010. As of January 2005, ACS collected information for
3,141 counties, American Indian reservations, Alaska Native tribal
areas, and Hawaiian homelands in the United States.
Using HUD's income limits for fiscal year 2005, we estimated, by
geographic area, the number of veteran households that were in each
income category.[Footnote 35] We also used information on veteran
households in ACS to describe their demographics, as well as the cost
and quality of their housing. Specifically, we obtained information on
the household's tenure (renter-or owner-occupied), disability status,
elderly status, race and ethnicity, housing affordability categories
(for example, households that paid 30 percent or less, 30.1 to 50
percent, and more than 50 percent of household income in rent), extent
of overcrowding, and indicators of housing quality. Census prepared
tabulations of these results based on our specifications.
ACS is the largest household survey in the United States, with an
annual sample size of about 3 million addresses. The ACS survey uses
probability sampling, which helps ensure the integrity of sample survey
results and that they are representative. Because a survey produces
estimates of the whole population using only a portion of the
population, all survey estimates contain sampling errors. This means
that the estimates derived from the sample would be different if the
survey had selected another sample. Since each sample could have
provided different estimates, we express our confidence in the
precision of this sample's results as 90 percent confidence
intervals.[Footnote 36] This is the interval that would contain the
actual population value for 90 percent of the samples that could have
been drawn. As a result, we are 90 percent confident that each of the
confidence intervals will include the true values in the study
population. In this report, instead of providing the upper and lower
confidence bounds, we provide margin of error, which is the difference
between an estimate and its upper or lower confidence bound. We express
margin of error as a percentage (for example, plus or minus 7 percent).
The sample for the 2005 ACS does not contain information on all
veterans in the United States. Specifically, the sample design does not
include individuals who live in group quarters--which include college
dormitories, correctional facilities, and certain types of nursing
facilities and hospitals--or homeless individuals. As a result, ACS
likely underestimates the number of veterans to the extent that
veterans live in group quarters or are homeless.
We assessed the reliability of the data we received from Census by
reviewing relevant documentation, interviewing knowledgeable officials,
performing electronic testing of the data, and replicating published
tables. In addition, we reviewed Census' quality review process to
ensure the completeness and accuracy of the tabulation that Census
prepared at our request. We determined that the data are reliable for
the purposes of this report.
To determine whether HUD's rental assistance programs take veteran
status into account when determining eligibility and subsidy amount, we
reviewed HUD's policies and regulations for the voucher, public
housing, and project-based programs. To assess how these programs treat
veteran-specific income and benefits, we reviewed HUD's policies and
regulations that define annual income, which is used to determine
eligibility and calculate subsidy amounts. We also interviewed
officials from HUD and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
To determine whether public housing agencies (PHA) and property owners
participating in HUD's programs have established a veterans'
preference, we interviewed officials from the 41 largest PHAs that
administer the public housing program (34 PHAs) and the voucher program
(41 PHAs) and the 13 largest performance-based contract administrators
(PBCA) that oversee property management under the project-based rental
assistance programs.[Footnote 37] Specifically, the PHAs and PBCAs that
we interviewed were responsible for administering or overseeing more
than half of the dollar assistance provided through each of the three
programs in fiscal year 2005. However, the information on preferences
cannot be statistically generalized to the other PHAs and property
owners. We reviewed HUD's policies and regulations for establishing
preferences and obtained information from officials on the extent to
which preferences, particularly a veterans' preference, were used for
tenant selection purposes. Additionally, we obtained and analyzed
studies by HUD and others on the use of preferences in general.
To determine the extent to which HUD's rental assistance programs
served veteran households in fiscal year 2005, we matched data from HUD
on program participants with data from VA on living veterans and used
these matched data to estimate the percentage of low-income veteran
renter households that received HUD assistance. To determine the extent
to which veteran households were served by HUD's rental assistance
programs, we obtained information on households receiving rental
assistance from HUD's administrative databases--Public and Indian
Housing Information Center (PIC) and Tenant Rental Assistance
Certification System (TRACS), as of September 30, 2005, and information
on all living veterans from VA's Beneficiary Identification and Records
Location Subsystem (BIRLS), as of October 1, 2004.[Footnote 38] We
matched data from HUD on program participants with data from VA on
living veterans. Specifically, we matched the Social Security numbers,
first and last names, and date of birth of the assisted households in
PIC and TRACS with the corresponding information for veterans in BIRLS.
For the records in PIC and TRACS that were matched to BIRLS, about 65
percent matched on Social Security number, first and last names, and
date of birth; about 30 percent matched on Social Security number and
some combination of names and date of birth; and about 5 percent
matched on names and date of birth only. We used the resulting matched
information to determine the number of veteran households that received
rental assistance from HUD and the annual subsidy amount that HUD paid
to veteran households in 2005. Our totals of HUD-assisted veteran
households could underestimate the actual number of veteran households
in the programs because of a lack of complete information on all living
veterans in the data we obtained from VA. For example, Social Security
numbers, which we used to match VA and HUD data, may not have been
available for all veterans who served in the 1970s or earlier. However,
we attempted to adjust for this by also conducting a match on veterans'
names and dates of birth only. Data entry errors in both VA and HUD
systems also could contribute to fewer successful matches.
To assess the reliability of the HUD data from the PIC and TRACS
databases, and the VA data from the BIRLS database, we reviewed
relevant documentation, interviewed knowledgeable officials, and
conducted electronic testing of the data. We determined the data were
sufficiently reliable for us to identify veterans who received
assistance through HUD rental programs.
For all of our research objectives, we consulted with officials from
various housing and veterans groups, including Harvard University's
Joint Center on Housing Studies, the National Low Income Housing
Coalition, the National Coalition of Homeless Veterans, the Corporation
for Supportive Housing, Vietnam Veterans of America, the American
Legion, and Volunteers of America. We also surveyed the literature on
these topics.
We conducted our work primarily in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los
Angeles, and Washington, D.C., from March 2006 through July 2007 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Demographic and Housing Characteristics of Low-Income
Veteran Renters:
Table 7: Number of Low-Income Renter Households by Household
Characteristics, 2005:
Characteristics: Race and ethnicity: White, Non-Hispanic/Latino;
Veteran household: Number: 1,567,625:(±1%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 69%: (±0.5);
Other household: Number: 11,259,715: (±0.6%);
Other household: Percentage: 51%: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Race and Ethnicity: Black or African-American, Non-
Hispanic/Latino;
Veteran household: Number: 452,200: (±3%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 20: (±0.5);
Other household: Number: 4,880,335: (±1%);
Other household: Percentage: 22: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Race and Ethnicity: American Indian and Alaska Native,
Non-Hispanic/ Latino;
Veteran household: Number: 27,890: (±9%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 1: (±0.1);
Other household: Number: 191,995: (±4%);
Other household: Percentage: 1: (±0.0).
Characteristics: Race and Ethnicity: Asian, Non-Hispanic/Latino;
Veteran household: Number: 31,605: (±10%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 1: (±0.1);
Other household: Number: 935,765: (±2%);
Other household: Percentage: 4: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Race and Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander, Non- Hispanic/Latino;
Veteran household: Number: 3,550: (±34%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 0: (±0.1);
Other household: Number: 36,525: (±10%);
Other household: Percentage: 0: (±0.0).
Characteristics: Race and Ethnicity: Other (including some other race
and two or more races), Non-Hispanic/Latino;
Veteran household: Number: 45,195: (±9%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 2: (±0.2);
Other household: Number: 358,310: (±3%);
Other household: Percentage: 2:(±0.1).
