Priced Out in 2004

Priced Out in 2004 is the latest in a series of housing publications created as a joint effort by the Technical Assistance Collaborative, Inc. (TAC) and the Washington, DC based Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Housing Task Force. TAC is a national non-profit organization that works to achieve positive outcomes on behalf of people with disabilities or other special needs by providing state of the art information, capacity building, and technical expertise to organizations and policymakers in the areas of mental health, substance abuse, human services, and affordable housing. For further information, contact:

Technical Assistance Collaborative, Inc.

535 Boylston Street

Suite 1301

Boston, MA 02116

(617) 266-5657

info@tacinc.org

www.tacinc.org

CCD is a national coalition of consumer, advocacy, provider, and professional organizations that advocate on behalf of people of all ages with disabilities and their families. CCD has created the CCD Housing Task Force to focus specifically on housing issues that affect people with disabilities. For further information, please contact the CCD Housing Task Force co-chairs:

Kathleen McGinley

National Disability Rights Network

(202) 408-9514

Kathy.McGinley@ndrn.org

Andrew Sperling

National Alliance for the Mentally Ill

(703) 516-7222

andrew@nami.org

Elizabeth Savage

The Arc of the United States and United Cerebral Palsy Disability Policy Collaboration

(202) 783-2229

savage@thearc.org

Permission to reprint portions of this report or the data therein is granted, provided appropriate credit is given to the Technical Assistance Collaborative, Inc..

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements		1
Foreword by Senator Jack Reed (D) Rhode Island		2
Priced Out in 2004 Key Findings		3
	Introduction		3
	Major Findings in Priced Out in 2004		4
	SSI Compared to Rents for One-Bedroom and Studio/Efficiency Units		6
	State-By-State Analysis of Housing Affordability		7
	Disturbing Trends in State Rent Levels		9
	Housing Market Area Analysis		11
	Highest-Cost Local Housing Market Areas		11
	Rising Costs in Rural Housing Markets		11
	SSI Compared to Median Income		12
	Effect of SSI Supplements		14
	SSI Cost-of-Living Increases Compared to Increases in Rents		15
	SSI Compared to the National Low Income Housing Coalition’s Housing Wage		16
Priced Out in 2004 Policy Recommendations		19
How to Use the Information in Priced Out in 2004		23

Appendices
Appendix A: State and City Housing Market Data		26
Appendix B: Housing Market Areas That Require More Than 100 Percent of Monthly SSI Benefits to Rent a One-Bedroom Housing Unit		42
Appendix C: Non-Elderly People With Disabilities Receiving SSI Benefits in 2004		45
Appendix D: Priced Out in 2004 Methodology		46

Priced Out in 2004 Findings:

An Analysis of SSI Monthly Income and Rental Housing Costs

Introduction

n 2004, the average national rent for a modest one-bedroom housing unit climbed to a record high of $676 – more than the entire monthly income of people with disabilities who rely on the federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program to pay for housing and other basic needs. From 2002 to 2004, the cost of rental housing rose nationally from 105.5 percent to 109.6 percent of monthly SSI payments.

These are two of the important findings included in Priced Out in 2004 – an analysis of the extreme housing affordability problems of people with disabilities with the lowest incomes. Priced Out in 2004 is being published by the Technical Assistance Collaborative, Inc. (TAC) and the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Housing Task Force to focus public attention on this serious housing crisis that affects the lowest-income people with disabilities – those who qualify for federal SSI payments. Priced Out in 2004 is also a call for an immediate, significant, and long overdue government response to this problem.

SSI is the federal income maintenance program that provides a base of support for people with significant and long-term disabilities who have virtually no assets.[1] Approximately 4 million people with disabilities between the ages of 18-64 rely on SSI income to pay for their basic needs – including housing.

In 2004, federal SSI payments provided a monthly income of $564. Twenty three states provided an additional state SSI supplement to individuals with disabilities living independently,[2] raising the national average SSI payment to $617, or $7,404 per year.[3]

Federal housing affordability guidelines state that low-income households should pay no more than 30 percent of monthly income towards housing costs – approximately $185 per month for an SSI recipient. This long-standing policy recognizes that money must be left over after the rent is paid to cover other basic needs such as food, clothing, transportation, etc.

