HousingWorks is the only service that collects data on applicants from the moment they start applying to the moment their housing search ends. We are also the only service that can collect and report on low-income inventory while simplifying waitlist maintenance. These unique data sets are a byproduct of the comprehensive housing search module and the equally comprehensive waitlist services module - and by combining these two unique sets of data we are able to provide real-time, supply-demand data that can help policy and planning agencies move forward with efficiency.

Since its inception in 2000, the HousingWorks team understood that it was essential to offer all three services simultaneously, and that the data module needed to be an automatic side-effect of improved service delivery because the data quality is inevitably better when there is an immediate benefit to the applicant and landlord, that benefit being "getting housed/providing housing - Reword the bold".

WHAT WE OFFER

An important outcome of our work with HousingWorks has implications far beyond the development agenda of one Boston CDC. Many housing advocates have long been aware that much of the affordable housing that is being developed is not in fact affordable to a large number of applicants who do not have access to rental assistance. HousingWorks’ database makes it plain that the majority of individuals and families seeking affordable housing in Boston are Extremely Low Income… living in poverty. The majority of the affordable units being developed are not affordable to most of the applicants for affordable housing Fenway CDC initially felt that it could address this issue internally by changing how rents in our future developments could be calculated. This proved to be impossible and has opened important questions about how affordable housing is being underwritten, whether rental assistance can be better integrated into new affordable housing and how new programs (such as the Boston Housing Authority City rent subsidy program) can address this serious shortcoming of the affordable housing sector."

Mat Thall, Vice President, Fenway Community Development Corporation

How it Works

HousingWorks in Action

HousingWorks advocates for and supports implementation on new City of Boston initiative

The Boston Rental Subsidy Coalition comprised of 20 different advocacy groups, lobbied the mayor's office for 5 years to institute one of the first programs to convert so-called "affordable" housing into truly affordable housing. The mayor's answer was always no. However, the game changed when HousingWorks brought some of its data reports to city hall as a new member of the coalition.

Click here to learn more

HousingWorks offers guidance to Fenway CDC Data Policy Committee

"In 2020 Fenway CDC embarked on a strategic planning exercise to determine what income groups and populations we should be serving in future affordable housing developed by the organization. Our goal was to ground our values, vision and mission in solid information about where was the greatest need and demand for affordable housing in both the Fenway neighborhood and the entire City of Boston. The census was of very little help; waiting lists for existing Fenway CDC developments – not always up to date -- provided a bit more information. We were extremely fortunate, however, in having HousingWorks as part of the working group developing our policies and goals. The HousingWorks enormous database of over 20,000 families seeking affordable housing in Greater Boston was a treasure trove. And HousingWorks creative responses to our requests to manipulate, extract, sort their data helped us to present a detailed and nuanced policy recommendation to the entire Fenway CDC Board of Directors."

HousingWorks helps property owners decide what to build next

2Life communities requested a report on average and worst waitlist times for each of their seven buildings which reside in Brighton, Newton, and Framingham, three very different socio-economic communities. They proactively sought this data to explore how to further their affordable housing mission.

Show average and worst waitlist graphic over five years. One graph above another.

Our Latest Reports

HousingWorks.net is comprised of three modules of service and data collection:

THE FIRST MODULE lets applicants and housing advocates locate and apply to all low-income housing across the 40+ different independent housing inventories. The first component allows applicants to anonymously search for and download applications free of cost. The second component is a subscription-based program for advocates to enter applicant information and download applications that are prepopulated with the entered information. This second component records and stores applicant information the moment they start applying, and updates information every time an applicant applies for any other housing property. This makes HousingWorks.net the only system that can quantify and unduplicate applicant information across private and public housing properties.

THE SECOND MODULE is the only a comprehensive inventory listing of truly low-income housing in Massachusetts tied with a subscription-based waitlist software and service for low-income housing administrators. This service product lets us build and update waitlists for more than 125 properties, mostly on the Eastern side of the state. This module allows HousingWorks.net to quantify and unduplicate applicant information up to the moment they are housed or rejected for housing. This module is connected to the first module so that HousingWorks.net also has comprehensive data on applicants from the moment they first apply to the moment their housing search ends across numerous, independent housing properties.

