Moving To Opportunity (MTO)
Instrument name: Moving To Opportunity (MTO) Evaluation Household SurveyTo obtain a copy of instrument click here
For additional information about this research initiative
Citation: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2001). The MTO Evaluation Household Survey was developed (and the data were collected) by Abt Associates Inc.
Purpose: To assess housing status of public housing residents who volunteered for a housing mobility demonstration, including housing quality, neighborhood satisfaction, and housing services/assistance. Also addresses housing stability/instability and the factors affecting it (rent burden, landlord issues, food security, doubled-up status).
Population: Low income, families, public housing residents who volunteered for a housing mobility demonstration
Publication date(s): 2002
Domains: Housing status; Housing services/assistance; Housing quality; Neighborhood conditions
Administration: Structured interview
Reliability and validity information: See authors for information about individual items or composite measures.
Instrument description/response options: Structured, closed-ended questions with the following items:
- Section A - Questions 1-3: Current housing tenure
- Section A - Questions 4-9: Housing status
- Section A - Questions 25-29: Rent/mortgage paid
Additional questions pertaining to neighborhood satisfaction, neighborhood safety, payment of utilities and housing security (i.e. ability to pay for housing, relationship with landlord) also included in instrument.
Description of the original study: The Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration Program, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), was implemented in five major metropolitan areas: Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York. The program recruited volunteers from among families living in public housing or private assisted housing in areas of the central cities with very high poverty rates (40 percent or more). The families had to have very low incomes and have children under 18 years old. Eligible participants in the MTO demonstration were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) the experimental group which received Section 8 rental certificates or vouchers to be used only in low-poverty areas (census tracts with less than 10% of the population below the poverty line in 1989); (2) the Section 8 comparison group which received regular Section 8 rental certificates or vouchers (geographically unrestricted); and (3) the control group which continued to receive their current project-based assistance. The demonstration was designed to answer two important questions about the role and effectiveness of assisted housing mobility: (1) What are the impacts of mobility counseling on families' location choices and on their housing and neighborhood conditions? and (2) What are the impacts of neighborhood conditions on the employment, income, education, and social well-being of MTO families? A final MTO evaluation is currently under way.
