Who is Served by the Housing Choice Voucher Program? A State- and County-Level Look

Authors: Christi Economy and Ryan Finnigan

The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program has consistently been shown to increase housing security, decrease homelessness, and improve families’ well-being.^[1] As the largest source of federal rental assistance, the HCV program provides 2.4 million households with a voucher for renting in the private market. Households typically contribute about 30 percent of their adjusted gross income, and the voucher covers the rest of the rent plus utilities (up to a cap).

Despite its success in keeping households safely and stably housed, this type of rental assistance is scarce. Only one in four eligible households currently receive federal rental assistance.^[2] The average household nationwide waits almost 2.5 years between applying for a voucher and leasing a home with one; and in many places, the average wait exceeds five or more years.^[3]

There is significant uncertainty about the extent to which future federal funding for housing vouchers might fall further short of the need, and significant funding increases are needed for existing vouchers to keep pace with rising costs.^[4] Additionally, funding for Emergency Housing Vouchers will soon be exhausted after only five years rather than the anticipated 10 years after its appropriation in 2021.^[5]

This piece describes the people whom the voucher program serves and spotlights the important role vouchers play in preventing housing instability. Recent analyses have highlighted the numbers of people and properties assisted by federal housing programs across the United States. We highlight the characteristics of people served by the HCV program in different places across the country.^[6]

Using the Picture of Subsidized Households public dataset from 2024,^[7] the interactive maps below show state- and county-level data on the percent of voucher households who are families with children, headed by seniors (ages 62+),^[8] or are participants with disabilities; and the percent of voucher households who earn most of their income from employment.

The maps also highlight average rent-to-income ratios for voucher households (i.e., how total rents without the subsidy compare to monthly household income). These data demonstrate the scale of need and diversity of HCV participants across different communities.

In every state, the average voucher household cannot afford their current rent without a voucher.

Rent-to-income ratios for voucher households highlight the importance of the HCV program in preventing housing instability and homelessness by comparing household incomes to what rental costs would be without the subsidy. For the average voucher household, their total monthly rent (including the rent and utilities paid by households and by their vouchers) is over 100 percent of their monthly household income: in 2024, the average rent-to-income ratio for voucher holders was 1.1.^[9]

Although the difference between rent and income varies between places, the typical voucher household could not afford to rent their current unit using their income alone in any state. As the interactive state map below shows, the average rent-to-income ratio ranged from 0.7—meaning that they would be extremely cost-burdened^[10]—in Wyoming, to more than 1.2 in Colorado, Florida, Arizona, California, and Nevada in 2024 (see Figure 1). In Colorado, for example, the HCV program serves over 35,000 households. The average rent for these households is 1.3 times higher than their average monthly income ($1,839 in rental costs versus $1,434 in total monthly income).

Figure 1. Average Rent-to-Income Ratio for Voucher Households by State, 2024

Source: HUD’s Picture of Subsidized Households
Note: Hover the cursor over a state to see additional information on the composition of HCV households.

The necessity of the HCV program is clear for renters living in high-cost markets across the country. Places like coastal counties in California, urban centers in Florida and New York, and university towns across the East Coast all have average rents that are far above monthly incomes for voucher holders. In Miami-Dade County, Florida, for example, the rent-to-income ratio for voucher holders is 1.5, with average rents at $2,367 and average incomes at $1,547 (see Figure 2).

However, the HCV program also provides much needed support in “lower-cost” states—such as Kansas, Mississippi, or Alabama—each of which include counties where rents far exceed monthly incomes for voucher holders. Lafayette County, in northern Mississippi, for example, has a rent-to-income ratio of 1.6 for voucher holders, with average rents at $2,231 and average monthly incomes at $1,396. Most voucher holders in Lafayette County are families with children, and half of the county’s voucher holders get most of their income from employment.

Figure 2. Average Rent-to-Income Ratio for Voucher Households by County, 2024

Source: HUD’s Picture of Subsidized Households
Notes: Hover the cursor over a county to see additional information on the composition of HCV households. The counties in light grey have no information available. HUD does not report information for places with 10 or fewer participating households.

