SPRING 2019

Measures of
Neighborhood Health
KANSAS CITY METRO

Prepared by: Students in UBPL 716: Neighborhood Revitalization

Urban Planning Program, University of Kansas
Prepared by students in:
Urban Planning 716:
Community and
Neighborhood Revitalization

University of Kansas
Spring 2019

Larisa Chambi
Melissa Fahrenbruch
Susie Geiger
Josh Gentzler
Maddie Hughes
Davianna Humble
Breanna Kolk
Zack Martin
Jessie Myers
Max Pitney
He Qin
Bryson Risley
Cody Spaid
Erin White Winn
Amie Young
 EXECUTIVE
SPRING 2019 SUMMARY
Among the largest challenges in the creation of neighborhoods. When implementing the Choice
affordable housing is finding the right location for Neighborhood program, Housing Authorities can
the housing. Increasingly, affordable housing is utilize the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data
seen as a platform to lift people out of poverty to determine if the neighborhood experienced an
and allow them to enter into a successful life. increase in mortgages originated comparatively
This process involves locating affordable housing to a timeframe before the program’s
in healthy neighborhoods that offer high levels of implementation.
opportunity. Measures of opportunity are such
factors as exposure to concentrated poverty, the This report’s research suggests that the highest
percent of the workforce that is unemployed, opportunity neighborhoods are neighborhoods
median income, the median household with less than 10 percent poverty, high
income, the median home value, and the level employment, with high performing schools and
of performance of students in local schools. with strong employment markets. The affordable
These measures of neighborhood health can be housing developments, including the Choice
determined through readily available data form Neighborhood program, would be best placed
the American Community Survey and the U.S. within these neighborhoods to induce the
Department of Housing and Urban Development. greatest amount of benefits for its residents.
This report presents information suggesting that
decision makers can use the Home Mortgage
Disclosure Act database to determine the
level of investor confidence, another indicator
of neighborhood health, through tracking the
number of mortgages originated within census
tracts.

This report creates two indexes. The first creates

an index which combines the standardized levels
of poverty exposure, unemployment, the school
performance, and the ratio of low-income jobs to
low-income workers within a tract. The second
index is based on the Home Mortgage Disclosure
Act and measures the number of loans issued
for owner occupancy per 1,000 owner occupied
homes within a census tract. This report finds
that there is a positive and significant relationship
between the traditional measurements of
neighborhood health and the number of home
mortgages originated for home purchase within

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 3

 SPRING 2019
OVERVIEW
the indicators method to address social issues
The Kansas City Housing Authority of Kansas City, including health, poverty, education, and inequality
Missouri asked the University of Kansas Urban (518); this was spurred by dueling developments
Planning program to perform a deep dive into the of greater interest in government intervention in
different measures of neighborhood health. Our social problems and more data being collected
goal was to understand the different mechanisms and analyzed (Kingsley, 2). This extended from
that impact neighborhood health and offer high the national level down to pioneering programs
levels of opportunity to the residents. within cities (2). However, as this initial interest
waned and the large cost of monitoring indicators
eventually made it a low priority in most places (2).
Neighborhood Health Indicators
However, several changes in the government
When it comes to evaluating public policy, to use landscape allowed the use of social indicators
an old cliché, it is just as much about the journey as to rise once again in the 1990s. The Urban
it is the destination. Specifically, the “destination” Institutes identifies the four key developments
is the judgement call we make and resulting action being advances in computer hardware, address-
we pursue and the “journey” is the criteria and matching and advances in GIS Software, advances
methodology we use to draw our conclusions. in the availability of automated administrative data,
When they examine neighborhoods like those in and advances in local institutional development
Kansas City and Joplin and consider potential (e.g. institutions devoted to creating, operating,
policy alternatives, planners and administrators and sharing systems of monitoring social
need to make determinations about their “health” indicators) (2-5). However, the use of indicators
and what major problems exist. Neighborhood is still not universal, and it is least common at
indicators are particular pieces of data that serve the level of evaluating individual neighborhoods.
as criteria for evaluation and are often paired with The movement for neighborhood indicators is
benchmarks used to make these aforementioned being spearheaded by several organizations/
judgement calls. This section will provide a agencies including the Urban Institute, Brookings
brief overview of the history, purpose, and best Metropolitan Institute, and the U.S. Department
practices for neighborhood indicators and look at of Housing and Urban Development, which are
a few specific examples of how they are used. making efforts to give communities the tools and
guidance they need to use indicators in a more
The idea of gathering data and tracking changes specialized fashion.
to make policy decisions in the U.S is obviously not
a new one. However, prior to the 1960s indicators Neighborhood indicators are used by a variety of
were mainly used on a national (or sometimes organizations, from governments to nonprofits to
state) scale to monitor economic conditions and even some private entities. However, they are all
trends (Land and Ferriss, 518). However, starting often united in the same purposes or goals. The
in the 1960s there arose a movement to use Community Toolbox identifies the five primary