As the average one-bedroom rent in the United States continues to climb well above 100 percent of monthly SSI payments, the nation’s most vulnerable people with disabilities who have virtually no other financial resources are completely priced out of the rental housing market. This extreme affordability gap between disability income and rents – combined with the growing scarcity of available federal rent subsidies necessary to close the gap – means that millions of the lowest-income people with disabilities have no choice but to live in untenable circumstances.

The most visible of these individuals – defined as “chronically homeless”[4] by the federal government – live on our streets, in makeshift campgrounds, under bridges and highways, and in over-crowded and expensive emergency shelters. Millions of other SSI recipients have extremely serious housing problems that may be less visible to the public eye but are very real nonetheless. Included in this group are people forced to remain in expensive and restrictive nursing homes or who are ready for discharge from costly and restrictive mental health facilities but have no place to live. Thousands of people with disabilities who receive SSI barely survive in seriously substandard board and care homes that remain open primarily because there are no other housing alternatives for the residents.

Hundreds of thousands of adults with disabilities still live at home with aging parents who are now in their 70s and 80s.[5] These parents have saved the government billions of dollars in housing and support services costs over many years yet they have no assurance that their adult child will have decent, safe, and affordable housing in the community after the family can no longer provide it.

Priced Out in 2004 illustrates the severity of these critical housing problems by comparing the amount of monthly SSI income received by people with disabilities living independently – including SSI supplements provided by 23 states – with modest rental housing costs represented by the Fair Market Rents (FMRs) published annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Priced Out also clearly illustrates that supplementing SSI is not the answer to the housing problems of people with disabilities in today’s high-cost housing market. Even in states with supplements, modest rents approached or exceeded 100 percent of SSI benefits.

This fourth edition of Priced Out makes a clear and compelling case that only an ongoing monthly housing subsidy – such as provided through HUD’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program and the Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program – is sufficient to close the extreme affordability gap between SSI income and rental housing costs. In a cruel irony, recent federal proposals such as HUD’s Flexible Voucher Program legislation would reduce, rather than expand, these subsidies for the poorest Americans with disabilities at a time of their greatest need.

Major Findings in Priced Out in 2004

The major findings from the Priced Out in 2004 study including the following:

In 2004, as a national average, a person receiving SSI needed to pay 109.6 percent of their entire monthly income in order rent a modest one-bedroom unit. From 2002-2004, the housing affordability gap for people with disabilities continued to grow alarmingly while federal housing officials repeatedly proposed re-directing essential rent subsidy funds to higher-income households.

During the six years since Priced Out in 1998 was published, the amount of monthly SSI income needed to rent a modest one-bedroom unit has risen an astonishing 59 percent – from 69 percent of SSI in 1998 to 109.6 percent of SSI in 2004.

People with disabilities receiving SSI are also priced out of smaller studio/efficiency rental units. In 2004, the national average cost of these units rose to 96.1 percent of monthly SSI, an increase of 8 percent from 2002.

People with disabilities who rely on SSI payments continue to be among the lowest-income citizens in the United States. In 2004, the national average income of a person with a disability receiving SSI fell to a new low of 18.4 percent of median income – down from 18.8 percent in 2002.

Over the past six years, since the publication of Priced Out in 1998, the national average income of a one-person household receiving SSI disability payments dropped 25 percent relative to median income – from 24.4 percent of median income in 1998 to 18.4 percent in 2004.

Despite government commitments to end chronic homelessness and promises to expand community living opportunities for people with disabilities, recent HUD legislative proposals would have eliminated policies that help people who rely on SSI to access Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers. Vouchers are designed to bridge the gap between income and rent by paying the difference between what a very low-income household can afford (e.g., 30 percent of income) and modest rental housing costs. Fortunately, Congress has thus far refused to support HUD’s effort to repeal long-standing federal policies that help households most in need of housing assistance.

