Mark Joseph, Ph.D. National Initiative on Mixed-Income Communities Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio. PresentaGon Outline

Transcription

1 3/7/16 Mixed-Income Development: Success, Challenges and Implica;ons Mark Joseph, Ph.D. National Initiative on Mixed-Income Communities Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio HAND Workshop on Mixed-Income Development March 8, 2016 nimc.case.edu PresentaGon Outline Policy context: mixed-income development OrganizaGonal context: mixed-income center Research and consulgng projects Research findings ImplicaGons for policy and pracgce 2 1

2 Social Change ImperaGve: Ending the SegregaGon of the Poor How can we decrease concentrated poverty? How can we promote and sustain economically and racially diverse communiges? 3 U.S. Mixed-Income Development History Massachuse<s Housing Finance Agency 1970s Montgomery County, Maryland 1980s Mixed-Income New Communi;es Program HOPE VI Program Atlanta Public Housing Transforma;on Chicago Plan for Transforma;on 1999-present HOPE SF San Francisco Public Housing Transforma;on 2006-present Choice Neighborhoods Ini;a;ve 2010-present 4 2

3 The Mixed-Income Development IntervenGon Ø Public-private partnerships, market-driven Ø DemoliGon, relocagon and resident choice Ø New urbanist, mixed-income, mixed-tenure design Ø Stringent tenant screening, vigilant property management Ø Some pre- and post-occupancy social services Ø Varying approaches to governance, communitybuilding Ø Goals, prioriges and philosophies vary 5 100% Mixed-Income Development in the U.S. An illustragon of income mix 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% Market-rate Affordable Public housing 30% 20% 10% 0%

4 From Larry Vale, MIT: Income mix in 260 HOPE VI developments compared with income mix in the 51 developments in the NIMC Scan of the Field 7 NaGonal IniGaGve on Mixed-Income CommuniGes Roles and Services Research and EvaluaGon Research studies EvaluaGon projects Scans of the field Networking/Convening Mixed-Income Network Learning Exchanges InformaGon Provision Resource website Mixed-income database Mixed-income library ConsultaGon Project design and execugon OperaGng culture shid Community engagement Data #integragngtheinnercity 4

5 3/7/16 Mixed-Income Research Chicago Plan for Transforma;on with University of Chicago HOPESF, San Francisco led by Learning for AcJon Cascade Village, Akron, Ohio Choice Neighborhoods Na;onal Evalua;on led by Urban InsJtute State of the Field Scans Social Dynamics (31 sites) Resident Services (60 sites) Hope VI Retrospec;ve Analysis with MIT 9 Mixed-Income ConsultaGon New Communi;es Ini;a;ve with Dept. of Planning and Economic Development, Washington D.C. Cleveland Choice Neighborhood with the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority Mixed-income development in Pi<sburgh with Trek Development East Bal;more Redevelopment Ini;a;ve with the Annie E. Casey FoundaJon Data management strategies with Urban Strategies, McCormack Baron Community Life Model with The Community Builders 10 5

6 Mixed-Income Development Database Cities Represented 11 Current Projects: CiGes 12 6

7 3/7/16 Research: Data and Methods Ø In-depth interviews Ø Household surveys Ø Focus groups Ø Field observagon Ø Document review Ø AdministraGve data analysis Ø Resident journals Ø Staff journals 13 New Book! IntegraJng the Inner City: The Promise and Perils of Mixed-Income Public Housing TransformaJon Robert Chaskin & Mark Joseph November 2015 University of Chicago Press 14 7

8 Defining Success in Mixed-Income Developments 1) PromoGng and sustaining mixed-occupancy 2) Increased quality of life: physical environment 3) Building community/ effecgve neighboring 4) PromoGng individual social/economic mobility 5) Nhood revitalizagon without displacement 15 Increased quality of life: physical environment Ø High quality design of buildings and grounds Ø Increased safety and security Neighborhood impact Research Findings: Areas of high success Ø Decreased crime Ø Increased private and public investment 16 8

9 Research Findings: Areas of mixed success Promo;ng and sustaining mixed-occupancy Ø Generally strong demand for market-rate rental Ø For-sale demand dependent on market condigons Ø Low rates of return of public housing residents Ø SubstanGal turnover in market-rate rental Ø Changes in intended mix: rental conversions, vouchers 17 Research Findings: Areas of low success Building community/ Effec;ve neighboring Ø Us versus them dynamics Ø Social isolagon, exclusion and sggma Ø Challenges re: public space, norms, governance Promo;ng individual social/economic mobility Ø No evidence of general improvements Ø Limited resources for sustained social supports 18 9

10 Incorporated Exclusion Physical integra;on reproduces marginality and leads to withdrawal and aliena;on rather than engagement and inclusion. Chaskin and Joseph (2015) 19 ImplicaGons for Policy and PracGce: MiGgaGng incorporated exclusion Ø MarkeGng diverse, urban places Ø IntenGonal vs. organic community-building Ø ProacGve mixed-income property management Ø Inclusive decision-making: towards shared norms 20 10

11 ImplicaGons for Policy and PracGce: Changing social and economic trajectories Post-occupancy supports and services Ø Deep, extended case management Ø From services to capacity and network-building Ø Changing capaciges, resources and mindsets A strategic focus on youth Ø ProacGve and broad outreach Ø Youth as leaders and designers 21 11