Opening Doors
A HOUSING PUBLICATION FOR THE DISABILITY COMMUNITY

SEPTEMBER 2004
ISSUE 25

Section 8 Problems Negatively Affect People With Disabilities

By Emily Cooper and Ann O'Hara

Introduction

The federal Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program is critically important to people with disabilities. Proposals made this year by the Bush Administration will seriously undermine the voucher program if they are adopted by Congress. Highlighted in Section 8 At Risk!, the March 2004 issue of Opening Doors, these proposals could cut over $1.6 billion from the Section 8 budget and convert the program to a block grant administered by Public Housing Agencies (PHAs).

This issue of Opening Doors provides a status report on the Section 8 voucher program, including up-to-the-minute information on three important topics:

An update on the Section 8 “battle” being played out in Washington, D.C. as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Fiscal Year 2005 budget moves slowly through Congress;
The disastrous effect of recent HUD Section 8 fiscal guidance to PHAs that places voucher holders – including people with disabilities – at risk of losing their housing; and
HUD’s continued mismanagement of more than 60,000 Section 8 vouchers set aside by Congress for people with disabilities.

Most importantly, this issue is about how readers of Opening Doors can help to remedy these serious problems and also help to advocate for new Section 8 vouchers in the federal budget. The Technical Assistance Collaborative, Inc. (TAC) and the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Housing Task Force (CCD Housing Task Force) – the publishers of Opening Doors – believe that the entire disability community must join with other interest groups to protect and expand the Section 8 program, both now and in the future. Toward that end, this issue provides specific and detailed “advocacy action steps” that can be implemented at both the local and federal levels to ensure the future of this vitally important federal housing program. If you care about decent, safe, affordable, and accessible housing for people with disabilities, we need your help and we need it now!

A publication of the
Technical Assistance
Collaborative, Inc.
and the Consortium for
Citizens with Disabilities
(CCD) Housing
Task Force

door

What's Inside?

More People With Disabilities Have Vouchers!

Status Report from Washington

Update on HUD's Section 8 Proposals

PHA Funding Shortfalls

HUD Mismanagement of 60,000 Disability Vouchers

Negative Effect on People with Disabilities

In this issue:

	Section 8 Budget Battle Not Over
	HUD Causes Fiscal Chaos in PHA Section 8 Programs
	HUD Mismanages Disability Vouchers

Sample Letter to Congress

Name of Congressman }(refer to www.nlihc.org to find this information)
Address

Dear ___________,

The XYZ Disability organization is writing to urge your immediate and continued support for the federal Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. Current HUD proposals, if enacted into law, would dismantle this highly successful federal housing program and cut $1.6 billion from its budget. These proposals would cause irreparable harm to 440,000 people with disabilities who currently have vouchers and to millions more who need vouchers to live in the community.

Over three million non-elderly people with disabilities currently receive federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits and have incomes equal to only 18 percent of the median income. Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers are now virtually the only federal resource available to help people with disabilities leave institutional settings, board and care homes, homeless shelters, and other costly facilities. It is estimated that hundreds of thousands of adults with disabilities are still living at home with aging parents who are in their 70s and 80s. They need vouchers in order to have stable housing in the community once their families can no longer provide housing for them.

These facts illustrate the critical need for more vouchers to be provided by Congress, rather than the need to cut the program’s funding. People with disabilities and other vulnerable low-income groups should not have to bear the burden of federal tax cuts that benefit the highest-income households.

We urge your support for this extremely important program.

Sincerely,

XYZ Disability Organization

Background

The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program is, without a doubt, the most important federal housing program in the United States today for people with extremely low incomes. With two million vouchers now in use, the program makes up approximately 50 percent of the entire supply of federally subsidized housing in the country. As other HUD-funded subsidy programs have either been eliminated or cut back, the Section 8 voucher program has become the major HUD program available to address the country’s most urgent housing needs – those of people with disabilities.

The Section 8 voucher program works by providing monthly rental assistance payments to private landlords. It is not an entitlement program and there are long waiting lists for Section 8 assistance. But the long wait is definitely worth it!

Households obtain Section 8 vouchers primarily through a network of 2,600 PHAs across the country. With a voucher, a household selects housing in the private rental market and typically pays between 30 – 40 percent of income toward the rent. The balance of the rent is paid by the PHA directly to the landlord with Section 8 voucher program funds from HUD. People with disabilities receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) typically pay between $150 – $200 per month towards monthly housing costs when they receive assistance through the Section 8 program.