THE THIRD MODULE is a real-time data reporting system. Since applicants sit on waitlists for years, it’s necessary to pull data from the first two modules to achieve a clear picture of the relationship between the applicant population and the housing inventory. Our datasets pull from the two service modules and the data sets are a byproduct of the increased service, which is a crucial feature. Further, by combining these two unique sets of data, these interactive modules allow HousingWorks.net to run real-time, supply-demand data comparisons that have never before been available; data that identifies gaps and can help suggest more efficient policy and planning.

Since its inception in 2000, the HousingWorks team has understood that it was essential to offer all three modules simultaneously, and that the data module needed to be an automatic side-effect of improved service delivery because data quality is inevitably better when there is an immediate benefit to the applicant – getting housed - and the landlord – filling vacancies

New, Real-Time Data on displacement shows cost of living, domestic violence, and accessibility/health issues as three biggest reasons for displacement.

Of the applicant pool who answered a new optional displacement question, “Cost of Living” is the biggest reason for displacement, followed by Domestic Violence and the Pandemic, respectfully.
A breakdown by gender and race shows that displacement does not impact race or gender races equally
Local agencies have not implemented methodology for displacement that might be caused by development.

Waitlist times are increasing despite more and more “affordable” housing being built.

Since these reports were first run in 2016, Average Waitlist Times have continuously hovered around 3 years, in contrast with average waitlist times in the 90s, which were closer to 6 months. Worst Waitlist Times has hovered at 20+ years.
Reporting waitlist times via trend is more helpful than reporting only a single year, because simply opening a waitlist at a property radically changes the reported waiting time that year, while not actually shortening the waiting time.
The worst waitlist times are 20 years or more. We need to further explore connection between worst waitlist times and the displaced population.

Data shows that you can no longer work in a town and afford to live there.

The number of people who are full-time employed but homeless was increasing before the pandemic
Although there was a drop during the height of the pandemic, the numbers are again on the rise, likely due to the end of the Eviction Moratorium.
The idea of rental assistance money is perceived as a less urgent issue.

Income Levels Show Crisis in What is Offered versus What is Needed.

Since the company’s inception, most applicants (85-90%) applying via HousingWorks.net have fallen under the 60% AMI range. During the pandemic, that number rose to approximately 98%, with applicants who fall under the 60% AMI range disappearing almost completely.
The disappearance of the 60% AMI population means two things: Longer waitlist times due to more people competing for 30% AMI units, and 60% units sitting empty since landlords have less and less eligible applicants for those units.
Developments that include mostly 70% AMI units and higher, while often referred to as “income restricted,” are also included in discussions of “affordable housing.” But how can it be termed affordable if it automatically excludes most of the working population?
With each Natural Disaster, Economic Swing, or Epidemic, AMI levels change almost instantly, and the state needs real-time data to be able to plan more effectively.
HUD’s AMI regions often group together towns like Boston and Lincoln, distorting the actual average incomes within a given town and allowing for confusing statements that ‘affordable housing is being built’. Because it arbitrarily groups rich and poor towns in the same cachement area, the AMI system should no longer be used to categorize new housing as market or affordable, but at the same time, the AMI system can be used to accurately the income levels of the populations seeking housing: in other words, use AMI for applicants, not for housing and you get a much more accurate story.

What Housing Lotteries Show Us.

The average lottery that HousingWorks.net runs or helps run takes in anywhere from 1,000 to 3,000 applicants. Of the eligible applicants, only 1-5% will actually get housed from the lottery.
The housing doesn’t address the needs of who is applying and the developers can’t afford to build housing that does address the needs.
This raises questions about how affordable housing is being underwritten, whether mobile vouchers can be better integrated into new affordable housing – like IDP units - and how new programs can address this serious shortcoming of the affordable housing sector.