Fair Housing Act

Practicum Report: Assessment of Fair Housing Act using a Normative Policy Evaluation Method Summary I considered this as a great opportunity for exploring the role played by the public policy practitioner in the Public Housing sector. I got to assess the Fair Housing Act, via a normative policy evaluation methodology. Collection of data was achieved through observation and literature review of materials that included policy guidelines as well as records for the housing agency.

It is clear from the assessment of programs and processes that XXXX Housing Agency obeys all the state and federal conditions on housing, such as the Fair Housing Act. Nonetheless, in order to improve the Act and make it even more accommodating for the smaller groups, the following recommendations are suggested; (1) HUD should supervise and impose grantee’s jurisdiction-wide favorable fair housing responsibilities via a reviewed Analysis of Impediments procedure.

(2) The HUD needs fund beneficiaries to carry out and present periodic evaluations of the Act as well as other federally-safeguarded equal opportunity effects of particular activities and programs embarked on with federal resources.

(3) Both program-specific and jurisdiction-wide processes include the consideration of housing opportunity indicators backed by established experience and studies; and (4) the HUD should supplement technical aid and requirements of submission to fund beneficiaries with a meticulous system of surprise, periodic audits of a subsection of beneficiaries as well as applicants to be selected via random selection together with other factors. Introduction The Fair Housing Act forbids discrimination, limitation, or preference because of gender, race, nationality, disability, family status, color, or whichever intentions to display such discrimination, preferences, and limitations.

The American Congress approved the federal act that falls under the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) department back in 1968 and 1988 (Hoosier State Press Association., 2019). The Indiana Fair Act also got approved in the year 1990. The two acts impact the following: renters or sellers of a property, agents taking part in the renting and sale of the property, as well as the media of advertising.

A lawsuit that involves advertising can be filed against the individual who is involved in the writing and placement of the advert together with the owner and management of the property, publication, and newspaper. The Fair Housing Act does not include buildings that have less than four units and their owner lives there, and those who own single family homes (Hoosier State Press Association., 2019). The Fair Housing Act becomes relevant of a property’s owner uses a broker and also takes part in unfair advertising.

Significance of the practicum Every government agency and jurisdiction should focus on fair housing responsibilities. This project concentrates on fair housing responsibilities for departments of housing. A city’s implementation of the fair housing policy encounters practical considerations and several varying needs, which are already influencing the city decision-makers and personnel. For instance: societies are ever changing. They are becoming more racially and ethnically diverse, with immigrant families, colored people, and handicapped individuals making up considerable fractions of societies. The raises the chances of fair housing concerns emerging.

An increased number of people of color are now staying in the suburbs, and the portion of those living in abject poverty is increasing as well. Cities are opening up themselves to accountability if they do not have an understanding of their duties under the fair housing policy. Cities ought to be ready if unanticipated situations surface requiring fair housing response or evaluation.

Learning objectives and expected outcomes This practicum gave the opportunity to review current procedures and policies concluding in a procedures and policy manual that helped in the issues of non-conformance, challenges of application, and concerns of policy restriction experienced by the housing agency. The course material alerted me that taking a look at social issues could be more complicated than what actually meets the eye. I had to understand and always bear in mind that an issue could have several underlying and systemic issues that need similar attention.

Public policy is created as a reaction to issues that need to be taken care of by decision-makers. These policies come in the form of laws and regulations. They can be created by whichever government body; from the city council to the president. The aim of public policy might be totally inseparable from its source. Both the government and the public policy help in the realization of societal needs as well as basic responsibilities (Dye, 2017). Policies determine how communities, states, and countries control their funds.

They also assist in maintaining social order. The policy making process is unending, chaotic, and untidy, and does not have any defined start of end point. Those engaged in the process might abide by general procedures of the policy creation process that has been described below in six phases (National Collaborating Center for Healthy Public Policy., 2013).

Being a practitioner, I anticipated gaining first-hand knowledge on policy execution and the complete processes in evaluating a policy for its alteration to match the day-to-day needs of those individuals it intends to serve or protect. I anticipated understanding the specific complicated procedures involved in modification of policies and how the numerous facets in policy execution influence one another, and how the systems react to a change in any of these facets.