To the dismay of housing advocates, during the past two years Congress has not provided sufficient funding for all of the 2.1 million Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers administered by Public Housing Agencies (PHAs). This decision has meant that there are approximately 80,000 vouchers that PHAs cannot give to people on voucher waiting lists despite the fact that millions of people with disabilities living on SSI payments desperately need them. [6]

HUD also proposed cutting funding for the Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities program for Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 despite the fact that there are thousands of people currently living in restrictive and expensive publicly-funded facilities who could benefit from less costly permanent supportive housing.

Today, tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and mortgage interest deductions as high as $1 million per household appear to have priority over federal housing programs that help the most vulnerable low-income people with disabilities. The findings in Priced Out in 2004 highlighted below must be a wake-up call for all government officials who fail to make the housing needs of people with disabilities a high priority. As advocates and self-advocates, we must use this data to build the political will to change government policies and promote a significant expansion of affordable and accessible housing for people with disabilities in every community in the United States.

SSI Compared to Rents for One-Bedroom and Studio/Efficiency Units

In 2004, a person with a disability receiving monthly SSI payments as their source of income needed to spend 109.6 percent of their monthly income in order to rent a modest one-bedroom unit priced at the HUD Fair Market Rent – up from 105.5 percent of monthly SSI needed to rent the same unit in 2002.

In 2004, even rents for modest studio/efficiency apartments were virtually beyond the reach of people who rely on the SSI program. A comparison of SSI income to the HUD Fair Market Rent for a studio/efficiency unit found that the average rent was equal to 96.1 percent of monthly SSI in 2004 – up from 89.2 percent in 2002.

Since Priced Out in 1998 was published six years ago, the housing affordability gap between SSI income and modest rents has grown at an astonishing rate. In 1998, a person with a disability attempting to obtain housing in the community on SSI payments alone needed to pay 69 percent of their monthly income to rent a modest one-bedroom unit and 58 percent to rent a studio/efficiency unit. In 1998, it was impossible to imagine that rents for one-bedroom and studio units would increase 59 percent in a mere six years to a level higher than the entire monthly income of a person receiving SSI. The cost of a studio/efficiency unit rose even more – by 64 percent – during those years.

Priced Out in 1998 pointed out that if a person with a disability made the difficult decision to pay 69 percent of their income for rent each month, they would qualify as having federally defined “worst-case” housing needs.[7] Beginning in 2002, and continuing today, even making the difficult choice to pay most of your SSI monthly income for housing – and worrying about your other basic needs after the rent is paid – is no longer an option.

With rents for modest housing now well above 100 percent of SSI income, an ongoing housing subsidy, such as a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher, is absolutely essential for people with disabilities who rely on SSI to obtain permanent housing of their own in the community.

State-By-State Analysis of Housing Affordability

A state-by-state analysis of one-bedroom housing costs provides compelling evidence that extreme housing affordability problems for people with disabilities exist in all 50 states. Table 1 below indicates that in 2004, the average rent for a one-bedroom unit was more than SSI income in 20 states and the District of Columbia – four more states than in 2002. The District of Columbia has the dubious honor of topping the chart as it did in 2002 with one-bedroom rents equal to 185 percent of monthly SSI payments.

TABLE 1:

PERCENT OF SSI BENEFITS NEEDED TO RENT A ONE-BEDROOM HOUSING UNIT

State	% SSI of Income
Alabama	78.2%
Alaska	76.1%
Arizona	111.7%
Arkansas	74.8%
California	114.4%
Colorado	109.0%
Connecticut	102.5%
Delaware	114.4%
District of Columbia	185.3%
Florida	119.5%
Georgia	107.8%
Hawaii	156.2%
Idaho	77.4%
Illinois	123.4%
Indiana	88.7%
Iowa	78.5%
Kansas	83.9%
Kentucky	75.5%
Louisiana	86.0%
Maine	93.2%
Maryland	145.2%
Massachusetts	134.9%
Michigan	101.6%
Minnesota	99.1%
Mississippi	76.8%
Missouri	89.2%
Montana	76.2%
Nebraska	80.0%
Nevada	131.2%
New Hampshire	119.0%
New Jersey	151.4%
New Mexico	87.2%
New York	137.6%
North Carolina	97.0%
North Dakota	71.5%
Ohio	87.8%
Oklahoma	71.5%
Oregon	99.2%
Pennsylvania	98.4%
Rhode Island	117.5%
South Carolina	89.9%
South Dakota	71.3%
Tennessee	84.9%
Texas	102.7%
Utah	98.4%
Vermont	92.2%
Virginia	128.4%
Washington	103.9%
West Virginia	71.1%
Wisconsin	80.4%
Wyoming	75.1%
NATIONAL	109.6%

