Census Note 5: A Cast-tocoast ExpansionFannie Mae Foundation Census Note 05 (June 2001)* A Coast-to-Coast Expansion: Geographic Patterns of U.S. Homeownership Gains During the 1990s
Summary of Findings
After faltering during the 1980s and early 1990s, the national homeownership rate climbed steadily in the second half of the past decade. The resumption of homeownership rate growth has been extensively documented by the popular press (Palmer 1999), federal government (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD] 1999a), industry trade groups (Carliner 1998), and academic institutions (Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University 2000). These accounts provide somewhat constrained insights into the nature of the 1990s homeownership expansion, however, because the ongoing government surveys used to monitor intercensal homeownership trends furnish limited historical perspective and geographic detail. Newly released data from Census 2000 offer an opportunity to study detailed geographic patterns of homeownership attainment within an extended historical context. Using these new data and information from prior decennial censuses, this Census Note analyzes homeownership change over the past several decades at the national, regional, state, and city levels. Changes in both homeownership rates and the number of homeowners are examined. The analysis finds that homeownership growth during the 1990s was historically strong and geographically extensive. Nationally, the homeownership rate increased more during the 1990s than at any time since the 1950s and the net increase in homeowners was the second highest on record. Homeownership rates increased in all census regions and divisions and in 49 of the 50 states, a geographic breadth not experienced since the 1950s. Notably, homeownership gains were also shared by the nation's large central cities, which have been a focus of recent business and public policy efforts to expand homeownership. Even older industrial cities that experienced substantial population decline and economic distress during the postwar period exhibited modest but encouraging homeownership gains. The Policy and Business Context: Recent Efforts to Expand Homeownership Federal housing and tax policies have long promoted homeownership (Krueckeberg 1999). Recently, however, federal housing policy has incorporated an explicit emphasis on expanding homeownership for groups with low homeownership rates, such as minorities and low-income households. During the 1990s, this policy was reflected in legislation and regulations to encourage more home mortgage lending to historically underserved populations and in the Clinton administration's National Homeownership Strategy (Simmons 2000). Federal policy has also emphasized increasing homeownership in historically underserved geographic areas, which include many neighborhoods in central cities. As an example of this geographic focus, one objective of HUD's 1999-2003 strategic plan was to "increase homeownership opportunities, especially in central cities, through a variety of tools, such as access to mortgage credit (HUD 1997; emphasis added). A variety of private efforts also emerged during the 1990s to expand the reach of homeownership. These initiatives included development of innovative mortgage products, adoption of more flexible underwriting procedures, enhanced outreach to minority and lower income households and communities, and abundant homeownership education and counseling programs (Listokin et al. 2000). As with public efforts, these private initiatives have often included an emphasis on increasing homeownership in central cities. In a recent study of the housing industry's efforts to expand homeownership, Listokin et al. (2000) found that large lending institutions were opening loan offices in central cities, forming partnerships with national urban organizations, and working with a variety of community-based nonprofit organizations located in urban areas. Although in concept these public and private initiatives extend to central cities of all sizes, in practice they often entail a special focus on larger cities. For example, HUD provided 12 grants under its Homeownership Zone Initiative in 1996 and 1997, all but one of which was given to a central city with at least 100,000 residents (HUD 2000). Of the 7 Alliance Communities designated by Freddie Mac in an effort to increase city homeownership rates, 6 are cities with populations over 300,000 (Freddie Mac n.d.). Similarly, offices opened by financial institutions in an effort to increase homeownership are often located in larger central cities. All of the 19 House America branches opened by Countrywide Home Loans between 1996 and 1999 were located in central cities with more than 250,000 residents (Listokin et al. 2000). Fannie Mae has 48 Partnership Offices, all but 3 of which are located in central cities with at least 100,000 residents (Fannie Mae n.d.).[1] It is important to note that recent public and private initiatives, although providing motivation for studying homeownership change in large central cities, are not necessarily the most significant factor underlying observed trends. Indeed, as will be discussed later in this Census Note, the factors causing homeownership change are numerous and include important demographic and economic forces in addition to recent homeownership initiatives. Defining and Measuring Changes in Homeownership A housing unit is owner-occupied if the owner or co-owner lives in the unit, even if it is mortgaged or not fully paid for (U.S. Bureau of the Census 2001a). All occupied housing units that are not owner-occupied are classified as renter-occupied, and therefore the latter category includes both dwellings rented for cash and those occupied without payment of cash rent. The homeownership rate is the percentage of all occupied housing units that are owner-occupied.