Secondly, I anticipated that this report is going be a useful and informative addition to the Fair Housing Act via the included recommendations. Methods In making the decision to analyze public policy, there is an inherent ethical opinion that individuals together with their welfare are of value. We should make an effort to learn about each force that influences the welfare of an individual and the society at large. The yearning to better the present system is the foundation for public policy.

In order to meet this objective, public policy students should first know how the present system operates. For this purpose, this study’s primary data was gathered via observation and literature review of materials that included policy guidelines and records for the housing agency. Being the main researcher, I showed up to all meetings held within the housing agency for the duration of time assigned for collecting data.

I observed and took notes on how the meetings were held, and how the operations of the agency are aware of and support the Fair Housing Act. Analysis of policy, with the vision of tackling public issues is prescriptive instead of descriptive in cases where it commends action to be taken instead of simply describing policy procedures. It is called normative policy and is aimed towards assessing what public policy needs to be in order to enhance general welfare (Cocharn & Malone, 2005).

Therefore, the data gathered for this study was analyzed using policy analysis technique. Justification for the normative policy analysis method The decision-making power in the democratic communities is described by fluctuating levels of decentralization. If the decision-making power is spread among different centers of power, like the different government branches (legislative, executive, and judicial) no particular group’s will is completely central (Robert & Zeckhauser, 2011; Cochran & Malone, 2005).

Policy experts thus asses how those involved in the policy process actually make decisions: what objectives are set by the several groups, how these objectives are pursued, and how does an issue get on the agenda. Political leaders should share power. Such leaders often disagree not just on the problems that need to be tackled, but also how the problems should be tackled. The resulting policy is usually the outcome of different strong groups pulling in their own directions. The result usually contrasts what anyone expected.

Therefore, policy experts assess how groups and individuals involved in the policy-making process interact with one another (Robert & Zeckhauser, 2011). Policy experts also try to apply sensible analysis to their efforts in order to get improved policy decisions. Therefore, via sensible and empirical assessment, an entity of research findings opens up the chances of policy experts offering important input to improve general wellbeing (Cochran & Malone, 2005). Based on the complex nature of formulation of policies to execution and assessment, this particular method is the most appropriate.

Recommendations and Conclusion In addressing the serious flaws of the present FHA regulations with regard to how they are linked to federally funded undertakings and activities, the following is recommended: a. Restructuring the Jurisdiction-Wide Analysis of Impediments (AI) Procedure As per the present jurisdiction-wide AI system as well as remedial action, I suggest stronger and clear metrics, collection of data, account-ability measures, and mechanisms of public input. i.

Clear Fair Housing Metrics Impediments definition To successfully accomplish the duty of FHA, the HUD regulations ought to specifically mention that the potential fair housing impediments that need to be dealt with include: · Any private or public omissions, decisions, or actions that have the impact or purpose of limiting the availability or choices of housing based on religion, color, race, nationality, family status, or disability (Pearl, 2014).

· Any private or public omissions, decisions, or actions that have the impact or purpose of concentrating or separating residents on the basis of on religion, color, race, nationality, family status, or disability. · Any private or public omissions, decisions, actions, or policies that have the impact or purpose of restricting access to various opportunities connected to housing based on religion, color, race, nationality, family status, or disability (HUD, 2017).

This governing language will clarify, on the basis of established law, fair housing impediments that (a) might surface public and private sources; (b) might arise from failures and actions to act and also official policies; (c) might result from deliberate discrimination or facially neutral doings which refute fair housing; and (d) could involve discriminatory or exclusionary forces.

The suggested criterion makes clear that fair housing impediments might assume the form of restricted access to opportunities connected to housing like the pattern of a municipality of siting low-wages, unequal minority housing in places far away from employment, health care, education, or any other opportunities that are connected to practical housing. How to overcome impediments The regulations ought to offer the grantees suggested actions that overcome the impacts of impediments recognized via its assessment that promise to minimize those impacts and positively develop fair housing (Pearl, 2014).

Simply put, there should be a connection between the suggested activities and the recognized impediments, and the suggested corrective efforts should display, accurately and the satisfaction of the department, that the impediments will be minimized as an outcome of the suggested activities. Additionally, the regulations ought to state that federal resources should not be utilized in ways that will perpetuate or aggravate fair housing impediments, regardless of whether or not they are recognized in the assessment of impediments.