Characteristics: Race and Ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino;
Veteran household: Number: 154,645: (±5%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 7: (±0.3);
Other household: Number: 4,350,295: (±1%);
Other household: Percentage: 20: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Household size: 1 person;
Veteran household: Number: 995,620: (±2%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 44: (±0.6);
Other household: Number: 9,086,420: (±0.7%);
Other household: Percentage: 41: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Household size: 2 persons;
Veteran household: Number: 694,420: (±2%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 30: (±0.5);
Other household: Number: 4,978,185: (±1.0);
Other household: Percentage: 23: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Household size: 3 persons;
Veteran household: Number: 240,765: (±4%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 11: (±0.4);
Other household: Number: 3,343,150: (±1%);
Other household: Percentage: 15: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Household size: 4 persons;
Veteran household: Number: 190,650: (±4%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 8: (±0.4);
Other household: Number: 2,487,920: (±1%);
Other household: Percentage: 11: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Household size: 5 persons;
Veteran household: Number: 95,660: (±6%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 4: (±0.2);
Other household: Number: 1,282,555: (±2%);
Other household: Percentage: 6: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Household size: 6 persons;
Veteran household: Number: 43,965: (±9%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 2: (±0.2);
Other household: Number: 535,290: (±3%);
Other household: Percentage: 2: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Household size: 7 persons or more;
Veteran household: Number: 21,635: (±14%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 1: (±0.1);
Other household: Number: 299,425: (±4%);
Other household: Percentage: 1: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Housing overcrowding: Less than or equal to 1.01
(person per room);
Veteran household: Number: 2,209,240: (±1%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 97: (±0.2);
Other household: Number: 20,469,770: (±0.5%);
Other household: Percentage: 93: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Housing overcrowding: Greater than 1.01 and less than
or equal to 1.51 (person per room);
Veteran household: Number: 55,890: (±8%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 2: (±0.2);
Other household: Number: 1,120,075: (±2%);
Other household: Percentage: 5: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Housing overcrowding: Greater than 1.51 (person per
room);
Veteran household: Number: 17,590: (±15);
Veteran household: Percentage: 1: (±0.1);
Other household: Number: 423,085: (±3%);
Other household: Percentage: 2: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Housing affordibility: Zero income/no cash rent;
Veteran household: Number: 234,535: (±3%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 10: (±0.3);
Other household: Number: 1,892,710: (±1%);
Other household: Percentage: 9: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Housing affordibility: Greater than 0% and less than
or equal to 30%;
Veteran household: Number: 763,640: (±2%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 33: (±0.6);
Other household: Number: 6,264,690: (±0.9%);
Other household: Percentage: 28: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Housing affordibility: Greater than 30% and less than
or equal to 50%;
Veteran household: Number: 699,470: (±2%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 31: (±0.5);
Other household: Number: 6,260,495: (±0.9%);
Other household: Percentage: 28: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Housing affordibility: Greater than 50%;
Veteran household: Number: 585,070: (±3%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 26: (±0.6);
Other household: Number: 7,595,035: (±0.8%);
Other household: Percentage: 35: (±0.2).
Characteristics: Adequacy of housing: Plumbing and kitchen complete;
Veteran household: Number: 2,229,455: (±1%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 98: (±0.2);
Other household: Number: 21,678,730: (±0.5%);
Other household: Percentage: 98: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Adequacy of housing: Plumbing or kitchen not complete;
Veteran household: Number: 53,260: (±7%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 2: (±0.2);
Other household: Number: 334,205: (±4%);
Other household: Percentage: 2: (±0.1).
Characteristics: Total;
Veteran household: Number: 2,282,720: (±1%);
Veteran household: Percentage: 100%:
Other household: Number: 22,012,930: (±0.5);
Other household: Percentage: 100%.
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Margins of error are reported
in parentheses.
[End of table]
Table 8: Number of Veteran Renter Households, by State, 2005:
State: Alabama;
Veteran renter household: All income: 59,995: (±6%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 32,020: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 53%: (±4).
State: Alaska;
Veteran renter household: All income: 18,000: (±11%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 10,040: (±15%0;
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 56: (±6).
State: Arizona;
Veteran renter household: All income: 93,490: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 42,920: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 46: (±3).
State: Arkansas;
Veteran renter household: All income: 49,355: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 27,550: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 56: (±4).
State: California;
Veteran renter household: All income: 493,675: (±3%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 236,150: (±4%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 48: (±2).
State: Colorado;
Veteran renter household: All income: 74,200: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 42,155: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 57: (±3).
State: Connecticut;
Veteran renter household: All income: 45,475: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 25,520: (±11%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 56: (±4).
State: Delaware;
Veteran renter household: All income: 10,860: (±15%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 4,885: (±22%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 45: (±7).
State: District of Columbia;
Veteran renter household: All income: 11,870: (±16%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 7,330: (±20%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 62: (±8).
State: Florida;
Veteran renter household: All income: 277,570: (±3%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 119,150: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 43: (±2).
State: Georgia;
Veteran renter household: All income: 141,195: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 73,970: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 52: (±3).
State: Hawaii;
Veteran renter household: All income: 34,725: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 14,735: (±14%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 42: (±5).
State: Idaho;
Veteran renter household: All income: 25,150: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Low- income: 13,155: (±14%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 52: (±5).
State: Illinois;
Veteran renter household: All income: 138,835: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 85,055: (±6%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 61: (±2).
State: Indiana;
Veteran renter household: All income: 81,250: (±6%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 51,420: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 63: (±3).
State: Iowa;
Veteran renter household: All income: 37,120: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Low- income: 23,055: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 62: (±3).
State: Kansas;
Veteran renter household: All income: 44,860: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 25,580: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 57: (±2).
State: Kentucky;
Veteran renter household: All income: 60,040: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 34,630: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 58; (±4).
State: Louisiana;
Veteran renter household: All income: 59,350; (±7%);
Low-income: 29,270; (±11%);
Percentage: 49; (±4).
State: Maine;
Veteran renter household: All income: 25,810: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 14,025: (±14%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 54: (±5).
State: Maryland;
Veteran renter household: All income: 89,965: (±6%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 46,990: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 52: (±4).
State: Massachusetts;
Veteran renter household: All income: 89,720: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 53,180: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 59: (±4).
State: Michigan;
Veteran renter household: All income: 110,000: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 71,400: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 65: (±3).
State: Minnesota;
Veteran renter household: All income: 54,200: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 34,635: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 64: (±4).
State: Mississippi;
Veteran renter household: All income: 37,275: (±9%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 16,705: (±14%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 45: (±5).
State: Missouri;
Veteran renter household: All income: 91,185: (±6%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 55,170: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 61: (±2).
State: Montana;
Veteran renter household: All income: 19,355: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 10,160: (±14%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 52: (±5).
State: Nebraska;
Veteran renter household: All income: 28,710: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 16,380: (±13%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 57: (±5).
State: Nevada;
Veteran renter household: All income: 59,265: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 28,445: (±11%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 48: (±4).
State: New Hampshire;
Veteran renter household: All income: 21,695: (±11%);
Low-income: 10,920: (±15%);
Percentage: 50: (±5).
State: New Jersey;
Veteran renter household: All income: 88,205; (±6%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 48,295: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 55: (±3).
State: New Mexico;
Veteran renter household: All income: 32,015: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 16,415: (±16%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 51: (±6).
State: New York;
Veteran renter household: All income: 253,320; (±3%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 135,060: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 53: (±2).
State: North Carolina;
Veteran renter household: All income: 135,660: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 68,515: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 51: (±3).
State: North Dakota;
Veteran renter household: All income: 14,190: (±13%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 7,470: (±15%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 53: (±4).
State: Ohio;
Veteran renter household: All income: 171,070: (±4%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 104,710: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 61: (±2).
State: Oklahoma;
Veteran renter household: All income: 64,110: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 33,925: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 53: (±4).
State: Oregon; Veteran renter household: All income: 75,540: (±7%);
Low-income: 44,575: (±9%);
Percentage: 59: (±3).
State: Pennsylvania;
Veteran renter household: All income: 175,275: (±4%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 104,535: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 60: (±2).