For More Information ...

For more information on how the voucher program works, refer to the following TAC publications available on TAC’s website (www.tacinc.org):

	Opening Doors issue #17: Section 8 Program at Risk! Administration Proposal Will Harm People with Disabilities
	Section 8 Made Simple: Using the Housing Choice Voucher Program to Assist People with Disabilities

More People With Disabilities Have Vouchers!

The Section 8 voucher program has become increasingly important – and increasingly available – to people with disabilities over the past eight years. According to HUD data, participation in the voucher program by people with disabilities in recent years has almost doubled. In the early 1990s, approximately 11 percent of the Section 8 vouchers[1] funded by Congress were being used by households with disabilities. Today, an estimated 22 percent of Section 8 vouchers are assisting people with disabilities. In real numbers, this means that approximately 440,000 of the two million vouchers now being used are assisting people with disabilities – a significant increase in a relatively short time period.

There are two key reasons for the increase in the number of people with disabilities who receive housing assistance under the Section 8 voucher program:

From 1997 – 2001, Congress created over 60,000 new vouchers exclusively for people with disabilities. In addition to being eligible for all “regular” vouchers, people with disabilities were intended to have exclusive access to these 60,000 additional vouchers; and

People with disabilities and their housing advocates have become more educated and skilled at “navigating” the complexities of the Section 8 process. Many have also formed partnerships with PHAs. Better access to information – including publications like TAC’s Section 8 Made Simple guidebook – has helped to make this progress possible.

What is at Stake

Because 440,000 people with disabilities currently have Section 8 vouchers, the disability community has a much bigger “stake” in the outcomes of any proposed changes to the voucher program. Certainly, without vouchers, many of these 440,000 households would undoubtedly be homeless. In addition to concerns about current voucher holders, there are thousands and thousands of people with disabilities on PHA voucher waiting lists who would be adversely affected by the changes to the program being proposed by HUD. Finally, there are several million people with disabilities with SSI-level incomes who need housing assistance. The Section 8 program must be expanded in order to help address this need. So the stakes are high indeed.

Major changes in the voucher program, whether they concern funding levels or how the program works, are decided in Washington , D.C. by the Administration and by Congress. It is important to pay attention to the Section 8 budget process and any other Section 8 legislation that is proposed. The disability community literally cannot afford to take the voucher program for granted!

There is also more at stake for people with disabilities in the voucher program than the outcomes of current Section 8 policy and budget battles in Washington. Because of years of mismanagement at HUD, the previously mentioned 60,000 vouchers created by Congress as a set-aside for people with disabilities are also at risk. Despite a mandate from Congress, HUD’s failure to manage and monitor these vouchers effectively means that some disability vouchers may have been given to non-disabled households. TAC, the CCD Housing Task Force, and key members of Congress are trying to repair the damage done by HUD and ensure that these vouchers are given only to people with disabilities. But we need your help! We also need your help to win the “battle” for the future of the Section 8 voucher program that continues to be fought in Washington, D.C.

Status Report from Washington

As mentioned earlier, the March 2004 issue of Opening Doors (available online at www.tacinc.org/index/admin/index/_uploads/docs/ACF10D7.pdf) described HUD’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 budget proposal to cut more than $1.6 billion from the voucher program – a funding cut of approximately 12 percent. That issue also provided an analysis of HUD’s Flexible Voucher Program proposal to convert the Section 8 voucher program to a federal block grant administered by PHAs. If enacted, these proposals would cause great harm to people with disabilities.

Last year, a similar effort by the Administration to convert the Section 8 voucher program to a state-administered block grant – the so-called Housing Assistance for Needy Families program – was rejected by Congress, after strong opposition was expressed by advocates from both housing and human services groups at the national and local levels. These HUD block grant proposals demonstrate the Administration’s budgetary goal to “downsize” the federal government’s commitment to provide affordable housing funding for the lowest-income people. In fact, HUD officials have recently stated publicly that the Section 8 program should be targeted to households with incomes above 30 percent of median income, rather than continue to be targeted to the lowest-income people!

On August 6, 2004 , HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson wrote an Op-Ed column for the New York Times about the Section 8 program. In this column, Secretary Jackson stated: “In 1998 Congress enacted a quota system that gives Section 8 vouchers almost exclusively to families making less than 30 percent of a given area’s median income … The Flexible Voucher Program, while still serving low-income families, would remove the quota system.”