[2] The homeownership rate for a given area can increase even if the number of owner-occupied units is decreasing, so long as homeowners are declining more slowly than renters. A concurrent increase in the homeownership rate and decrease in homeowners is most likely at the city level and particularly for cities experiencing rapid population and household loss. Therefore, in addition to analyzing trends in homeownership rates, this Census Note also examines changes in the number of homeowners. Although the definition of homeownership has remained constant in recent censuses, the question used to determine housing tenure changed between the 1980 and 1990 censuses. In 1990, the tenure question was modified to clarify that a household owned its home even if it had an outstanding mortgage or other loan on the property. Although this change had the potential to artificially inflate the change in the number of owner-occupied units and homeownership rate between 1980 and 1990, it is unlikely to have had a major impact on trend measurement during the period (Myers et al. 1992). The questions used to determine housing tenure in the 1990 and 2000 censuses were virtually identical. One additional measurement issue has the potential to affect assessment of homeownership change using the decennial census. According to preliminary analysis of census coverage data by the U.S. Bureau of the Census (2001b) Executive Steering Committee for Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation Policy, the differential undercount between owners and renters is likely to have declined between the 1990 and 2000 censuses. If further analysis shows this to be the case, then increases in 1990s homeownership rates as measured by the decennial census will be lower than they would have been had the differential undercount remained constant between 1990 and 2000. Despite the potential complications associated with using the decennial census to measure homeownership change, it offers the most consistent, geographically detailed, and historically deep data on homeownership that are available. As noted by Myers et al. (1992), recent decennial censuses offer the additional benefit of being conducted at similar points in the economic cycle, thereby limiting the possibility that short-term variations in the economic environment will distort trends. Individual regions, states, and cities might have been at very different points in their economic cycle over the course of the last several censuses, however. One final potentially confounding factor relates to changes in city boundaries over time. Some homeownership growth at the city level might be attributable to annexation of surrounding territory or consolidations of city and county governments. To the extent that the annexed or consolidated land area is predominantly suburban in nature (and therefore more homeowner-oriented), such geographic expansions are likely not only to artificially inflate gains in the number of homeowners, but also in the homeownership rate.[3] Geographic Areas Studied Changes in homeownership are studied for the nation, the census regions and divisions, and the states between 1940 and 2000. Because of the aforementioned efforts to increase city homeownership, this Census Note also analyzes homeownership trends in large central cities during the last three decades of the 20th century. Three different groups of large central cities are studied. The first group includes all 177 incorporated central cities with 2000 populations of at least 100,000. To assess how homeownership trends are progressing under some of the most challenging urban conditions, the second group ("declining cities") includes 36 municipalities that experienced at least two decades of population loss during the postwar period.[4] The third group ("distressed cities") comprises economically distressed cities selected using the resident need classification system developed by James (1995). These 18 cities had resident needs that were at least 30 percent greater than the nation as a whole in both 1980 and 1990.[5] The list of cities in each of the last two groups is provided in the appendix. National Homeownership Growth In April 2000, the U.S. homeownership rate was 66.2 percent, the highest level ever recorded in a decennial census (table 1). This rate represented an increase of 2.0 percentage points over that recorded in the 1990 census. The increase was the largest decadal increment since the 6.9 percentage point gain of the 1950s.  The solid increase in the national homeownership rate last decade was the result of strong growth in the number of homeowners and continued deceleration of renter household growth. The number of homeowners increased by 10.8 million during the 1990s, a gain exceeded only by the addition of 11.9 million homeowners during the 1970s. Growth in the number of homeowners last decade was 50 percent greater than during the 1980s. As homeowner growth accelerated during the 1990s, rental household growth continued a three-decade slide. The number of renters increased by 2.7 million last decade, a level of growth 37 percent less than during the 1980s and 45 percent less than during the 1970s. As a result of these opposing trends, homeowners accounted for a larger share of household growth during the 1990s than in any decade since the 1950s. On net, eight of ten households added during the 1990s were homeowners, compared with seven of ten or less during the three preceding decades. Homeownership Trends for the Regions, Divisions, and States The 1990s homeownership boom was very broad-based geographically, stretching from coast to coast. The homeownership rate increased in each census region and division and in 49 of the 50 states (figure 1). More states experienced increasing homeownership rates last decade than in any other decade except the 1940s and 1950s.[6] The geographic breadth of homeownership rate gains in the 1990s stands in sharp contrast to the 1980s, when only 18 states had homeownership rate increases. Fewer than 40 states experienced increases in their homeownership rates during the 1970s and 1960s.  Several areas of the country experienced sharp reversals in homeownership rate trends (figure 2). The turnaround was most pronounced in the Mountain division, where the homeownership rate in every state increased during the 1990s after declining during the preceding decade. During the 1980s, the division contained the two states with the largest drops in homeownership rates; in the 1990s it contained two of the three states with the largest increases. 