State: Rhode Island;
Veteran renter household: All income: 20,795: (±12%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 12,960: (±15%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 62: (±6).
State: South Carolina;
Veteran renter household: All income: 70,810: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 37,680: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 53: (±3).
State: South Dakota;
Veteran renter household: All income: 13,360: (±13%);
Low-income: 8,260: (±18%);
Percentage: 62: (±8).
State: Tennessee;
Veteran renter household: All income: 87,575: (±6%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 47,070: (±8%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 54: (±3).
State: Texas;
Veteran renter household: All income: 302,390: (±3%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 142,150: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 47: (±2).
State: Utah;
Veteran renter household: All income: 21,300: (±11%);
Veteran renter household: Low- income: 10,400: (±17%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 49: (±6).
State: Vermont;
Veteran renter household: All income: 9,665: (±14%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 5,955: (±20%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 62: (±9).
State: Virginia;
Veteran renter household: All income: 147,980: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 60,580: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 41: (±2).
State: Washington;
Veteran renter household: All income: 127,215: (±4%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 73,795: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 58: (±2).
State: West Virginia;
Veteran renter household: All income: 24,210: (±10%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 12,895: (±14%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 53: (±5).
State: Wisconsin;
Veteran renter household: All income: 76,880: (±5%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 46,000: (±7%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 60: (±3).
State: Wyoming;
Veteran renter household: All income: 10,705: (±17%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 4,850: (±26%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 45: (±9).
State: Total;
Veteran renter household: All income: 4,306,475: (±1%);
Veteran renter household: Low-income: 2,282,720: (±1%);
Veteran renter household: Percentage: 53%: (±0.4).
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Margins of error are reported
in parentheses.
[End of table]
Table 9: Number of Low-Income Veteran Renter Households with Moderate
or Severe Housing Affordability Problems, by State, 2005:
State: Alabama;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 32,020: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 14,465: (±6%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 45%: (±6).
State: Alaska;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 10,040; (±15%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 4,930: (±8%);
Percentage: 49: (±8).
State: Arizona;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 42,920: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 24,610: (±4%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 57: (±4).
State: Arkansas;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 27,550: (±10%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 14,375: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 52: (±5).
State: California;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 236,150: (±4%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 160,770: (±2%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 68: (±2).
State: Colorado;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 42,155: (±8%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 24,695: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 59: (±5).
State: Connecticut;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 25,520: (±11%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 13,715: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 54: (±7).
State: Delaware;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 4,885: (±22%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 2,595: (±13%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 53: (±13).
State: District of Columbia;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 7,330: (±20%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 4,750: (±12%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 65: (±12).
State: Florida;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 119,150: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 76,985: (±3%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 65: (±3).
State: Georgia;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 73,970: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 39,940: (±4%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 54: (±4).
State: Hawaii;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 14,735: (±14%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 9,290: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 63: (±7).
State: Idaho;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 13,155: (±14%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 6,285: (±8%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 48: (±8).
State: Illinois;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 85,055: (±6%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 43,530: (±3%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 51: (±3).
State: Indiana;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 51,420; (±8%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 24,645: (±4%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 48: (±4).
State: Iowa;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 23,055; (±10%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 10,565: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 46: (±5).
State: Kansas;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 25,580: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 10,710: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 42: (±5).
State: Kentucky;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 34,630: (±9%);
Households with an affordability problem: 18,165: (±4%);
Percentage: 52: (±4).
State: Louisiana;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 29,270: (±11%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 15,665: (±6%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 54: (±6).
State: Maine;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 14,025: (±14%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 8,290: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 59; (±7).
State: Maryland;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 46,990: (±10%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 27,210: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 58: (±5).
State: Massachusetts;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 53,180: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 30,450: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 57: (±5).
State: Michigan;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 71,400; (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 39,185: (±3%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 55: (±3).
State: Minnesota;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 34,635: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 18,950: (±4%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 55: (±4).
State: Mississippi; Low-income veteran renter household: Total
households: 16,705; (±14%);
Households with an affordability problem: 9,385: (±8%);
Percentage: 56: (±8).
State: Missouri;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 55,170: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 26,525: (±3%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 48: (±3).
State: Montana;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 10,160: (±14%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 5,280: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 52: (±7).
State: Nebraska;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 16,380: (±13%);
Households with an affordability problem: 6,720: (±6%);
Percentage: 41: (±6).
State: Nevada;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 28,445: (±11%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 19,920: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 70: (±5).
State: New Hampshire;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 10,920: (±15%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 7,175: (±7%);
Percentage: 66: (±7).
State: New Jersey;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 48,295: (±8%);
Households with an affordability problem: 30,895: (±5%);
Percentage: 64: (±5).
State: New Mexico;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 16,415: (±16%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 10,245: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 62: (±7).
State: New York;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 135,060: (±5%);
Households with an affordability problem: 80,610: (±2%);
Percentage: 60: (±2).
State: North Carolina;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 68,515: (±8%);
Households with an affordability problem: 37,805: (±4%);
Percentage: 55: (±4).
State: North Dakota;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 7,470: (±15%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 2,745: (±8%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 37: (±8).
State: Ohio;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 104,710: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 53,445: (±2%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 51: (±2).
State: Oklahoma;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 33,925: (±10%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 15,850: (±6%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 47: (±6).
State: Oregon;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 44,575: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 26,010: (±4%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 58: (±4).
State: Pennsylvania;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 104,535: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 56,245: (±2%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 54: (±2).
State: Rhode Island;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 12,960: (±15%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 6,195: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 48: (±7).
State: South Carolina;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 37,680: (±10%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 19,085: (±6%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 51: (±6).
State: South Dakota;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 8,260: (±18%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 3,480: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 42: (±7).
State: Tennessee;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 47,070: (±8%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 24,230; (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 51; (±5).
State: Texas; Low-income veteran renter household: Total households:
142,150: (±5%); Households with an affordability problem: 82,100:
(±2%); Percentage: 58: (±2).
State: Utah;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 10,400: (±17%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 4,695: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 45: (±9).
State: Vermont; Low-income veteran renter household: Total households:
5,955: (±20%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 2,955: (±11%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 50: (±11).
State: Virginia; Low-income veteran renter household: Total households:
60,580: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 37,170: (±3%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 61: (±3).
State: Washington;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 73,795: (±5%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 41,870: (±4%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 57: (±4).
State: West Virginia;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 12,895: (±14%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 5,765: (±9%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 45: (±9).
State: Wisconsin;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 46,000: (±7%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 21,035: (±3%);
Percentage: 46: (±3).
State: Wyoming;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 4,850: (±26%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 2,330: (±13%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 48: (±13).
State: Total;
Low-income veteran renter household: Total households: 2,282,720:
(±1%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Households with an affordability
problem: 1,284,540: (±2%);
Low-income veteran renter household: Percentage: 56%: (±0.6%).
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Margins of error are reported
in parentheses.
[End of table]
Table 10: Number of Low-Income Households with Housing Affordability
Problems for the 50 Largest Metropolitan Areas, by Veteran Status,
2005:
[See PDF for image]
Source: GAO analysis of sample survey data from 2005 ACS.
Note: Margins of error are reported in parentheses.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix III: Information on HUD's Supportive Services Programs
Available to Veterans:
Historically, Congress has recognized the importance of providing
supportive services to veterans who are homeless or at risk of becoming
homeless. Most of HUD's rental assistance programs are not required to
provide supportive services, with the exception of the Section 202
Supportive Housing for the Elderly and Section 811 Supportive Housing
for Persons with Disabilities programs.[Footnote 39] However,
households participating in HUD's rental assistance programs can
receive supportive services, typically through separate programs funded
by HUD. Table 11 contains descriptions of these programs.
Table 11: Description of HUD Supportive Services Programs Available to
Veterans:
Dollars in millions.
