Search results

Showing 1 – 12 of 12 results.

Curated

Partially restricted

Simple Crosstabs

Evaluation of Housing to Home Ownership (H2O) in South Carolina, 2021-2025 (ICPSR 39668)

Released/updated on: 2026-05-26

Geographic coverage: United States, South Carolina

Time period: 2021-09-30--2025-03-31

The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families (Center) is proposing to offer an enhancement to its current primary workshop offerings to improve a participant's housing status. Few of the Center's participants are homeowners and many lack stable housing. The Center is defining housing stability on the following spectrum: (1) literally homeless - emergency shelter, community based transitional housing, streets; (2) transitional housing - staying or living doubled up with a family member or friend (with or without paying rent); (3) stable housing - own rental unit with participant's name as leaseholder; and (4) permanent housing - home ownership with or without mortgage in the participant's name. The aim of Housing Stability to Home Ownership (H2O) is to move participants up the previously defined housing spectrum and stabilize the father and his family.

The H2O Program includes:

Completing the H2O Enhancement Courses (9 hours of instruction)
Assessing current and indicating desired position on the Housing Stability Spectrum
Plan focused on making progress to achieve desired level on the Housing Stability Spectrum
Follow-up case management/housing search assistance
Formal case closure at 18 months

Curated

Restricted

Formative Evaluation Phase: The Continuum of Housing Services for Victims of Intimate Partner Violence, Baltimore, Maryland, 2019-2021 (ICPSR 38227)

Released/updated on: 2025-12-16

Geographic coverage: Baltimore, United States, Maryland

Time period: 2019-06-01--2020-12-31

Unsafe and unstable housing are among the immediate and longer-term consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV). Significant questions remain as to the most efficient and effective housing models for survivors, particularly for outcomes of revictimization and housing stability. Researchers shared primary data from a prospective study of IPV survivors receiving transitional housing or rapid re-housing at a single program site in Baltimore MD. The study aimed to assess the impact of housing services on safety and housing stability outcomes.

Self-published

Los Angeles County Eviction Prevention Resources, 2024 (ICPSR 219104)

Released/updated on: 2025-04-15

Geographic coverage: Los Angeles County, California, United States

Time period: 2024-01-01--2024-11-30

This dataset contains information about eviction prevention resources available to Los Angeles County residents in 2024. We define eviction prevention resources as direct services offered to tenants to help them avoid eviction (e.g. legal aid, rental assistance, etc.), educational materials and self-help guides designed to help tenants understand housing rights and the eviction process, and efforts to strengthen eviction prevention that do not include the provision of direct services to clients including advocacy campaigns and philanthropic funding priorities related to eviction prevention. Each entry lists a different eviction prevention resource and includes details about the types of support available, geographic service area, and eligibility criteria.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

American Housing Survey, 2015 National Data, Including an Arts and Culture Module (ICPSR 36801)

Released/updated on: 2019-03-05

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2015-01-01--2015-12-31

The 2015 American Housing Survey marks the first release of a newly integrated national sample and independent metropolitan area samples. The 2015 release features many variable name revisions, as well as the integration of an AHS Codebook Interactive Tool available on the U.S. Census Bureau We site. This data collection provides information on the characteristics of a national sample of housing units in 2015, including apartments, single-family homes, mobile homes, and vacant housing units. Data from the 15 largest metropolitan areas in the United States are included in the national sample survey (the AHS 2015 Metropolitan Data are also available as ICPSR 36805). The data are presented in three separate parts: Part 1, Household Record (Main Record), Part 2, Person Record, and Part 3, Project Record.

Household Record data includes questions about household occupancy and tenure, household exterior and interior structural features, household equipment and appliances, housing problems, housing costs, home improvement, neighborhood features, recent moving information, income, and basic demographic information. The household record data also features four rotating topical modules: Arts and Culture, Food Security, Housing Counseling, and Healthy Homes.