In many places, the HCV program primarily supports families with children, seniors, or people with disabilities.

Nationwide, 37 percent of voucher holders are households with children, 34 percent are households headed by a senior (ages 62+), and 26 percent of participants have a disability. However, whom the HCV program serves varies significantly across places. It is up to Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) that administer the vouchers to make decisions on priority populations through local preferences (as long as they are consistent with federal guidelines). Common local preferences used by PHAs include people experiencing homelessness, people with disabilities, elderly households, and residents who live or work in the jurisdiction.

In many counties, families with children make up 50 percent or more of households served by the HCV program. On the high end, Kaufman County, Texas (just east of Dallas) and Desoto County, Mississippi (just south of Memphis, TN) have voucher programs that serve at least 80 percent households with children (see Figure 2). In Rockland County, north of New York City, the HCV program serves a high percentage of working families: 66 percent of HCV households are households with children, and 70 percent of voucher households get the majority of their incomes from wages. The voucher program has distinct benefits for children—growing up in safe, stable housing leads to better health, education, and employment outcomes later in life.^[11] This is particularly true for families who are able to use the voucher to move to lower-poverty neighborhoods.^[12]

The percentage of HCV households headed by a senior varies significantly across counties: from six to 98 percent. However, in nearly 250 counties, at least half of HCV voucher holders are headed by seniors. This includes counties of varying sizes and geographies, such as Orange County, California (serving 24,152 households); Washoe County, Nevada (serving 2,821 households); and Lincoln County, North Carolina (serving 208 households). As seniors exit the workforce, access to a voucher helps to reduce rent burdens and allow aging in place—enabling people over 62 to stay connected to their families, support networks, and doctors.^[13] As people age and face increased healthcare challenges, access to safe and stable housing leads to better physical and mental health outcomes.^[14]

Counties that serve the highest percentages of people with disabilities (between 50 and 98 percent) through the voucher program tend to be small and/or rural. This includes places like Mohave County, Arizona, a mostly rural county spanning over 13,000 miles. Of the 808 people using a voucher in the county, 56 percent have a disability. Often, people with a disability are on fixed incomes, such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI), that are insufficient to cover market rents. Access to a voucher helps to keep housing costs manageable, and allows people to search for units that meet their specific accessibility needs (e.g., widened doorways, neighborhoods with accessible sidewalks, proximity to caretakers, etc.).^[15]

The data highlight the importance of the HCV program for participants’ housing security. In all 50 states, most HCV households would be unable to afford their current housing without the support of a voucher. Even for those who could pay their entire rent, doing so would leave little or no income for essentials like food, transportation, or healthcare. Ultimately, funding cuts and/or eligibility changes risk displacing a wide range of households that, in every community, include a large proportion of families, seniors, and people with disabilities. In contrast, expansions to the HCV program will be needed to reverse the nation’s upward trends in homelessness and housing cost burdens.

Endnotes

^[1] Fischer, W., Rice, D., and Mazzara, A. (2019). Research Shows Rental Assistance Reduces Hardship and Provides Platform to Expand Opportunity for Low-Income Families. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Retrieved from: https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/research-shows-rental-assistance-reduces-hardship-and-provides-platform-to-expand; Gubits, D., et al. (2018). What Interventions Work Best for Families Who Experience Homelessness? Impact Estimates from the Family Options Study. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. Vol. 37, no. 4: 835–866. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22071; Wood, M., Turnham, J., and Mills, G. 2008. Housing affordability and family well‐being: Results from the housing voucher evaluation. House Policy Debate. Vol. 19, no. 2:367-412.

^[2] To be eligible for the HCV program, all households must have annual incomes below 50 percent of Area Median Income (AMI), and 75 percent of households admitted into the program each year must have incomes below 30 percent of AMI.

^[3] Acosta, S., & Gartland, E. (2021, July 22). Families Wait Years for Housing Vouchers Due to Inadequate Funding. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Retrieved from:  https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/families-wait-years-for-housing-vouchers-due-to-inadequate-funding.

