The purpose of this thesis is to update an on-going spatial study of US
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Housing Choice Voucher
(HCV) distribution in Hamilton County, Ohio, drawing from previous quantitative
studies of 2000 (Wang and Varady, 2005) and 2005 (Varady et al, 2010) voucher holder
location data that utilized GIS hot spot analysis to investigate the spatial distribution of
HCV households throughout Hamilton County, Ohio in those two time periods. This
thesis adds to that discussion an exploration of how the HCV program fits into the larger
story of inner ring suburb decline within US metropolitan areas.
This thesis includes an informant interview-based qualitative study of the
suburban neighborhood of Finneytown within Springfield Township, Ohio, where hot
spot analysis revealed a voucher concentration in 2005 (Varady et al, 2010). Interviews
with key stakeholders involved with or affected by administration of the HCV program
focused on the effects of voucher holder concentrations, both real and perceived; how the
program is administered; and the nature of voucher holder concentrations. This
investigation speaks to the popular concerns of negative spillover effects from HCV
concentrations such as crime, property maintenance, and social disruption.
One weakness of spatial analysis on this research topic is that it fails to reveal the
human stories behind the HCV program. Interviews, however, rely on perceptions of
others and their own interpretations of the phenomena in question. This paper combines
quantitative and qualitative research approaches in order to render a more complete
portrait of Finneytown in regards to the HCV program. The study of Finneytown also ties into the larger stories of inner ring suburb decline within US metropolitan areas and
of federal housing subsidy in suburban communities.
This study finds that voucher holders are generally moving away from fewer
locations within Cincinnati to a greater number of locations around the county, but that
voucher distribution is characterized for a large part by relatively few, fairly concentrated
locations within and outside the city. The most important influence on voucher holder
location appears to be the availability of rental housing that meets the fair market rent
standard, though larger rental properties, especially those financed using the Low Income
Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), are more likely to rent to voucher holders. Formerly
owner-occupied single family detached houses are more likely to become renter-occupied
if they are older, smaller, lower quality, and/or lack amenities such as garages and
basements. Disruptive social behavior and poor maintenance of exterior property
appurtenances associated with properties participating in the HCV program lack a
consistently responsible party whom local code enforcement officials can contact to
mitigate those issues. Immigration of voucher holders into suburban communities is
associated with impacts on local school districts that may require new programs and staff
training to handle. Though presence of voucher holders in inner ring suburbs may
correlate with signs of community decline, the evidence suggests that the HCV program
is in many ways a symptom, not a cause, of that decline.