In this Advisory Council Member Spotlight we introduce Jim Hill, vice president for government relations and housing at the Milwaukee Center for Independence (MCFI). MCFI’s mission is to assist individuals and families with special needs to better live and work in the community. It believes that all people living with disabilities and other barriers to success can reach their highest levels of independence.

MCFI offers, among other things, employment and mental health services. What is the nexus between these and housing?

All of the individuals we serve at MCFI have a physical, developmental, cognitive, or mental illness or disability of some kind. We know from many studies on the subject that housing is an indispensable element in providing a sense of stability, security, and confidence to enable individuals with disabilities to live independently. This is particularly true for those with mental illness, where the additional forces of stigma, social marginalization, and poverty further threaten stability.

Safe, affordable, quality, permanent housing creates an environment where stability is key, recovery is possible, and the ability to thrive – not just merely survive – is more than just a hope; it’s an achievable outcome.

Put very simply, housing is as important a form of treatment as medication, therapies, case management, and access to other support services. Without housing, the path to recovery, employment, and good health is much more difficult to navigate.

The Milwaukee community has been quite active in pursuing supportive housing developments that emphasize a “Housing First” approach. Tell us a little bit about your experience with this.

The “Housing First” approach operates on the foundational principle that an individual’s need for safe, affordable, quality, and permanent housing must be addressed first – not as an afterthought or “when we get around to it” – if the cycle of chronic homelessness is to be broken and eradicated. The “100,00 Homes” organization summarizes findings that are repeated in numerous studies: “An immediate connection to permanent, supportive housing can ensure that over 80% of homeless individuals remain housed, even among clients with severe substance abuse and mental health conditions.”

Over the last seven years in Milwaukee, we have undertaken an aggressive effort, aided by a strong commitment to collaboration and partnerships, to make access to quality affordable housing a top priority for extremely low-income individuals, especially those with mental illness who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. Since 2007, more than 400 units of new, high-quality, affordable, supportive housing have been developed. Much need still remains unaddressed, but the results of an improved quality of life for hundreds of residents with disabilities are evident and encouraging.

With the initial emphasis on housing, we have been able to move services into place that are designed to equip individuals with the tools and skills necessary to continue living independently and as active participants in community life. These services, funded primarily from local and state revenues, are available to address the specific needs of residents. Choice is the operative word. Engagement with services is not a mandatory condition of tenancy; it is a voluntary benefit of it.

What other challenges do communities like Milwaukee face in meeting the need for safe, affordable, quality, and permanent housing?

As you know, the development of housing that meets that criteria depends on the availability of financing from multiple sources including the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, state and local Housing Trust Funds, the FHLBC’s own Affordable Housing Program (AHP), foundation grants, private donations, debt financing where necessary, and operating subsidies made possible by project-based Housing Choice Vouchers.

The need in our communities for this housing still far outstrips the supply. Congressional budget proposals have targeted the Housing Choice Voucher program for reductions, and as cuts to the program are made, fewer Housing Assistance Program contracts will be funded adequately. This shortfall, combined with the statutory cap on the amount of rental subsidy that an individual housing authority can allocate to project-based developments, will substantially limit the ability of local housing authorities to offer this critically needed resource. It is quite possible that without that subsidy, affordable housing, especially housing targeted to serve extremely low-income individuals (at or below 30% AMI), may be all but impossible to produce.