During the past few months, while Congress has been considering HUD’s latest Section 8 block grant proposal and the $1.6 billion cut in funding for the upcoming fiscal year, HUD has been busy causing serious fiscal problems with PHAs’ Section 8 voucher program funding for this fiscal year. To advocates who have been involved with the Section 8 program for many years, it appears that HUD is determined – through one method or another – to undermine one of the most successful federal housing programs ever created. An update on the status of HUD’s Section 8 proposals for next year, as well as information on the current Section 8 fiscal problems for PHAs, is provided below.

Update on HUD’s Section 8 Proposals

Although the struggle to preserve the Section 8 voucher program is far from over, advocates finally received some good news in July when the U. S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee rejected HUD’s Section 8 voucher program budget cuts and its Flexible Voucher Program proposal. The Committee acted in response to a sustained advocacy effort from around the country, including actions by advocates for people with disabilities. Unfortunately, in order to fully fund all current Section 8 vouchers that are leased, the Committee cut most of HUD’s other programs by 4.3 percent, including the Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program, the McKinney/Vento Homeless Assistance programs, and the HOME program.

The full House has not yet acted on the Appropriation’s Committee recommendations for the Section 8 voucher program. The Senate has also not acted on any HUD appropriations legislation, which means that the Section 8 battle. To add to the uncertainty, Congress may not be able to reach agreement on a final federal budget for FY 2005 until after the November elections.

These federal funding decisions facing Congress cannot be put off forever. Housing advocates at both the national and local levels must remain vigilant and continue to advocate to preserve and expand the Section 8 voucher program. Cuts to Section 8 funding and some version of the Flexible Voucher Program may be “back on the table” for discussion before the FY 2005 budget process finally concludes. Once FY 2005’s budget is a reality, advocates for people with disabilities must be prepared to work even harder so that new Section 8 vouchers can be obtained in the FY 2006 budget – a process that will begin in early 2005.

PHA Funding Shortfalls

In addition to concerns about the FY 2005 HUD budget, Section 8 advocates have also been trying to deal with serious fiscal problems at many PHAs related to their current Section 8 budget for this fiscal year. Shortfalls in Section 8 funding for vouchers currently leased are occurring at many PHAs and will continue to be a problem through the Fall of 2004. These problems are forcing many PHAs to:

· Consider terminating vouchers currently under lease;

· “Hold” unleased vouchers rather than issue them to households on the Section 8 waiting lists;

· Immediately lower rents to landlords;

· Eventually raise tenant rents; and/or

· Make other changes that will ultimately reduce landlord participation and make it much more difficult for vouchers to be used.

The fiscal problems of PHA voucher programs are complex but are primarily an outcome of new HUD policies announced in an April 22 HUD Notice to PHAs (PIH Notice 2004-7: Implementation of FFY 2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act Provisions for the Housing Choice Voucher Program). HUD has stated that these new policies are mandated by Congress, and that HUD is merely following Congressional instructions, but many Members of Congress disagree with HUD’s actions. Advocates believe that HUD’s willingness to provoke complete fiscal chaos in PHAs’ Section 8 voucher programs and – more importantly – cause two million low-income households to worry about the security of their housing voucher – is completely indefensible.

As PHAs began to run out of funds in June of 2004, HUD did modify its fiscal guidance somewhat, but not until after many Section 8 voucher holders were put at risk of losing their vouchers. As we go to press with this issue in August of 2004, these serious fiscal problems may continue to plague some PHAs across the nation. Until this problem is finally resolved, some PHAs are at risk of not receive all the funding they need to pay for all vouchers currently leased.

What You Can Do

The disability community must remain vigilant and active in its advocacy efforts around Section 8 vouchers. Congress is beginning to get the message that the Section 8 program is important to many constituencies – including people with disabilities. But more advocacy is needed to protect the program now and expand the program in the future.

If you have not yet contacted your members of Congress to underscore the importance of the Section 8 voucher program for people with disabilities and urge their support for full funding, please do it now! A sample letter to Congress is included on page 2. If you have already expressed your support, we recommend that you continue to pay attention to Section 8 program related developments in Washington , and get back in touch with your legislators as important developments occur. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington , D.C. www.cbpp.org maintains an excellent website with up-to-the-minute information on this important issue. TAC’s website (www.tacinc.org) and the National Low Income Housing Coalition’s (NLIHC) website (www.nlihc.org) are also good sources of information. The NLIHC site can help you learn how to contact Members of Congress.

