Talking to Landlords

Although evaluations of housing programs have increasingly incorporated a qualitative component to help researchers understand the mechanisms and meanings behind the statistical findings, systematic collection of data from housing suppliers (landlords, property managers, builders, and developers) ha...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cityscape (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 2018-01, Vol.20 (3), p.281-291
Hauptverfasser: Garboden, Philip M.E., Rosen, Eva
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Although evaluations of housing programs have increasingly incorporated a qualitative component to help researchers understand the mechanisms and meanings behind the statistical findings, systematic collection of data from housing suppliers (landlords, property managers, builders, and developers) has been lacking. Indeed, no comprehensive set of best practices exist for evaluation teams looking to incorporate the voices of supply-side actors in their work. In response to the lack of information on housing suppliers and a desire to understand what motivates landlord participation in the Housing Choice Voucher Program, HUD funded the first ethnographic study of landlords, Urban Landlords and the Housing Choice Voucher Program: A Research Report. This study involved a 5-year data collection effort in Baltimore, MD; Dallas, TX; Cleveland, OH; and Washington, D.C., and conducted 150 interviews with landlords and property managers, most of whom were drawn from a random stratified sample. In the article, we explore lessons learned across four key components of the ethnographic study: (1) sampling, including the process of developing a sampling frame, stratification, and pulling a sample; (2) recruitment, focusing on the "under the hood" techniques for getting landlords to participate; (3) the interview itself, exploring how to elicit candid responses that can inform policy development; and (4) ethnographic methods, focusing on how field observation can enrich the interview data and reduce analytic bias. We believe the technical details provided will be of great interest within the housing policy evaluation community and advance the use of qualitative and ethnographic methods in evaluation research going forward.
ISSN:1936-007X
1939-1935