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 4

purposes as community assessment, program These five types of indicators are used so often
evaluation, maintaining accountability, monitoring primarily because they correspond to some of
of community goals and outcomes, and making the most common social issues in neighborhoods
policy decisions (Section 10). One strategy many and some of the most intense policy debates at
cities employ is to use these indicators within the local level. Ellen and Turner, in their literature
an open data initiative. Cities like Kansas City overview of how neighborhood conditions have
not only track and use large amounts of data, been connected to individual outcomes, identify
they make public how the city is performing in relationships (whether purely theoretical or widely
various goal areas (Open Data KC). These efforts substantiated by evidence) between indicators
go a long way to maintaining accountability and in all five of these categories and welfare of
can produce other benefits such as increasing neighborhood residents in various stages of their
citizen engagement and creating a more generally lives. As they explain, some of the major leading
informed populace. In addition, some cities, indicators in these categories include the average
such as Madison, Wisconsin, utilize advanced level of education attainment, crime rate, poverty
mapping techniques to make this information rate, average income, and even life expectancy
as understandable, applicable, and interactive (834). However, they caution against using simple
as possible (Madison Neighborhood Indicators numerical values as be-all-end-all indications of
Project). However, with all the benefits of open the condition of the neighborhood and what policy
data it is not without its risks and challenges. direction a government should take (843-847).
The Center for Open Data Enterprise highlights They stress the importance of subtler aspects of
the potential for privacy issues for individuals neighborhood contexts such as social networks,
(especially for more sensitive information like crime peer influences, and the availability of resources
reports or code compliance complaints) as well as within a neighborhood (836).
the inherent security risks that come from making
so much information so easily accessible (1-2). Though many organizations and agencies use
similar indicators, they often use them in very
After establishing a goal for use of the indicators, different ways and there is far from universal
the main question and often a very difficult one agreement on which indicators matter most and
becomes what specific indicators should be what levels should indicate a healthy versus
used. As is typically the case in government, unhealthy neighborhood. One notable example
there is no right answer or “one size fits all” set of of a divisive indicator is proximity to employment
indicators; they need to be tailored to community opportunities within a neighborhood. Some argue
conditions, context, and goals. The Community that those living closer to job opportunities will
Toolbox provides a set of criteria to judge experience better individual outcomes. In 2015,
potential neighborhood indicators; they should be a report by the Metropolitan Policy Program
relevant, available, usable in practice, statistically at Brookings Institute found that people living
measurable, logically or scientifically defensible, closer to jobs were more likely to be working and
reliable, policy-relevant, and leading (which means experienced shorter spells of joblessness, and
changes in the indicator indicate coming changes they found this effect to be especially pronounced
in other indicators within that category) (Section for lower-income individuals (2-4). On the other
10). The amount of different indicators used by hand, some recent research has downplayed
communities is large and diverse; however, the five the importance of proximity, arguing that the
most used categories of indicators are education, concentration of jobs within cities in addition to
crime, health, poverty, and jobs. widespread vehicle ownership and the availability
of public transportation. For example, in a 2014

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 5

analysis of the relationship between job access of a neighborhood to one single value (2018
and employment status, Hu and Giuliano found Distressed Communities Index: Methodology).
proximity to jobs to be insignificant at all rates These components are amount of those with no
of poverty. They concluded that the inherent high school diploma, housing vacancy rate, adults
challenges of being a poor job seeker make not working, poverty rate, median income ratio,
it difficult to take full advantage of closeness to change in employment, and change in (business)
jobs and that wealthier job seekers have enough establishments (2018 Distressed Communities
means so that, except for very large increments, Index: Methodology). The metric is a relatively
their distance to work is fairly negligible (13-15). simple and easy to use one, but some have
accused the initiative of being overly simplistic and
The Urban Institute’s National Neighborhood the Economic Innovation Group has having a pro-
Indicators Partnership (NNIP) is a cross- business bias. This does not necessarily mean the
community collaborative initiative meant to index should not be used but, rather, emphasizes
“further the development and use of neighborhood the importance of being aware of potential biases
information systems” (National Neighborhood and holes in indicator data.
Indicators Partnership). The participating partners
come from 31 different metropolitan areas and One final example of the use of neighborhood
include nonprofits, universities, local government indicators is the Healthy Communities Assessment
agencies, foundations, and other organizations. Tool. It was created by the U.S. Office of Policy
They list their three major purposes as building Development and Research within the Department
a regularly updated information system of data of Housing and Urban Development. It provides
on neighborhood conditions, encouraging the communities with a method to evaluate their health
practical use of that data by community leaders, relative to others and can be used to examine
and promoting the importance of indicators both entire cities and individual neighborhoods
to improve the conditions of low-income within them (HCI Domains and Indicators). It
neighborhoods and the capacities of those living utilizes indicators from the Health Community
in them. The NNIP does not have a definitive list Index which consists of 10 categories: economic
of indicators, but rather has those engaging in a health, educational opportunities, employment
specific initiative (can be one or more partners) opportunities, environmental hazards, health
determine their own. For example, the Cleveland systems and public safety, housing, natural areas,
Community Building Initiative uses a variety of neighborhood characteristics, social cohesion,
datasets under five major categories: economic and transportation (HCI Domains and Indicators).
opportunity, institutions and services, family, child, The tool will rank a community against others and
and youth development, safety and security, and against various benchmarks or goals (whether from
neighborhood identity and pride (Kingsley, 7-10). a national program or an individualized strategic
The NNIP offers participants the opportunity plan) (HCI Domains and Indicators). It can also
to share their data and findings with each other provide information on which indicators have the
and, in certain cases, to collaborate directly on a strongest effect on the community’s overall health
program. (HCI Domains and Indicators).

Another large-scale application of neighborhood While all the information above is useful for
indicators is the Distressed Communities Index communities like Kansas City, it is important to
created by the Economic Innovation Group. realize that the uses of neighborhood indicators
The index combines seven economic and social expand far beyond these examples and the field
indicators in an effort to distill the “distress” level is still developing significantly. Community leaders