You can also contact your PHA to find out whether they are being negatively effected by HUD’s new fiscal policies for the voucher program. You can begin this conversation with your PHA by asking this simple question: “Will the PHA’s Section 8 program be adversely effected by HUD’s April 22, 2004 notice?” If the answer is yes, ask for more information regarding exactly what the PHA plans to do to cut Section 8 voucher program costs. You want to take note of any effort to terminate current Section 8 tenants, lower rents to landlords, raise tenant rents, or hold back “turnover” vouchers. Ask the PHA what they are doing, if anything, to contact their Congressional delegation and offer to help. Let the PHA know that disability organizations can sometimes have a greater impact on this issue with Members of Congress than PHAs – because people with disabilities and their families may be harmed by HUD’s actions.

HUD Mismanagement of 60,000 Disability Vouchers

Another critical Section 8 problem that the disability community can help to remedy is HUD’s continuing mismanagement of approximately 60,000 Section 8 disability vouchers. These valuable housing resources were created by Congress specifically for people with disabilities. Despite this Congressional mandate, many of these vouchers may have been given to households without disabilities. Housing advocates for people with disabilities can help re-direct these vouchers to people with disabilities by helping to educate and monitor the PHAs that administer them.

These disability vouchers fall into two basic categories:

An estimated 12,090 “Mainstream” Section 8 vouchers that are actually funded from HUD’s Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities Program (see box at right for more information). The table on page 8 lists those PHAs with Mainstream vouchers; and
An estimated 49,590 additional Section 8 vouchers set-aside by Congress for people with disabilities (see page 16 for more information). The table on page 12 lists those PHAs with additional disability vouchers.

Basics of Mainstream Section 8 Vouchers Funded
From the Section 811 Program

Since 1997, Congress has funded over 12,000 tenant-based vouchers from the Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program. HUD “converts” this funding into Section 8 vouchers and awards the vouchers to both PHAs and non-profit disability organizations that apply through an annual NOFA. This NOFA is extremely important because it is the only program guidance HUD has ever provided to the agencies administering Section 811-funded Mainstream vouchers.

PHAs can tell the difference between 811-funded Mainstream vouchers and all other Section 8 vouchers by the fact that 811-funded vouchers are the only Section 8 vouchers administered by PHAs that have five-year Annual Contributions Contracts (ACCs). An ACC is HUD’s legal contract with a PHA for the Section 8 voucher program. The table on page 8 lists all PHAs that administer five-year Section 811-funded Mainstream vouchers.

Because they are funded from the Section 811 program, which by law dedicated exclusively to people with disabilities, it is illegal for a PHA to provide one of these vouchers to a non-disabled household. Nonetheless, there is evidence of serious problems with the administration of the Mainstream voucher program including the following:

Some PHAs are not aware of their obligations under the Mainstream program. They may not be aware that the vouchers are actually funded from the Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program. Because they may lack this information, PHAs may have provided these vouchers to non-disabled households.
Some PHAs and non-profits administering these vouchers have also had difficulty obtaining enough funding from HUD to ensure that all of the vouchers they were awarded by HUD can be leased. There are several bureaucratic reasons for this lack of funding. The outcome is the same however – fewer disability vouchers being given to people with disabilities.
PHAs may not be providing some or all of the housing-related supportive services they are obligated to provide to people with disabilities as a condition of their Mainstream funding award. In order to receive these vouchers from HUD, PHAs were required to commit to providing certain supportive services such as assistance with housing search, accessibility modifications, etc. to people who received these vouchers. HUD has not monitored PHAs to ensure that these services are being made available.

During the past year, Congress has become increasingly concerned about problems with the Section 8 Mainstream program. More information is needed, however, to determine exactly how serious these problems may be. Disability advocates can help to collect this information and also to advocate with PHAs for the proper use of these vouchers.

HUD’s Lack of Guidance

Although there are very specific aspects of HUD’s mismanagement of disability vouchers, these problems can be summed up in one simple sentence: HUD has done an extremely poor job communicating with PHAs regarding disability vouchers. In fact, until recently, no HUD program guidance on these vouchers set aside for people with disabilities had been issued by HUD other than the original Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs), some of which were published as far back as 1997!