Person Record data includes questions about personal disabilities, income, and basic demographic information. Finally, the Project Record data includes questions about home improvement projects. Specific questions were asked about the types of projects, costs, funding sources, and year of completion.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

American Housing Survey, 2015 Metropolitan Data, Including an Arts and Culture Module (ICPSR 36805)

Released/updated on: 2019-03-05

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 2015-01-01--2015-12-31

The 2015 American Housing Survey marks the first release of a newly integrated national sample and independent metropolitan area samples. The 2015 release features many variable name revisions, as well as the integration of an AHS Codebook Interactive Tool available on the U.S. Census Bureau Web site. This data collection provides information on representative samples of each of the 15 largest metropolitan areas across the United States, which are also included in the integrated national sample (available as ICPSR 36801). The metropolitan area sample also features representative samples of 10 additional metropolitan areas that are not present in the national sample. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Census Bureau intend to survey the 15 largest metropolitan areas once every 2 years.

To ensure the sample was representative of all housing units within each metro area, the U.S. Census Bureau stratified all housing units into one of the following categories: (1) A HUD-assisted unit (as of 2013); (2) Trailer or mobile home; (3) Owner-occupied and one unit in structure; (4) Owner-occupied and two or more units in structure; (5) Renter-occupied and one unit in structure; (6) Renter-occupied and two or more units in structure; (7) Vacant and one unit in structure; (8) Vacant and two or more units in structure; and (9) Other units, such as houseboats and recreational vehicles.

The data are presented in three separate parts: Part 1, Household Record (Main Record); Part 2, Person Record; and Part 3, Project Record. Household Record data includes questions about household occupancy and tenure, household exterior and interior structural features, household equipment and appliances, housing problems, housing costs, home improvement, neighborhood features, recent moving information, income, and basic demographic information. The Household Record data also features four rotating topical modules: Arts and Culture, Food Security, Housing Counseling, and Healthy Homes. Person Record data includes questions about personal disabilities, income, and basic demographic information. Finally, Project Record data includes questions about home improvement projects. Specific questions were asked about the types of projects, costs, funding sources, and year of completion.

External data

Effects of High-poverty Neighborhoods on Youth (Continuation-Revised) (ICPSR 35999)

Released/updated on: 2015-06-18

Geographic coverage: United States

This project collected survey data on the long-term outcomes of youth whose families participated in the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program, in which families were randomly assigned to receive one of two types of housing vouchers or to a control group. The data pertain to youth who were aged 10-20 in 2007 and who were interviewed 10 to 15 years after their families enrolled in the program. The project collected both survey data and longitudinal administrative data on schooling, employment, and delinquency for MTO youth.

External data

The Effects of Homelessness Interventions on Child Outcomes (ICPSR 35865)

Released/updated on: 2015-05-01

Geographic coverage: United States

This study adds a child component to an intervention evaluation funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2,400 homeless families with over 5,000 children across 12 sites are assigned to either usual care (little more than shelter) or one of three interventions: ongoing subsidies with no services beyond lease-up, community-based rapid re-housing (temporary subsidies with housing-related services), and program-based transitional housing with intensive social services. Assessments are collected from caregivers, direct observation, and interviews of older children. Data include child health and development, achievement, behavioral problems, school outcomes, and school environment.

Curated

Restricted

Moving to Opportunity: Final Impacts Evaluation Science Article Data, 2008-2010 (ICPSR 34860)

Released/updated on: 2013-10-04

Geographic coverage: New York City, Baltimore, United States, Chicago, Illinois, Massachusetts, Los Angeles, California, New York (state), Maryland, Boston

Time period: 1994-01-01--2010-12-31

The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program was a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. This Restricted Access Dataset (RAD) includes data from the 3,273 adults interviewed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation and is comprised of variables analyzed for the article "Neighborhood Effects on the Long-Term Well-Being of Low-Income Adults" that was published in the journal Science on September 21, 2012. The article focused on subjective well-being, physical and mental health, social networks, neighborhoods, housing, and economic self-sufficiency. Families were tracked from the baseline survey (1994-1998) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-2010) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families from five United States cities. Households were randomly assigned to one of three groups:

The low-poverty voucher (LPV) group (also called the experimental group) received Section 8 rental assistance certificates or vouchers that they could use only in census tracts with 1990 poverty rates below 10 percent. The families received mobility counseling and help in leasing a new unit. One year after relocating, families could use their voucher to move again if they wished, without any special constraints on location.
The traditional voucher (TRV) group (also called the Section 8 group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling.
The control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled.

