Share this intervention

Summary

Chicago Section 8 Housing Vouchers offered subsidies to income-eligible applicants to help them pay for rent.

The Chicago Housing Authority Corporation Inc. offered families a Section 8 housing voucher, which they could use to subsidize rent for housing purchased in the private market. The voucher value was equal to the difference between either the fair market rent amount or the selected unit's rent (whichever was lower) and 30 percent of the family's adjusted income. Adjusted income included earnings and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families benefits but excluded Food Stamp (now the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and Medicaid benefits, income from the earned income tax credit, earnings of dependent children younger than 18, and payments received for caring for foster children. Families could use their housing vouchers even if their income exceeded the eligibility limit (50 percent of the local median income) as long as the fair market rent and the unit’s rent were more than 30 percent of their income. Because families were required to pay 30 percent of their income toward rent, the subsidy amount decreased as income increased and fully phased out when annual income reached about $43,000 (in 2007 dollars). Families who applied for a voucher were randomly assigned positions on a waiting list. Families were eligible to receive the voucher if their household’s annual income was below 50 percent of the local median income and they were age 65 or younger, did not have a self-reported disability, and were not living in public housing at the time of application. The intervention was implemented in Chicago, IL.

Populations and employment barriers:

Effectiveness rating and effect by outcome domain

Need more context or definitions for the Outcome Domain table below?
View the "Table help" to get more insight into terms, measures, and definitions.

View table help

Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns

Outcome domain Term Effectiveness rating Effect in 2018 dollars and percentages Effect in standard deviations Sample size
Increase earnings Short-term No evidence to assess support
Long-term No evidence to assess support
Very long-term Not supported unfavorable $-879 per year -0.042 42358
Increase employment Short-term No evidence to assess support
Long-term No evidence to assess support
Very long-term Little evidence to assess support 0% (in percentage points) 0.000 0
Decrease benefit receipt Short-term No evidence to assess support
Long-term No evidence to assess support
Very long-term Not supported unfavorable $124 per year 0.045 42358
Increase education and training All measurement periods No evidence to assess support

Studies of this intervention

Study quality rating Study counts per rating
High High 1

Implementation details

Characteristics of research participants
Black or African American
94%
White
3%
Hispanic or Latino of any race
4%

The Pathways Clearinghouse refers to interventions by the names used in study reports or manuscripts. Some intervention names may use language that is not consistent with our style guide, preferences, or the terminology we use to describe populations.