The homeownership rate in the Mountain division as a whole increased by 3.7 percentage points last decade after falling by 2.9 percentage points during the 1980s. The number of homeowners added in the Mountain states during the 1990s set a new record for the division and was more than double the increase in owner-occupants during the 1980s. Only in the Northeast did homeownership gains fall off substantially from the 1980s. This was particularly true in the Middle Atlantic division, where increments in both the homeownership rate and number of homeowners were less than during the 1980s. The 0.8 percentage point increase in the homeownership rate of the Middle Atlantic states was lower than in any other census division. Among individual states, homeownership gains were particularly strong in Nevada, where the homeownership rate increased by 6.1 percentage points last decade after falling by 4.8 percentage points during the 1980s (figure 2). During the 1990s, Nevada added over 200,000 homeowners, more than double the increment recorded in any prior decade. Other states with large turnarounds in their homeownership rate trends and record growth in the number of owner-occupants include Arizona, Colorado, Utah, and Texas. Arkansas, the only state that had a decreasing homeownership rate during the 1990s, actually experienced fairly healthy growth in the number of owner-occupants. The number of Arkansans who owned their homes grew by 16.7 percent last decade, just below the rate of increase for the nation. The state's falling homeownership rate was attributable to an unusually strong rate of renter household growth, which was more than double the national rate and the fastest pace experienced by the state in the postwar period. Homeownership Change in Large Central Cities The nation's large central cities shared in the 1990s homeownership boom. Among the 177 central cities with at least 100,000 residents in 2000, the homeownership rate rose by 1.5 percentage points last decade after falling during the 1980s and increasing by only 0.6 percentage points during the 1970s. During the 1990s, the number of homeowners in these cities increased by 1.4 million. This level of growth was 81 percent greater than during the 1980s and 16 percent greater than during the 1970s. Strong growth in these cities' homeowner populations helped them to increase their share of national homeownership growth. Their share of the nation's homeownership growth increased from 10.4 percent in the 1970s, to 11.0 percent in the 1980s, and 13.3 percent last decade. Even older industrial cities with lengthy histories of decline and distress showed significant homeownership progress during the 1990s. In the 36 "declining" cities, the homeownership rate increased by 0.7 percentage points last decade, following a gain of 1.6 percentage points in the 1980s and 0.6 percentage points during the 1970s. These cities' sub-par homeownership rate gains during the 1990s masks a distinct positive trend in their homeowner populations. After losing 25,000 homeowners during the 1970s, the declining cities added 90,000 owner-occupants during the 1980s and 163,000 during the 1990s (figure 3). Although very small, these cities' share of national homeownership growth has increased in each of the last two decades.  The apparent discrepancy between homeownership rate and homeowner trends in the declining cities can be resolved by comparing trends in renter and owner household growth. The increase in the homeownership rate in these cities during the 1970s was the result of more rapid loss of renters than homeowners. The former decreased by 3.3 percent during the decade, whereas the latter fell by a more moderate 0.6 percent. During the 1980s, the number of owner-occupants in these cities began to increase again, but the ranks of renters shrank at an even more rapid pace. As a result, the declining cities turned in a deceptively strong homeownership rate performance during the 1980s, with their homeownership rate increasing at the same time that the national rate fell. By the 1990s, continued homeownership gains in these cities were accompanied by a return to growth in the number of renter households. Renewed renter household growth helped to suppress increases in the homeownership rates relative to the 1980s. The 18 "distressed" cities also exhibit encouraging homeownership trends. Changes in homeownership rates and owner-occupants in these cities were similar to those experienced in the 36 declining cities. Homeownership rate increases were highest in the 1980s and roughly comparable during the 1970s and 1990s. The number of owner-occupants in these cities fell slightly during the 1970s, increased by 95,000 during the 1980s, and grew by 133,000 during the 1990s (figure 3). Their share of national homeownership growth rose from zero in the 1970s to just over 1 percent in each of the last two decades. Homeownership Change in Individual Cities Homeownership change varied widely across the cities studied.[7] In step with the strong gains in its region and state, Las Vegas turned in one of the most impressive performances. The homeownership rate in Las Vegas increased by 8.7 percentage points during the 1990s after falling by 6.0 and 0.7 percentage points in the 1980s and 1970s, respectively. During the past decade, the city added over 54,000 homeowners, a quantity greater than the total number of owners living in the city as of 1990.