What does this indicator measure?
This indicator uses U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standard definitions to estimate the number and percentage of families whose income level is insufficient to afford private, market-rate housing without assistance or subsidies.  HUD income guidelines are used to determine eligibility for publicly funded “affordable housing” programs for low-income families, such as conventional public housing and Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8).  Thus, the number of families falling within the HUD income limits serves as a fairly accurate estimate of the demand for affordable housing, or more accurately, the demand for housing that is affordable for those families unable to afford market-rate housing.

The HUD guidelines categorize families by their income compared with the median family income (MFI) for the area—in this case, the Dallas Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA).  Families with incomes between 80% and 50% of the area’s MFI are classified as low income, families with incomes between 50% and 30% of area MFI are classified as very low income, and families with incomes below 30% of area MFI are classified as extremely low income.  Families in all three income categories are eligible for public housing programs, although their priority on the waitlist will differ.  Unfortunately, there are no available data sources that directly compute the percentage of families falling into these income categories.  This indicator approximates this percentage by computing the percentage of families living in a census block group (the smallest available geography) in which the block group median family income falls into one of the income categories explained above.  The data presented here are obtained from Claritas.

It is important to note that in assessing an individual family’s eligibility for public housing programs, the income guidelines are more complex than the percentages of area MFI used in this indicator.  HUD calculates income limits approximately equal to 80%, 50%, and 30% of area MFI.  However, in certain areas, the income limits may be adjusted up or down somewhat to mitigate for unusually high or low housing costs relative to income, or particularly high or low area incomes as compared with the national median.  Moreover, the income limits are then adjusted for family size when applied to individual applicants.  For more information on HUD methodology, click here.  It should also be noted that while area MFI is calculated using the census definition of family, which excludes single-person households, single individuals are eligible for public housing programs, although singles that are neither elderly nor disabled have a very low waitlist priority.  Because the HUD income limits are significantly decreased when applied to single applicants, including single people in this indicator would overestimate the number of households in each category that could qualify for a public housing program.  Therefore, this indicator is computed in terms of families, not households.

This indicator provides an important complement to the Waiting list for public housing indicator.  This indicator, Demand for affordable housing, tries to address the inherent problems associated with using the public housing waiting list as a proxy for the overall demand for affordable housing.  In other words, not all individuals in need of public housing are actually on the waitlist.  Moreover, although this indicator is defined using HUD standards for publicly funded housing program eligibility, it has broader scope.  The concept of affordable housing need not be so inextricably linked to the concept of public housing as it is today.  Many families on the upper end of the low-income distribution, with incomes approaching 80% of area MFI, are in need of affordable housing—that is, quality housing that is affordable to them.  This housing need not necessarily be publicly funded housing.  In the future, the growing need for more affordable housing may be met by a public–private partnership.  With some encouragement from government, private developers may begin to take a new philosophy—one of providing quality, affordable housing for cost-conscious customers—if they can be convinced that there is a viable market niche in low-cost but high-quality housing.  By examining the prevalence of families in three low-income categories, this indicator helps quantify the number of families in need of different types of affordable housing.

• Henderson and Hunt Counties had the highest proportion of families living in low income block groups, but Dallas County had the highest proportion of families living in very low income block groups.
• Henderson County had 80% of families living in a block group with block group MFI less than 80% of area MFI, while Hunt County had 58% of families in a low income block group.  These very high proportions can be partially explained by the rural nature of Henderson and Hunt Counties and the typically lower cost of living and lower incomes associated with rural areas.
• Dallas County had 45% of families living in a block group with block group MFI less than 80% of area MFI. 
• In Kaufman County, the percentage was 32% of families, and in Ellis County, it was 26%.
• Collin and Denton Counties had the lowest percentages of families living in block groups with median family income less than 80% of area MFI, at 7% and 10%, respectively.

• Dallas County had nearly 15% of families living in a very low or extremely low income block group where block group median family income was less than 50% of area MFI. 
• Henderson, Hunt, and Kaufman Counties had the next largest percentages of families living in a very low or extremely low income block group, at 5.7%, 6.4%, and 3.5%, respectively.
• Dallas County had 9,386 families living in extremely low income block groups where block group median family income was less than $19,500, or 30% of area MFI.
• Henderson County had 172 families living in an extremely low income block group, while Hunt County had 143 families.
• Collin, Denton, Kaufman, and Rockwall Counties each had less than 2% of families living in a block group with block group median family income less than 50% of area MFI.