On August 5, 2004 HUD finally released some limited guidance regarding these vouchers in PIH Notice 2004-13: New Codes for Special Programs Reported on the Family Report. This Notice provides brief instructions for PHAs to collect and submit data to HUD on vouchers set aside by Congress for people with disabilities. This Notice states that the requested data will allow HUD to “track the usage of funds awarded or assigned to PHAs through the Housing Choice Voucher program for special populations, particularly non-elderly disabled families.” Although this Notice is a step in the right direction, it is unclear how it will improve access by people with disabilities to these set aside vouchers if they are no longer being targeted to people with disabilities by PHAs.

Despite the recent HUD’s Notice, many PHAs may still:

Not even know they have these vouchers in their Section 8 program; and

Not be aware of their legal obligations regarding these Section 8 vouchers that Congress set aside for people with disabilities.

HUD’s lack of comprehensive guidance to PHAs means that disability housing advocates must first help PHAs determine if they have any vouchers from one or more of these disability set-aside programs. To assist with this task we are publishing the complete list of PHAs with set-aside vouchers in this issue of Opening Doors. If a PHA in your area is listed, disability advocates should contact them as soon as possible. Bring this issue of Opening Doors with you so that the PHA can see exactly what disability vouchers HUD awarded them in prior years.

Section 8 Mainstream Housing Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities Program
(Section 811-funded vouchers with five-year renewable Annual Contributions Contracts)

