Examining Housing Experiences by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Examining Housing Experiences by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

The recent inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identification in the U.S. Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey allows researchers and policymakers to consider the unique experiences of LGBTQ+ households in the marketplace. Photo credit: istockphoto.com/martin-dm

Veronica Helms, Emily Molfino, and Ben Winter from HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research discuss insights from the U.S. Census Household Pulse Survey

The social science research community has a poor track record when it comes to studying the housing experiences of the LGBTQI+ community, defined here as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and individuals whose orientations differ from those who identify as heterosexual and cisgender. People who are sexual and gender minorities (SGMs) are rarely seen in national data collection efforts and social science literature. Some research, however, shows that households containing SGMs face unique challenges in economic security and basic living standards. Prior research also shows that SGMs, particularly transgender people, experience increased housing discrimination and housing insecurity throughout their lives.

Recent inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) questions in the U.S. Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey gives researchers an opportunity to examine the intersection of SOGI, race, ethnicity, and housing status. This article introduces the housing research community to high-level findings regarding (1) the prevalence of housing insecurity among LGBTQI+ households; (2) the intersection of race, ethnicity, and LGBTQI+ household status when examining housing insecurity; and (3) the extent to which HUD programs serve the LGBTQI+ community. Although these analyses are subject to some limitations, they represent HUD’s first estimates of housing insecurity among LGBTQI+ households.

We hope these findings will encourage researchers to further explore the intersections of SOGI, race, ethnicity, and housing status. More research in this space can help ensure equitable access to the housing safety net (as well as equal outcomes) for this historically marginalized population that policymakers too often overlook.

Housing Insecurity + SOGI

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey, approximately 15.4 percent of all U.S. renter households, or 6.9 million households, are LGBTQI+, meaning that the respondent self-identified as SGM. To better understand housing insecurity among this population, we examined the relationship between self-reported SOGI responses and two housing insecurity metrics: (1) behind on rent and (2) fearful of imminent eviction (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Key findings include the following:

• LGBTQI+ and non-LGBTQI+ households experienced similar rates of housing insecurity. Housing insecurity rates for these two populations were approximately the same as those in the general U.S. renter population.
• Households with respondents who reported “other” for SOGI variables had the highest rates of housing insecurity; these individuals do not identify with the sexual orientation or gender identity categories presented in the Household Pulse Survey. Because this group experiences high rates of housing insecurity, more research on this population is needed.
• Households with respondents who chose not to answer SOGI questions had higher rates of housing insecurity than did LGBTQI+ and non-LGBTQI+ households. Assuming there is a pattern behind why a respondent chose not to respond to these questions, this finding suggests a strong nonresponse bias when using the Household Pulse Survey data for this special population.

Housing Insecurity + Race/Ethnicity

A large body of research finds significant racial and ethnic disparities in rates of housing insecurity. During the pandemic, people of color experienced the highest rates of housing insecurity. To illustrate the breadth of this disparity, we examined the relationship between self-reported race and ethnicity responses and two housing insecurity metrics: (1) behind on rent and (2) fearful of imminent eviction (Figure 3 and Figure 4). Key findings include the following:

• Black, non-Hispanic respondents living in renter households had the highest rates of housing insecurity: 25 percent were behind on rent, and 12.5 percent were fearful of imminent eviction.
• White, non-Hispanic respondents living in renter households had the lowest rates of housing insecurity: 9.6 percent were behind on rent, and 4.2 percent were fearful of imminent eviction.

Housing Insecurity + Race/Ethnicity + SOGI

We also examined housing insecurity by cross-tabulated SOGI and race/ethnicity categories to better understand the intersections of race, ethnicity, SOGI, and housing insecurity. Because cross-tabulation resulted in several groupings, we examined the behind on rent and fearful of imminent eviction metrics separately. Key findings include the following:

• Housing insecurity metrics were higher for LGBTQI+ black and Hispanic renter households than for their non-LGBTQI+ black and Hispanic counterparts. LGBTQI+ white renters exhibited housing insecurity rates similar to those of their non-LBGTQI+ counterparts.
• Among LGBTQI+ renter households, nearly 30 percent of black, non-Hispanic respondents reported being behind on rent compared with 9.7 percent of white, non-Hispanic households and 21 percent of Hispanic households.
• Among renter households not identifying as LGBTQI+, racial and ethnic disparities were similar to those of the general renter population.
• Although the sample size is limited, respondents who identified as “other” on SOGI questions faced the highest rates of housing insecurity. Rates were elevated for all racial and ethnic groups. Similarly, those who chose not to respond to SOGI questions had similarly high rates of housing insecurity, yet racial and ethnic gaps persisted.

HUD-supported Housing Assistance + SOGI

HUD analysts successfully linked Household Pulse Survey SOGI data with administrative data on HUD’s three largest rental assistance programs: public housing, vouchers, and multifamily housing. Because HUD’s administrative data systems do not collect SOGI data, this analysis provides the Department’s first estimate of LGBTQI+ households receiving HUD assistance.

One key finding from this research is that renter households and HUD-assisted households demonstrate a similar prevalence of LGBTQI+ households. LGBTQI+ households make up approximately 15 percent of all U.S. renter households and approximately 12 percent of HUD-assisted renter households (Table 1). This finding suggests that, at the national level, HUD’s housing programs may not pose a significant barrier to entry for LGBTQI+ households. More research is needed, however, to determine whether the take-up rate for LGBTQI+ households is consistent across different regions or market typologies (such as rural versus urban areas). More research is also needed to determine whether LGBTQI+ households who do receive assistance experience outcomes similar to those of non-LGBTQI+ households receiving assistance, such as in the length of assistance and the ability to access high-quality neighborhoods with HUD assistance.

Recognizing the important role of intersectionality, we also examined race, ethnicity, and LGBTQI+ household status among all renter households and HUD-assisted households. Several key findings emerged, including the following:

• The distribution of LGBTQI+ households by race and ethnicity was similar for HUD-assisted households and all renter households; however, more research is needed to confirm this finding.
• An estimated 10 percent of black, non-Hispanic LGBTQI+ renter households live in public and assisted housing. An estimated 90 percent of black LGBTQI+ households live in unassisted housing stock.
• An estimated 5 percent of Hispanic, LGBTQI+ renter households live in public and assisted housing. An estimated 95 percent of Hispanic LGBTQI+ households live in unassisted housing stock.

Conclusion

As HUD continues to advance equity across its policies and programs, researchers and policymakers must consider the unique experiences of LGBTQI+ households in the marketplace. Understanding those needs starts with the ability to see the LGBTQI+ community in federal surveys and administrative datasets. Recent advances in federal survey instruments that include SOGI questions have helped promote that visibility, which gives us a particular insight into who resides in HUD programs. We hope that future research into the housing experiences of the LGBTQI+ community will help advance the cause of LBGTQI+ equality, mitigate the effects of generations of discrimination, and improve the lives of America’s SGM population.