The dataset contains all outcomes and mediators analyzed for the Science article, as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis. Demographic information includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, employment status, and education level.

Curated

Restricted

Neighborhood Revitalization and Disorder in Salt Lake City, Utah, 1993-2000 (ICPSR 3261)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Time period: 1993-01-01--2000-12-31

This project examined physical incivilities (disorder), social strengths and vulnerabilities, and police reports in a declining first-ring suburb of Salt Lake City. Physical and social conditions were assessed on residential face blocks surrounding a new subdivision that was built as a revitalization effort. Data were collected before and after the completion of the new subdivision to assess the effects of the subdivision and of more proximal social and physical conditions on residents' blocks in order to understand important revitalization outcomes of crime, fear, and housing satisfaction and conditions. The study also highlighted place attachment of residents as a psychological strength that deserved greater attention. The research site consisted of a neighborhood located on the near west side of Salt Lake City that had been experiencing gradual decline. The neighborhood surrounded a new 84-unit single family detached housing subdivision, which was built in 1995 with money from a HUD demonstration grant. The study began in 1993 with a systematic observational assessment of crime and fear-related physical features on 59 blocks of the older neighborhood surrounding the planned housing site and 8 sampled addresses on each block, followed by interviews with surrounding block residents during 1994-1995, interviews with residents in the newly built housing in 1997, and interviews and physical condition assessments on the surrounding blocks in 1998-1999. Police crime report and city building permit data for the periods during and immediately following both waves of data collection were obtained and matched to sample addresses. Variables in Parts 1 and 2, Environmental and Survey Data for Older Subdivision, focus on distance of respondent's home to the subdivision, psychological proximity to the subdivision, if new housing was in the respondent's neighborhood, nonresidential properties on the block, physical incivilities, self-reported past victimization, fear of crime, place attachment, collective efficacy (neighboring, participation, social control, sense of community), rating of neighborhood qualities, whether block neighbors had improved property, community confidence, perceived block crime problems, observed conditions, self-reported home repairs and improvements, building permits, and home satisfaction. Demographic variables for Parts 1 and 2 include income, home ownership, ethnicity, religion, gender, age, marital status, if the resident lived in a house, household size, number of children in the household, and length of residence. Variables in Part 3, Environmental and Survey Data for Intervention Site, include neighborhood qualities and convenience, whether the respondent's children would attend a local school, and variables similar to those in Parts 1 and 2. Demographic variables in Part 3 specify the year the respondent moved in, number of children in the household, race and ethnicity, marital status, religion, sex, and income in 1996.

Curated

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Supportive Services Program in Senior Housing, Tenant Characteristics and Service Use, 1990-1991: [United States] (ICPSR 6013)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1990-05-01--1991-10-31

These data describe tenants of subsidized elderly housing who used services provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Supportive Services Program in Senior Housing (RWJF SSPSH), and document use of these services. Services provided by the RWJF SSPSH program included housekeeping, transportation, meals, running errands, assistance with forms, personal care, and home health care. Three types of data comprise this collection: (1) participant information taken at first service delivery (Part 1), (2) administrative logs describing services delivered to each client (Parts 2-7), and (3) information on each site participating in the program (Part 8). Information about the participants includes age, gender, living arrangements, monthly income, health status, ability to do light and heavy tasks, and ability to do personal tasks. Information on service delivery includes the type and amount of each service delivered, whether the tenant paid for the service, how the service was funded, and the quarter in which the service was delivered. Site information includes subsidy type, building start date, type of location (urban, suburban, or rural), and whether the site had a full- or part-time service coordinator.

