April 17, 2003 | Read Time: 6 minutes
Four years ago, when Chicago housing officials unveiled a $1.6-billion plan to demolish tens of thousands of
public-housing units and replace them with new developments, Donta C. Brown had one question: “Would I be able to come back?”
A nine-year resident of the Abla Homes development on Chicago’s west side, Ms. Brown, a mother of three, worried that she and her family would lose their home and have little say about where they ended up. “I was scared,” she says.
Through the help of programs supported in part by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, in Chicago, Ms. Brown and thousands of other Chicago public-housing residents are getting help with relocation during one of the largest public-housing makeovers in recent American history. What’s more, Ms. Brown and residents of 38 projects have been receiving counseling, résumé help, job placement, transportation, and other services from MacArthur-supported groups based in neighborhoods replete with public high-rises.
In addition to making grants as part of a four-year, $25-million effort, MacArthur has brought those organizations, business groups, religious leaders, and others together so that new developments work for residents in the 25,000 units now proposed to replace the eyesores of the city’s skyline.
Many of the new units will house those with incomes at or above the median income of Chicago residents, a controversial part of the plan. While the MacArthur grants are designed to smooth the transition of the developments from having all low-income residents to a mix of incomes, lowering the concentrations of poor people in certain Chicago neighborhoods is also a goal. About 5 percent of the city’s residents live in public housing.
By supporting those efforts, MacArthur has entered uncharted territory for foundations, which typically have steered clear of involving themselves in federal housing. “We’re involved in this partly to make sure that people can exercise their choice” between moving back into new public projects or getting federal help in paying their rent in the private-housing market, says Susan Lloyd, a program director at the MacArthur Foundation.
Criticism of Program
The transformation plan, designed by local and federal governments, would make replacement developments appealing to those who earn at or above Chicago’s median income — $70,000 per year for a family of four. Under the transformation plan, one-third of the federally subsidized units will house people who can afford market-rate apartments. The remaining units will be reserved for those who make 60 percent or less of the median figure.
The Chicago plan has already been criticized for its participation in the federal program — called HOPE VI — which has used $5-billion since 1992 to turn public housing for the poor into mixed-income developments. Chicago has also faced dissent over how it has carried out the plan: Several Chicago nonprofit groups recently sued the Chicago Housing Authority, the organization that manages the city’s public housing, charging it with encouraging segregation. The housing authority denies the charges.
HOPE VI has been disparaged by the Bush Administration, which would like to eliminate it because of its cost, and nonprofit housing groups, which say that the major aim of mixed-income developments is to move the poor elsewhere and leave them without vital social services.
A study published last year by the National Housing Law Project, an Oakland, Calif., an advocacy group for the poor, said that only 11 percent of former residents returned to public-housing sites that had been razed to make way for mixed-income complexes. The bulk of residents — 49 percent — were sent to live in other public-housing developments. Another study, conducted by the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, found that the federal government has financed the demolition of 72,000 public-housing units, but planned only about 42,000 replacement apartments. Many critics of HOPE VI decry the lack of one-for-one replacement of public housing.
Federal housing officials say that those numbers tell only part of the story. As part of HOPE VI, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development will support construction of 15,000 homes that will be sold to low-income people. Other government programs help the poor pay rent for apartments owned by private landlords, officials add.
Ms. Lloyd acknowledges the controversies, but says that MacArthur’s grants were created to counter the least sensitive aspects of the federal program.
“Some may say that foundation grants might support HOPE VI, but we think what we’re doing goes beyond the scope of that program,” Ms. Lloyd says, adding that MacArthur would like to see housing authorities in other cities copy its approach to helping the poor relocate while their public-housing units are being renovated.
Services for Residents
The Chicago Housing Authority, which received $300,000 in MacArthur grants last year, credits the foundation’s money with energizing the transformation plan.
“Dollar for dollar, we’ve found that private money, such as MacArthur’s grant money, has been used much more efficiently than government block grants have been,” says Kathryn Greenberg, spokeswoman for the housing authority. “Because of the lack of bureaucracy, the private dollars help get things moving.”
The authority used some of the MacArthur money to inform residents of their rights, which include either a home in one of the new developments or a federal voucher to help pay the difference in rent between a government-subsidized unit and a market-rate unsubsidized home. “We asked residents to sign relocation contracts, but many of them didn’t understand them,” says Ms. Greenberg. The authority, as a result, used grant money to give hundreds of clinics on how to read the contracts. “It gave us a chance to explain things. This isn’t clean and easy work. So we’re glad that MacArthur has the guts to back this,” she says.
The Chicago Community Trust, a local grant maker, used its $1.5-million grant from MacArthur to start a fund to support groups that offer services to public-housing residents. The trust hopes to spur other donors to contribute to the fund, and so far it has received $500,000 from the McCormick Tribune Foundation, in Chicago.
“We’re hoping this fund becomes the repository for other donors and foundations who want to aid the transformation process,” says Jennifer B. Jobrack, spokeswoman for the trust.
Ms. Jobrack says the fund has made grants to so-called “service connectors” in neighborhoods. Those groups are expected to use the money to expand their staffs and services to meet the needs of thousands of public-housing residents. Typically, the services include English courses for non-English speakers, literacy training, job placement, treatment for drug and alcohol abuse, and day care for children. The Urban Institute study found that many families waiting to relocate nationwide need such services to make a successful transition into HOPE VI-backed developments.
The Marcy-Newberry Association, where Donta Brown turned for help after learning of a program there last year, received $55,000 in MacArthur money through the Chicago Community Trust. “The grant helped us grow and augment our case management,” says Benjamin J. Kendrick, the association’s executive director. He estimates that the association has provided services to more than 1,000 residents.
Ultimately, Donta Brown opted not to return to a public-housing apartment, instead accepting a federal housing voucher good for about $1,200 per month in rent. She sees the move as a way out of poverty.
“I really appreciate that these people are here to help us,” Ms. Brown says. “Before the transformation, it seemed like there was nobody around to offer it.”