State	% SSI of Income
Alabama	70.0%
Alaska	65.1%
Arizona	95.9%
Arkansas	67.4%
California	97.7%
Colorado	95.7%
Connecticut	84.6%
Delaware	106.9%
District of Columbia	162.2%
Florida	106.6%
Georgia	99.3%
Hawaii	134.0%
Idaho	68.7%
Illinois	106.7%
Indiana	78.0%
Iowa	68.6%
Kansas	74.3%
Kentucky	66.3%
Louisiana	78.4%
Maine	80.0%
Maryland	126.8%
Massachusetts	124.0%
Michigan	92.0%
Minnesota	85.1%
Mississippi	68.6%
Missouri	79.1%
Montana	66.0%
Nebraska	71.9%
Nevada	112.4%
New Hampshire	100.7%
New Jersey	135.4%
New Mexico	75.9%
New York	118.3%
North Carolina	86.2%
North Dakota	61.7%
Ohio	76.4%
Oklahoma	65.3%
Oregon	85.0%
Pennsylvania	86.2%
Rhode Island	107.5%
South Carolina	81.4%
South Dakota	64.2%
Tennessee	76.4%
Texas	92.6%
Utah	88.8%
Vermont	80.4%
Virginia	116.3%
Washington	91.0%
West Virginia	63.1%
Wisconsin	68.4%
Wyoming	68.3%
NATIONAL	96.1%

State	% FMR Change
Alabama	9.2%
Alaska	6.8%
Arizona	6.4%
Arkansas	12.8%
California	6.4%
Colorado	3.1%
Connecticut	4.8%
Delaware	6.5%
District of Columbia	6.2%
Florida	13.7%
Georgia	-0.5%
Hawaii	19.7%
Idaho	16.9%
Illinois	4.5%
Indiana	9.9%
Iowa	7.3%
Kansas	8.5%
Kentucky	6.5%
Louisiana	12.5%
Maine	7.0%
Maryland	11.7%
Massachusetts	3.0%
Michigan	7.3%
Minnesota	6.9%
Mississippi	12.2%
Missouri	11.3%
Montana	7.5%
Nebraska	10.8%
Nevada	11.3%
New Hampshire	8.3%
New Jersey	10.1%
New Mexico	6.5%
New York	9.7%
North Carolina	7.3%
North Dakota	0.5%
Ohio	2.5%
Oklahoma	9.2%
Oregon	2.9%
Pennsylvania	6.2%
Rhode Island	28.5%
South Carolina	8.1%
South Dakota	-3.7%
Tennessee	8.9%
Texas	8.0%
Utah	2.6%
Vermont	3.3%
Virginia	13.7%
Washington	0.0%
West Virginia	6.1%
Wisconsin	9.9%
Wyoming	5.6%
NATIONAL	7.6%

An additional 26 states had Fair Market Rent increases between 5-10 percent during this two-year period, indicating significant growth in the cost of rental housing in most housing market areas of the country and not simply on the West and East Coasts. For example, states such as Alabama and Kansas – not known for their high-cost housing markets – had increases of 9 percent and 8 percent respectively.

Even in the two states that saw a slight decline in Fair Market Rents (Georgia and South Dakota), one of these states (Georgia) still had one-bedroom rents above 100 percent of SSI. Unfortunately, even when rents go down, people with disabilities receiving SSI payments still cannot afford to pay them.

New HUD proposed Fair Market Rents for 2006 published for comment in June of 2005 show these trends continuing – which means that people with the most significant and long-term disabilities will continue to have virtually no access to affordable housing in the community unless more rent subsidies are provided. While a “soft” rental market and increasing vacancy rates may lower rents in some locations, a decline in rents to a level affordable for SSI recipients would require a real estate market crash of monumental proportions not seen in the country’s history.