HOUSING AGENCY	VOUCHERS	YEAR AWARDED
Alabama
Housing Authority of Jefferson County	50	‘03
Housing Authority of Walker County	75	‘99
Mobile Housing Board	100	‘97
Arizona
Arizona Behavioral Health Corporation*	125	‘00, ‘03
City of Mesa Housing Authority	100	‘97
City of Phoenix Housing Authority	75	‘02
Mohave County Housing Authority	50	‘00
Pima County Housing Authority	50	‘00
Arkansas
Benton Housing Authority	75	‘02
California
Anaheim Housing Authority	225	‘97, ‘01, ‘03
City of Fresno Housing Authority	42	‘03
City of Napa Housing Authority	30	‘02
County of Riverside Housing Authority	38	‘97
County of San Bernardino Housing Authority	100	‘98
County of Santa Clara Housing Authority	53	‘00
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles	75	‘99
Housing Authority of the County of San Diego	50	‘03
Oakland Housing Authority	175	‘98, ‘01
Santa Cruz County Housing Authority	100	‘00, ‘01
Colorado
Center for People with Disabilities*	75	‘02
CO Department of Human Services	50	‘03
CO Division of Housing	50	‘03
Colorado Bluesky Enterprises*	75	‘00
Larimer County Housing Authority	65	‘02
Connecticut
CT Department of Social Services	150	‘99, ‘01
Waterbury Housing Authority	75	‘00
Delaware
Dover Housing Authority	30	‘99
Wilmington Housing Authority	100	‘97
District of Columbia
Community Connections*	150	‘01, ‘02
Florida
Alachua County Housing Authority	75	‘01
Boley Centers for Behavioral Health Care*	181	‘99, ‘01, ‘03
Broward County Housing Authority	50	‘03
Carrfour Supportive Housing*	50	‘03
Clearwater Housing Authority	75	‘97
Housing Partnership*	75	‘00
Miami-Dade Housing Authority	75	‘99
Tallahassee Housing Authority	75	‘00
Georgia
GA Department of Community Affairs	75	‘02
Housing Authority of the City of Atlanta	50	‘03
Housing Authority of the City of Decatur	75	‘01, ‘02
Rockmart Housing Authority	58	‘02
Hawaii
City and County of Honolulu	175	‘98, ‘01
Idaho
ID Housing and Finance Association	75	‘01
Illionois
Chicago Housing Authority	50	‘03
Housing Authority of the Village of Oak Park	50	‘03
Quincy Housing Authority	75	‘02
Springfield Housing Authority	75	‘99
Indiana
Columbus Housing Authority	75	‘01
Crawfordsville Housing Authority	20	‘02
Kansas
Sek-Cap, Inc.	75	‘02
Wichita Housing Authority	75	‘01
Kentucky
Housing Authority of Floyd County	25	‘98
KY Housing Corporation	75	‘02
Louisiana
Community Support Programs*	58	‘99
Housing Authority of Jefferson Parish	75	‘98
Housing Authority of New Orleans	25	‘97
Pilgrim Rest Community Development*	75	‘00
Maine
Augusta Housing Authority	50	‘99
Brunswick Housing Authority	15	‘99
Westbrook Housing Authority	100	‘97
Maryland
Anne Arundel County Housing Authority	100	‘97
ARC Northern Chesapeake Region*	75	‘99
Housing Authority of the City of Rockville	50	‘98
MD Department of Housing and Community Development	60	‘99
Massachusetts
American Training*	50	‘03
Brockton Area Multi-Services*	14	‘03
Chelmsford Housing Authority	75	‘02
Community TeamWork*	43	‘01
Greater Lynn Mental Health and Retardation Association*	125	‘01, ‘03
Lawrence Housing Authority	25	‘98
Lowell Housing Authority	75	‘00
MA Department of Housing and Community Development	75	‘99
Middlesex North Resource Center *	75	‘01
Peabody Housing Authority	75	‘00
The Bridge of Central Mass*	35	99
Westfield Housing Authority	25	98
Michigan
Housing Services for Eaton County *	75	01
Ingham County Housing Commission	100	98
Madison Heights Housing Commission	50	97
Minnesota
HRA of the City of Saint Paul PHA	100	98
Mental Health Resources*	75	02
Plymouth Housing Redevelopment Authority	15	99
Scott Carver Dakota CAP Agency*	50	02
South Metro Human Services*	75	02
Missouri
Community Housing Network*	75	99
Kansas City Housing Authority	100	97
Nebraska
Douglas County Housing Authority	125	98, 01
Nevada
Accessible Space*	75	01
NV Rural Housing Authority	150	01, 02
New Hampshire
Harbor Homes*	75	00
Keene Housing Authority	50	97
New Jersey
Collaborative Support Programs of NJ*	75	00
Community Enterprises Corporation*	50	03
Hunterdon County Housing Authority	50	98
Jersey City Episcopal Community Development Corporation*	50	03
Jersey City Housing Authority	200	97, 98
NJ Department of Community Affairs	66	00
New Mexico
Barrier Free Futures*	20	99
Truth or Consequences Housing Authority	20	97
New York
Albany Housing Authority	75	99
Amsterdam Housing Authority	25	98
Family and Children Association*	50	03
Gloversville Housing Authority	30	99
Mercy Haven*	36	99
NY City Housing Authority	100	97
NY Society for the Deaf*	150	99, 00
Options for Community Living*	75	01
Rochester Housing Authority	150	99, 01
Southern Tier Environment for Living*	25	99
Town of Amherst Housing Authority	175	98, 00
Town of Colonie Housing Authority	10	98
Transitional Services for Long Island *	75	02
North Carolina
Eastern Carolina Human Services Agency	75	01
Housing Authority of Greensboro	50	97
Ohio
Columbiana Metropolitan Housing Authority	75	02
Columbus Metropolitan Housing Authority	75	99
Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority	125	02, 03
Emerald Development & Economic Network ( EDEN )*	50	03
Fayette Metropolitan Housing Authority	75	99
Hancock Metropolitan Housing Authority	75	00
Marion Metropolitan Housing Authority	75	02
New Avenues for Independence *	75	99
Portage Metropolitan Housing Authority	75	01
Oregon
Clackamas County Housing Authority	75	00
Coos-Curry Housing Authority	50	99, 01
Housing Authority of Douglas County	10	99
Housing Authority of the City of Salem	50	97
Josephine Housing and Community Development	75	99
Pennsylvania
1260 Housing Development Corporation*	50	03
Allegheny County Housing Authority	49	03
Blair County Housing Authority	22	97
Butler County Housing Authority	50	97
Carbon County Housing Authority	15	00
Clarion County Housing Authority	100	97
Northampton County Housing Authority	10	00
Philadelphia Housing Authority	50	03
Rhode Island
Gateway HealthCare*	75	99
Kent County Mental Health Center *	75	99
South Carolina
Housing Authority of the City of Myrtle Beach	69	00
Tennessee
Housing Authority of Crossville	12	99
Knoxville Community Development Corp.	100	97
Metropolitan Development and Housing Agency	75	02
TN Housing Development Agency	50	03
Texas
Austin Housing Authority	59	02
City of Amarillo Housing Authority	80	98, 02
Housing Authority of Dallas	125	99, 03
Housing Authority of El Paso	75	02
Housing Authority of Fort Worth	100	98
Housing Authority of the City of Houston	50	03
San Antonio Housing Authority	100	98
Utah
Beaver County Housing Authority	15	99
Cedar City Housing Authority	25	97
Logan City Housing Authority	75	00
Vermont
VT State Housing Authority	200	98
Virginia
Chesapeake Redevelopment and Housing Authority	75	02
County of Loudoun Housing Services	75	02
Hampton Redevelopment and Housing Authority	75	00
Piedmont Housing Alliance *	75	99
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority	46	02
VA Housing Development Authority	100	97
Washington
Bellingham Housing Authority	75	99
Housing Authority of Okanogan County	75	01
Housing Authority of the City of Vancouver	75	00
Housing Authority of Thurston County	75	99
King County Housing Authority	150	98, 03
Seattle Housing Authority	75	01
West Virginia
Housing Authority of the City of Morgantown	39	97
Wisconsin
Waukesha County Housing Authority	75	99

