Transition planners and inmates often look to public housing as an important and viable source of housing for individuals leaving prison or jail because of its affordability and ubiquity (relative to specialized supportive housing). Depending on the nature of the offense(s) for which they were convicted and their family situation, however, these individuals may find it difficult to access public housing. Regulations frequently prohibit a person with a criminal record from living in public housing units. (See Research Highlights, above, for more details.) And, perhaps even more importantly, the demand for public housing far exceeds the supply. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, three-fourths of households eligible for housing assistance do not receive any such assistance. ^[1]   (See Policy Statement 30, Housing Systems, for more information on challenges to meeting the demand for affordable housing.) Waiting lists are typically long, and most housing agencies place priority on housing families with children. Transition planners should familiarize themselves with local waiting lists and the local agency's preferences for admission and screening policies to develop a more accurate picture of the likelihood of public housing for different re-entering individuals.

Despite the tremendous barriers that limit formerly incarcerated individuals' access to public housing and HCVs (sometimes known as Section 8), these two federal programs remain critical sources of housing assistance for releasees in many communities. Public housing agencies not only provide housing at rent levels attainable by most people leaving prison or jail, but also are usually mission-driven to offer access to self-sufficiency programs, adult education, substance abuse treatment, and other supportive services. HCVs may be an even more important resource, because of their flexibility and adaptability. In many communities that have no local or state affordable housing programs, federally subsidized housing remains the only housing resource for low-income individuals or individuals with disabilities. Especially in these localities, corrections administrators and transition planners should seek to understand the particular screening policies of local PHAs and to collaborate with them to ensure that individuals leaving prison and jail are not excluded without exception from accessing subsidized housing resources.

Example: Legal Action Center (NY)

In winter 2001, the Legal Action Center (LAC) compiled summaries of the admission and eviction guidelines and procedures affecting people with criminal records in thirteen local housing agencies around the country, including the use of "One Strike" policies by these agencies. These summaries are available on the Publications page of the LAC website, www.lac.org.

Policymakers should work with PHAs to determine where exceptions or changes can be made to regulations or policies to increase access to public housing and Section 8 vouchers by individuals released from prison or jail. They should also encourage PHAs to recognize where they have discretion in screening people with criminal convictions, and to avoid categorically excluding this population from their housing units.

Notably, although federal laws do permit PHAs to deny housing to individuals with criminal records in many cases, there is a clear exception in the case of individuals who fall under the "physical or mental impairment" provision of the Fair Housing Act. ^[2]   The US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the refusal to rent to individuals participating in a drug and alcohol abuse program constituted illegal discrimination against handicapped individuals under the federal Fair Housing Act. ^[3]   The court's ruling has been cited in subsequent actions, affirming that applicants in recovery must not be discriminated against based on their past history with alcohol and drugs. Although the courts have been clear that this protection does not apply to current illegal use of or addiction to a controlled substance including alcohol, PHAs can grant exceptions to individuals who are participating in treatment or social service programs, or who can demonstrate their completion of treatment or rehabilitation. Some states, in fact, provide individuals with "Certificates of Rehabilitation" upon successful completion of treatment programs, which these individuals can use to increase access to employment or to improve their applications for public housing or Section 8 vouchers.

Further exceptions can be made to public housing and Section 8 exclusions for those individuals reuniting with families that already reside in federally subsidized housing. Community-based organizations, working in partnership with local PHAs, should consider creative options that can promote family stability and public safety.

Example: La Bodega de la Familia, Family Justice (NY)

La Bodega de la Familia, the community-based‘žservice arm of New York's Family Justice,‘žhas successfully encouraged their local PHA not to evict families that accept their members returning from incarceration by emphasizing that the returning individual's participation in La Bodega promotes community safety because it offers the individual (and his or her family) substance-abuse treatment and adherence to other conditions of release. La Bodega works in partnership with the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) to consider how existing exceptions to admission policies apply on a case-by-case basis. When they meet the conditions of admission, releasees and their families are allowed to remain in public housing as long as the families receive services to assist the returning family member to remain in treatment and maintain sobriety. With full support from NYCHA, a new satellite office of La Bodega will soon open in public housing space to offer more accessible support to families in federally assisted housing.