6 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

need to be vigilant for new developments that HOPE VI made significant contributions that influ-
could better empower them to understand and ence the design of Choice such as community de-
improve their neighborhoods. velopment opportunities, diverse housing options,
and how to incorporate tenants into the fold (Pen-
HOPE VI and CHOICE Neighborhoods dall & Hendey, 2013). Choice continues HOPE
IV’s emphasis on public-private partnerships and
There have been many efforts to remedy commu- mixed-financing for assisted housing but the pro-
nity and neighborhood decline that range all levels grams also extends eligibility to privately-owned,
of government. Efforts have been in the form of ini- federally subsidized developments (Pendall &
tiatives, legislation, and federal frameworks alike. Hendey, 2013). Additionally, Choice provides
In 2010, the federal government pursued Choice funding for neighborhood improvement projects
Neighborhoods as an alternative to HOPE VI, in that further the programs goals, which will later
an effort to create more comprehensive change in be discussed. Choice Neighborhoods focuses
community and neighborhood revitalization. This resources on transforming entire neighborhoods
paper will seek to explain the history of Choice with supportive services and for improvement to
Neighborhoods, the goal of the initiative, and the the surrounding community through the develop-
impact on Kansas City, Missouri. ment of community facilities and addressing va-
cant, blighted properties (Couch, 2015).
HOPE VI and Choice Neighborhoods
During the late 1980s, Congress established a Goals of Choice Neighborhoods
commission to identify severely distressed pub- Choice serve as an approach to “encourage local
lic housing and to create a plan to address the innovation and integration of housing redevelop-
problem (Couch, 2015). This commission, the Na- ment, tenant services, neighborhood-level plan-
tional Commission on Severely Distressed Public ning, and community development” (Pendall &
Housing, found that 86,000 public housing units Hendey, 2013, 3). In order to accomplish this, the
were severely distressed and recommended a Department of Housing and Urban Development,
revitalization plan. In response, Congress create also known as HUD, outlined three core goals for
the HOPE VI program to revitalize dilapidated Choice:
public housing units, rehabbing units, and relo- 1. Housing: Replace distressed public and as-
cating residents (Couch, 2015). Later, in the late sisted housing with high-quality mixed-income
1990s, HOPE IV was incorporated into the Qual- housing that is well-managed and responsive
ity Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998, to the needs of the surrounding neighborhood;
and the purposes of the program were to improve 2. People: Improve outcomes of households
the living environment, revitalize sites of severely living in the target housing related to employ-
distressed public housing units, decrease poverty ment and income, health, and children’s edu-
concentration, and build sustainable communities cation; and
(Couch, 2015). However, there were concerns 3. Neighborhood: Create the conditions nec-
that HOPE VI enabled public housing authorities essary for public and private reinvestment in
(PHAs) to demolish viable units, displace families, distressed neighborhoods to offer the kinds of
and exercise overly rigid rescreening practices amenities and assets, including safety, good
to bar residents from returning to their revitalized schools, and commercial activity, that are im-
communities (Couch, 2015). portant to families’ choices about their com-
munity.
In 2010, Choice Neighborhoods funded to replace
and expand HOPE IV (Pendall & Hendey, 2013). Eligibility of Choice Neighborhoods

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 7

There are several requirements that a neighbor- ing a range of human services that are offered to all
hood and housing units must meet before apply- residents in the Paseo Gateway Neighborhoods.
ing. Neighborhoods must have: The neighborhood goal is to create the necessary
• Minimum 20 percent of resident who earn ex- conditions to attract public and private investment
tremely low incomes, and resident can attend meetings to learn about
• One of three indicators of distress: the community within the Paseo Gateway Initiative
o Part I violent crime rates over the boundaries (Paseo Gateway, 2019).
past three (3) years that are at least 1.5 times the
city rate, Choice Neighborhoods is a significant stride to-
o Rate of long-term vacant or sub- wards neighborhood and community revitaliza-
standard homes that is at least 1.5 times the city tion. It is necessary that there is opportunity for
rate, and/or public input for efforts to be successful and those
o A low-performing public school or interested in Choice Neighborhoods funding must
at least twenty (20) children or 20 percent of the meet all eligibility requirements for consideration.
children from the target public and/or HUD-assist- Kansas City has set aside the Paseo Gateway as
ed housing who attend a low-performing public the city’s entry into Choice Neighborhoods and
school, and only time – and data-driven studies – will tell allude
• Severely distressed public and/or HUD-assist- to the prosperity of the program.
ed housing that meets the definition provided
in the HOPE VI statute (HUD, 2010).
NIMBYISM
Housing must be severely distressed, meaning it:
• Requires major redesign, reconstruction, or NIMBYism or Not In My Backyard is when resi-
demolition, dents who otherwise would support affordable
• Contributes to the physical decline of the sur- housing oppose the same infrastructure develop-
rounding neighborhood, ments near their own residence. The people that
• Meets other criteria related to socioeconomic oppose these developments are called NIMBYs.
distress, and/or NIMBYs have effectively prevented the construc-
• Is certified/documented as such (HUD, 2010). tion of affordable housing all across the country.
With a real need for this type of infrastructure, it
Kansas City and Joplin is important to identify ways in order to combat
As of January 2016, HUD has distributed a Choice Nimbys to allow for the construction of affordable
Neighborhood Implementation Grant for the housing in middle-income neighborhoods.
Paseo Gateway which would replace the Chou-
teau Courts public housing site and to support the NIMBYism is caused by a variety of factors for af-
revitalization of Pendleton Heights portions of the fordable housing. NIMBYism derives from estab-
Paseo West and Independence Plaza neighbor- lished residents having common misconceptions
hoods (Paseo Gateway, 2019). The Housing Au- of affordable housing. They believe allowing low-
thority of Kansas City and Brinshore Development, er income families to move in will increase crime,
LLC are constructing new mixed-income develop- place a larger burden on schools and decrease
ments that include replacement public housing the value of their homes. These residents’ views
units, affordable housing units, and unrestricted are based on stereotypes and have failed to see
market rate units (Paseo Gateway, 2019). the benefit of affordable housing not just for the
low income families that move in, but for their own
The people aspect of the plan focuses on provid- community. Families of lower income children get

