Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

A fundamental assumption of racial discrimination research is that gatekeepers are confronted with an applicant pool that is racially heterogeneous. The reality of urban housing markets, however, is that historical patterns of residential segregation intersect with other structural barriers to drive not only selection into housing but also selection into the applicant pool. We ask: In a housing market segmented by race, what role do race and racism play in shaping tenant screening processes? How does race intersect with other stigmatizing factors such as voucher status, eviction history, and gender?

This paper uses 160 interviews with landlords in Baltimore, Cleveland, Dallas, and Washington, DC, to examine how racial logics shape the tenant screening process in the affordable housing market. In all four areas, voucher holders are over 85 percent African American. We show how landlords navigate this process, given their market position, and their ideas about who makes a “good” tenant. When landlords choose tenants, they can use observable traits based on credit checks, criminal background checks, and residential history checks to select for traits that are unobservable, such as the tendency to pay rent reliably and not cause problems. However, in the affordable housing market, potential tenants tend to fail on some or all of these official tests. Landlords then turn to discriminate illegally between traits that are protected classes, such as race, gender, and family size, tapping into various prejudices.

We find that larger landlords rely on screening algorithms that calculate a prospective tenant’s “score,” based on official checks. In the voucher submarket however, a voucher can outweigh a low credit score or a history of eviction, especially if the tenant’s rental portion is low. Landlords rely on these formalized screening techniques in hopes of weeding out the “professional tenant.” In contrast, smaller landlords often make decisions based on informal screening mechanisms such as “gut feelings,” home visits, and “smell” tests in order to weed out “problem” tenants.

We uncover a process whereby landlords racialize their tenants — even within a predominantly black tenant pool — in ways that limit residential options for low-income, minority, and subsidized tenants. Landlords recounted common narratives of the black underclass and the so-called culture of poverty. Their distinction between a “good” and a “bad” minority tenant is based on the degree to which that tenant conforms to (or resists) modes of behavior that align with these insidious cultural narratives. We find that landlords are prompted to put aside certain racial prejudices when they have the right financial incentives, but only when the tenant also conforms to these racialized expectations.

These findings present substantial challenges for fair housing enforcement. While it is hard for policy to address racial discrimination explicitly, there are a number of policies that could be targeted to encourage landlords to rent to minority voucher holders. We examine the strength and limitations of Source of Income Protection laws, Small Area FMR, “Ban the box” legislation regulating criminal background checks, landlord outreach, and “damage insurance” programs.