 Comment on Susan J. Popkin, Mary K. Cunningham, and Martha Burt's “public housing transformation and the hard‐to‐house”Michael Kelly Housing Policy Debate, 2005, vol. 16, issue 1, 25-35 Abstract: I agree with the underlying premise of the article that it is important for public housing to provide for the housing and supportive service needs of the hard‐to‐house—to the extent that this is practical and possible. However, I also note some important caveats to put potential public housing and HOPE VI (Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere) support for this population into perspective. The needs of the hard‐to‐house go beyond the transformation of public housing. Although Popkin, Cunningham, and Burt are correct in noting that this population requires specialized services, public housing authorities have neither the capacity nor the resources to deliver them. The problem is not public housing or its transformation, but rather the lack of adequate resources for both the shelter and the services that residents require. The diverse needs of this population ultimately demand the coordinated efforts and resources of many public, private, and nonprofit providers. Date: 2005 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:houspd:v:16:y:2005:i:1:p:25-35 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2005.9521532 Access Statistics for this article Housing Policy Debate is currently edited by Tom Sanchez, Susanne Viscarra and Derek Hyra More articles in Housing Policy Debate from Taylor & Francis Journals |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.