8 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

the opportunity to attend better schools which in
turn increases their chances to go to college and Despite the possibility of converting NIMBYism,
earn more as adults, these families also shop at a study performed by C. Scally says that most
local stores and can help generate income. In people do not change their mind on this issue,
a report conducted by the Nation Association even when confronted with positive data. Scally
of Homebuilders, “Building 100 affordable rental states: “current efforts to disprove fears based on
homes generates $11.7 million in local income, statistical analyses fail to speak directly to those
$2.2 million in taxes and other revenue for local promoting NIMBY attitudes in their communities.
governments, and 161 local jobs in the first year Attempts to regulate equity through mandates are
alone.” (NLIHC) commonly contested by affected communities,
and fail to address legacies of regional inequalities
It is important to note that Nimbys are on both created by exclusionary actions.” However, Scally
sides of the political spectrum. Just because an continues by saying that “the marketing and ed-
individual agrees that affordable housing is nec- ucation to shift NIMBY attitudes may hold some
essary doesn’t mean they want it where they live. promise, but cannot yet be linked to sufficient re-
They still fear the problems affordable housing can versals of NIMBY-related institutional actions, or
bring along. There are many factors that play into to significant increases in the number of affordable
people’s fears of affordable housing which leads rental units developed.”(Scally)
to NIMBYism: racism, classism and fear of dis-
placement can all play into people’s aversion to Many people are set in their ideals when it comes
affordable infrastructure in their areas. There are to NIMBYism. With that in mind, there are ways to
also more legitimate concerns such as population reach people. One of the best ways to effectively
and traffic density. reach people is to focus efforts on areas where
NIMBYism does not already exist. This is demon-
While there are many reasons people support strated in Clayton Nall’s “Beyond NIMBYism:
NIMBYism, there are possible ways to help the Why American Support Affordable Housing But
issue. First, always be transparent about the proj- Oppose Local Housing Development” where he
ect. No one will be happy about a surprise build- finds that “repeatedly emphasized the virtues of
ing popping up in their backyard. Being open and additional housing [...] as a way to improve hous-
up front can help educate people and potentially ing affordability [...] is likely to fall on deaf ears.”
get them on board. Second, respect is important However, when supporters try and “activate ex-
when dealing with homeowners in the area. While isting attitudes towards housing” they see more
some fears may be irrational and racist, some success (Nall).
also do have legitimate fears and concerns when
it comes to affordable housing popping up in the
area, such as housing developments increasing Opportunity Zones
school enrollment. This fear seems rational, but
has been proven to be false. In a study by MAPC Opportunity zones were created by the 2017 Tax
entitled “School Enrollment Report,” 234 public Cuts and Jobs Act to encourage investments in
schools from in the state of Massachusetts from economically distressed neighborhoods through
2000-2016 found that their school enrollment the creation of Qualified Opportunity Funds (QOF).
barely changed in areas with rapidly growing hous- A QOF is any investment partnership or corpora-
ing development (MAPC). This is a great example tion that holds 90 percent or more of its assets
of people’s irrational fears surrounding NIMBYism in a qualified opportunity zone. The program is
not being rooted in reality. still in its infancy, and Congress has asked the IRS

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 9

to delay reporting on its effectiveness until 2020. 3. It also allows taxpayers to permanently exclude
While these factors make it virtually impossible to from tax any gains that arise from investing in
gauge the program’s ability to effectively revitalize the fund if the fund is held for 10 years. This is
distressed communities, it is important for local significant, because it allows investors to earn
government officials to understand the possible returns on their investments.
benefits and risks of participation. 4. The business opportunities are wide-ranging
and include residential rental properties, which
What is an opportunity zone? were excluded from earlier similar programs.
There are currently 8,700 opportunity zones in The only businesses that are explicitly barred
the United States, ranging from industrial towns from participating in the opportunity zone
to rural areas. Governors are able to designate program are vice businesses, such as liquor
census tracts with a poverty rate of 20 percent or stores, casinos and massage parlors.
higher or a median household income that is less
than 80percent of the surrounding area as eligible The expectation of a large, tax-free return on in-
zones (Reitz 2017). vestment combined with the broad regulations for
both opportunity zone designation and applica-
To incentivize economic development in opportu- ble business activity suggests that the program is
nity zones, the Investing in Opportunity Act—part more likely to be utilized in areas that are already
of the larger Tax Cuts and Jobs Act—established predispositioned to gentrification, rather than the
opportunity funds. These funds offer exemption highly distressed communities the program is in-
from certain taxes; most notably the capital gains tended to target.
tax. A capital gain is the profit from the sale of an
asset- investment or property. These profits are Potential Risks for Distressed Communities
subject to taxation. If a taxpayer invests their cap- There is a caveat to the opportunity zone desig-
ital gains in an opportunity fund, they are allowed nation requirements that could have a substantial
to delay or reduce the capital gains tax (Eastman impact on distressed communities. According to
and Kaeding 2019). If investors choose to keep the Investing in Opportunity Act, a census tract
their investments in a QOF for 10 years, they can that is not low-income can be designated as an
exclude from taxation any gains that accrue af- opportunity zone if it is “contiguous with a low-in-
ter their initial investment (Eastman and Kaeding come community that is designated as a qualified
2019). opportunity zone”. This means that it is possible—
and probable—that large opportunity fund invest-
Benefits to investors ments will be funneled to areas that are not truly
Although its effect on distressed communities re- low-income.
mains unclear, the program is attractive to inves-
tors for four primary reasons: Affordable housing advocates hypothesize that
1. The law allows taxpayers to postpone taxes on the opportunity zone program will only expedite
profits from the sale of any property or asset the gentrification process in vulnerable communi-
as long as the cash equivalent of the profit is ties, effectively counteracting its intended purpose
invested in an Opportunity Fund until 2026. of improving quality of life for residents of dis-
2. The law allows for the exclusion of 10 percent tressed neighborhoods. Development spurred by
of the original gain from taxation if held in an opportunity funds will likely result in rent increases
Opportunity Fund for at least five years; a total in already struggling census tracts, forcing original
exclusion of 15 perecnt if held in an Opportu- occupants of the zones to relocate.
nity Fund for seven years.

10 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

Regulations for developments made using Op-
portunity Funds are vague and limited: the pro-
gram mandates that “substantial improvement”
be made to building investments made in the
zones, but fails to provide additional clarification
on the criteria for this guideline. Further concern-
ing, there exists no rent threshold for properties
developed using Opportunity Funds. Developers
are able to set rents at levels that provide them
with adequate financial returns, providing an ob-
vious financial incentive to charge high rents and
virtually no incentive to provide affordable housing
options for people with low incomes. Analysts ex-
pect rent rates to rise by approximately 30 perecnt
of current rates in some opportunity zones, which
will result in approximately 80 percent of census
tracts located within opportunity zones becoming
rent burdened (Sterling).

