Skip to main content

Re: AHS: Opinions sought on proposed changes.

HUD.GOV HUDUser.gov
eList
AHS
At the University of Memphis we have a neighborhood inventory protocol that uses
the more detailed observational items; we included them deliberately to compare
particular neighborhoods with the AHS Memphis survey data. Our goal is to better
capture the nature and extent of neighborhood blight, with the idea of targeting
particular types of interventions (and the possibility, for example, of in-kind
contributions from corporate contractors) to particular structural problems. We
therefore find the detailed items quite useful. I realize, however, that this is a
somewhat particularistic use of the data, but if other research/practitioner
centers are actively engaged in developing city-level interventions, other cities
might continue to find the detailed items useful.

Phyllis Betts, Director
Center for Community Building and Neighborhood Action (CBANA)
School of Urban Affairs and Public Policy
University of Memphis

ahslistserv@huduser.gov wrote:

> From: American Housing Survey (AHS) ListServ <ahs@huduser.gov>
>
> We are working on changes to the content of the 2005 national survey. As I
> have mentioned here before, the 2005 survey will feature sampling improvements
> designed to do a better job of reaching manufactured housing and assisted
> living units. We are also going to make some changes to the income module
> because of what Scott Susin found in his recent paper comparing AHS and CPS
> income measures.
>
> While we're at it, we are looking at a few other areas to see if we can
> rephrase questions to make them work better, and we are considering dropping
> some questions that don't yield useful information. I would like your opinion
> on one of these proposed changes.
>
> We have a series of questions about structural conditions. At one time these
> were "observation" items, in which the interviewer would fill in the answer
> based on what he saw. After 1997, they became respondent questions. They are
> not used in the ZADEQ recode of "adequate housing." We are considering
> dropping them to reduce respondent burden. These are the variables:
>
> EMISSR: missing roof materials
> EHOLER: holes in roof
> ESAGR: sagging roof
> EMISSW: missing wall materials
> ESLOPW: sloping walls
> EBOARD: windows boarded up
> EBROKE: broken windows
> EBAR: windows covered with metal bars
> ECRUMB: crumbling foundation
>
> An alternative to dropping these completely would be to replace them with three
> questions, one each on roofs, windows, and walls.
>
> Are the current questions important to anyone's work? Would the proposed
> alternative do as well? Please reply to me or to the mailing list, as you
> like. Remember, to reply to the mailing list you have to include
> ahs@huduser.gov in your address header.
>
> Oh, by the way: the 2003 survey goes into the field today!
>
> Dav Vandenbroucke
> Economist
> U.S. Dept. HUD
> david_a._vandenbroucke@hud.gov
> 202-708-1060 ext. 5890
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> This message was forwarded to you by the Listserv ahs@huduser.gov because
> you had expressed an interest.
> To stop receiving these messages send an email to ahs@huduser.gov
> with "unsubscribe" as the SUBJECT of your message.
> To reply to all members of the list address your reply to ahs@huduser.gov.
> Message archives are at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/elist/archive.html
> For help send an email to helpdesk@huduser.gov