[8] It added more owner-occupants last decade than one in four states and exceeded homeowner growth in all but three other cities, each of which had a substantially larger population. Among the "declining" cities, Portland and Denver turned in the strongest homeownership performances during the past decade. Each saw its homeownership rate rise by roughly 3 percentage points following declines during the 1980s. Each also experienced an increase in the number of owner-occupants of at least 20 percent during the 1990s. Chicago is another "declining" city with a strong homeownership performance last decade. It also serves as an interesting case because it illustrates how trends in homeownership rates can be misleading at the city level. The city's homeownership rate increased by 2.3 percentage points during the 1990s, an increment lower than the 2.5 percentage point gain during the 1980s and the 4.1 percentage point gain of the 1970s. Yet Chicago added nearly 40,000 homeowners last decade, compared with growth of only 30,000 during the 1970s and a loss of 1,000 owners during the 1980s. A major factor behind the substantial increases in homeownership rates during the earlier two decades was large losses of renter households. In each of the earlier decades, Chicago lost roughly 70,000 renters, whereas in the 1990s the number of renters in the city remained virtually unchanged. At the other end of the homeownership change spectrum was a group of older industrial cities located mostly in the Middle Atlantic and East North Central divisions. Rochester, NY probably experienced the most difficult decade in the 1990s, losing 13 percent of its homeowners and nearly 4 percentage points off its homeownership rate. Of the nation's largest cities, Philadelphia and Detroit suffered the worst declines, each losing more than 6 percent of its homeowners. Factors Contributing to Recent Homeownership Trends The aforementioned public and private initiatives to expand homeownership opportunities played a role in the strong homeownership gains of the 1990s. However, a number of other factors likely supported robust homeownership growth. Unusually favorable economic conditions during much of the past decade undoubtedly contributed to the homeownership boom. The nation's record economic expansion generated low unemployment rates and strong income growth, which likely supported the demand for and affordability of homeownership. Homeownership affordability was also facilitated by low mortgage interest rates, which were 8 percent or less during the second half of the 1990s. In comparison, mortgage rates averaged 10 percent between 1972 and 2000 and peaked at almost 17 percent in 1981.[9] Strong house price appreciation during the late 1990s might also have affected homeownership trends. Real house prices rose 11 percent between 1994 and 1999, just below the pace of house price appreciation during the late 1980s (Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University 2000). While increasing house prices reduce homeownership affordability for first-time buyers, they also increase the attractiveness of homeownership as an investment. Myers et al. (1992) found a positive correlation at the state level between house price and homeownership rate change during the 1980s, suggesting that rising prices might foster homeownership growth by making housing a more attractive investment. Demographic factors also played a key role in the 1990s homeownership expansion. Part of the increase in the homeownership rate was caused by the continued aging of the large Baby Boom generation into the middle-age categories. Because homeownership rates generally increase with age, the aging of the population would have lifted the overall homeownership rate even had the economic and policy environments for homeownership remained unchanged during the decade. Implication of Increased Homeownership Attainment The 1990s homeownership boom is generally viewed favorably because of its assumed benefits for individual homeowners, their communities, and society as a whole (HUD 1999b). Homeownership is a major life goal for many people, is generally associated with improved housing and neighborhood quality, and affords households more control over and flexibility in customizing their living environments (Rohe, McCarthy, and Van Zandt 2000). Therefore, the rise in homeownership is likely associated with greater life and residential satisfaction for millions of Americans. There is also some evidence that growing up in an owner-occupied home might enhance a child's educational attainment and decrease the chance of teenage pregnancy (Green and White 1996). Finally, homeownership offers substantial economic benefits for many households, including the opportunity to build wealth and take advantage of federal tax breaks. Aside from these individual benefits, homeownership is also widely believed to produce positive externalities. Studies have indicated that increased homeownership is associated with greater neighborhood stability and increased political awareness and participation (Rohe and Stewart 1996; DiPasquale and Glaeser 1999). Through its effects on housing construction and the demand for household goods and services, homeownership