Considerations
Due to the infancy of the program and Congress’
directive to delay evaluation until 2020, it is im-
possible to directly evaluate the impact of oppor-
tunity zones on distressed communities. Howev-
er, evidence suggests that investor expectation of
a return on investment, combined with a lack of
program regulation, makes the program unlikely to
succeed in its intended purposes. Further report-
ing is needed to fully assess whether opportunity
zones successfully revitalize distressed communi-
ties.

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 11

 SPRING 2019
ANALYSIS
Health Indicators
Kansas City Metropolitan Census Tracts by Map 1
Percent of the Population Below Poverty
• There are 12 of 507 census tracts, or 2
percent, in the Kansas City metropolitan area
with more than 40 percent poverty found in the
Kansas City boundaries. Thirty-one tracts, or 6
percent, have 30 percent poverty or more. (See
Map 1)
• The strongest positive correlations with
poverty were with unemployment and low educa-
tional attainment. The strongest negative cor-
relations were with median income and median
home value.
• The Kansas City Metropolitan area shows
at least 37 out of 507 census tracts increased in
poverty over the years 2010 to 2017. However,
80 census tracts do show some improvement of
the same time. This does not take these census
tracts out of poverty, however. (See Figure 2)
Figure 1

Kansas City Percent of Unemployment

• There are 26 of 507 census tracts, or 5
percent, in the metropolitan area with higher un-
employment above 15 percent (map 2).
Figure 2 • The Kansas City metropolitan area shows
136 census tracts experienced increased un-
employment over the 2010 to 2017-year peri-
od. However, 345 census tracts do show some
improvement over the same time. This does not
zero out these census tracts from unemploy-
ment.

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 12

Percent of Population with Low Educational 389 census tracts increase in paying more than
Attainment 30 percent of household income on housing over
• There are 31 of 507 census tracts, or 6 the 2010 to 2017-year period. However, 118
percent, in the Kansas City metropolitan area census tracts do show some improvement over
with low education attainment of 30 percent or the same time.
more. (See Map 3)
• Kansas City metropolitan area shows 53
census tracts increased by at least 5 points in
the Population with Low Educational Attainment
over the 2010 to 2017-year period. However,
438 census tracts do show some improvement Map 2
over the same time. This does not remove these
census tracts of low educational attainment,
however.

Total Median Income

• There are 149 of 507 census tracts, or
29 percent, with a median income of $45,000 or
less. (See Map 4)
• The Kansas City metropolitan area shows
423 census tracts decreased in total median in-
come over the 2010 to 2017-year period. How-
ever, 68 census tracts do show some improve-
ment over the same time.

Total Median Home Value

• There are 248 of 507 census tracts, or
49 percent, in the Kansas City metropolitan area
with a value of $150,000 (See Map 5)
• The Kansas City metropolitan area shows
402 census tracts decreased in total median
home value over the 2010 to 2017-year period.
However, 88 census tracts do show some im-
provement over the same time.

Housing Burden of 30 percent or more of

Household Income
• Unlike previous distributions, housing bur-
den is more widely distributed across the Kansas
City metropolitan area. There are 461 of 507 cen-
sus tracts, or 91 percent, with households paying
15 percent more of their income on housing. (See
Map 6)
• The Kansas City metropolitan area shows

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 13

Map 3 Map 5

Map 4 Map 6

14 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

Longitude Employment Household The ratio of low-income jobs to low-income
Dynamics (LEHD) Data workers is significantly negatively correlated with
the poverty rate. This suggests that assisting
The goal of the many affordable housing pro- low-income families in leaving areas of high-pov-
grams is to help low-income households move erty cab offer households more opportunities to
into areas where there are greater opportunities find access to entry level jobs. It’s worth noting
for them. This includes more job opportunities that although there is a negative correlation be-
and chances for households to rise out of pover- tween the two, it is not a linear relationship.
ty. The longitudinal employer-household dynam-
ics data was sources from the Social Explorer There are two inflection points in the relationship
platform and is categorized by wage level. The where the ratio of low-income jobs to low-income
relationship between a neighborhood’s rate workers changes its relationship with poverty.
of poverty and the ratio of low-income jobs to These ratios can be broken up in the following
low-income works needs to be examined in order three categories of census tracts:
to determine if households locating near jobs is 1. When the ratio of low-income jobs to low-in-
more beneficial than simply moving away from come workers is 0 to 1.5. In this range the
areas of high rates of poverty. A higher ratio of poverty rate is high and drops quickly as the
low-income jobs to low-income workers indicates ratio increases.
the higher possibility that low-income workers will 2. When the ratio is 1.51 to 5, the poverty rate
be able to get a job. This is illustrated in Figure 3, is lower (approximately 10 percent to 30
below. percent) and drops more slowly as the ratio
increases.
3. When the ratio is above 5, the poverty rate is
at its lowest at less than 10 percent.

Figure 3

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 15

Four models were used to conclude how the LEHD Data can be further explored in relation to
ratio of low-income jobs to low-income workers education and transportation. Whether the move-
relates to the overall poverty-rate. These models ment of low-income households to high opportu-
were: nity areas will help children of these households
1. Linear model: y=α+β×(x ) receive a better education is something else that
2. Logarithmic model: y=α+β×ln(x) needs to be considered. Based on Figure 4 be-
3. Inverse model: y=α+β×1/(x) low, when the value of low-income jobs to low-in-
4. Exponential model: y=α×(x)^β, in which x is come workers increases the school index also in-
the ratio of low-income jobs to low-income creases simultaneously. This suggests that when
workers, and y is the poverty rate. low-income families move into high-opportunity
census tracts (where the ratio of low-income jobs
None of the models show an interesting differ- to low-income workers is high) there is a higher
ence until the exponential model. chance of children in these households receiving
a higher quality education.
In the final section of ratios (greater than 5), the
exponential model is the most accurate model
to describe the connection between poverty rate
and the ratio of low-income jobs to low-income
workers. Almost 14 percent of results can be
predicted by this model. If the linear regression
model is used, the accuracy drops about 20
percent, and only 11 percent of data can be ex-
plained by the model.

