Housing and Its Impact on Education, Health, and Economic Mobility
Introduction
Substandard housing is often an overlooked factor in social welfare issues.
Safe, affordable housing in thriving neighborhoods is crucial for upward mobility.
The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation has supported research for over a decade on housing as a platform for opportunity.
Research highlights the importance of housing stability, affordability, quality, and location.
Why Educators Should Care About Housing
Safe, stable, and affordable housing during childhood is pivotal for later academic success.
Environments significantly impact children during developmental stages; chaos, frequent moves, pollutants, and unhealthy conditions can have lasting negative effects.
Inadequate housing can strain household budgets, leaving insufficient funds for nutritious food, which affects a child's readiness to learn.
Adolescents in poor-quality housing have lower math and reading scores, even after controlling for parenting and other factors.
Among young children in high-poverty neighborhoods, substandard housing is the strongest predictor of behavioral or emotional problems.
Improving housing stability yields long-term benefits for children.
Any residential move during childhood is associated with nearly half a year loss in school.
Each additional move is associated with small declines in social skills.
A majority of US children move at least once during childhood, and a sizable group moves three or more times.
Moving three or more times in childhood is associated with lower earnings, fewer work hours, and less educational attainment later in life.
Moving between ages six and ten is a particularly sensitive time, linked to lower educational attainment and earnings later in life.
Families spending 30 percent of their income on rent (considered affordable) spend more on child enrichment than those spending more or less.
Homelessness is linked to behavioral problems in children.
Too few families can move to higher-performing neighborhood schools, even with housing vouchers.
One-third of public housing families and one-fourth of voucher users live near schools ranked in the bottom 10^{th} percentile in their state.
The Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) is more effective than housing vouchers in locating families near higher-performing schools, though LIHTC serves slightly better-off families.
Why Health Care Professionals Should Care About Housing
Neighborhood and health disparities are strongly linked; zip code can be as important as genetic code in determining health status and life expectancy.
Where you live affects access to resources impacting health, such as housing quality, access to fresh food, parks, and jobs.
Substandard housing contributes to children’s poor health at age 6 and developmental delays by age 2.
Poor housing conditions and overcrowding are associated with more depression and hostility among Latino mothers.
Moving to lower-poverty neighborhoods can lead to improvements in physical and mental health for adults, including reduced diabetes and obesity.
Neighborhood pollution has clear health consequences.
8,600 fewer preterm births annually could result from reducing prenatal exposure to traffic congestion pollutants, saving at least 444 million annually.
Latinos in public housing in the Bronx have a significantly higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease than Section 8 voucher holders or low-income Latinos in general.
Neighborhood social cohesion reduces the risk of depression or hostility among low-income Latinos in New York City.
About 10 percent of low-income children in a national survey were homeless at some point in childhood, relying more on emergency rooms and exhibiting more behavioral problems.
Housing for homeless families and rental assistance for food-insecure families improves health outcomes and lowers health care spending for vulnerable children.
Why Those Focused on Ensuring Greater Economic Security and Mobility Should Care About Housing
Housing is a launching pad to successful lives; high-quality housing in strong neighborhoods enables residents to capitalize on opportunities.
Investing in communities benefits the entire city and region by lowering social, health, and economic costs.
Improving neighborhood social cohesion and access to jobs, and reducing environmental hazards have a strong effect on health, earnings, and well-being.
Housing affordability and stability encourage work; families using housing vouchers worked more consistently after five years compared to similar low-income families without vouchers.
Policies focused solely on moving families to better neighborhoods are insufficient; additional supports are needed.
Siblings who lived in public housing as teenagers fared better than siblings with less time in public housing, earning more as young adults and being less likely to be incarcerated; more room in family budgets to invest in children may be a factor.
Improving housing stability for children has long-term benefits; moving three or more times in childhood lowered later earnings by nearly 52 percent.
In Milwaukee, 16 households are evicted every day, disproportionately affecting poor, black women; evictions disrupt children’s schooling and perpetuate economic disadvantage.
Racial segregation and a tight rental market constrain housing choice for low-income families, potentially causing voucher holders to live nearer lower-performing schools.
Inclusionary zoning policies are effective in expanding access to more economically diverse neighborhoods and better-performing schools, though currently a small part of affordable housing.
For low-income seniors, reverse mortgages can be a lifeline; escrowing funds for property tax and insurance payments for borrowers with low FICO scores is the most effective strategy to reduce default rates.