The Spatial Concentration of Subsidized Housing - Poverty & Race ...

solution, although parsimonious, led to too much diversity within voucher tracts andobscured the difference between tracts that also had site-based units from those thatdid not. Larger number of clusters (11, 15 and 17-cluster solutions) broke the data toofinely resulting in too few units while not changing the basic interpretation.Description of ClustersThe 9-cluster solution indicates the complexity of geographic distribution ofsubsidized housing types. The clusters are described here followed by an analysis bysubsidy type. Supporting data for this analysis can be found in Tables 6.1 – 6.4,Figures 6.1 – 6.6, and Appendix Table A.9. Policy recommendations for each clusterare described here and summarized in Table 6.5.Cluster 1: Vouchers/No Subsidized Housing – Very Low Concentration – Very LowPovertyThe first cluster (cluster 1) consists of the largest number of census tracts andcontains very few units of subsidized housing with an average of seven subsidizedunits per census tract. On the basis of number of neighborhoods this cluster is thelargest with 30,792 census tracts (60.2 percent). A subset of this cluster consisting of8,253 tracts (16.1 percent) has no subsidized housing units. Only one cluster type hasa mean poverty rate under the MSA-wide mean of 11.8 percent and that is cluster 191