| HOME | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Correspondence: Address correspondence to Esme Fuller Thomson, PhD, Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada, M5S 1A1. E-mail: esme.fuller.thomson{at}utoronto.ca
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 TOP Abstract MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Key Words: Grandparents raising grandchildren • Housing issues • Custodial grandparenting • Senior housing
For many years, grandparents raising grandchildren constituted a largely forgotten segment of America's caregiver population. There was a dramatic increase in this subgroup, including a 52% increase from 1990 through 1998 in the number of "skipped generation" households in which neither member of the parent generation was present (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001a). By the year 2000, there were an estimated 2,350,000 grandparents raising grandchildren in the United States (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001b). These demographic changes brought increased research, policy, and practitioner attention to the prevalence of and challenges involved in grandparent caregiving (Bryson & Casper, 1999; Burnette, 1999; Chalfie, 1994; Cox, 2000; Fuller-Thomson, Minkler, & Driver, 1997; Hayslip & Goldberg-Glen, 2000). With some important exceptions, however (Boston Aging Concerns, 1994; Generations United, 2000, 2001a, 2001b; Kauffman & Goldberg-Glen, 2000), both research and policy and practice interventions to assist grandparent caregivers have largely ignored the unique issues faced by many custodial grandparents as a result of their residence in public housing or other rental situations.
Although access to adequate and affordable housing is a major concern for many grandparents who suddenly find themselves raising their children's children, it is likely to be particularly problematic for renters, especially if they are living below the poverty line. The presence of children, for example, may violate rental agreements and result in evictions based on occupancy limitations. Residents in senior housing also may face eviction if they take in grandchildren. As Kauffman and Goldberg-Glen (2000, page 369) have pointed out with respect to grandparent caregivers in public housing, this population confronts all of the normative issues connected with aging and parenting, "but with the added burdens imposed by poverty and/or residence in the distressed communities that commonly typify the public housing setting." Grandparents in Housing and Urban Development (HUD) subsidized Section 8 (voucher) housing similarly may face a special set of issues that makes the already challenging job of raising one's grandchildren more difficult.
This article uses data from the Census 2000 Supplementary Survey (C2SS), which used the American Community Survey (ACS) methodology and questionnaire (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000a) to determine the prevalence of renting among American grandparents raising grandchildren and the sociodemographic characteristics of such renters. It focuses in particular on grandparent caregiver renters living below the poverty line, and documents the differences and similarities between those low income renters who receive government housing subsidies and those who do not. The article then highlights some of the special problems and challenges facing custodial grandparent renters, including housing discrimination and the application (and misapplication) of rules and regulations that may have the effect of penalizing grandparents for taking on a caregiver role. The need for additional research on this substantial subgroup of renters within the overall custodial caregiver population, and on their unique housing related concerns and issues, is discussed. This article concludes by highlighting several policy proposals that have been advanced to better address the needs of grandparent caregiver renters, promising programmatic interventions, and directions for further research.
|
Methods |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This study focuses on the experience of grandparent caregivers who are in rental housing and thus the sample was restricted to the respondents who met this criterion (n = 2,639). The numbers and percentages were generated using a weighting variable designed by the Census. This weight variable represents the probability of selection, including noninterview adjustments and controlling to the 2000 Census housing units and population level (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000a). To generate the p values for the chi-square analyses and the independent t tests, a modified weight variable was applied. This modified weight variable was created by dividing the original weight variable for each respondent by the average weight for all respondents who were grandparent caregiver renters. Thus, the mean value for the modified weight variable is rescaled to one. If the original weight had been used, the chances of analyses reaching the level of significance were substantially inflated. This commonly used strategy to modify the weight variable is recommended for bivariate analyses in studies in which each respondent is normally weighted to represent hundreds or thousands of people (Lepkowski, 2002; Statistics Canada, 1999).
|
Results |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
There were 237,516 grandparent caregiver renters living below the poverty line, which averaged $17,603 for a family of four in the year 2000 (Dalaker, 2001). Of these, fully 60% were spending more than 30% of their income on rent. For 2 in 5 (41.4%), at least half of their household income was consumed by rent. Gross rent again inflated these figures: 83.5% spent more than 30% of their household income and 57.2% spent at least half. These rental quarters frequently met the Census criteria for overcrowding with approximately 3 of every 10 reporting overcrowding by either definition. However, when we broke down the analysis for those living below the poverty line by whether or not they received housing subsidies, the picture was further clarified: Only 19.8% of poor renters receiving housing subsidies lived in overcrowded quarters (Census definition) in contrast to 36.9% of those without. More than 143,000 people, or 60% of grandparent caregiver renters who were living below the poverty line, were not receiving any housing subsidy from the government.
When the total population of more than 600,000 grandparent caregiver renters was considered, those who received housing subsidies differed significantly from those who did not on a number of dimensions (see Table 2). Subsidy recipients were far more likely to be female (85% vs. 69%), to be unmarried (76% vs. 47%), to be African American (59% vs. 33%), to have not completed high school (61% vs. 45%), to be American citizens (87% vs. 77%), to be living below the poverty line (66% vs. 30%), and to have raised their grandchild for at least 5 years (40% vs. 32%).
