| Despite the failures associated with the modern housing movement initiated during the inter-war period of the twentieth century, the past fifteen years have shown that government involvement in the production of affordable housing can be stimulating and beneficial. This study examines different aspects related to one such beneficial program, the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) initiated in the US as a result of the 1986 Tax Reform Act. In particular, this research focuses on lease-purchase, single-family housing projects developed from 1987 to 2000 in Louisville, Kentucky as part of the “Low Income Housing Tax Credit” program.;Although the LIHTC program offers financial incentives (i.e., “tax credits”) on a competitive basis to any developer for selected rental housing projects, federal law requires that competing non-profit developers be preferred recipients of “tax credits”.;Using a multi-trait multi-method approach, this research project has determined what factors (e.g., unit cost, unit size, structural elements, quality of construction, design quality, and aesthetic elements) are more likely to differentiate houses produced by non-profit agencies when compared to units built by for-profit developers. Also, multivariate statistical analysis was performed in order to isolate the influence of developer type on housing production costs when controlling for structural and quality housing attributes.;Results indicate that when structural and quality predictors are taken into account, houses that are similar in terms of quality and structural factors tend to cost more when built by non-profit developers. Nonprofit developers, however, are more likely to build in areas with better quality houses. Although for-profit houses do not differ in terms of exterior design and general appearance, when compared to nonprofit builders, for-profit developers seem to produce units that make use of superior construction/insulation materials, have better designed plans, and provide more elements meant to increase the residential comfort and the quality of living.;In addition, currently, there are no official composite industry standards for classifying the quality of single-family units. This study has suggested a set of new variables that can be included in a standardized performance measure, contributing to the development of a rating system. |