also serves as a stimulant to the economy (HUD 1995). Homeownership is not necessarily an unqualified good, however, and some have begun to point to the possible downsides of the recent homeownership boom (Hochstein 1999). At the level of the individual, questions have been raised about the sustainability of homeownership for lower-income, highly leveraged households, particularly in the event of an economic recession. Unsustainable homeownership can also have negative implications for neighborhoods if foreclosed and abandoned homes are spatially concentrated. Finally, the mortgage lending industry is at risk of substantial financial losses if large numbers of recently developed affordable loan products, many of which require minimal downpayments and have not been tested in an economic downturn, go into default. Homeownership and homeowner tax policy might also have adverse consequences for the labor and capital markets. One study, for example, provided preliminary evidence that states with higher homeownership rates also experience higher unemployment rates, supposedly because homeownership suppresses labor mobility (Green and Hendershott 1999). Some economists have also argued that federal tax incentives for homeownership encourage over-consumption of housing and divert capital away from more productive uses (Bourassa and Grigsby 2000). The resumption of U.S. homeownership growth during the 1990s has been extensively chronicled in the popular, industry, and academic presses. Newly released data from Census 2000 offer the opportunity, however, to add historical perspective and geographic texture to the story of rising American homeownership. These new data show that the 1990s homeownership boom was the strongest and most geographically extensive in decades. Virtually all regions, divisions, and states shared in the expansion and several staged remarkable turnarounds from lackluster homeownership performance during the 1980s. The homeownership expansion has even reached into some of the nation's most historically troubled cities, which showed modest but steady improvements in homeownership growth over the last three decades. It is impossible to disentangle the multiple forces that brought about the return to strong and widespread homeownership growth. Favorable demographic trends and a record economic expansion certainly played important roles, but new public and private efforts to expand homeownership opportunities also likely contributed. This last factor might have been particularly important in the nation's cities, which are one focal point of recent homeownership initiatives. Additional investigation using the rich information from Census 2000 will further enhance our understanding of the 1990s homeownership expansion, addressing issues such as how the boom was distributed across generations and racial and ethnic groups. Future research might also provide valuable insights into the relative importance of demographic, economic, and policy factors in spurring one of the best decades for American homeownership in recent memory. Patrick A. Simmons is Director of Housing Demography at the Fannie Mae Foundation. He is also editor of the book Housing Statistics of the United States published by Bernan Press. The author thanks Dowell Myers of the University of Southern California and Kristopher Rengert of the Fannie Mae Foundation for invaluable comments on an earlier draft of this Census Note. He also thanks Carol Bell, Robert Lang, and Brenda Brown for their editorial input and assistance. * About the Census Notes Series The Fannie Mae Foundation's Census Notes series provides timely analyses of Census 2000 data to stimulate discussion and further research. Although Census Notes are reviewed internally and on an informal basis externally, they have not been subject to the formal process of external peer review that is commonly used for the Foundation's research publications. Therefore, they should be viewed as works in progress and their findings should be considered preliminary. 1. In many cases, however, the market areas served by such offices extend beyond the cities in which they are located. Several of Fannie Mae's Partnership Offices, for instance, serve an entire state or even a group of states. 2. By definition, there is one household per occupied housing unit. Thus, the homeownership rate can be alternatively conceived as the proportion of households that own their homes. 3. The difficult process of adjusting for land area changes is beyond the scope of this article. In any event, housing data for small geographic areas that might permit such corrections are not yet available from Census 2000. 4. The 36 cities were selected using a two-step process (Simmons and Lang 2001). The first step identified the 50 most populous cities in the nation as of 1950. This initial group includes all cities with a 1950 population of 200,000 or more. The second step screened out those places that did not experience at least two decades of population decline in the postwar period. 5. James's (1995) index of resident need is based on the economic status of city residents relative to that of the national population. The resident need index incorporates rates of poverty, unemployment, and growth in per capita income. The high resident need cities are also restricted to municipalities with at least 250,000 population as of 1980. 