The Outcomes Evaluation of the Choice Neighborhoods Program

Forms and Documents

Forms and supporting documents for this ICR

Document	Type	Status	Availability
Final-4-27-21 - Household Survey Consent.docx	Supplementary Document	Uploaded 2021-04-27	Repair queued
30-Day Notice.pdf	Supplementary Document	Uploaded 2021-04-27	Repair queued
final-4-27-21- Choice Supporting Statement Part B.docx	Supporting Statement B	Uploaded 2021-04-27	Repair queued
Final-4-27-21 - Choice Supporting Statement Part A.docx	Supporting Statement A	Uploaded 2021-04-27	Available
60-Day Notice Choice Neighborhoods.pdf	Supplementary Document	Uploaded 2021-01-26	Repair queued

IC Document Collections

Information collection document groups

IC ID	Collection	Type	Status	Form
247032	Interviews with Neighborhood informants: Implementation lead, Local police precinct commanders, Local anchor institution staff, Community leaders	Other-Interviews with Neighborhood informants: Implementation le	New
247031	Interviews with education informants: Education implementation lead, education implementation staff	Other-Interviews with education informants: Education implementa	New
247030	Interviews with people informants: People implementation lead, Case management staff, Other service providers	Other-Interviews with people informants: People implementation l	New
247029	Interviews with housing informants: Housing implementation lead, Housing developers, Public housing and affordable-housing property management staff	Other-Interviews with housing informants: Housing implementation	New
247028	Interviews with HUD staff	Other-Interviews with HUD Staff	New
247027	Interviews with High-level informants: Lead grantees, City officials and staff	Other-Interviews with High-level informants: Lead grantees, City	New
247026	Interviews with resident leaders	Other-Interviews with resident leaders	New
247024	Household survey	Other-Household Survey	New

ICR Details

OMB Control No:	ICR Reference No: 202101-2528-009
Status: Received in OIRA	Previous ICR Reference No:
Agency/Subagency: HUD/PD&R	Agency Tracking No:
Title: The Outcomes Evaluation of the Choice Neighborhoods Program
Type of Information Collection: New collection (Request for a new OMB Control Number)	Common Form ICR:  No
Type of Review Request: Regular	Date Submitted to OIRA: 04/27/2021

table that charts list comparision

	Requested	Previously Approved
Expiration Date	36 Months From Approved
Responses	2,663	0
Time Burden (Hours)	1,800	0
Cost Burden (Dollars)	0	0

---

Abstract: This is a new collection. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s Office of Policy Research and Development is conducting an Outcomes Evaluation of the Choice Neighborhoods Program. Choice provides direct investments through competitive grants targeted to neighborhoods marked by high rates of poverty with distressed public or HUD-assisted housing. Choice is one of HUD’s primary tools to support planning and implementation efforts to catalyze redevelopment in cities across the nation through an ambitious multifaceted strategy focused on three components: housing, people and neighborhood. By leveraging public and private dollars to support locally driven strategies, local leaders, residents, government officials, and community stakeholders work together to create and implement a transformation plan that revitalizes distressed HUD housing, supports residents, and addresses challenges in the neighborhood. The Choice grant is expected to attract greater levels of public and private investment in the neighborhood, increase civic engagement, and catalyze physical and perceived neighborhood improvements. Choice activities include the redevelopment of public or assisted target housing, the provision of case management and supportive services for residents of the target developments, and physical improvements in the neighborhoods, such as those in infrastructure and public facilities, neighborhood housing, commercial development, and community amenities. Since fiscal year (FY) 2010-11, HUD has engaged with more than 30 neighborhoods, awarding more than $862 million in implementation grants and $38 million in 85 Planning Grants. Under contract with HUD, The Urban Institute completed a baseline evaluation in 2016 of the first five Choice implementation sites: Quincy Corridor neighborhood in Boston, Massachusetts; Woodlawn neighborhood in Chicago, Illinois; Iberville/Tremé neighborhood in New Orleans, Louisiana; Eastern Bayview neighborhood in San Francisco, California; and Yesler neighborhood in Seattle, Washington. In 2018, HUD was directed by Congress to undertake a follow up evaluation of the Choice Neighborhoods Program. In 2019, HUD contracted with The Urban Institute and their partners Decision Information Resources (DIR) and Case Western Reserve University’s (CWRU) National Initiative on Mixed-Income Communities for a follow up evaluation, which is the subject of this information collection request. The follow-up evaluation builds on the Urban Institute’s baseline study by incorporating measures of outcomes and impact in key areas of interest. The evaluation will use qualitative and quantitative methods to answer the following overarching research question: whether public and private dollars were successfully leveraged to 1) replace distressed public and assisted housing with high-quality mixed-income housing that is well-managed and responsive to the needs of the surrounding neighborhood, 2) improve outcomes for households in the target housing, including in employment and income, health, and education, and 3) create the conditions necessary for public and private reinvestment in distressed neighborhoods to improve amenities and assets. The evaluation will include the original neighborhoods from the baseline evaluation and 2013 grantees: Near East Side neighborhood in Columbus, Ohio; South Norwalk neighborhood in Norwalk, Connecticut; North Central Philadelphia neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Larimer/East Liberty neighborhood in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Data are collected under Title 12, U.S.C. Sec. 1701Z-1 and 2.

