Skip to sections below

Share this program

PrintEmail

Summary

Permanent Housing Subsidy (SUB) aimed to provide housing stability for families as a means to improving their economic outcomes. This evaluation directly compared SUB with a separate program, Project-Based Transitional Housing (PBTH), to better understand which of the two programs might be more effective; the distinctive feature of SUB is that it provided permanent assistance with housing rental costs through state or local public housing agencies (PHAs).

SUB provided permanent assistance with housing rental costs through state or local PHAs. As long as families remained eligible (for example, met low-income criteria and had no drug-related convictions) and compliant (for example, paid rent on time), they could continue receiving the housing subsidy indefinitely. Housing subsidies were typically provided as a housing choice voucher, which program participants could use to rent housing that met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Housing Quality Standards, and that had a rent that was deemed reasonable based on rental costs for comparable homes in a given housing market. The local PHA set Housing Choice Voucher amounts, and if rental costs exceeded this limit, families were required to pay 30 percent of their unadjusted monthly income toward rental costs The primary population for the subsidies was families who spent at least seven days in an emergency homeless shelter and had at least one child age 15 or younger. The program took place in 12 locations in the United States: Alameda County, CA; Atlanta, GA; Baltimore, MD; Boston, MA; Connecticut; Denver, CO; Honolulu, HI; Kansas City, MO; Louisville, KY; Minneapolis, MN; Phoenix, AZ; and Salt Lake City, UT.

Comparing the effectiveness of SUB with the effectiveness of PBTH indicates how much better SUB meets participants’ needs than PBTH does. The distinctive feature of SUB is that it provided permanent assistance to eligible families, whereas PBTH provided temporary housing and case management for 6 to 24 months. This evaluation also studied Community-Based Rapid Rehousing.

25295.02-Study of Permanent H
Populations and employment barriers: Parents, Unemployed

Implementation at a glance

Primary service
Housing supports and subsidies
Program services
Housing supports and subsidies
Review services terms
Setting(s)
Tested in multiple settings
Year evaluation began
2010
Implementing organization(s)State or local public housing agencies (PHAs)

Effectiveness rating and effect by outcome domain

View table definitions

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

Outcome domain Term Effectiveness rating Effect in 2024 dollars and percentages Effect in standard deviations Sample size
Increase earnings Short-term Cannot assess support
Long-term Little evidence to assess support unfavorable $-4,520 per year -0.124 471
Very long-term Cannot assess support
Increase employment Short-term Cannot assess support
Long-term Little evidence to assess support unfavorable -2% (in percentage points) -0.058 471
Very long-term Cannot assess support
Decrease benefit receipt Short-term Cannot assess support
Long-term Little evidence to assess support favorable $-52 per year -0.015 415
Very long-term Cannot assess support
Increase education and training All measurement periods Cannot assess support

Effectiveness ratings

  • Well- supported
  • Supported
  • Mixed support
  • Not supported
  • Insufficient evidence
  • Cannot assess support

Studies of this program

Study quality rating Study counts per rating
High High 1
Back to top

Program cost

No cost information available.

Cost results

Estimate (in 2024 dollars) Quality of cost analysis that produced the estimate
Monthly program cost, per participant * $1,557
Good quality

* See below for further details on the cost analysis.

Cost information

How much did the program cost per participant?

The average monthly program cost per participant was $1,557 in 2024 dollars. This figure is based on cost information for this program reported in one cost study reviewed by Pathways to Work (for details, see the FAQ). The study reported an average cost per participant of $1,557 per month of use and reported a mean of 31 months of use over the study period. This implied an average total program cost per participant of $48,887 in 2024 dollars over the 37-month study period. This study received a rating of Good quality for the cost analysis.

Cost information is not directly comparable across programs due to differences in the categories of costs reported and program length. Cost information is not an official price tag or guarantee.

Back to top

Implementation details

The information contained here reflects how the program was implemented at the time of the evaluation.

Local context

Characteristics of research participants
Black or African American
37%
White, not Hispanic
21%
Unknown, not reported, or other
24%
Hispanic or Latino of any race
20%

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if the authors reported race and ethnicity separately; in these cases, we report the category White, rather than White, not Hispanic.

State(s) where implemented

AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE DC FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY Canada

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