Figure 4

16 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

Investor Confidence
Home Mortgage Disclosure Act reviewing the HMDA data, based on the work
of George Galster, census tracts throughout the
The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) was Kansas City Metropolitan Area are categorized
enacted in 1975. “The Home Mortgage Disclo- into four groupings based on levels of poverty:
sure Act requires many financial institutions to Less than 10 percent poverty, Poverty between
maintain, report, and publicly disclose loan-level 10-20 percent, Poverty between 20-40 percent
information about mortgages. These data help poverty, and Poverty greater than 40 percent
show whether lenders are serving the housing poverty.
needs of their communities; they give public
officials information that helps them make deci- In the Kansas City Metropolitan Area, there are
sions and policies; and they shed light on lending 508 census tracts. A majority of these tracts
patterns that could be discriminatory.” (consum- (63 percent) have less than 10 percent poverty
erfinance.gov/data-research/hmda) This data and about 20 percent have between 10 and 20
source is being used to determine how many percent poverty. Finally, 17 percent of the census
loan applications within a census tract were orig- tracts have more than 20 percent poverty and
inated to purchase a home. This data set allows less than 0.5 percent of the census tracts contain
detailed analysis of home purchase activity within very concentrated amounts of poverty, defined as
the Kansas City Metropolitan Area. In 2017, there greater than 40 percent poverty. Galster states
were 35,000 mortgages originated to purchase that level of poverty within a tract should be the
homes within the Kansas City Metropolitan Area. defining characteristic that determines where
These mortgages were worth a combined $8 affordable housing is placed within a city. He says
billion to the region. that affordable housing should be placed within
tracts which contain less than 10 percent poverty
In order to measure investor confidence, the in order to minimize the negative spillover ef-
HMDA data set was used to create a variable fects of poverty. Galster suggests that affordable
which counts the number of originated purchase housing may be placed in tracts which contain
home loans per 1,000 owner-occupied homes between 10 and 35 percent poverty only when
within a given census tract. This variable will be analysis of the new housing suggests that the
used to measure investor confidence. The higher increased level of poverty will not have an impact
the number of home loans originated, the greater on the neighborhood. In the Kansas City Metro-
the investor confidence is in census tract as a politan Area, there are 300 census tracts which
larger number of people are choosing to buy a affordable housing could be placed with very few,
home there. This variable will be used to com- if any, negative spillover effects.
pare investor confidence with other variables
which can be used to measure the health of a In Figure 5, the number of loans originated within
neighborhood. census tracts are broken down by the level of
poverty within the tract. The disparity between
Proximity of Mortgages to Poverty the level of investor confidence and percent of
One of the defining characteristics of the health the population in poverty is evident. This sug-
of a neighborhood is the concentration of pov- gests that the level of investment within a cen-
erty within a neighborhood. For the purposes of sus tract is heavily influenced by the amount of
poverty within the tract. Tracts with less than 10

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 17

percent of their residents living below poverty related with the percent of poverty, total number
account for 63 percent of the tracts within the of jobs, the income level of those jobs, and the
Kansas City Metropolitan Area, but greater than quality of schools located within that tract. The
80 percent of mortgages originated for purchase relationship between the percent of poverty and
in the area were located within these tracts. The amount of home loans is significant and indicates
20 percent of the tracts within the area have that as the amount of poverty within a census
greater than 20 percent poverty, had fewer than tract increases, the amount of new loans origi-
5 percent of the mortgages originated in 2017. nated in the census tract decreases. This table
shows the correlation between the percent of
Figure 5
poverty within a tract and the number of loans
originated per 1,000 owner occupied homes.
There is a significant negative correlation be-
tween the two numbers which demonstrates that
as the number of loans originated increases the
level of poverty in a tract decreases.

There is also a correlation between the number of

purchase loans and the Low-Income Job Ac-
cessibility variable. The relationship between the
number of originated loans and the access that
low-income residents have to entry level jobs is
significant and positive. The relationship is not
strong and is the weakest among the four vari-
Figure 6 ables in Figure 6.

The Department of Housing and Urban Devel-

opment produces two indexes also used in this
report to measure the quality of the Schools
located in/near a census tract and the connectiv-
ity to a transit system, labeled the School Index
Correlation and Transit Index in Figure 6, respectively. These
To further analyze the data, the HMDA data will indexes were used to determine if there was any
be compared to a set of variables from the LEHD correlation between the number of purchase
and Census datasets. The number of purchase loans originated in a tract and the score of the
loans per 1000 homes was correlated to the Index. The School index is highly positively cor-
Low-Income Job Accessibility – LEHD 2015, the related with the number of purchase loans in a
HUD School Index - 2017, the HUD Transit Index tract. This confirms the anecdotal evidence that
- 2017, and the Percent Poverty – US Census quality schools have a significant influence on
2017. This was done to determine if the number a household’s decision on where to live. As the
of purchase loans originated in a census tract School Index score is higher, the number of pur-
has a relationship with these variables of neigh- chase loans also increases. Figure 6 also shows
borhood health. that there is no correlation between a census
tract’s access to a transit system and the number
According to this analysis, the amount of pur- of purchase loans originated in the Kansas City
chase loans originated in tracts is highly cor- Metropolitan Area.

18 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

Figure 7 come households should be located. The index-
es taken into consideration were School Index,
Poverty Index, Labor Force Engagement Index,
Transportation Index, Transportation Cost Index,
and the Hazard Index.

The School Index uses fourth-grade performance

to assess quality of an elementary school within
a neighborhood. Labor Force Engagement In-
dex assesses how many people aged 18 to 64
(able to work) are actively searching for work or
are employed in the neighborhood. Labor Force
Engagement has stronger investor confidence in
metropolitan areas, where there is larger access to
transportation and more high opportunity schools.
The Poverty Rate Index is the percentage of peo-
ple living with income below the federal poverty
line, in 2015 the poverty level for a family with two
children was less than $24,046. However, after
analyzing the investor confidence in relation to the
Poverty Index, the Percent Poverty in 2017 was
found to have a more significant relationship. Per-
cent Poverty is 100 minus the percent poverty at
the census tract level.