^[4] Treskon, M., and Levy, K. (2025, May 28). The Trump Administration Has Proposed $27 Billion in Cuts by Block Granting Housing Assistance. That Could Worsen the Housing Affordability Crisis. Urban Institute. Retrieved from: https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/trump-administration-has-proposed-27-billion-cuts-block-granting-housing-assistance; Acosta, S., and Gartland, E. 2025. To Better Meet Record Levels of Need, Keep Families Housed, Congress Must Increase 2025 Funding for Housing Assistance. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Retrieved from: https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/to-better-meet-record-levels-of-need-keep-families-housed-congress-must-increase.

^[5] The Emergency Housing Voucher (EHV) program, which authorized 70,000 new vouchers in 2021 for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness, will exhaust its initially appropriated funding by 2026. This large loss of rental assistance will likely result in displacement of affected households and increase strain on PHAs working to meet growing housing needs. The impending consequences of this cut highlights the risks of further cutting funding for the HCV program. For more info, see: https://www.cbpp.org/blog/unless-congress-acts-59000-additional-households-at-risk-of-homelessness

^[6] Soucy, D. (2025, April 22). More Than 9 Million People Could Be at Risk of Homelessness If Federal Rental Assistance Was Eliminated. National Alliance to End Homelessness. Retrieved from: https://endhomelessness.org/resources/sharable-graphics/more-than-9-million-people-could-be-at-risk-of-homelessness-if-federal-rental-assistance-is-eliminated/; Olarsch, B., & Warrior, A. (2025, July 1). Raising Risk, Reducing Supply: How Federal Rental Assistance Cuts Could Break the Housing Market. Center for Public Enterprise. Retrieved from: https://publicenterprise.org/raising-risk-reducing-supply-how-federal-rental-assistance-cuts-could-break-the-housing-market/.

^[7] Picture of Subsidized Households is a public dataset that provides detailed information on households receiving various types of federal housing assistance, including Housing Choice Vouchers. The dataset, provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), relies on annual reports from public housing agencies across the United States.

^[8] HUD programs typically classify people ages 62 or older as “seniors” or “elderly.”

^[9] The average monthly household income is measured as the average annual total household income divided by 12. The Picture of Subsidized Households only reports total household income from all sources (i.e., including wages, public benefits, and personal transfers like child support payments) and does not include the adjustments for calculating the amount of household income paid toward rent (i.e., deductions for dependent household members).

^[10] Renters are considered “cost burdened” if they spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent and utilities (i.e., a rent-to-income ratio of 0.3) and “extremely cost burdened” if they spend more than 50 percent (a rent-to-income ratio of 0.5). Cost-burdened households typically spend significantly less on essentials like food and healthcare, and have a greater risk of eviction and homelessness. See more at: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/high-housing-costs-are-consuming-household-incomes

^[11] Wood, et al. (2008).

^[12] Chetty, R., Hendren, N., & Katz, L. F. (2016). The Effects of Exposure to Better Neighborhoods on Children: New Evidence from the Moving to Opportunity Experiment. American Economic Review, 106(4), 855–902.

^[13] Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2021). More Housing Vouchers Needed to Help Older Adults Afford Stable Homes in the Community. Retrieved from: https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/more-housing-vouchers-needed-to-help-older-adults-afford-stable-homes-in-the.

^[14] Swope, C., and Hernández, D. (2019). Housing as a Determinant of Health Equity: A Conceptual Model. Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 243, no. 112571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112571.

^[15] Bailey, A., de la Huerga, R., and Gartland, E. (2021). More Housing Vouchers Needed to Help People With Disabilities Afford Stable Homes in the Community. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Retrieved from: https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/more-housing-vouchers-needed-to-help-people-with-disabilities-afford-stable-homes.

Acknowledgments

Our thanks to Terner Center colleagues and affiliates for their thoughtful reviews of this piece: Carolina Reid, Ophelia Basgal, Ben Metcalf, and Sarah Karlinsky.

This research does not represent the institutional views of the University of California, Berkeley, or of the Terner Center’s funders. Funders do not determine research findings or recommendations in the Terner Center’s research and policy reports.