Beyond the problem projects paradigm: Defining and revitalizing “severely distressed” public housing

This article challenges the utility of the concept of “severely distressed” public housing, arguing instead that the program has systemic problems and that the 6 percent of developments recently identified as severely distressed by the National Commission on Severely Distressed Public Housing are merely those furthest along a continuum. Applying the commission's own criteria to nationwide program data that reveal dramatically increased resident impoverishment during the past decade, the article reveals the need for a more inclusive definition of severe distress. While acknowledging the moral and political imperative to ameliorate conditions in the worst‐off places first, the article cautions against overreliance on a problem projects paradigm that could obstruct calls for systemwide reforms. The article advocates an action‐oriented research agenda, emphasizing data collection on a variety of ill‐understood socioeconomic aspects of public housing conditions and enabling policy analysts to set clearer goals about what sustainable revitalization of public housing should entail.