They should also clarify that the post award evaluations as well as status reports ought to record the execution of the suggested as well other actions to tackle fair housing impediments and offer ample information and data to record the impact and success of these actions. ii. Guidelines of data collection The collection of accurate and relevant data is important for the continuance of fair housing.

Consequently, reviewed HUD regulations ought to mention that jurisdictions ought to incorporate in their assessments of impediments the gathering and documentation of appropriate demographic patterns together with concentrations of ethnic, racial, religious, linguistic, or income groups and disable individuals as shown in state federal, and other reliable sources of information and data (HUD, 2017). The analysis/ evaluation of impediments should include demographic information and other related fair housing data. The evaluations ought to also entail mapping systems such as GIS to represent residential patterns.

FHA regulations ought to also define integrative and segregated housing effects especially by taking into account how minority concentration is defined e.g. whether an area is habited by a subpopulation which accounts for more than 12 percent of the subpopulation in the larger region (HUD, 2017). Gathering information on ethnicity and identifying areas of segregation in urban areas is often done through utilizing existing secondary sources. Gathering data on disability can be done by adapting HUD data on disability numbers in public housing as well as adapting census information.

Investigating the demand for accessible housing units will entail the need to get other information on the current demand for accessible and affordable housing from individuals with disabilities, the available affordable and accessible housing units, and the number of accessible units in the works (HUD, 2017; The Opportunity Agenda, 2010). HUD inspectors already have the power to ask for more accessible units for disabled people in new housing projects.

Additionally, HUD has data sets (household-level) for assisted housing programs and the location of the accessible units and the ethnicities of the people habiting the units (Turner & Acevedo-Garcia, 2005; HUD, 1996). Special considerations of the impacts of racially segregated actions/ policies should only be made by taking into account familial status, mental disability, physical disability, and other related factors that have influenced government housing policies in the past.

For the purpose of ensuring compliance with this requisite, it is my recommendation that HUD should avail mapping tools and data via a new online platform that should be designed to help recipients, applicants and other stakeholders. iii. Better public participation I am in support of existing regulations (e.g. 24 C.F.R. § 91.105) that require the participation of the public in major housing decisions e.g. the process of Consolidated Planning (Kanter, 1994). It is my recommendation that the regulations ought to be uniformly enforced.

In addition to the public participation regulations captured in Section 91.105, I recommend that jurisdictions should avail their preliminary analyses of impediments and the actions they propose including mapping data, if available, on a public online platform where the citizenry can contribute easily and openly. iv. Accountability Measures One of the major problems in the existing AI system is the fact that HUD employees do not regularly review AIs so as to ascertain the probability of success, the substance, and the accuracy of them.

Therefore, in addition to the recommendation that regulations should designate specific actions, data requirements and criteria to be used, I recommend that HUD staff should be made to regularly review AI and to do onsite inspections before the approval of projects for federal funding. This recommendation is supported by TRASVIÑA (2011). For the purpose of efficiency, I recommend that the HUD uses the same principles that the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) uses in collecting revenue.

The principles include focusing on large tax payers and generally deterring other payers from evading tax, responding quickly to info they receive about those who do not comply, and randomly auditing payers. For HUD, this simply means focusing on large projects, checking on those who are suspected not to be in compliance with regulations, and regularly doing filed inspections to ensure compliance (The Opportunity Agenda, 2010; Li, Campbell & Fernandez, 2013). The above actions will ensure that there are higher levels of compliance with the regulations. a.

Ensuring Fair Housing Compliance in Individual Federally-Funded Projects Besides reforming the AI process, there is a need to ensure that all federally funded projects comply with FHA duty and other requirements that exist to ensure equal opportunity. One of the tools I recommend for this is the use of the OIS (Opportunity Impact Statement) requirement (Kochera, 2002; Smith, 2016). I, therefore, recommend that the HUD should come up with more regulations to require the drafting and submission of OISs by potential fund recipients (Kochera, 2002).

This could help ensure that those who receive funds are those who comply with the basic fair housing principles. Improving Enforcement and Funding Decisions Regulatory accountability is one of the key factors that will determine the likelihood of the proposed reforms succeeding. Therefore, in cases where data (including OISs) show that there is potential discrimination, funding should be denied or stopped pending further investigations. The recent stopping of funding to BART by FTA after public complaints is an important example and model.