6. During the 1940s, all 48 states in existence at the time experienced homeownership rate increases. 7. Homeownership data for all 177 cities examined in the study are available on the Fannie Mae Foundation World Wide Web site at http://www.fanniemaefoundation.org/census_notes.html. 8. As noted previously, growth through annexation is an important factor behind homeownership gains for some cities, including Las Vegas (City of Las Vegas 2000). 9. Mortgage rates are for 30-year, fixed-rate conventional conforming loans from Freddie Mac's Primary Mortgage Market Survey Bourassa, Steven C., and William G. Grigsby. 2000. Income Tax Concessions for Owner-Occupied Housing. Housing Policy Debate 11(3):521-46. Carliner, Michael. 1998. Inside Rising Home Ownership. Housing Economics, January 1998. Washington, DC: National Association of Home Builders. City of Las Vegas, Planning and Development Department. 2000. Las Vegas Grows by Annexation. Las Vegas Growth Watch (Fall 2000):2. DiPasquale, Denise, and Edward L. Glaeser. 1999. Incentives and Social Capital: Are Homeowners Better Citizens? Journal of Urban Economics 45:354-84. Fannie Mae. n.d. Partnership Offices. Accessed on the World Wide Web at www.fanniemae.com/neighborhoods/partnership/partnership_offices.html on May 27, 2001. Freddie Mac. n.d. Freddie Mac: The Catalyst for Community Development Lending. McLean, VA: Freddie Mac. Green, Richard K., and Patric H. Hendershott. 1999. Home Ownership and Unemployment in the U.S. Working Paper. Washington, DC: National Multi Housing Council. Green, Richard K., and Michelle J. White. 1996. Measuring the Benefits of Homeowning: Effects on Children. Journal of Urban Economics 41:441-61. Hochstein, Marc. 1999. American Dream May Have Nightmarish Effects. American Banker Notes, June 24. James, Franklin J. 1995. Urban Economies: Trends, Forces, and Implications for the President's National Urban Policy. Cityscape 1(2):67-123. Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. 2000. State of the Nation's Housing. Cambridge, MA: Joint Center for Housing Studies. Krueckeberg, Donald A. The Grapes of Rent: A History of Renting in a Country of Owners. Housing Policy Debate 10(1):9-30. Listokin, David, Elvin K. Wyly, Larry Keating, Kristopher M. Rengert, and Barbara Listokin. 2000. Making New Mortgage Markets: Case Studies of Institutions, Home Buyers, and Communities. Research Report. Washington, DC: Fannie Mae Foundation. Myers, Dowell, Richard Peiser, Gregory Schwann, and John Pitkin. 1992. Retreat from Homeownership: A Comparison of the Generations and the States. Housing Policy Debate 3(4):945-75. Palmer, Joel. 1999. Is Everyone Partaking in the Housing Boom? Des Moines Business-Record, October 18. Rohe, William H., George McCarthy, and Shannon Van Zandt. 2000. The Social Benefits and Costs of Homeownership. Working Paper 00-01. Washington, DC: Research Institute for Housing America. Rohe, William M., and Leslie S. Stewart. 1996. Homeownership and Neighborhood Stability. Housing Policy Debate 7(1):37-82. Simmons, Patrick A. 2000. Shelter Indicator. In Calvert-Henderson Quality of Life Indicators, ed. Hazel Henderson, Jon Lickerman, and Patrice Flynn. Bethesda, MD: The Calvert Group. Simmons, Patrick A., and Robert E. Lang. 2001. The Urban Turnaround: A Decade-by-Decade Report Card on Postwar Population Change in Older Industrial Cities. Fannie Mae Foundation Census Note 01, April 2001. Washington, DC: Fannie Mae Foundation. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1999. Housing: Then and Now: 50 Years of Decennial Censuses. World Wide Web page http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/histcensushsg.html (accessed May 2001). U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2001a. Census 2000 Profiles of General Demographic Characteristics: Technical Documentation. Issued May 2001. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2001b. Report of the Executive Steering Committee for Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation Policy. Issued March 2001. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2001c. 2000 Census of Population and Housing: Profiles of General Demographic Characteristics. Issued May 2001. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. nd. State of the Cities Data Systems: Census Data. World Wide Web page http://socds.huduser.org/scripts/odbic.exe/Census/Census_Home.htm? (accessed May 2001). U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1995. Homeownership and Its Benefits. Urban Policy Brief Number 2. August, 1995. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1997. Strategic Plan: FY 1999-2003. September 30, 1997. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1999a. What's Happened to Homeownership? U.S. Housing Market Conditions, Winter 1999. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 1999b. America's Homeownership Rate Rises to 66.7 Percent Including Record Numbers of Black and Hispanic Families. Press Release 99-69, April 21, 1999. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2000. Homeownership Zones Initiative. World Wide Web page www.hud.gov:80/progdesc/homezone.cfm (accessed May 15, 2001) "Declining" Cities (36)
"Distressed" Cities (18)
|
| All Content © 2007 Fannie Mae Foundation. All rights reserved. |