Curated

Governmental Units Analysis Data (ICPSR 28)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: Mississippi, Montana, United States, Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Florida, Maryland, South Carolina, Idaho

This data collection provides information on the demographic, social, economic, political, and civil characteristics of selected municipalities with populations of 25,000 or more in the United States during the 1960s. Information is provided on population characteristics, such as the number of native-born persons residing in the state of birth, percentage of persons aged 5 years and older who were migrants, percentages in 1962 of non-white, foreign-born, and native-born populations of foreign or racially mixed parentage, median school years completed by those aged 25 years and older, percentage of elementary school children in private school, median income of families, number of full-time city employees per 1,000 population, percentage of civilian labor force that was unemployed in 1960, percentage of employed persons in white-collar occupations and in manufacturing industries, and percentage of the employed civilian labor force that was professional and that were managers, officials, and proprietors. Other variables provide information on city characteristics, such as the age of the city, the presence of dormitory city, balanced city, central city, independent city, and the suburbs, the density of population per square mile, the employment-residence ratio, the presence or absence of application for the Model Cities Program, and the number of applications for, and whether the city was a winner of, the All-American City award between 1952 and 1967. Further variables detail information on the city housing situation, such as the number of dwelling units built in 1929 or earlier, the number of dilapidated dwellings, the presence or absence of a local housing authority and jurisdiction of local housing authority, participation in programs of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (Public Law 412), the presence or absence of a low-rent housing program and of slum clearance, and the number of low-rent housing units per 100,000 population. Additional variables give information on city politics, including the presence of mayor-council government, city-manager government, and nonpartisan elections, the number of city councilmen, the percentage of city council elected at large, the percentage of the county presidential vote for the Democratic party and for the Republican party in 1960, and the numbers of registered voters. Other items cover city services and programs, such as the presence or absence of poverty programs, the number of dollars per capita for poverty programs as of June 30, 1966, the presence or absence of urban renewal programs and their execution or completion as of June 30, 1966, the current per capita amount raised for Community Chest, and the presence or absence of action on fluoridation of city water. There are also variables that identify a subset of cities for urban renewal analysis, Community Chest analysis, analysis of fluoridation decisions, and analysis of decisions about public housing.

Curated

Survey of Income and Education, 1976: Welfare Extract (ICPSR 7918)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16

Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Indiana, Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, Montana, Kentucky, California, Kansas, Florida, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Idaho, Oregon, Vermont, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Maine, Alabama, Arkansas, Washington, South Carolina, Nebraska, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, Alaska, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nevada, New York, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, Michigan, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Ohio

Time period: 1976-01-01--1976-12-31

This data collection, focusing on the welfare and public support system, contains information from the SURVEY OF INCOME AND EDUCATION, 1976 (ICPSR 7634), conducted during the months of April through July of 1976 by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The survey served as a supplement to the yearly Current Population Survey and was conducted to obtain reliable state-by-state data on the numbers of children in local areas with family incomes below the federal poverty level. The information was used to facilitate Title 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The survey includes questions used in the Current Population Survey and also contains additional exclusive questions covering school enrollment, disability, health insurance, bilingualism, food stamp recipiency, assets, and housing costs. The National Chicano Research Network created this extract by including only those cases for people who received either of the following types of support: food stamps in 1975 or 1976, public housing, government rent subsidy, railroad retirement, United States government SSI, aid to families with dependent children, other public assistance, Medicaid, veteran's assistance, neighborhood health center, free or low-cost clinic, other public source, or any public assistance or welfare the previous month. The 110 variables used from SURVEY OF INCOME AND EDUCATION, 1976: RECTANGULAR FILE (ICPSR 7919) were mostly demographic, income-related, and employment-related variables. The data were provided by the National Chicano Research Network, which was located at the Survey Research Center of the Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.