Negative Effect on People with Disabilities

TAC and the CCD Housing Task Force have developed an estimate of the negative effect of HUD’s mismanagement of these 60,000 disability vouchers. We estimate that between 10,000 and 20,000 disability vouchers may have been given in error to non-disabled households by PHAs.

This estimate was derived by estimating the percentage of these vouchers that would “turn over” each year and be available for a new person with a disability on the Section 8 waiting list. Turnover vouchers are those vouchers that have already been given out (or “issued”) to a household and – for numerous reasons – the voucher is “returned” to the PHA. When this happens, the turnover voucher can then be re-issued to an applicant on the waiting list.

Congress has been very clear with HUD that when any of these 60,000 disability vouchers turns over they should be re-issued to people with disabilities. Typically, about 5 percent to 10 percent of a PHA’s vouchers will turnover in the course of a year. By applying these turnover rates to the disability vouchers available every year since 1997, TAC has estimated that if 5 percent of the available vouchers turned over in any given year, and if this turnover was not redirected to people with disabilities as Congress intended, it is possible that 10,000 people with disabilities have not been assisted. This estimate increases to 20,000 vouchers if a 10 percent turnover rate is used.

Sample Letter to PHA:

Section 8 Director
Anytown Housing Authority
10 Main Street
Anytown , USA

Dear Section 8 Director,

According to the enclosed Opening Doors publication, in recent years Anytown Housing Authority has been awarded ## vouchers for people with disabilities from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). I am writing to you to obtain more information about these vouchers. Specifically,

Are you aware that you have been awarded these vouchers for people with disabilities?
How many of these vouchers are currently being used (i.e., leased)?
How did you determine who would receive these vouchers?
Are any of the vouchers currently being used by non-disabled households?
Do these vouchers continue to be used by people with disabilities when they turn over?

I am working to ensure that there is safe, decent, and affordable housing for people with disabilities. This information will be extremely helpful in determining what resources are available for people with disabilities in Anytown.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Helpful Disability Organization

What You Can Do

Local and state disability organizations, advocates, and self-advocates can help TAC and the CCD Housing Task Force ensure that these 60,000 disability vouchers continue to be set aside exclusively for people with disabilities:

→ Using the list of PHAs with disability vouchers provided in this issue, find out if PHAs in your geographic area were awarded these vouchers by HUD. Keep in mind that these HUD awards were made starting in 1997, and that every single voucher is still funded by Congress.

→ If you determine that one or more PHAs in your locality received a HUD award of disability vouchers, you can contact the PHA to learn the status of these vouchers. To maintain a written record, it is best to contact the PHA in writing (see sample letter on page 10). Make sure to include a copy of HUD’s PIH Notice 2004-13 (available online at www. hudclips.org) with your written request.

→ If possible, have other disability organizations join you in this effort. Recently, a California-based disability coalition wrote a letter that helped identify a PHA that had received 75 disability vouchers in 1999 and was no longer setting them aside for people with disabilities on the Section 8 waiting list. The PHA and the disability coalition are now working together to correct this problem. Not surprisingly, the California PHA was completely unaware of the directive from Congress to continue to set aside these vouchers for people with disabilities.

→ If you receive a written or verbal response from the PHA indicating that the PHA is not continuing to maintain these disability vouchers as a set-aside, please let TAC know. The best way to contact us is by e-mailing TAC’s Technical Assistance Coordinator Jessica Shaw at jshaw@tacinc.org . Your e-mail response will help TAC document the full extent of this problem.