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
These figures are of particular concern because grandparent caregivers are faced with many additional costs related to the education, health care, and other basic needs of the children in their care. For example, Bryson and Casper (1999) revealed that fully 1 in 3 children in the care of grandparents lack access to health insurance, compared with 1 in 7 in the general population. Out-of-pocket health care costs for such children may be substantial, because low income children have significantly higher rates of illness and disability than children in higher socioeconomic groups (Amick, Levine, Tarlov, & Walsh, 1995).
The significant differences found between those grandparent caregiver renters receiving and not receiving housing subsidies by gender, marital status, race, and educational attainment were all in the expected direction. Being female, being African American, not being married, and not having completed high school all constitute important vulnerability factors for poverty (Amick et al., 1995). Poverty, in turn, is the main criteria for receipt of subsidized housing.
That U.S. citizenship was associated with receipt of subsidies also was anticipated, because eligibility is often contingent on citizenship or permanent resident status. Not being an American citizen may have a negative impact on both the grandparent and the grandchild far beyond housing. These problems are particularly acute for noncitizens who do not have permanent residency status. Many noncitizens are not eligible to work nor are they eligible for financial assistance such as Supplemental Security Income (California Department of Social Services, 2002). Noncitizens also are much more likely to be without health insurance coverage (Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, 2002).
Finally, the strong association between receipt of subsidies and having been a custodial grandparent for 5 years or more is likely to reflect the fact that these long-term caregivers are more likely to have formal custody of the children in their care (e.g., to have had the children placed in their care through court order). Being in the foster care system in turn increases their chances of accessing resources and services for which they are eligible, including, importantly, subsidized housing.
Although subsidized housing programs may alleviate some of the financial hardships faced by low-income renters, this study indicates that such programs are not reaching the majority of qualified applicants in the grandparent caregiver population. As noted previously, more than 140,000 grandparent caregiver renters (60.6%) living below the poverty line were not receiving any housing subsidy from the government. These numbers are by definition conservative estimates of the number of eligible grandparent caregivers who are not receiving subsidies. The poverty line cutoff thus is a much more stringent criteria for eligibility than that used by the Public Housing Authority, which allows families to earn up to 50% above the median income for the county or metropolitan area in which they live.
Many reasons may explain why so many eligible grandparents have not accessed housing subsidies. Like other low-income renters, grandparent caregivers may lack knowledge about the availability of subsidies or may harbor incorrect perceptions that they are not eligible for such assistance. As suggested, those grandparents raising grandchildren without formal custody, and in relative isolation from social service providers, may be particularly likely to lack such information, and/or to fear that the children might be taken away if their living situation was to become known (Cox, 2000; Minkler & Roe, 1993).
In other cases, however, personnel in the agencies charged with providing subsidized housing services may have misinformation leading them to discourage eligible grandparent caregivers from applying for assistance. For example, Sand (2000) found widespread misperceptions among HUD officials and other housing experts who erroneously believed that grandparents lacking legal custody were ineligible for housing subsidies.
Overcrowding represents another housing-related problem faced by many grandparent caregiver renters, with more than one fourth officially meeting the criteria for overcrowding by both the Census and HUD definitions of the term. Grandparent caregiver renters living in poverty, moreover, were significantly more likely to live in overcrowded conditions, although this appears to be alleviated for those who receive housing subsidies.
For grandparents living in studios or small one or two bedroom apartments, the sudden arrival of grandchildren may result in violations of standards governing the number of people that can live in these units. Although HUD intentionally has been somewhat flexible concerning its occupancy guidelines, these sometimes have been invoked by landlords and others to discriminate against families with children (Sand, 2000). The Fair Housing Act has been used to challenge questionable practices in this regard (e.g., when grandparents have been prohibited from sharing a room with a grandchild). Despite such efforts, however, housing discrimination remains a problem facing many custodial grandparents.
Overcrowding may also present problems for grandparents whose grandchildren were formally placed with them through the child welfare system. Although such placement provides needed financial benefits, in some states, children placed through child welfare agencies can only be placed in homes having separate bedrooms for children of each gender (Berrick & Needell, 1999). A grandparent with a two bedroom apartment who takes in a granddaughter and grandson thus may be precluded from gaining formal custody unless she is willing and able to move into a larger home. Failure to access a larger apartment and thus to be eligible for formal placement, in turn, may prevent a grandparent from receiving the substantially higher child care payments available to formal caregivers (de Toledo & Brown, 1995; Minkler & Roe, 1993).
Like other low income renters, grandparent caregivers in the subsidized housing market face a situation characterized by the existence of far fewer rental units in either public housing or the Section 8 private rental market than residents needing such accommodations. Substantial decreases in the number of available rentals during the 1990s—a period which, as noted earlier, was characterized by a dramatic increase in the number of intergenerational households headed by grandparents—has considerably worsened this situation and resulted in long waiting lists for both public and private rental units (Kauffman & Goldberg-Glen, 2000).