Program: Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS);
Description: Provides funding for FSS program coordinators to work with
local private and public sources to provide supportive services to
tenants to help them obtain employment and achieve economic
independence and self-sufficiency. Supportive services most commonly
provided include child care, transportation, remedial education, and
job training;
Type of funding: Grants;
FY 2005 budget authority: $46.0;
Eligible households: Households living in public housing or receiving
housing choice vouchers;
Entity receiving funding: Public housing agencies.
Program: Multifamily housing service coordinators;
Description: Provides funding for service coordinators who assist
elderly individuals and persons with disabilities to obtain needed
supportive services from community agencies;
Type of funding: Grants, excess income from a property (residual
receipts), rent increases;
FY 2005 budget authority: $50.0;
Eligible households: Households with a member who is elderly or has a
disability living in HUD project-based housing;
Entity receiving funding: Owners of project-based properties.
Program: Neighborhood networks;
Description: Funding to provide computer and Internet access and job
training to tenants;
Type of funding: Grants;
FY 2005 budget authority: $15.0;
Eligible households: Households living in public housing;
Entity receiving funding: Public housing agencies.
Program: Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS);
Description: Funding to provide supportive services to help (1) tenants
transition from welfare to work through job training programs and (2)
the elderly and persons with disabilities live independently;
Type of funding: Grants;
FY 2005 budget authority: $53.0;
Eligible households: Households living in public housing;
Entity receiving funding: PHAs and nonprofits.
Program: Congregate Housing Services;
Description: Funding to provide meals and other nonmedical supportive
services;
Type of funding: Grants;
FY 2005 budget authority: No new grants since 1995;
Eligible households: Households with a member who is elderly or has a
disability living in HUD project-based and public housing;
Entity receiving funding: State and local governments, PHAs, and
nonprofits.
Program: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA);
Description: Provides housing assistance and related supportive
services to low- income persons with HIV/AIDS and their families;
Type of funding: Grants and formula allocations;
FY 2005 budget authority: $282.0; Eligible households: Low-income
persons with HIV/AIDS and their families;
Entity receiving funding: States, cities, and nonprofit organizations.
Source: GAO.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix IV: HUD's Policies on Eligibility and Subsidy Amounts with
Respect to Veteran-Specific Income and Benefits:
When determining eligibility and subsidy amounts under HUD's rental
assistance programs, program administrators generally must calculate a
household's adjusted annual income, or gross income, less any
exclusions and deductions. HUD's policies and statute provide for 39
different types of income exclusions and 5 deductions.[Footnote 40]
When determining income eligibility and subsidy amounts, HUD generally
does not distinguish between income sources that are specific to
veterans, such as benefits that VA provides and other types of incomes.
As table 12 shows, most types of income sources and benefits that
veteran households receive from VA would be excluded by HUD when
determining eligibility and subsidy amounts. Excluded income sources
and benefits generally relate to payments that veteran households
receive under certain economic self-sufficiency programs or
nonrecurring payments such as insurance claims. Of the benefits
included, most are associated with recurring or regular sources of
income, such as disability compensation, pensions, and survivor death
benefits.
Table 12: HUD's Treatment of Veteran Benefits in Determining Household
Income and Subsidy Amount:
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Veterans with service-connected disabilities;
Included in or excluded from income: [Empty].
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Monthly disability compensation (for veterans who have a
disability due to an injury or disease incurred or aggravated during
active military service); Included in or excluded from income:
Included, except for payment received on or after January 1, 1989, from
the Agent Orange Settlement Fund.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Additional disability compensation for those in need of
regular aid and attendance of another person;
Included in or excluded from income: Included.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Living allowance for participating in vocational
rehabilitation training;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Work study allowance for participating in vocational
rehabilitation training;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Combat-related special compensation (offsets the
reduction in military retired pay due to the receipt of VA disability
compensation);
Included in or excluded from income: Included.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: One-time payment of up to $11,000 toward purchase of
specially adapted automobile or other conveyance;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Annual clothing allowance (for veteran using prosthetic
or orthopedic appliances, or with a skin condition);
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: [Empty];
Included in or excluded from income: [Empty].
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Veterans without service-connected disabilities;
Included in or excluded from income: [Empty].
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Monthly pension (for wartime veterans with low incomes
who are permanently and totally disabled or age 65 years and older);
Included in or excluded from income: Included.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Medal of Honor pension;
Included in or excluded from income: Included.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Payments for the cost of full-time training in college,
technical, or vocational school;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Work-study wages paid to veterans for work they do for VA
while attending training in college, technical, or vocational school;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Life insurance payments;
Included in or excluded from income: [Empty].
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Veterans' Group Life Insurance (VGLI) (provides renewable
5-year term coverage for veterans who had service members group life
insurance at the time they separated from the service and converted
that amount of coverage to VGLI);
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Accelerated death benefits (advanced life insurance
payments of up to 50% of coverage to terminally ill policyholders);
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Service-disabled veterans insurance (up to $10,000 in
life insurance for veterans with service- connected disabilities but
who otherwise are in good health. Veterans who are totally disabled may
receive additional supplemental coverage of up to $20,000);
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Insurance dividends (tax-free dividends paid annually on
selected active government life insurance policies);
Included in or excluded from income: Included.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Health care services;
Included in or excluded from income: [Empty].
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Inpatient and outpatient medical care in VA facilities
(co-pays may apply depending on veterans income);
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Travel costs to receive medical care;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Free medical examinations including laboratory and other
diagnostic tests;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Readjustment (helps veterans return to civilian life) and
bereavement counseling;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Prosthetic and sensory aids;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Special services for blind veterans;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Mental health care;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Vocational assistance and therapeutic work opportunities
to help veterans live and work in their communities;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Domiciliary care (for homeless veterans or veterans with
medical, mental health, substance abuse, or other health maintenance
needs that can be managed in a residential treatment setting);
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Outpatient dental treatment;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Outpatient pharmacy services;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Emergency medical care in non-VA facilities;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Other benefits;
Included in or excluded from income: [Empty].
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Burial expenses;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Weekly unemployment compensation for a limited period of
time for veterans who do not begin civilian employment immediately
after leaving military service;
Included in or excluded from income: Included, except for payments
received under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2931).
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Survivor benefits;
Included in or excluded from income: [Empty].
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Death pension (monthly payments for low-income surviving
spouses and unmarried children of deceased veterans with wartime
service);
Included in or excluded from income: Included.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Military death gratuity payment (one time payment to next
of kin of service members who die while on active duty or retirees who
die from a service-connected injury within 120 days of retiring);
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Dependency and indemnity compensation (monthly payment to
a surviving spouse, child, or parent of a veteran whose death resulted
from a service-related injury or disease);
Included in or excluded from income: Included.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Payments to surviving spouses and children for the cost
of full or part-time training through various sources including
colleges, universities, vocational schools, and independent study;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Work-study wages paid to surviving spouses and children
for work they do for VA while attending training;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Montgomery GI Bill death benefit;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Allowances for children of Vietnam or Korean veterans
born with birth defects;
Included in or excluded from income: Included, except for allowances
paid under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. 1805 to a child suffering from
spina bifida who is the child of a Vietnam veteran.
Veteran income and benefits sources: Veterans with service-oriented
disabilities: Reimbursement for most medical expenses covered by the
Civilian Health and Medical Program of VA;
Included in or excluded from income: Excluded.
Sources: GAO analysis of HUD policies on income exclusions and VA's
2006 Federal Benefits for Veterans and Dependents.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix V: Demographic and Housing Characteristics of HUD-Assisted
Low- Income Veteran Renters:
Table 13: Number of HUD-Assisted Veteran Renter Households, by State,
2005:
State: Alabama;
Voucher: 1,154;
Public housing: 1,786;
Project-based: 1,111;
Total: 4,051.