→ You should also arrange to meet with the PHA and bring this issue of Opening Doors and a copy of HUD’s PIH Notice 2004-13 with you to the meeting. Advise them to contact their Local HUD Section 8 staff to confirm the policy outlined in this issue of Opening Doors. If that does not work (and it may not), request that the PHA contact HUD Headquarters at (202) 708-2934 and speak to Deborah Hernandez, the Acting Section 8 Administrator. Or you can contact Ms. Hernandez on your own, if you are concerned that the PHA will not follow-up on your request. Ask Ms. Hernandez to contact the PHA and inform them of the Congressional policy directing PHAs to maintain these vouchers for people with disabilities upon turnover. Please e-mail Jessica Shaw at the above e-mail address to keep TAC informed of on your efforts!

If your PHA is continuing to maintain these disability vouchers as a set-aside for people with disabilities, please thank them for their efforts! Because HUD never informed PHAs in writing of this requirement, it is likely that the PHA made this positive decision on their own. They should be congratulated for continuing to be responsive to the housing needs of people with disabilities!

[1] This statistic includes Section 8 vouchers as well as Section 8 certificates – which were merged into one voucher program by Congress in 1998.

Section 8 Vouchers for People with Disabilities
(Vouchers with one-year renewable Annual Contributions Contracts)

HOUSING AGENCY	VOUCHERS	YEAR AWARDED
Alabama
Housing Authority of Jefferson County	93	‘98,’99
Housing Authority of Leeds	1	‘01
Housing Authority of the City of Montgomery	100	‘02
Housing Authority of Walker County	34	‘98
Mobile Housing Board	122	‘00
Arizona
City of Mesa Housing Authority	150	‘00,’01
City of Phoenix Housing Authority	200	‘98
Arkansas
Conway County Housing Authority	125	‘02
Jonesboro Urban Renewal Housing Authority	100	‘98
White River Regional Housing Authority	100	‘98
California
Alameda County Housing Authority	75	‘99
Anaheim Housing Authority	75	‘99
Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Dept.	75	‘99
City of Fresno Housing Authority	75	‘99
City of Garden Grove	100	‘98
City of Long Beach Housing Authority	200	‘02
City of Oceanside Housing Authority	100	‘98
City of Redding Housing Authority	34	‘98
City of San Jose Housing Authority	75	‘99
City of Santa Ana Housing Authority	100	‘98
City of Santa Barbara Housing Authority	100	‘97
County of Contra Costa Housing Authority	200	‘98
County of Fresno Housing Authority	75	‘99
County of Los Angeles Housing Authority	100	‘98
County of San Bernardino Housing Authority	75	‘99
County of Santa Clara Housing Authority	100	‘98
Housing Authority of the City of Encinitas	50	‘98
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles	300	‘98,’01
Imperial Valley Housing Authority	49	‘97
Kern County Housing Authority	225	‘98
Oakland Housing Authority	85	‘01
San Diego Housing Commission	200	‘00
San Francisco Housing Authority	75	‘99
Colorado
Aurora Housing Authority	75	‘99
Boulder City Housing Authority	50	‘97
Boulder County Housing Authority	35	‘98
CO Department of Human Services	960	‘98,’00,’01,’02
CO Division of Housing	350	‘98,’02
Denver Housing Authority	75	‘99
Fort Collins Housing Authority	100	‘98
Grand Junction Housing Authority	150	‘98,’01
Jefferson County Housing Authority	175	‘98,’99
Loveland Housing Authority	75	‘01
Connecticut
CT Department of Social Services	300	‘98,’01
Danbury Housing Authority	202	‘99
Greenwich Housing Authority	78	‘00
Manchester Housing Authority	36	‘00
Middletown Housing Authority	50	‘99
Naugatuck Housing Authority	20	‘00
New Britain Housing Authority	75	‘99
Norwalk Housing Authority	50	‘98
Waterbury Housing Authority	76	‘02
West Haven Housing Authority	100	‘98
Winchester Housing Authority	20	‘01
Windsor Housing Authority	30	‘98,’99
Windsor Locks Housing Authority	32	‘00
Delaware
Wilmington Housing Authority	50	‘97
District of Colubmia
DC Housing Authority	347	‘98,’99,’01
Florida
Broward County Housing Authority	75	‘01
City of Pensacola Housing Authority	50	‘98
Hialeah Housing Authority	298	‘99,’00,’01
Hillsborough County-BOCC	100	‘98
Housing Authority of Boca Raton	75	‘00