Housing Market Area Analysis

In 2004, there were 2,708 separate HUD-defined housing market areas in the United States, including metropolitan areas, counties, and the non-metro or rural areas of each state. An analysis of all 2,708 housing market areas indicates that in 2004, there was not one area in the United States with rents that were affordable to people with disabilities receiving SSI benefits. Modest one-bedroom rents in these areas ranged from 58 percent of SSI (in non-metropolitan areas in Oklahoma) to 189 percent of SSI (in Columbia, local MD). State-by-state data on each of these housing market areas is provided in Appendix A beginning on page 26.

Highest-Cost Local Housing Market Areas

In 2004, when analyzed by state, there were a total of 170 local separate housing market areas in the country where the cost of a one-bedroom unit was higher than monthly SSI payments. In contrast, Priced Out in 2002 identified 132 local housing market areas with rents exceeding SSI.

In addition to the District of Columbia, 38 states had at least one local housing market area in 2004 where monthly rents were more than the monthly income of an SSI recipient. Significant portions of Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia have now joined the ranks of states like California, Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey that have long been recognized as high-cost housing markets. Figure 1 below highlights the ten highest-cost local housing market areas in the country for people with disabilities who rely on SSI payments. A complete list of all 170 local housing market areas with rents above SSI income can be found in Appendix B on page 42.

Figure 1:

TEN HIGHEST COST LOCAL HOUSING MARKET AREAS – 1-BEDROOM UNITS

1.      Columbia (Maryland) 189.9%

2.      Washington (District of Columbia/Maryland/Virginia) 185.3%

3.      Southern New Hampshire 182.2%

4.      Maui County (Hawaii) 175.2%

5.      Middlesex/Somerset/Hunterdon (New Jersey) 172.9%

6.      Nantucket County (Massachusetts) 169.7%

7.      New York (New York) 166.4%

8.      Bergen/Passaic (New Jersey) 166.3%

9.      Pitkin County (Colorado) 160.4%

10. Nassau/Suffolk (New York) 159.3%

Rising Costs in Rural Housing Markets

The rising cost of rental housing is now affecting even the most rural parts of the country and the people with disabilities who live there. Table 4 on page 12 examines this trend, by analyzing the growth in rental housing costs compared to SSI in the 49 states with non-metro areas (New Jersey and the District of Columbia do not have any non-metro areas).

TABLE 4:

PERCENT CHANGE IN SSI NEEDED TO RENT A ONE-BEDROOM HOUSING UNIT IN RURAL AREAS (2002-2004)

State	% of SSI for 1-Bedroom (2002)	% of SSI for 1-Bedroom (2004)	Percent Change
Alabama	57.9%	63.5%	9.6%
Alaska	75.1%	74.2%	-1.2%
Arizona	76.9%	86.4%	12.3%
Arkansas	56.9%	65.3%	14.7%
California	64.1%	67.9%	5.8%
Colorado	87.1%	97.0%	11.4%
Connecticut	82.7%	79.7%	-3.7%
Delaware	88.9%	97.5%	9.7%
Florida	89.3%	85.5%	-4.3%
Georgia	69.8%	74.1%	6.2%
Hawaii	143.7%	150.7%	4.9%
Idaho	61.9%	71.6%	15.6%
Illinois	60.0%	69.2%	15.3%
Indiana	66.4%	76.2%	14.8%
Iowa	66.4%	70.6%	6.3%
Kansas	63.0%	69.2%	9.8%
Kentucky	59.7%	65.8%	10.2%
Louisiana	59.3%	64.0%	8.0%
Maine	81.6%	83.8%	2.6%
Maryland	92.4%	92.2%	-0.2%
Massachusetts	93.2%	91.8%	-1.4%
Michigan	65.9%	73.7%	11.9%
Minnesota	60.4%	63.9%	5.8%
Mississippi	59.6%	68.3%	14.5%
Missouri	56.4%	65.1%	15.3%
Montana	71.5%	74.7%	4.4%
Nebraska	61.7%	70.3%	14.0%
Nevada	95.7%	102.8%	7.4%
New Hampshire	94.0%	94.6%	0.6%
New Mexico	64.1%	70.2%	9.5%
New York	75.9%	76.3%	0.6%
North Carolina	71.1%	76.2%	7.2%
North Dakota	58.7%	65.8%	12.0%
Ohio	68.2%	75.2%	10.3%
Oklahoma	53.5%	58.5%	9.2%
Oregon	77.0%	83.6%	8.6%
Pennsylvania	70.9%	71.9%	1.3%
Rhode Island	115.9%	117.2%	1.1%
South Carolina	69.7%	74.8%	7.3%
South Dakota	69.6%	65.1%	-6.4%
Tennessee	56.3%	66.3%	17.7%
Texas	65.1%	71.6%	10.0%
Utah	81.7%	87.8%	7.5%
Vermont	85.3%	87.0%	2.1%
Virginia	74.7%	75.2%	0.6%
Washington	78.3%	84.3%	7.6%
West Virginia	64.4%	68.8%	6.9%
Wisconsin	57.9%	66.7%	15.2%
Wyoming	69.7%	75.6%	8.5%
NATIONAL	67.9%	73.5%	8.2%

