Overview
Title
30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection; 2025 American Housing Survey; OMB Control No.: 2528-0017
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Housing and Urban Development wants to ask people about their homes to make sure everyone has a good place to live, and they are asking for help to do it better. But some things are not clear, like how much it will cost, why they want to ask more people in some types of homes, and how often they're going to share what they find out.
Summary AI
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is requesting approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the 2025 American Housing Survey. This survey aims to provide detailed information about housing quality, costs, and neighborhood assets to support effective housing policies and programs. HUD plans to implement a continuous data collection model, intending to improve efficiency and data accuracy. The public is invited to submit comments on the necessity and utility of the information collection, especially regarding ways to minimize the data collection burden and enhance its quality.
Abstract
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days of public comment.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published in the Federal Register outlines a proposal to adopt a new continuous data collection model for the 2025 American Housing Survey. This survey is integral for providing comprehensive information on housing quality, costs, and neighborhood characteristics to inform housing policies and programs. HUD is soliciting public comments on this proposed data collection effort, which emphasizes enhancing data accuracy and efficiency.
General Summary
The notice indicates that the HUD intends to shift from periodic surveying to a continuous model to improve data quality and operational efficiency. This change is anticipated to supply more frequent and reliable information. The survey aims to collect data on various topics, including housing quality and costs, neighbourhood attributes, and supplemental topics like climate risk and home accessibility. A distinctive feature is the "bridge sample," designed to safeguard against disruptions by providing comparative data with previous survey samples.
Issues and Concerns
Several issues arise from the proposal:
Lack of Cost Estimates: There's an absence of detailed cost implications associated with the transition to a continuous data collection strategy. Understanding these expenses is crucial to evaluating the model's cost-effectiveness and ensuring no wasteful spending occurs.
Administrative Costs: The document does not address potential additional administrative costs due to more frequent data collection and processing. Transparent information on administrative impacts would offer a complete picture of the financial and operational demands of this initiative.
Wording Variations Testing: While the survey plans to test wording variations related to sexual orientation and gender, it does not explain the methodology or potential effects on respondents, necessitating clarity to ensure participant sensitivity and inclusiveness.
Improvement Rationale: The assertion that continuous data collection will improve data quality lacks explicit evidence or a methodology for measuring such improvements. Concrete explanations would bolster the proposal's credibility.
Oversampling Justification: The rationale behind oversampling HUD-assisted housing units remains unexplained, creating uncertainty about why this group, as opposed to others, requires more extensive sampling.
Bridge Sample Details: Details on selecting units for the bridge sample are scant, raising questions about its representativeness and ability to provide meaningful comparisons with new data sets.
Technical Language: The use of specialized terms like "dependent interviewing techniques" and "PUF data products" without definitions may hinder concept accessibility for readers without a technical background in survey methodology.
Data Release Frequency: Ambiguities in the timeline for data releases leave stakeholders unclear on the timeliness of access, complicating planning and utilization of the survey data.
Public and Stakeholder Impact
Broadly, the transition to a continuous data collection model could enhance the utility and timeliness of housing data, directly supporting informed policy-making and addressing housing market issues. However, potential costs and operational complexities need clearer definitions to ensure that the change is beneficial without imposing unnecessary burdens.
Specific stakeholders, such as nonprofit organizations and industry groups, could gain from regular, current housing data to tailor their programs and research. Organizations like the Pine Street Inn and the Manufactured Housing Institute have expressed support, highlighting the value of comprehensive, up-to-date information. Conversely, without clear information on implementation costs and methodology, taxpayers and smaller organizations might be concerned about resource allocation and representation in the data.
In summary, while the HUD's initiative could significantly improve housing data's relevance and applicability, addressing the highlighted concerns would ensure the proposal is transparent, inclusive, and efficient, ultimately maximizing its positive impact.
Issues
• The notice does not provide an estimated cost for implementing the continuous data collection model, which would help evaluate potential wasteful spending.
• The document lacks details on the potential additional administrative costs associated with the frequent collection and processing of data in the continuous collection model.
• The proposal mentions testing wording variations related to sexual orientation and gender, but there is no information on how this research will be conducted or the potential impacts on survey participants.
• The document assumes that continuous data collection will improve data quality and comparability, but it does not provide evidence or a rationale for how these improvements will be measured or achieved.
• The justification for the oversample of HUD-assisted housing units lacks clarity, as it is not clear why this specific group requires oversampling compared to other housing unit categories.
• The description of the bridge sample lacks detail on the criteria used to select these housing units and how it ensures a representative sample for comparison with the new 2025 sample.
• The document uses technical language and terms like 'dependent interviewing techniques' and 'PUF data products' without explanations or definitions that would aid understanding for those unfamiliar with survey methodology.
• The frequency of data release (annual or biennial) remains somewhat ambiguous, leaving stakeholders uncertain about their access to timely data.