The Relationship between HUD The transportation cost and transportation access
Indexes and Investor Confidence in indexes were removed from the index of opportu-
the Kansas City Metropolitan Area nity based upon a lack of statistical significance.
Furthermore, the Housing Authority of Kansas
Data was gathered from HMDA, American Com- City, MO conducted an internal survey of how res-
munity Survey, and Department of Housing and idents were transported to 299 Paseo. HAKC staff
Urban Development (HUD) to determine investor found that a majority of residents traveled using
confidence at the census tract level in the Kan- their own vehicle, borrowed a vehicle, or rode with
sas City metropolitan area. HUD developed AFFH a friend. While 299 Paseo is not located directly
Data to compare access to different opportunity along the Independence Ave Bus Rapid Transit,
indices at the census tract level throughout the it is a viable transportation option and was used
region. The opportunity indexes were compared less than 10 percent of the time. This indicates
to an index of investor confidence. The index of that transportation cost and transportation access
investor confidence is derived from Home Mort- indexes are overstated and unnecessary. The
gage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data. It measures Hazard Index was also removed from the index of
the number of owner-occupied home purchases opportunity due to inability to compare the results
per 1000 homes in each census tract. Looking in different census tracts.
for the relationship between these investor confi-
dence and neighborhood opportunity index helps The analysis determines the correlation between
determine where low-income homes and low-in- each of the HUD indexes paired with the investor

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 19

 Figure 8 Figure 9
ACS Poverty Index vs. Purchased Loans Originated by Number School Index and Home Purchase Loans for
of Owner-Occupied Houses in Tract per 1000 Homes Owner-Occupied Houses

confidence index. Figure 8 explains shows the

significant relationship between the Percent Pov- Figure 10
erty in 2017 and the number of owner-occupied Labor Force Engagement Index and Home
loans per 1000 homes. Purchased Loans for Owner-Occupied Houses

The relationship between Percent Poverty and the

investor confidence is significant, however it is not
linear. Investor confidence in the neighborhood
is higher when the threshold of loans is over 40
per 1000 homes. Percent poverty was used as
a neighborhood indicator to analyze a percent of
a whole population in a census tract in poverty.
The data used was from ACS to eliminate welfare
usage, which is no longer considered a good in-
dicator.

Figure 9 shows there is a statistically significant

direct relationship between the quality of schools
in the census tract and the level of confidence.
When school quality is below 20 percent, investor
confidence varies, with a mostly low confidence.
Figure 10 shows the relationship between Labor
As the school quality rises, investor quality rises
Index and purchase loans by number of own-
as well. Investor quality rises when it reaches 40
er-occupied homes per 1000 in the Kansas City
loans per 1000 homes.
metropolitan area.

20 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

This chart shows there is a statistically significant scattered and have a weak relationship with loan
relationship between Labor Index and Inves- originations (R squared of only 0.013). The line of
tor confidence. The chart has an R-squared of fit does show a weak negative correlation be-
0.327, which shows a positive yet small relation- tween the percent housing that is assisted and
ship. As the labor force engagement rises within the number of loan originations. This means that
a neighborhood so does investor confidence. as the rate of assisted housing goes up in a cen-
sus tract purchase loan numbers will drop very
Assisted Housing slightly with no obvious thresholds.

Federally assisted housing was broken down To understand how many tracts are affected by
into three different groupings: tenant-based this relationship a histogram was created. Figure
assistance; project-based assistance; and the 11 shows that nearly two-thirds of the census
total of both tenant-based and project-based tracts in the Kansas City metropolitan area have
units. Tenant-based assistance is comprised of fewer than two percent assisted housing units.
Housing Choice Vouchers, which allows ten- The normal curve would predict that the majority
ants to pay 30 percent of their income towards of census tracts should have between 2.6 to 4.6
housing and utilities and allows for increased percent assisted housing. Furthermore Figure 11
mobility. Project-based assistance is made up of illustrates that there is a large number of census
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit units, Section 8 tracts with little or no assisted housing.
housing, public housing units plus a few smaller
Figure 11
HUD sponsored multi-family programs. These
units were divided by the total count of housing
units in each census tract to create the percent
of tenant-based assisted units, project-based
assisted units, and total assisted housing units in
each tract.

Our studies show that the average percent of

assisted housing per census tract is 3.7 percent
which is greater than the average of all census
tracts in Kansas and Missouri at 1.1 percent.
However, all of the variables tested have large
standard deviations indicating a large spread of
cases, ranging from 0 to 56 percent. To see if a
correlation exists between the rate of assisted
housing and the number of purchase loans orig-
inated by owner-occupants, a scatter plot was
created to determine if the relationship is linear or
if any thresholds could be identified. A threshold
may indicate that the presence of assisted hous-
ing beyond a certain percent may cause a signifi-
cant reduction in investor confidence.

Figure 10 confirms that the instances of loan

originations by the percent assisted housing are

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 21

 Figure 12 Figure 14
Property Crime
18000
16000
14000

12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Figure 15
Violent Crime
40000

35000

30000

25000

Crime Data
20000

15000

10000

Crime has decreased overall and in both property 5000

and violent crimes across all census tracts. Total 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
crime across all census tracts dropped by 22
percent and 11,411 in absolute units. Property
Crime has decreased at 18 percent and 2,889
absolute units. Lastly, violent crime has dropped
24 percent and 8,522 absolute units.

Figure 13
Total Crime
60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

22 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019

References
Bertoni, S. (2018, July 18). An Unlikely Group Of Billionaires And Politicians Has Created The
Most Unbelievable Tax Break Ever. Forbes Magazine. Retrieved March 27, 2019, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes-
digitalcovers/2018/07/17/an-unlikely-group-of-billionaires-and-politicians-has-created-the-most-unbelievable-tax-break-
ever/#19854cde1485

Briefing on Open Data and Privacy. The Center for Open Data Enterprise, 2016, Briefing on Open Data and Privacy, reports.
opendataenterprise.org/BriefingPaperonOpenDataandPrivacy.pdf.

