Results

Our model finds that in areas with a decrease in household income, there was a corresponding increase in the percentage of vacant lots & residents 25+ years old but a decrease in the unemployment rates when the fixed effects model was utilized (M2). The model showed that while the median house value had an overall increase, the reality for residents living in the Metro areas was an increase in unemployment and the percentage of vacant lots.

Conclusion

The Federal Housing program subsidies did not have an equal effect on median house values in the tracts they were utilized. The NMTC and the LIHTC programs targeted housing tracts with differing household income thresholds & poverty rates. The LIHTC program targeted recipients with a lower household income & a higher poverty rate. As a result, the housing tracts targeted by the LIHTC program had a higher median home growth than the NMTC program. Overall, the participants in the LIHTC program had a more positive outcome, however neither program had a statistically significant increase beyond what occurred in similar tracts.