Why Data Matters

By Jennifer Gilbert, Susan Connelly, and Scott Pollack
for ULI Boston/New England

It is startling how little reliable, coherent data is available upon which we are expected to base policies governing the planning, design and building of affordable housing. It exists but is hard to bring together in a way that everyone, from individuals to communities to politicians, can use to make better decisions that we will live with for the foreseeable future.

Under the Commonwealth’s system of local rule, the direction of housing and planning policy is dictated by the people who already live in cities and towns. That makes some logical sense, as they are the ones who vote, pay taxes, and actively participate in local politics.

An unfortunate consequence, however, is that the voices of those who need housing, who would be happy to join a community, are excluded. The natural human tendency to dislike change means that, unless existing residents choose to advocate for housing, exclusionary policies that define anyone who is not from there as ‘other’ tend to dominate public discourse.

There is some precedent for existing residents to rally around more housing, and the Boston Globe has reported on the growth of YIMBY (yes in my backyard) groups. But without unassailable data, and an understanding of what it means, it is almost impossible to have a real conversation about who we are, what we have, what we need, and trends for the future.

In a perfect world, every major policy discussion, from local zoning to state funding, would start with data we can all agree on.

The current administration recognizes the need for data, and the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities has added data scientists to its staff. But rigorous collection of data and making it public does not always reach the top of the public sector to-do list.

Housing Navigator MA released a search tool in 2021, after years of forensic data collection, which covers the state’s entire inventory of affordable (“income restricted”) housing. This free tool not only helps individuals looking for an affordable place to live, but it also provides data dashboards that, for the first time, provides a town-by-town accounting of the state’s affordable housing.  This kind of granular level data is exactly what policy makers at all levels need to make better informed, data-driven decisions. That said, this data is only a starting point. Routinely collecting more holistic data would be better.

There are a lot of unsupported assumptions about who lives in, needs, or “deserves” affordable housing. Indeed, there are a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions about what affordable housing is. But just as the housing shortage was not caused by one policy, affordability is not a singular problem. Not all needs are the same, not all areas of Massachusetts face the same problems, so any comprehensive policy will require multiple solutions.

Cambridge, a city with a strong track record for affordable housing production, provides a good example of how difficult the problem can be.  Activists for new housing regularly cite the Cambridge Housing Authority’s (CHA) long waitlist – nearly 31,000 households – as evidence that the city needs much, much more affordable housing. The difficulty is that this number, while real, neither provides enough information to determine the range of need nor does it give us enough to know what to do.

Tax credits are often cited as part of the solution to building more housing, and it is. Turns out that only 709 of the 31,000 households on the waitlist, or just 2%, could afford “affordable” housing created with tax credits. Why? Because typical underwriting for tax credit developments forces a rent of around $2,200/month for a 2BR. That means that a family of three would have to make about $80,000/year. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, people who are critical to our economy don’t earn that including almost everyone who prepares or serves a meal, nursing assistants, and home health aides.

This is not a criticism of tax credit financing, which is critical to many affordable housing projects across Massachusetts and the country. Rather we need to understand the opportunities and limits of existing resources.  We need to look beyond headlines like “31,000 on the waitlist” and understand, using granular data, the existing affordable housing system, who it serves now and who it will serve in the future.

Decisions being made now will have a legacy beyond our lifetimes. They will affect the economy, jobs, and taxes. They should reflect who we aspire to be, yet they are being made in a continuing, historic context of exclusionary housing policies and zoning. And they are often made by people whose life experience has been very different than the people on those long waiting lists.

We need to make decisions based on the now and the future for everyone. And they need to be based on granular data, like that found in Housing Navigator MA, to understand both broader issues as well as detailed situations in places as divergent as Boston, Carlisle, New Bedford, and Worthington.

Jennifer Gilbert launched Housing Navigator Massachusetts in 2019 driven by a passion to create housing opportunities and reduce the divides in housing access and equity. Susan Connelly is Chief Operating Officer of Housing Opportunities Unlimited. Scott Pollack is founder of SRPlanning (SRPlan.net) and serves as Co-Chair of ULI Boston/New England’s Housing Roundtable. Please send any reactions, comments, or ideas to Scott at [email protected].