Carrns, A. (2019, February 15). ‘Opportunity Zones’ Offer Tax Breaks and, Maybe, Help for Communities. The New York Times.
Retrieved March 26, 2019, from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/business/opportunity-zone-tax-break-controversy.html

Couch, L. (2015). Public Housing: Choice Neighborhoods Initiative and HOPE VI. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/
files/Sec4.05_Public-Housing-Choice-Neighborhoods_2015.pdf

Eastman, S., & Kaeding, N. (2019, January 17). Opportunity Zones: What We Know and What We Don’t. Retrieved from
https://taxfoundation.org/opportunity-zones-what-we-know-and-what-we-dont/

Economic Innovation Group, & Economic Innovation Group. (2017, February 06). The Investing in Opportunity Act Factsheet.
Retrieved from https://medium.com/the-investing-in-opportunity-act/the-investing-in-opportunity-act-factsheet-c068deba2b2e

Ellen, Ingrid Gould, and Margery Austin Turner. “Does Neighborhood Matter? Assessing Recent Evidence.” Housing Policy De-
bate, vol. 8, no. 4, 1997, pp. 833–866., doi:10.1080/10511482.1997.9521280

“HCI Domains and Indicators.” Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment, www.huduser.gov/healthycommunities/indicators.

Hu, Lingqian, and Genevieve Giuliano. “Poverty Concentration, Job Access, and Employment Outcomes.” Journal of Urban
Affairs, vol. 39, no. 1, 2 Jan. 2017, pp. 1–16., doi:10.1111/juaf.12152.

Kingsley, G Thomas. Neighborhood Indicators: Taking Advantage of New Potential. The Urban Institute, 1998, Neighborhood
Indicators: Taking Advantage of New Potential, www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/27466/412380-Neighborhood-In-
dicators-Taking-Advantage-of-the-New-Potential.PDF.

Kneebone, Elizabeth, and Natalie Holmes. The Growing Distance between People and Jobs in America. 2015, The Growing
Distance between People and Jobs in America, www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Srvy_JobsProximity.pdf.

Land, Kenneth C, and Abbott L Ferriss. “The Sociology of Social Indicators.” 21st Century Sociology, Sage Publication’s, Inc.,
2007, pp. 518–526.

Madison Neighborhood Indicators Project, City of Madison, WI, 2019, madison.apl.wisc.edu/.

Monies, P. (2019, March 19). Tribes Shut Out of ‘Opportunity Zone’ Deals. Retrieved from https://oklahomawatch.
org/2019/03/15/tribes-shut-out-of-opportunity-zone-deals/

Morphy, E. (2019, February 13). How Opportunity Zones Might Define Substantial Improvement. Retrieved April 04, 2019, from
https://www.globest.com/2019/02/13/how-opportunity-zones-might-define-substantial-improvement/

Urban Planning of University of Kansas 23

Nall, C. Marble W. Beyond NIMBYism: Why Americans Support Affordable Housing but Oppose Local Housing Developments.
Nall Research Group. April 3, 2017.

National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership, Urban Institute, 2019, www.neighborhoodindicators.org/.

NLIHC. Our Homes, Our Voices. (2019). Retrieved from: https://www.ourhomes-ourvoices.org/about

Novack, J. (2018, July 19). Triple Play Tax Break: New Opportunity Zone Funds Cut Your Taxes Three Ways. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/2018/07/18/triple-play-tax-break-new-opportunity-zone-funds-cut-your-taxes-
three-ways/

Open Data KC, City of Kansas City, Mo., 2019, data.kcmo.org/.

Paseo Gateway. (2019). Choice Neighborhood | Kansas City, MO. Retrieved from https://paseogateway.com/

Pendall, R., & Hendey, L. (2013). A Brief Look at the Early Implementation of Choice Neighborhoods. The Urban Institute.

Perez, D. (2017, October 2). Mixed-Income Housing: Success and Opportunities. Retrieved from https://www.kansascityfed.
org/publications/community/connections/articles/2017/q32017/mixedinc

Philbrik, S., & Reardon, T. (2019). School Enrollment Report – MAPC. Retrieved from https://www.mapc.org/enrollment/

Reitz, C. (2018, August 17). What are Opportunity Zones and How do They Work? | Resources. Retrieved from https://fun-
drise.com/education/blog-posts/what-are-opportunity-zones-and-how-do-they-work

Riquier, A. (2018, November 26). A tax break to hasten gentrification? Housing market’s Opportunity Zones may miss their tar-
get. Retrieved April 03, 2019, from https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-tax-break-to-hasten-gentrification-housing-markets-
opportunity-zones-may-miss-their-target-2018-11-23

Scally, C. P. (2013). The Nuances of NIMBY: Context and Perceptions of Affordable Rental Housing Development. Urban Affairs
Review, 49(5), 718–747.

“Section 10. Community-Level Indicators: Some Examples.” Community Toolbox, University of Kansas, 2018, ctb.ku.edu/en/
table-of-contents/evaluate/evaluate-community-initiatives/examples-of-community-level-indicators/main.

Sterling, T. (2019, February 05). Why Opportunity Zones Will Likely Increase Rents in
Vulnerable Areas. Globe Street Magazine. Retrieved March 27, 2019, from https://www.globest.com/2019/02/05/why-op-
portunity-zones-may-actually-increase-rents-in-vulnerable-areas/?utm_source=GlobeSt_WebPromo_020719&utm_medi-
um=Email&utm_campaign=GlobeSt_Marketing_Campaign&src=EMC-Email&cn=AM_RE_GlobeSt_WebPromo_020719_
js&bu=remp&pt=&et=promotion&slreturn=20190221114012

Svaldi, A. (2019, March 14). Boulder not buying into opportunity zones. Retrieved from https://www.denverpost.
com/2019/03/14/boulder-opportunity-zones/

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (2010). Choice Neighborhoods Round 1 NOFA Broadcast. Re-
trieved from https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_9825.PDF

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (2019). Choice Neighborhoods. Retrieved from https://www.hud.
gov/cn

“2018 Distressed Communities Index: Methodology.” Economic Innovation Group, eig.org/dci/methodology.

24 KCMO Measures of Neighborhood Health 2019