State: Alaska;
Voucher: 514;
Public housing: 96;
Project- based: 171;
Total: 781.
State: Arizona;
Voucher: 1,211;
Public housing: 376;
Project-based: 839;
Total: 2,426.
State: Arkansas;
Voucher: 1,453;
Public housing: 915;
Project-based: 930;
Total: 3,298.
State: California;
Voucher: 13,563;
Public housing: 1,674;
Project- based: 4,820;
Total: 20,057.
State: Colorado;
Voucher: 1,810;
Public housing: 450;
Project-based: 1,380;
Total: 3,640.
State: Connecticut;
Voucher: 1,232;
Public housing: 603;
Project-based: 1,029;
Total: 2,864.
State: Delaware;
Voucher: 181;
Public housing: 105;
Project-based: 269;
Total: 555.
State: District of Columbia;
Voucher: 547;
Public housing: 315;
Project-based: 426;
Total: 1,288.
State: Florida;
Voucher: 3,168;
Public housing: 1,376;
Project-based: 2,428;
Total: 6,972.
State: Georgia;
Voucher: 1,918;
Public housing: 1,476;
Project-based: 1,419;
Total: 4,813.
State: Hawaii;
Voucher: 707;
Public housing: 275;
Project-based: 262;
Total: 1,244.
State: Idaho;
Voucher: 537;
Public housing: 81;
Project-based: 382;
Total: 1,000.
State: Illinois;
Voucher: 3,426;
Public housing: 2,211;
Project-based: 3,225;
Total: 8,862.
State: Indiana;
Voucher: 2,016;
Public housing: 944;
Project-based: 1,893;
Total: 4,853.
State: Iowa;
Voucher: 1,529;
Public housing: 295;
Project-based: 918;
Total: 2,742.
State: Kansas;
Voucher: 730;
Public housing: 618;
Project-based: 824;
Total: 2,172.
State: Kentucky;
Voucher: 1,807;
Public housing: 1,420;
Project-based: 1,555;
Total: 4,782.
State: Louisiana;
Voucher: 1,763;
Public housing: 965;
Project-based: 1,192;
Total: 3,920.
State: Maine;
Voucher: 965;
Public housing: 299;
Project-based: 748;
Total: 2,012.
State: Maryland;
Voucher: 2,082;
Public housing: 564;
Project-based: 1,256;
Total: 3,902.
State: Massachusetts;
Voucher: 2,899;
Public housing: 1,462;
Project- based: 3,019;
Total: 7,380.
State: Michigan;
Voucher: 2,118;
Public housing: 1,362;
Project-based: 3,452;
Total: 6,932.
State: Minnesota;
Voucher: 2,016;
Public housing: 1,426;
Project-based: 1,934;
Total: 5,376.
State: Mississippi;
Voucher: 830;
Public housing: 690;
Project-based: 1,008;
Total: 2,528.
State: Missouri;
Voucher: 2,317;
Public housing: 1,177;
Project-based: 1,952;
Total: 5,446.
State: Montana;
Voucher: 514;
Public housing: 185;
Project-based: 527;
Total: 1,226.
State: Nebraska;
Voucher: 461;
Public housing: 510;
Project-based: 564;
Total: 1,535.
State: Nevada;
Voucher: 802;
Public housing: 363;
Project-based: 424;
Total: 1,589.
State: New Hampshire;
Voucher: 671;
Public housing: 340;
Project-based: 525;
Total: 1,536.
State: New Jersey;
Voucher: 2,440;
Public housing: 1,514;
Project- based: 2,278;
Total: 6,232.
State: New Mexico;
Voucher: 934;
Public housing: 277;
Project-based: 446;
Total: 1,657.
State: New York;
Voucher: 8,348;
Public housing: 7,329;
Project-based: 5,341;
Total: 21,018.
State: North Carolina;
Voucher: 3,169;
Public housing: 1,756;
Project- based: 1,519;
Total: 6,444.
State: North Dakota;
Voucher: 561;
Public housing: 137;
Project-based: 305;
Total: 1,003.
State: Ohio;
Voucher: 5,243;
Public housing: 2,765;
Project-based: 4,677;
Total: 12,685.
State: Oklahoma;
Voucher: 1,620;
Public housing: 1,070;
Project-based: 1,239;
Total: 3,929.
State: Oregon;
Voucher: 1,964;
Public housing: 270;
Project-based: 1,128;
Total: 3,362.
State: Pennsylvania;
Voucher: 4,173;
Public housing: 3,017;
Project- based: 3,833;
Total: 11,023.
State: Rhode Island;
Voucher: 378;
Public housing: 589;
Project-based: 1,211;
Total: 2,178.
State: South Carolina;
Voucher: 1,182;
Public housing: 677;
Project- based: 974;
Total: 2,833.
State: South Dakota;
Voucher: 573;
Public housing: 197;
Project-based: 544;
Total: 1,314.
State: Tennessee;
Voucher: 1,273;
Public housing: 1,980;
Project-based: 2,037;
Total: 5,290.
State: Texas;
Voucher: 5,574;
Public housing: 2,489;
Project-based: 2,878;
Total: 10,941.
State: Utah;
Voucher: 728;
Public housing: 142;
Project-based: 372;
Total: 1,242.
State: Vermont;
Voucher: 460;
Public housing: 91;
Project-based: 278;
Total: 829.
State: Virginia;
Voucher: 2,377;
Public housing: 925;
Project-based: 1,505;
Total: 4,807.
State: Washington;
Voucher: 2,531;
Public housing: 478;
Project-based: 1,538;
Total: 4,547.
State: West Virginia;
Voucher: 1,119;
Public housing: 489;
Project- based: 941;
Total: 2,549.
State: Wisconsin;
Voucher: 1,699;
Public housing: 799;
Project-based: 2,322;
Total: 4,820.
State: Wyoming;
Voucher: 200;
Public housing: 64;
Project-based: 214;
Total: 478.
State: Total;
Voucher: 101,487;
Public housing: 51,414;
Project-based: 76,062;
Total: 228,963.
Sources: GAO analysis of VA's Beneficiary Identification and Records
Location Subsystem and HUD's Public Housing Information Center and
Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System.
Note: Totals exclude Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and
the Virgin Islands. Totals do not reflect 23,157 veteran renter
households in which state information could not be derived.
[End of table]
Table 14: Number of HUD-Assisted, Elderly Veteran Renter Households, by
State, 2005:
State: Alabama; Voucher: 91;
Public housing: 433;
Project-based: 499;
Total: 1,023.
State: Alaska;
Voucher: 61;
Public housing: 20;
Project-based: 57;
Total: 138.
State: Arizona;
Voucher: 174;
Public housing: 90;
Project-based: 582;
Total: 846.
State: Arkansas;
Voucher: 132;
Public housing: 232;
Project-based: 425;
Total: 789.
State: California;
Voucher: 3,121;
Public housing: 486;
Project-based: 3,223;
Total: 6,830.
State: Colorado;
Voucher: 249;
Public housing: 151;
Project-based: 747;
Total: 1,147.
State: Connecticut;
Voucher: 174;
Public housing: 269;
Project-based: 671;
Total: 1,114.
State: Delaware;
Voucher: 32;
Public housing: 28;
Project-based: 148;
Total: 208.
State: District of Columbia;
Voucher: 52;
Public housing: 110;
Project- based: 227;
Total: 389.
State: Florida;
Voucher: 462;
Public housing: 431;
Project-based: 1,454;
Total: 2,347.
State: Georgia;
Voucher: 172;
Public housing: 331;
Project-based: 652;
Total: 1,155.
State: Hawaii;
Voucher: 70;
Public housing: 58;
Project-based: 117;
Total: 245.
State: Idaho;
Voucher: 72;
Public housing: 28;
Project-based: 194;
Total: 294.
