The Role of Housing in Welfare Reform: The Experience of the North Carolina TANF/Housing Pilot Program William M. Rohe, Ph.D. Center for Urban and Regional Studies University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill TANF Reauthorization and Housing Policy: Crosscutting Implications TANF Reauthorization and Housing Policy: Crosscutting Implications April 12, 2002

Four questions: 1. Why were welfare agencies in N.C. interested in using TANF funds for housing? 1. Why were welfare agencies in N.C. interested in using TANF funds for housing? 2. How does the N.C. TANF/Housing Pilot work? 3. How does current policy constrain the use of TANF funds for housing? 4. What changes in federal policy are needed?

Social service agencies support the use of TANF funds for housing because: They have seen the debilitating impacts of inadequate housing. Inadequate housing includes: They have seen the debilitating impacts of inadequate housing. Inadequate housing includes:  Poor housing quality  Lack of affordable housing  Poorly located units They understand that the prospect of decent housing can be a motivator They understand that the prospect of decent housing can be a motivator

Key elements of the N.C. TANF/Housing Pilot Program Goal was to “assist as many TANF-eligible families as possible secure decent, affordable housing.” Goal was to “assist as many TANF-eligible families as possible secure decent, affordable housing.” Competitive grant process with $3 million set- aside of TANF funds going to coalitions of welfare, housing and training organizations Competitive grant process with $3 million set- aside of TANF funds going to coalitions of welfare, housing and training organizations Minimum 50% cash match Minimum 50% cash match Eligibility criteria include: TANF eligible families (200% of poverty level) and employed or in job training 20 hrs./week Eligibility criteria include: TANF eligible families (200% of poverty level) and employed or in job training 20 hrs./week Time frame: January 2001 – June Reauthorized through June Time frame: January 2001 – June Reauthorized through June 2003.

Pilot program characteristics Eight counties selected to participate. Grants from $217K – $472K Eight counties selected to participate. Grants from $217K – $472K County coalitions included between 3 and 15 agencies County coalitions included between 3 and 15 agencies Housing activities include: Housing activities include:  Long- term rental assistance  Short- term rental assistance  Down payment assistance (IDAs)  Housing counseling and education  Referral services Support services include: Support services include:  Job training  Transportation assistance  Childcare assistance  Conflict resolution  Substance abuse/ mental health services Wide range of clients targeted Wide range of clients targeted

Pilot Impacts after one year: A total of 1,398 clients served A total of 1,398 clients served 386 families received rental assistance 386 families received rental assistance 21 families bought homes 21 families bought homes 16 families moved into non-subsidized units 16 families moved into non-subsidized units Lasting interagency partnerships formed Lasting interagency partnerships formed

How does current policy constrain the use of TANF for housing? Long term rental benefits to working families are defined as “assistance” unlike transportation and child care benefits Long term rental benefits to working families are defined as “assistance” unlike transportation and child care benefits The definition of the work requirement in the Pilot program prohibits full-time education The definition of the work requirement in the Pilot program prohibits full-time education

What changes are needed in TANF policy? Housing assistance provided to working families should be considered “non assistance” Housing assistance provided to working families should be considered “non assistance” Allow education to substitute for the work requirement Allow education to substitute for the work requirement