Princeton University Study Finds Public Housing Responsible for Disproportionate Share of Evictions

A Princeton University study concluded that that public housing authorities are more likely to evict renters than private landlords.

In a report by the Princeton University’s Eviction Lab found that public housing authorities are not only just as likely to evict renters as private property owners, public housing authorities also more likely to make multiple eviction filings against the same renter. 

The study analyzed hundreds of thousands of eviction filings from 2010 to 2016 in 29 states and noted that public housing authorities “account for a disproportionately large share of eviction cases.” The study found public housing authority eviction filings are intended to collect unpaid rent from tenants rather than displace them. The study further noted, “Just as private market landlords routinely wield the threat of removal as a means of disciplining tenants and collecting rent, eviction filings remain a common event in public housing, especially among a subset of residents who experience regular difficulty making rent.”

While researchers for the study identified a variety of eviction practices among public housing authorities, with some authorities evicting more and some less than private landlord evictions. The study also concluded that the rates of eviction filings were higher in public housing authorities with a larger share of Black residents and lower among public housing authorities with a higher share of senior residents in comparison to the private sector landlords.

The Eviction Lab Findings

The Eviction Lab states “there are nearly 3,000 different housing authorities across the country, the landscape of public housing is diverse.” Yet, one data point coming out of the study showed that renters in 46.8% of tenant eviction matters, had faced multiple eviction filings against them at the same address compared to just 28.4% in the private rental market, a likely indication that evictions are being used as a rent collection tool. The study also pointed out that rates of evictions among public housing authorities varied and that eviction rates were not dependent upon the size of housing authorities. In one example:

“The Housing Authority of the City of Charleston, South Carolina, had the highest serial eviction filing rate of any large public housing authority in our sample: over 8 in every 10 households that were filed against were filed against repeatedly. Fourteen publich housing authorities—most in North Carolina, South Carolina, or Virginia—had serial eviction filing rates above 50%. By contrast, 13 large public housing authorities had serial eviction filing rates below 20%. In short, not all housing authorities file repeatedly against their tenants.”

Other Findings

Residents in public housing typically pay no more than 30% of their income towards rent and are typically considered as extremely low-income according to data provided by Princeton University’s Eviction Lab. As a result, many may struggle to pay rent and other household expenses despite receiving housing subsidies. Despite that, it is apparent that housing authorities have deployed aggressive tactics by filing eviction after eviction, in many instances, against the same tenants to force them to pay the rent. The study concludes, however, that there is no evidence that repeated eviction filings against the same tenants improves the performance of a public housing authority.

Experts point out that public housing has been impacted by both reduced funding and mismanagement over many decades, which has increased the need to collect rents. A recent example like the Skid Row Housing Trust in the Los Angeles area illustrate the severe financial consequences that plague affordable housing developments when rent collections are and other circumstances such as drug use and damage to facilities caused by residents exist leading to dilapidated and uninhabitable conditions.

The Eviction Lab, in conducting the study, interviewed managers of several public housing authorities throughout the U.S. They found that the philosophy and rent collection metrics in place at the various public housing authorities played a part the rates of evictions. An example given by the Eviction Lab included a public housing authority in Cleveland, Ohio that files eviction cases as soon as possible whereas the one in Akron, Ohio only files eviction cases as a very last resort, which results in fewer eviction filings than Cleveland’s public housing authority.

How To Address This Issue

To address the rate of evictions by public housing authorities, the Eviction Lab suggests that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) begins using eviction rates as a measure of evaluation of public housing authorities, and stop “turning a blind eye to the scale of displacement from public housing and the frequent reliance on eviction.”

The Eviction Lab, which had conducted the study, makes nationwide eviction data publicly available and accessible for use by policymakers, community organizers, journalists, educators, non-profit organizations, students, and citizens interested in understanding more about housing, eviction, and poverty. According to its website, the “Eviction Lab at Princeton University is a team of researchers, students, and website architects who believe that a stable, affordable home is central to human flourishing and economic mobility. Accordingly, understanding the sudden, traumatic loss of home through eviction is foundational to understanding poverty in America.”