Memo to Members

PHA Strategies for RAD Conversions Vary by Local Capacity and Geographic Region

Jul 28, 2025

By Katie Renzi, NLHC Research Intern 

A recent article published in Housing Policy Debate titled “A Spectrum of Preservation to Privatization? Public Housing Authorities’ Adoption of the Rental Assistance Demonstration Across the United States” provides a comprehensive overview of the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program and how it is implemented by Public Housing Authorities (PHAs). RAD is a federal initiative designed to address preservation needs in public housing by converting properties from traditional public housing to a Project-Based Section 8 model enabling the use of public-private financing. The authors found that RAD’s implementation varied significantly by region and PHA size. They also found that the dominant management arrangement among RAD properties was for-profit owned and managed, given that RAD properties house lower-income tenants than the overall public housing population. 

To investigate this transformation, the study used datasets compiled from HUD administrative data, including the RAD Resource Desk and the Picture of Subsidized Households. This included data for RAD’s two primary components: Component 1, which converts traditional public housing properties to a Project-Based Section 8 assistance model, and Component 2, which converts the contracts of various other HUD-assisted multifamily housing programs already operated by private or non-profit owners to the Section 8 model. The authors analyzed regional variation in the adoption of RAD across 495 PHAs, including 1,696 Component 1 and 481 Component 2 properties. The analysis details the characteristics of the PHAs, the demographics of residents in affected properties, and the emerging ownership and management structures under the RAD program as of July 2024. 

The study revealed distinct geographic patterns for RAD’s two primary components. Component 1, the conversion of traditional public housing, has been most heavily adopted in the US South, with the Southeast/Caribbean region alone accounting for 35% of all converted units. The Midwest and Southwest also showed significant activity, at 19% and 12% of conversions, respectively. In contrast, Component 2 conversions are geographically concentrated in the Northeast, collectively accounting for over 70% of conversions. An overwhelming 43% of these units are in the New York/New Jersey region alone, with New York City showing a high density of conversions. This geographic divergence suggests that different regional housing markets and policy environments are influencing which parts of the RAD program are utilized. 

A key finding is the emergence of two divergent strategies among PHAs, largely dependent on their size and existing capacity. Large, high-capacity PHAs, often with prior experience in complex federal programs like HOPE VI that involve public private-partnerships, are using RAD as a tool for recapitalization and acquiring additional funds. These agencies, which account for 52% of all converted units, have leveraged the program to raise $19 billion in construction funds, $11.7 billion in Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and created thousands of additional non-subsidized units. On the other end of the spectrum, 61 PHAs, a majority of which are small, have converted their properties without leveraging any new debt or tax credits. These low-financing PHAs were often early adopters of RAD and appear to be using the program as a tool to reposition their assets and step away from the operational obligations of the traditional public housing model entirely. 

The research also found that the public housing properties converted under RAD served a population that was, on average, more socially and economically vulnerable than residents in the broader public housing system. Data shows that households in these properties were more likely to be non-white than the national public housing average (74.1% vs. 59.6%), largely due to having a higher share of Black residents (53.2% vs. 39.1%). Furthermore, these households had lower average annual incomes ($12,563 vs. $13,043), a higher proportion of very low-income households (94% vs. 90.6%), and a greater prevalence of single-parent families (38% vs. 34.3%).  

Analysis of a sample of 863 converted properties revealed that RAD has created a complex spectrum of ownership and management structures. Profit-motivated entities have emerged as the dominant players, owning 64% of properties and managing 42% of the sample. In contrast, PHAs retain ownership in only 16% of cases, although they continue to act as property managers in 36% of conversions, often under a private owner. The most prevalent management arrangement was a profit-motivated entity acting as both owner and manager (37%), followed by a traditional PHA-owned and managed structure (16%), and a hybrid model where a property is profit-owned but PHA-managed (14%). 

These findings indicate that RAD is fundamentally reshaping the provision of federally subsidized housing, with its implementation largely dependent on the existing capacities and strategies of local PHAs. The authors propose a need for stronger federal monitoring to ensure RAD’s public benefits and resident protections are maintained, particularly as private actors take on larger roles. They add that future research should investigate the impact of RAD conversions from the perspective of residents to better understand the impact of its implementation. They conclude by acknowledging the dire need for the preservation and expansion of subsidized housing, particularly as many programs are inadequately funded, threatening the stability of millions of residents. 

Read the full report here.