Addressing the multiple housing-related problems that face grandparent caregivers, particularly if they are renters, will require a multipronged approach. Several key policy components of such an approach recently were put forth by Generations United (GU), a national coalition promoting intergenerational programs and policies, which has been in the forefront of efforts to focus national attention on the needs of relative caregivers and their families. In its Public Policy Agenda for the 107th Congress, (Generations United, 2001a), GU called for legislation that would:
One important vehicle identified by GU for helping to carry out the first recommendation listed previously was the Fair Housing Initiatives Program that funds nonprofit organizations to "explain to the general public and key housing market actors what equal opportunity in housing means and what it requires of them in the sale, rental and financing of housing."(U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2000). Sand (2001) has suggested that, if additional funds were earmarked for education and outreach specifically regarding issues related to grandparent-headed households, the Fair Housing Initiatives Program might be particularly well-suited to reaching this population.
Concurrent with efforts to create public policies to better address the housing and related needs of grandparent caregivers, particularly if they are renters, programmatic interventions also should be developed, including intergenerational housing specifically designed to meet the needs of such households. An important prototype may be found in Boston's GrandFamilies House, a 26-unit complex of apartments built expressly to accommodate the needs of relative caregivers and their families. The two local nonprofits that developed this facility were able to combine public and private financing to create the complex. Physical accommodations to aid both toddlers and seniors, on site programs, and a task force to promote advocacy on behalf of grandparent-headed households are among the features offered (Kauffman & Goldberg-Glen, 2000). Replications of GrandFamilies House are getting underway in 12 other locations (Generations United, 2001b). Although far more broad-ranging policy changes are needed to meet the housing needs of relative caregivers and their families (Boston Aging Concerns, 1994; Sand, 2000), interventions like GrandFamilies House provide an important example of local-level programs that can make a difference.
Limited support for the development of informational and other forms of assistance to help qualified grandparent caregiver renters learn about and better access subsidized housing also may be provided through the National Family Caregiver Support Program (NFCSP). Under reauthorization of the Older American Act, which created the NFCSP (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Aging, 2002), states are allowed to use up to 10% of their NFCSP funds to assist older relative caregivers. The Program's stipulation that priority be given to caregivers in the greatest financial and social need also is important, because as indicated previously, a sizable proportion of relative caregiver renters live at or below the poverty line.
This study also pointed up a number of avenues for further research. For example, although less than 1.5% of grandparent caregivers lived in housing with incomplete bathrooms or kitchens, the C2SS did not include questions that could help determine other aspects of the quality of the housing units occupied. Because many public housing and Section 8 units are in deteriorating condition, and lack of preventive maintenance frequently is a problem (Atlas & Dreier, 1994), further research is needed that could document the quality and adequacy of housing available to grandparent caregivers along these and related dimensions. With its very large sample size, its high response rate, and its inclusion of several key questions specifically on grandparent caregiving, as well as questions enabling researchers to explore such critical housing issues as overcrowding and the use of housing subsidies, the C2SS/ACS is uniquely suited to use in such research.
Longitudinal studies that would enable a careful look at changes and continuities in the housing situation of grandparent caregiver renters over time also are needed, in part to guide programmatic and policy interventions to assist this population. Finally, further evaluative research on alternative approaches to intergenerational housing is needed to better assess the strengths and limitations of these models, and suggest avenues for improvement.
Grandparent caregivers are raising some of the United States' most vulnerable children (Minkler, 1999). As this study suggests, many of these grandparents are performing this role while paying a large proportion of their income for rent, and/or in other ways facing hardship in the renter's market. This study has attempted to help illuminate the situation of grandparent caregivers who are renters and has suggested avenues for further research using the C2SS/ACS as a primary data source. In addition, however, it has been suggested that changes in programs, policies, and practices be considered on the basis of the extant knowledge base to assist America's growing number of intergenerational households headed by grandparents.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
This research is part of a larger study made possible by a grant from the Retirement Research Foundation, and we gratefully acknowledge the Foundation for its belief in and support of this work. We gratefully acknowledge Tammy Tan for her consulting and assistance with computer analysis in conjunction with this study. We are grateful as well to Maggie T. Biscarr, Ana Beltran, Jaia Peterson, and Jon Pynoos who provided helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article. Our sincere thanks also go to Kenneth Bryson and Mai Weismantle, for their encouragement and assistance, and to the U.S. Bureau of the Census. 
1Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Canada.
2School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley.
Received for publication March 12, 2002. Accepted for publication June 21, 2002.
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPAbstractMethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  B. Hayslip Jr. and P. L. Kaminski Grandparents Raising Their Grandchildren: A Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Practice Gerontologist, April 1, 2005; 45(2): 262 - 269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. A. Comerford, M. M. Henson-Stroud, C. Sionainn, and E. Wheeler Crone Songs: Voices of Lesbian Elders on Aging in a Rural Environment Affilia, November 1, 2004; 19(4): 418 - 436. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|
