Lessons Drawn From Local Housing Authorities: Characteristics of Survival and Success

Author: James Armstrong

Dissertation School: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universit

Abstract:

Local housing authorities (LHAs) are a large population of American public institutions. Chartered by state governments, numbering in excess of 4,000 institutions, they are an underexamined population of non-taxing special districts. LHAs own substantial fixed and liquid assets, manage large annual cash flows, significantly influence local real estate markets, and act as a primary agent for the delivery of federal, state, and local assisted housing. These authorities operate in an environment requiring entrepreneurial management while attending to housing and community development public policy responsibilities. LHAs offer scholars and practitioners an opportunity to draw lessons concerning institutional survival and policy achievement applicable among LHAs and suggesting potential lessons for other, younger populations of special districts.

This research project proposes to fill a significant gap in knowledge by describing salient characteristics of this institutional population, investigating characteristics contributing to institutional survival and policy success, and drawing normative lessons from LHAs, for LHAs, for other special districts, and for public administration practitioners and scholars.

Methodology

The study’s approach is multimethodological, relying on demographic and performance data available from LHAs and from HUD, enriched with qualitative data developed from interviews with elite members of the LHA leadership community. To describe the institutional population, the study will assess jurisdictions, governance, operating arenas, and scopes of powers chartered to LHAs by the states, LHA financial characteristics, and program and tenant characteristics. Data sources will include HUD and LHAs.

To assess characteristics related to survival and policy performance, the study will use a most different cases approach, identifying two purposive samples of approximately 25 LHAs, one comprised of agencies recognized as exemplars, and the other comprised of struggling agencies. Comparisons of demographic, financial, and performance data concerning these 50 agencies will produce sets of characteristics associated with outstanding and poor performance.

To enrich the study’s outcomes and avoid overlooking subtler indicators of success or trouble, interviews with elite LHA leaders will solicit expert viewpoints concerning potential indicators, potential members of the most different cases purposive institutional samples, and cross checking feedback concerning preliminary findings and outcomes.

Back to Search Result of DDRG Dissertations