---

Authorizing Statute(s): US Code: 12 USC 1701z-1 Name of Law: Research and Demonstrations
  

Citations for New Statutory Requirements: None

---

Associated Rulemaking Information
RIN:	Stage of Rulemaking:	Federal Register Citation:	Date:
	Not associated with rulemaking

---

Federal Register Notices & Comments
60-day Notice:	Federal Register Citation:	Citation Date:
	85 FR 33189	06/01/2020
30-day Notice:	Federal Register Citation:	Citation Date:
	86 FR 22064	04/26/2021
Did the Agency receive public comments on this ICR? No

---

Number of Information Collection (IC) in this ICR: 8

table that charts list of burden

IC Title	Form No.	Form Name
Household survey
Interviews with HUD staff
Interviews with High-level informants: Lead grantees, City officials and staff
Interviews with Neighborhood informants: Implementation lead, Local police precinct commanders, Local anchor institution staff, Community leaders
Interviews with education informants: Education implementation lead, education implementation staff
Interviews with housing informants: Housing implementation lead, Housing developers, Public housing and affordable-housing property management staff
Interviews with people informants: People implementation lead, Case management staff, Other service providers
Interviews with resident leaders

---

ICR Summary of Burden

table that charts list of burden

	Total Request	Previously Approved	Change Due to New Statute	Change Due to Agency Discretion	Change Due to Adjustment in Estimate	Change Due to Potential Violation of the PRA
Annual Number of Responses	2,663	0	0	2,663	0	0
Annual Time Burden (Hours)	1,800	0	0	1,800	0	0
Annual Cost Burden (Dollars)	0	0	0	0	0	0

Burden increases because of Program Change due to Agency Discretion: Yes

Burden Increase Due to: Miscellaneous Actions

Burden decreases because of Program Change due to Agency Discretion: No

Burden Reduction Due to:

Short Statement: This evaluation is designed to answer a range of questions about Choice implementation and early outcomes across nine Choice sites: 1. Quincy Corridor neighborhood in Boston, Massachusetts 2. Woodlawn neighborhood in Chicago, Illinois 3. Iberville/Tremé neighborhood in New Orleans, Louisiana 4. Eastern Bayview neighborhood in San Francisco, California 5. Yesler neighborhood in Seattle, Washington. 6. Near East Side neighborhood in Columbus, Ohio 7. South Norwalk neighborhood in Norwalk, Connecticut 8. North Central Philadelphia neighborhood in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 9. Larimer/East Liberty neighborhood in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania The research questions are organized in four main topic areas below. Each may be answered through multiple data collection modes.

---

Annual Cost to Federal Government: $1,109,294

Does this IC contain surveys, censuses, or employ statistical methods? Yes Part B of Supporting Statement

Does this ICR request any personally identifiable information (see OMB Circular No. A-130 for an explanation of this term)? Please consult with your agency's privacy program when making this determination.     Yes

Does this ICR include a form that requires a Privacy Act Statement (see 5 U.S.C. §552a(e)(3))? Please consult with your agency's privacy program when making this determination.     Yes

Is this ICR related to the Affordable Care Act [Pub. L. 111-148 & 111-152]? No

Is this ICR related to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, [Pub. L. 111-203]? No

Is this ICR related to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)? No

Is this ICR related to the Pandemic Response? No

---

Common Form ICR:  No

---

On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3).

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

(a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

(b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

(c) It reduces burden on small entities;

(d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous language that is understandable to respondents;

(e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

(f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

(g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8 (b)(3) about:

(i) Why the information is being collected;

(ii) Use of information;

(iii) Burden estimate;

(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory);

(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and

(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

(h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected.

(i) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology (if applicable); and

(j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.

Certification Date: 04/27/2021

---