State: Illinois;
Voucher: 417;
Public housing: 664;
Project-based: 1,819;
Total: 2,900.
State: Indiana;
Voucher: 215;
Public housing: 273;
Project-based: 776;
Total: 1,264.
State: Iowa;
Voucher: 234;
Public housing: 133;
Project-based: 525;
Total: 892.
State: Kansas;
Voucher: 97;
Public housing: 212;
Project-based: 396;
Total: 705.
State: Kentucky;
Voucher: 190;
Public housing: 347;
Project-based: 571;
Total: 1,108.
State: Louisiana;
Voucher: 131;
Public housing: 190;
Project-based: 584;
Total: 905.
State: Maine;
Voucher: 146;
Public housing: 124;
Project-based: 434;
Total: 704.
State: Maryland;
Voucher: 289;
Public housing: 186;
Project-based: 678;
Total: 1,153.
State: Massachusetts;
Voucher: 453;
Public housing: 636;
Project-based: 1,790;
Total: 2,879.
State: Michigan;
Voucher: 322;
Public housing: 522;
Project-based: 1,785;
Total: 2,629.
State: Minnesota;
Voucher: 278;
Public housing: 553;
Project-based: 1,060;
Total: 1,891.
State: Mississippi;
Voucher: 68;
Public housing: 151;
Project-based: 404;
Total: 623.
State: Missouri;
Voucher: 230;
Public housing: 374;
Project-based: 926;
Total: 1,530.
State: Montana;
Voucher: 76;
Public housing: 37;
Project-based: 237;
Total: 350.
State: Nebraska;
Voucher: 62;
Public housing: 223;
Project-based: 328;
Total: 613.
State: Nevada;
Voucher: 254;
Public housing: 187;
Project-based: 284;
Total: 725.
State: New Hampshire;
Voucher: 185;
Public housing: 181;
Project-based: 352;
Total: 718.
State: New Jersey;
Voucher: 328;
Public housing: 676;
Project-based: 1,473;
Total: 2,477.
State: New Mexico;
Voucher: 127;
Public housing: 88;
Project-based: 209;
Total: 424.
State: New York;
Voucher: 1,375;
Public housing: 1,963;
Project-based: 2,885;
Total: 6,223.
State: North Carolina;
Voucher: 326;
Public housing: 354;
Project- based: 720;
Total: 1,400.
State: North Dakota;
Voucher: 99;
Public housing: 48;
Project-based: 128;
Total: 275.
State: Ohio;
Voucher: 527;
Public housing: 646;
Project-based: 2,139;
Total: 3,312.
State: Oklahoma;
Voucher: 165;
Public housing: 319;
Project-based: 420;
Total: 904.
State: Oregon;
Voucher: 291;
Public housing: 68;
Project-based: 648;
Total: 1,007.
State: Pennsylvania;
Voucher: 521;
Public housing: 1,081;
Project- based: 2,124;
Total: 3,726.
State: Rhode Island;
Voucher: 64;
Public housing: 345;
Project-based: 703;
Total: 1,112.
State: South Carolina;
Voucher: 135;
Public housing: 157;
Project- based: 390;
Total: 682.
State: South Dakota;
Voucher: 104;
Public housing: 113;
Project-based: 214;
Total: 431.
State: Tennessee;
Voucher: 129;
Public housing: 477;
Project-based: 923;
Total: 1,529.
State: Texas;
Voucher: 712;
Public housing: 773;
Project-based: 1,352;
Total: 2,837.
State: Utah;
Voucher: 121;
Public housing: 68;
Project-based: 211;
Total: 400.
State: Vermont;
Voucher: 106;
Public housing: 46;
Project-based: 166;
Total: 318.
State: Virginia;
Voucher: 227;
Public housing: 186;
Project-based: 722;
Total: 1,135.
State: Washington;
Voucher: 331;
Public housing: 91;
Project-based: 812;
Total: 1,234.
State: West Virginia;
Voucher: 96;
Public housing: 122;
Project-based: 363;
Total: 581.
State: Wisconsin;
Voucher: 264;
Public housing: 321;
Project-based: 1,214;
Total: 1,799.
State: Wyoming;
Voucher: 50;
Public housing: 26;
Project-based: 90;
Total: 166.
State: Total;
Voucher: 14,607;
Public housing: 15,628;
Project-based: 39,851;
Total: 70,086.
Sources: GAO analysis of VA's Beneficiary Identification and Records
Location Subsystem and HUD's Public Housing Information Center and
Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System.
Note: Totals exclude Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and
the Virgin Islands. Totals do not reflect 4,611 veteran renter
households in which state information could not be derived.
[End of table]
Table 15: Number of HUD-Assisted, Disabled Veteran Renter Households by
State, 2005:
State: Alabama;
Voucher: 338;
Public housing: 559;
Project-based: 383;
Total: 1,280.
State: Alaska;
Voucher: 219;
Public housing: 29;
Project-based: 66;
Total: 314.
State: Arizona;
Voucher: 482;
Public housing: 146;
Project-based: 232;
Total: 860.
State: Arkansas;
Voucher: 439;
Public housing: 339;
Project-based: 283;
Total: 1,061.
State: California;
Voucher: 5,875;
Public housing: 771;
Project-based: 1,052;
Total: 7,698.
State: Colorado;
Voucher: 912;
Public housing: 207;
Project-based: 540;
Total: 1,659.
State: Connecticut;
Voucher: 430;
Public housing: 239;
Project-based: 269;
Total: 938.
State: Delaware;
Voucher: 57;
Public housing: 47;
Project-based: 92;
Total: 196.
State: District of Columbia;
Voucher: 110;
Public housing: 123;
Project-based: 102;
Total: 335.
State: Florida;
Voucher: 1,029;
Public housing: 642;
Project-based: 572;
Total: 2,243.
State: Georgia;
Voucher: 393;
Public housing: 459;
Project-based: 396;
Total: 1,248.
State: Hawaii;
Voucher: 254;
Public housing: 104;
Project-based: 77;
Total: 435.
State: Idaho;
Voucher: 252;
Public housing: 47;
Project-based: 107;
Total: 406.
State: Illinois;
Voucher: 1,122;
Public housing: 883;
Project-based: 841;
Total: 2,846.
State: Indiana;
Voucher: 749;
Public housing: 453;
Project-based: 750;
Total: 1,952.
State: Iowa;
Voucher: 589;
Public housing: 104;
Project-based: 259;
Total: 952.
State: Kansas;
Voucher: 328;
Public housing: 271;
Project-based: 263;
Total: 862.
State: Kentucky;
Voucher: 694;
Public housing: 558;
Project-based: 532;
Total: 1,784.
State: Louisiana;
Voucher: 416;
Public housing: 248;
Project-based: 340;
Total: 1,004.
State: Maine;
Voucher: 535;
Public housing: 103;
Project-based: 236;
Total: 874.
State: Maryland;
Voucher: 768;
Public housing: 248;
Project-based: 368;
Total: 1,384.
State: Massachusetts;
Voucher: 1,463;
Public housing: 744;
Project- based: 813;
Total: 3,020.
State: Michigan;
Voucher: 762;
Public housing: 612;
Project-based: 1,106;
Total: 2,480.
State: Minnesota;
Voucher: 817;
Public housing: 610;
Project-based: 555;
Total: 1,982.
State: Mississippi;
Voucher: 203;
Public housing: 203;
Project-based: 287;
Total: 693.
State: Missouri;
Voucher: 793;
Public housing: 516;
Project-based: 648;
Total: 1,957.
State: Montana;
Voucher: 230;
Public housing: 83;
Project-based: 185;
Total: 498.
State: Nebraska;
Voucher: 137;
Public housing: 197;
Project-based: 154;
Total: 488.
State: Nevada;
Voucher: 391;
Public housing: 163;
Project-based: 110;
Total: 664.