State	% of Median Income
Alabama	20.3%
Alaska	21.9%
Arizona	18.1%
Arkansas	21.3%
California	21.7%
Colorado	16.2%
Connecticut	16.8%
Delaware	15.4%
District of Columbia	11.3%
Florida	18.6%
Georgia	16.9%
Hawaii	15.4%
Idaho	21.6%
Illinois	15.4%
Indiana	16.9%
Iowa	17.3%
Kansas	17.3%
Kentucky	20.1%
Louisiana	20.7%
Maine	19.3%
Maryland	13.4%
Massachusetts	15.8%
Michigan	16.3%
Minnesota	16.8%
Mississippi	23.8%
Missouri	17.2%
Montana	20.4%
Nebraska	17.5%
Nevada	16.8%
New Hampshire	14.9%
New Jersey	13.1%
New Mexico	20.9%
New York	18.7%
North Carolina	18.2%
North Dakota	18.3%
Ohio	17.0%
Oklahoma	22.2%
Oregon	16.5%
Pennsylvania	17.7%
Rhode Island	17.7%
South Carolina	18.5%
South Dakota	20.1%
Tennessee	19.5%
Texas	18.2%
Utah	16.9%
Vermont	18.0%
Virginia	15.4%
Washington	16.2%
West Virginia	21.8%
Wisconsin	18.7%
Wyoming	18.1%
NATIONAL	18.4%

The District of Columbia had the lowest SSI income relative to median at 11.3 percent. This level of poverty is one important factor in the extremely high rate of homelessness among people with disabilities in our nation’s capital. Other states with SSI incomes below 16 percent of median income include New Jersey (13.1 percent), Maryland (13.4 percent), New Hampshire (14.9 percent), Delaware (15.4 percent), Hawaii (15.4 percent), Illinois (15.4 percent), Virginia (15.4 percent), and Massachusetts (15.8 percent).

Effect of SSI Supplements

The SSI/median income comparison data also reinforces an important policy principle highlighted in previous Priced Out studies – that state SSI supplements do increase income but not sufficiently to close the housing affordability gap for people with disabilities. In 2004 state SSI supplements ranged from a high of $362 per month in Alaska to a low of $1.70 in Oregon. Table 6 below provides a listing of the states with SSI supplements.

TABLE 6:

2004 SSI STATE SUPPLEMENTS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES LIVING INDEPENDENTLY IN THE COMMUNITY

State	2004 State Supplement
Alaska	$362.00
California	$226.00
Colorado	$37.00
Connecticut	$183.00
Delaware	$5.00
Idaho	$52.00
Maine	$10.00
Massachusetts	$114.39
Michigan	$14.00
Minnesota	$81.00
Nebraska	$12.00
New Hampshire	$27.00
New Jersey	$31.25