CHANCE's FEDERAL POLICY BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES
Through our work, we have identified 15 barriers to affordable, accessible, and integrated housing. They are listed below.
1. Federal programs do not easily accommodate or advance affordable, accessible, integrated housing for all Americans.
HUD and other federal funds flow predominantly to state and public housing authorities and non-profits that primarily create congregate housing. The limited application of federal housing programs for persons with disabilities is compounded by the fact that people with disabilities are not typically a priority in affordable housing initiatives. Federal and state policies, predominately finance programs, providers, and buildings versus services, supports, and people.
2. Section 8 vouchers cannot be used for homeownership for people with very low incomes and in communities where public housing authorities (PHAs) refuse to participate in the program.
Constraints regarding the use of Section 8 vouchers for homeownership prevent many people with disabilities from participating in this program. Section 8 vouchers can only be accessed by people that live in communities where PHAs voluntarily participate in the Section 8 Homeownership program. In many communities, PHAs have refused to participate. In addition, the final rule on the homeownership program (implemented by HUD in October 2000) includes a provision that excludes people with very low incomes. This provision establishes a national minimum income requirement that is equal to 2,000 hours of annual full-time work at the Federal minimum wage. Because of resource limits that apply to public benefits, many people with disabilities will be excluded from the HUD homeownership program.
3. There is a nationwide shortage of single-family housing that can accommodate the needs of individuals with disabilities.
Most single-family housing is not physically or financially accessible to people with disabilities that have low incomes. In many areas high property values and rent costs prevent people with disabilities from entering the housing market. Funds need to be secured to make single family homes physically and financial accessible. There is a need for collaboration and regulations that result in new homes being built with universal and visitable design. In addition, the primary subsidy earmarked affordable, accessible, and integrated housing (Section 8 tenant-based vouchers) is extremely limited, thus creating large waiting lists favoring individuals who are homeless or people with critical needs.
4. Individualized personal assistance is rarely available to people with disabilities.
A majority of the funds available for services to people with disabilities are allocated to expensive institutional and facility based services. Individuals are prevented from obtaining affordable, accessible, and integrated housing because of the lack of adequate individualized personal assistance to meet their daily basic needs. A percentage of the funding that is allocated to institutional and facility based services needs to be made available for personal assistance services. Any efforts directed at decreasing institutional and facility based services to offer people personal assistance need to be supported.
5. Housing subsidies for people with disabilities are not identified as a priority in most consolidated plans submitted to HUD.
Consolidated plans are a prerequisite for receiving funds under HUD's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) programs. Many individuals and organizations interested in promoting affordable, accessible, and integrated housing for people with disabilities have not participated in prioritizing their communities in consolidated plans. Some communities that have identified affordable, accessible, or integrated housing for people with disabilities as a priority have not taken action to address this priority. Individuals and organizations need to assure that HUD provides people with disabilities the necessary funds to have their own homes by actively participating in the consolidated planning process.
6. Medicaid and Social Security limit cash resources.
Medicaid and Social Security limit the assets a person is allowed to accumulate before benefits are jeopardized. Most set-sides and provisions within these programs do not include affordable, accessible, and integrated housing.
7. Fewer than ten states in the country have amended their Medicaid Waiver to allow for the use of the Live-in-Care provision.
In 1990, Congress amended the Medicaid Home and Community-Based Waiver statute to allow states to claim federal Medicaid reimbursement for the "room and board" (food and shelter) costs associated with having an individual live in a waiver recipient's home and provide the recipient with support. This provision (which we will call the live-in-care provision) provides an exception to the general rule that excludes federal Medicaid payments from covering the cost of room and board expenses. In order to use this provision, states must include unrelated live-in personal caregivers as providers of an approved waiver service and choose to include the caregiver's rent and food expenses as part of the waiver service payment. In order to employ this option, states must amend their waiver or include the provision in new wavier applications or renewals. Unfortunately, fewer than ten states have made this provision available. It is important for states to use this provision to reallocate their resources, thus allowing available funds to be used to assist Medicaid recipients to secure homes of their own. States need to avail themselves of this cost-neutral way to assist people whose options would otherwise be limited to institutional settings.
8. Medicaid waiver funds may not be used for housing without live-in support.
Under the above-mentioned rule, a portion of the live-in support person's room and board can be blended into the housing costs of the supported individual. The same use is not extended to an individual with a disability that does not require live-in support. This limitation excludes a large tier of people receiving Medicaid funds who want to live in housing that is integrated, accessible, and affordable but do not need live-in support.
9. Public funds flow through providers.
Public funds flow to agencies, not individuals. Therefore, agencies have the power and the control. Providers of housing and services often allocate large overhead allowances to support their administrative costs (sometimes in excess of 30%), giving them a significant financial stake in sustaining congregate housing models in which housing and supports are inextricably intertwined.
10. The general public is not knowledgeable about the benefits gained when people with disabilities obtain affordable, accessible, and integrated housing in communities.
There are few examples of people with disabilities having affordable, accessible, and integrated housing in the community. Citizens, lenders, people with disabilities and their families, builders, realtors, lawyers, and judges are often unaware of the benefits of individuals owning their homes. Education must be provided that gives examples of individuals who have successfully achieved affordable, accessible, and integrated housing highlighting the benefits to individuals and the community.
11. Individuals who live in facilities and individuals who require intensive personal assistance are uninformed about the possibilities of affordable, accessible, and integrated housing.
People with disabilities who live in facilities and who require intensive personal assistance are often not considered capable of having affordable, accessible, and integrated housing. In order to maintain a facility's financial base, individuals are not informed by the people providing assistance of the possibilities of affordable, accessible, and integrated housing. Agencies (at all levels) who provide services to individuals who live in facilities and who require intensive personal assistance should be required to offer information on the possibility of affordable, accessible, and integrated housing.
12. The Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) affects affordability of live-in support.
FLSA poses some complications for affordable, accessible, and integrated housing. Provisions exempting live-in support workers from federal minimum wage requirements, thus facilitating more flexible arrangements, need to be enacted by the Department of Labor.
13. Liens on property restrict contributions.
Medicaid and other sources of public dollars can place liens on individual's homes financed with their funds, thus making it difficult for families to invest money in homes for their adult children, or for homeowners to build any equity.
14. Affordable housing funds predominately benefit non-profit housing providers, not individuals.
Affordable housing funds do not flow directly to individuals. Public and private funding for affordable housing must be directed individuals. People with disabilities could obtain affordable, accessible, and integrated housing if funds were made available for items such as utilities, first month's rent, furniture, mortgage buy downs, down payment, closing costs, renovations, and housing escrow accounts.
15. Community Reinvestment Act's (CRA) reform could offer more direct involvement for people with disabilities.
Bankers are not required to gather data on people with disabilities and may over look this underserved group in assessing and addressing community credit needs. CRA reform calls for banks to be evaluated on their performance and to directly involve public input in drafting strategic plans for CRA compliance.
Up-dated 11/2001