State: New Hampshire;
Voucher: 338;
Public housing: 125;
Project-based: 164;
Total: 627.
State: New Jersey;
Voucher: 873;
Public housing: 501;
Project-based: 516;
Total: 1,890.
State: New Mexico;
Voucher: 349;
Public housing: 121;
Project-based: 155;
Total: 625.
State: New York;
Voucher: 3,258;
Public housing: 2,010;
Project-based: 1,317;
Total: 6,585.
State: North Carolina;
Voucher: 1,029;
Public housing: 608;
Project- based: 430;
Total: 2,067.
State: North Dakota;
Voucher: 184;
Public housing: 66;
Project-based: 89;
Total: 339.
State: Ohio;
Voucher: 2,184;
Public housing: 1,260;
Project-based: 1,670;
Total: 5,114.
State: Oklahoma;
Voucher: 454;
Public housing: 489;
Project-based: 414;
Total: 1,357.
State: Oregon;
Voucher: 782;
Public housing: 98;
Project-based: 380;
Total: 1,260.
State: Pennsylvania;
Voucher: 1,487;
Public housing: 1,213;
Project- based: 1,071;
Total: 3,771.
State: Rhode Island;
Voucher: 179;
Public housing: 221;
Project-based: 473;
Total: 873.
State: South Carolina;
Voucher: 343;
Public housing: 241;
Project- based: 219;
Total: 803.
State: South Dakota;
Voucher: 210;
Public housing: 83;
Project-based: 177;
Total: 470.
State: Tennessee;
Voucher: 497;
Public housing: 879;
Project-based: 687;
Total: 2,063.
State: Texas;
Voucher: 1,693;
Public housing: 849;
Project-based: 829;
Total: 3,371.
State: Utah;
Voucher: 345;
Public housing: 49;
Project-based: 89;
Total: 483.
State: Vermont;
Voucher: 242;
Public housing: 35;
Project-based: 75;
Total: 352.
State: Virginia;
Voucher: 725;
Public housing: 285;
Project-based: 381;
Total: 1,391.
State: Washington;
Voucher: 1,150;
Public housing: 212;
Project-based: 587;
Total: 1,949.
State: West Virginia;
Voucher: 356;
Public housing: 180;
Project-based: 383;
Total: 919.
State: Wisconsin;
Voucher: 659;
Public housing: 382;
Project-based: 882;
Total: 1,923.
State: Wyoming;
Voucher: 108;
Public housing: 26;
Project-based: 61;
Total: 195.
State: Total;
Voucher: 38,232;
Public housing: 19,641;
Project-based: 22,667;
Total: 80,540.
Sources: GAO analysis of VA's Beneficiary Identification and Records
Location Subsystem and HUD's Public Housing Information Center and
Tenant Rental Assistance Certification System.
Note: Totals exclude Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and
the Virgin Islands. Totals do not reflect 6,769 veteran renter
households in which state information could not be derived.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development:
U.S. Department Of Housing And Urban Development:
Washington, DC 20410-5000:
Office Of Public And Indian Housing:
July 31, 2007:
Memorandum For: David G. W. Director, Financial markets and Community
Investment:
From: Milan Ozdinec, Deputy Assis ant Secretary for Public Housing and
Voucher Programs:
Subject: GAO Review – Draft Report (GAO Review of Rental Housing
Information on Low Income Veterans Housing Conditions and Participation
in HUD's Programs) (GAO # 250280):
As requested in your July 14, 2007, email, our comments regarding the
subject document are recorded below: Page 1 of the GAO Audit Review –
Draft Report (GAO-07-1012) titled "What GAO Found", states in paragraph
two that HUD policies for its three major rental assistance programs
generally do not take veterans status into account when determining
eligibility or assistance levels. Also, paragraph two states that the
majority of the forty-one largest public housing agencies that
administer the voucher or public housing programs have no veteran's
preferences for admission and the thirteen largest performance-based
contract administrators that oversee most properties under project-
based programs reported that owners generally did not adopt veteran's
preference. Paragraph three goes on to say that in fiscal year 2005, an
estimated eleven percent of all eligible low-income veteran households
(about 250,000) received assistance.
HUD objects to the characterization that policies for its three major
rental assistance programs generally do not take veterans status into
account when determining eligibility or assistance levels. The use of
the federal selection preferences were temporarily suspended in FY 1996
and then permanently repealed with the enactment of the Quality Housing
and Work Responsibility Act. Therefore, HUD cannot mandate that a PHA
establish any particular type of preference for their Housing Choice
Voucher (HCV) Program, however, veterans who' meet income and other
eligibility requirements can receive assistance. PHAs, in their Housing
Choice Voucher Administrative Plan, may choose to establish a
preference for veterans and only in this instance is a PHA required to
document veteran status information. Since most PHAs do not have a
preference category for veterans, it is difficult to accurately discern
the number of veterans assisted under the HCV program. HCV program
participants may have veteran status but entered the program under a
different preference category (for example, an elderly or disabled
preference) or under no preference category at all. The report does
acknowledge on page 12 that, of the households with veterans, a
significant proportion reported that the veteran was elderly or
disabled which are two of the commonly used preferences chosen by most
PHAs.
Also, we note there is a lack of complete information on all veterans
from data obtained through the Veterans Administration (VA), (see Page
41 of the Draft Report). For example, social security numbers, which
were used to match VA and HUD data, may not have been available for all
veterans who served in the 1970's or earlier. Again, this would
ultimately affect the estimated count of 250,000 veterans who received
assistance through HUD programs in 2005.
Paragraph two of Page 1 of the report states that HUD generally does
not distinguish between income that is specific to veterans, such as
veterans-provided benefits and other sources of income. Under HUD
regulations at 5.609, VA benefits are considered income to the person.
However, HUD does exclude many types of benefits that may assist
veterans, such as payments for training and education and health care
services. These exclusions would in fact benefit the veteran by
lowering his/her annual income, which in turn, would lower the total
tenant payment amount required by HUD. In addition to the above
mentioned exclusions, HUD regulations at 24 CFR 5.609 also allows for
the exclusion of special pay to a family member serving in the Armed
Forces who is exposed to hostile fire.
The Report's scope and methodology gives detailed information as to
where and how the data for this report was gathered. Pill's PIC
database system was matched against data from VA of all living
veterans. Specifically, social security numbers, first and last names,
and date of birth of the assisted households in PIC were matched
against corresponding information of veterans in VA's Beneficiary
Identification and Records Location Subsystem. It is unclear from this
report whether the methodology included entering the field office
location and housing authority for the veterans in the VA database.
Without that preliminary information, the search in the PIC database
will yield few results.
If you have any questions regarding this draft report and would like to
discuss further, please contact Victoria Alston of the Housing Voucher
Management and Operations Division at 202-402-4889.
[End of section]
Appendix VII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
David G. Wood, (202) 512-8678, or woodd@gao.gov:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the individual named above, Daniel Garcia-Diaz,
Assistant Director; Carl Barden; Michelle Bowsky; Mark H. Egger;
Cynthia Grant; John T. McGrail; Marc Molino; Josephine Perez; Carl
Ramirez; Barbara Roesmann; and Rose M. Schuville made key contributions
to this report.
FOOTNOTES
[1] We use the Bureau of the Census's definition of a veteran:
generally, a person who is 18 years of age or older and has served on
active duty in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast
Guard in the past, but is no longer on active duty. Persons who have
served in the National Guard or Military Reserves are classified as
veterans only if they have been called or ordered to active duty.
[2] U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, "Affordable
Housing Needs 2005: Report to Congress" (Washington, D.C.: May 2007).
HUD defines rent to be affordable if it is less than or equal to 30
percent of a household's monthly gross income. Inadequate housing can
include units that have electrical or plumbing problems or lack
complete kitchen or bathroom facilities. By definition, households that
receive rental assistance do not have "worst-case" housing needs.
[3] HUD is required by law to set locality-specific income limits that
are used to determine eligibility of applicants for HUD's assisted
housing programs. HUD develops income limits by categories (for
example, 80, 50, and 30 percent of AMI) for each metropolitan area and
nonmetropolitan county, adjusted for family size, and for areas that
have unusually high or low income-to-housing-cost relationships.
[4] We contacted or visited 41 different PHAs. Of these, 33 PHAs
administered both the public housing and voucher programs, 7
administered the voucher program only, and 1 administered the public
housing program only.
[5] In this report, we consider a veteran renter household to be
elderly if at least one veteran member was 62 years or older. A veteran
renter household with a disability contains at least one veteran member
with a disability as defined by Census.
[6] See GAO, Homeless Veterans Programs: Improved Communications and
Follow-up Could Further Enhance the Grant and Per Diem Program, GAO-06-
859 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 11, 2006).
[7] U.S.C. Title 38, Part II General Benefits, and Part III
Readjustment and Related Benefits.
[8] A tenant's rent is based on a family's anticipated gross annual
income--that is, income from all sources received by the family head,
spouse, and each additional family member who is 18 years of age or
older, less applicable exclusions and deductions. There are 44
different types of income exclusions and deductions.
[9] HUD's project-based rental assistance programs include project-
based Section 8, Project Rental Assistance Contract (PRAC) under the
Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly and the Section 811
Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities programs, Rental
Assistance Program (RAP), and Rent Supplement.
[10] The Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program is an exception
because it is administered by PHAs rather than property owners or
managers.
[11] Census defines disability as a long-lasting sensory, physical,
mental, or emotional condition that can make it difficult for a person
to perform activities such as walking, climbing stairs, dressing,
bathing, learning, or remembering. The condition can impede a person
from being able to go outside the home alone or to work at a job or
business. The definition includes persons with severe vision or hearing
impairments.
[12] Estimates derived from the ACS, like all survey data, contain
sampling errors (that is, such estimates would be different if the
survey had selected another sample). Since each sample could have
provided different estimates, we express our confidence in the
precision of this sample's results as 90 percent confidence intervals.
In this report, we express this type of error as a margin of error,
which is the difference between an estimate and its upper or lower
confidence interval, and we express the margin of error as a
percentage. The margins of error were larger for Vermont, Delaware, and
Wyoming (exceeding plus or minus 20 percent) than those for the other
states because of the relatively small sample size used to derive the
estimates (see app. II for margins of error for each state and the
District of Columbia).
[13] HUD classifies a housing affordability problem as "moderate" if
housing costs are between 30.1 percent and 50 percent of household
income and "severe" if housing costs are more than 50 percent.
[14] HUD's regulation defines housing overcrowding as a housing unit
with 1.01 or more persons per room (see 24 C.F.R. 791.402) but does not
provide a definition for severe overcrowding. The measure of severe
overcrowding to which we refer in this report (1.51 or more persons per
room) is commonly used for statistical reporting purposes.
[15] According to ACS, a housing unit has complete plumbing if it has
(1) hot and cold piped water, (2) a flush toilet, and (3) a bathtub or
shower and complete kitchen facilities if it has (1) a sink with piped
water, (2) a stove or range, and (3) a refrigerator.
[16] 24 C.F.R. 5.609.
[17] In addition to these 39 income exclusions, program administrators
must also apply five income deductions to determine the household's
adjusted income--that is, the amount of income used to calculate the
household's rental contribution, which include standard amounts for
each dependent and for elderly family members and those with
disabilities. See 24 C.F.R. 5.611.
[18] Pub. L. Nos. 101-201 and 104-204.
[19] The veteran also must meet HUD's eligibility requirements for the
housing choice voucher program.
[20] HUD Notices of Funding Availability for the Section 8 Set-Aside
for Homeless Veterans with Severe Psychiatric or Substance Abuse
Disorders, Fiscal Years 1992, 1993, and 1994.
[21] According to the VA, veterans receiving HUD-VASH vouchers may
leave the program because, for example, they no longer need or qualify
for assistance.
[22] Pub. L. No. 107-95.
[23] The House and Senate bills for HUD's fiscal year 2008
appropriations (H.R. 3074 and S. 1789) appropriate monies for
additional HUD-VASH vouchers.
[24] Qualifying conditions under this preference included displacements
caused by disaster, government action, hate crime, and domestic abuse,
and to avoid reprisals.
[25] According to HUD, a unit is substandard if it is dilapidated; does
not have operable indoor plumbing; does not have a usable flush toilet
inside the unit for exclusive use of the family; does not have
electricity, or has inadequate or unsafe electrical service; does not
have a safe or adequate source of heat; should, but does not, have a
kitchen; or has been declared unfit for habitation by an agency or unit
of government. In addition, if an applicant is a homeless family, that
family is considered to be living in substandard housing.
[26] The use of the federal preference requirement was temporarily
suspended by the continuing resolution enacted in January 1996 through
the appropriations act for fiscal year 1998.
[27] Specifically, QHWRA required that not less than 75 percent of new
program participants under the voucher program and not less than 40
percent under the public housing and project-based Section 8 programs
be extremely low income.
[28] A PHA's administrative plan is a comprehensive guide to the
agency's policies, programs, operations, and strategies for meeting
local housing needs and goals. There are two parts to the plan: (1) the
5-Year Plan, which each PHA submits to HUD once every fifth PHA fiscal
year and (2) the Annual Plan, which is submitted to HUD every year.
[29] A tenant selection plan is a comprehensive guide that describes
the owners' tenant selection policies and procedures. These plans
include descriptions of the eligibility requirements and income limits
for admission.
[30] U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy
Development and Research, "The Use of Discretionary Authority in the
Tenant-Based Section 8 Program" (Washington, D.C.: 2000).
[31] During the 109th Congress, this legislation was introduced in both
the Senate and the House of Representatives (S. 3475 and H.R. 5561). On
April 10, 2007, the legislation was reintroduced in the Senate (S.
1084).
[32] National Low Income Housing Coalition, A Look at Waiting Lists:
What Can We Learn from the HUD Approved Annual Plans?, NLIHC Research
Note 04-03 (Washington, D.C.: 2004).
[33] According to HUD policy, a preference for households that are
involuntarily displaced by government action or natural disaster
generally applies to properties that have a HUD-insured mortgage.
[34] Since a significant portion of HUD-assisted households have very
low-and extremely low-incomes, we also estimated the share of veteran
renter households in these two income categories and found that about
19 percent of them received HUD assistance (compared with about 27
percent of other households).
[35] HUD is required by law to set locality-specific income limits that
are used to determine eligibility of applicants for HUD's assisted
housing programs. HUD develops income limits by categories (for
example, 80, 50, and 30 percent of AMI) for each metropolitan area and
nonmetropolitan county, adjusted for family size and for areas that
have unusually high or low income-to-housing cost relationships.
[36] In its published estimates derived from ACS, Census reports the
magnitude of sampling error based on a 90 percent confidence level.
[37] We contacted or visited 41 different PHAs. Of these, 33 PHAs
administered both public housing and voucher programs, 7 administered
voucher programs only, and 1 administered public housing programs only.
[38] PIC is the automated HUD system that PHAs use to submit
information to HUD on households receiving voucher and public housing
rental assistance. TRACS is HUD's automated system for collecting and
maintaining rental assistance data from property owners and contract
administrators on individuals residing in multifamily housing projects.
BIRLS is VA's computerized system of veterans and beneficiary records,
and it contains personal and military service data.
[39] The two programs--which fund the development of rental housing for
very low-income households with members who are elderly or have a
disability--require that project sponsors make supportive services
available to assisted households.
[40] These deductions include standard amounts for each dependent
member of the household or for members who are elderly or have a
disability.
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Susan Becker, Acting Managing Director, BeckerS@gao.gov (202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
