Methodology and Definitions

About two-thirds of Americans, or 76 million households, own their homes while the remaining one-third, or 43 million households, rent.¹ Of owner-occupied housing units, 62 percent, or 46 million, have a mortgage. This report examines housing loss due to eviction and foreclosure, and presents findings from mixed methods research on housing instability and loss in the United States.

In addition to a brief section on our national-level findings, we focus on case studies on three U.S. counties: Forsyth County, North Carolina; Maricopa County, Arizona; and Marion County, Indiana. The purpose of these case studies is to evaluate housing insecurity and loss at a more granular level of analysis, in different geographies and social contexts.

We analyzed and visualized the available geospatial data on evictions, mortgage foreclosures, and tax foreclosures nationally and in each case study location. To supplement these quantitative findings, we utilized American Community Survey (ACS) data from the U.S. Census Bureau and tested for statistical relationships between housing loss and a number of socioeconomic variables. For each case study location, we further conducted key informant interviews (KIIs) to better understand the causes of home loss, as well as the consequences of displacement. These KIIs, along with desk research, helped to provide geographic, demographic, economic, social, political, and historical context to our housing-related findings.

Housing Loss Rate and Housing Loss Index

Limitations of Prior Studies: Prior studies on housing loss tend to examine different mechanisms of loss in silos. Eviction, mortgage foreclosure, and tax foreclosure are analyzed separately, rather than as components of the same, broader problem: housing instability and loss. The processes of eviction and foreclosure may be different, yet the underlying causes are often the same, and each result in displacement and trauma—financially, physically, and emotionally. In most U.S. cities, a worker on minimum wage will be unable to make housing payments—either rent or a mortgage. The impact on a child who switches schools three times a year due to housing instability is likely similar whether home loss occurs via eviction or foreclosure. And residents of a blighted neighborhood likely do not care if their block of empty homes is a result of foreclosures or chronic evictions.

Our Scoring Metrics: For the reasons above, we decided to develop a single “score” of housing loss in the United States, capturing the overall magnitude of both eviction and mortgage foreclosure.

In order to generate an indicator of housing loss that is based on the total number of evictions and the total number of mortgage foreclosures, we created two new measures: a housing loss rate and a housing loss index. These two scores were calculated for the counties for which both eviction and mortgage foreclosure data are available for 2014 to 2016. At the national level, this data is available for 2,221 counties, out of the 3,143 counties in the United States.² The national housing loss index compares rates of housing loss in each county against the national average. In each of the case studies, the housing loss index compares the housing loss rate in each census tract against the county average.

Housing Loss Rate: The housing loss rate captures loss by combining the total number of evictions and the total number of mortgage foreclosures for a given geography, and then normalizing that sum by the total number of renters and the total number of homeowners with a mortgage within the given geography. As a result, this rate shows the scale of housing loss within a given geography in relation to the number of households who could potentially experience such a loss.

The unit of analysis at the national level is the county, and the unit of analysis in each case study is the census tract.³

We note, however, that the rate does not capture any trends related to housing loss, or whether loss has increased or decreased over the study period, nor does it inherently express which mechanism of loss—eviction or foreclosure—has the greater impact on overall housing loss. A "housing loss dashboard" included below separately reports the proportion of housing loss accounted for by eviction and foreclosure to provide insight into the predominant mechanism of instability in each county or county-equivalent.

Housing Loss Index: The housing loss index compares the housing loss rate against an average: the national average of all counties for which data was available, in the case of our national research, and the county average in our case studies.

As a benchmark for interpretation, at the national level, a county with a housing loss index score of 1 experiences a housing loss rate equal to the average of all other counties in the United States for which we have data. An index of 3 indicates that the county under consideration experiences a housing loss rate that is three times the national average. A housing loss index of less than 1 implies that the county under consideration is doing “better” on average (i.e., experiencing less housing loss) than all other counties in the country.

Case Study Selection Criteria

Early research involved the exploration of various U.S. counties for inclusion in case studies. We selected our locations based on a number of requirements:

1. An early assessment of the prevalence of housing loss and instability.
2. The availability of granular and mappable data for evictions and mortgage foreclosure, as well as tax foreclosure, to a lesser extent.
3. The availability of a university partner and/or a New America Local office, in order to conduct key informant interviews “on site,” and to leverage existing networks in order to engage with local stakeholders.
4. Regional variation, in order to account for differences in economics, politics, demographics, and histories.

Qualitative Methodology

After we selected our case study locations, we finalized research partnerships with: New America Indianapolis and the Institute for American Thought at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, in Marion County, Indiana; the Environmental Law and Policy Clinic at the Wake Forest University School of Law, the Department of Anthropology at Wake Forest University, and the Center for the Study of Economic Mobility at Winston-Salem State University in Forsyth County, North Carolina; and the Knowledge Exchange for Resilience at Arizona State University in Maricopa County, Arizona

From November 2019 to June 2020, graduate and undergraduate students from these institutions conducted key informant interviews (KIIs) with a wide variety of stakeholders, including government officials, housing advocates, real estate developers, journalists, lawyers, service providers, and community members to gain an in-depth understanding of local issues related to housing loss. Questions were developed collaboratively, and focused on how often residents lost their homes—and whether through eviction, mortgage foreclosure, or another mechanism; who was most at-risk of losing their home; where within the relevant county this loss was most acute; why people were losing their homes; and what happened after they did. In total, researchers conducted 31 interviews in Marion County, Indiana; 15 in Maricopa County, Arizona; and 20 in Forsyth County, North Carolina.

The researchers provided us with recordings and transcripts of the KIIs, a written summary of each interview, and a summary of findings.

Quantitative Methodology

Together with our data science and visualization partner, DataKind, we located, cleaned, standardized, and visualized the data on evictions, mortgage foreclosures, and, in certain cases, tax foreclosures. In our analysis, we tested for any statistical relationships between housing loss and a number of socioeconomic variables via correlation analysis.

Our nationwide index is limited to eviction and mortgage foreclosure data from 2014 to 2016. We were unable to include tax foreclosure due to the lack of accessible data for most U.S. counties. However, we have included tax foreclosure in our case studies for Marion County, Indiana and Forsyth County, North Carolina, as we were able to obtain the relevant data.

Project Data Sources

National data on evictions was supplied by the Eviction Lab at Princeton University,⁴ and data on mortgage foreclosures was provided by ATTOM Data Solutions.⁵ Using this data, DataKind generated nationwide, county-level maps depicting rates of eviction, mortgage foreclosure, and housing loss rate, as well as a map indicating overall data coverage for U.S. counties. Using the national data, we also analyzed the correlation between select five-year (2012–2016) ACS census estimates and the eviction rate, mortgage foreclosure rate, and the housing loss rate at the county level.

For our three case studies: we supplemented data from Eviction Lab and ATTOM with data acquired from local agencies, as described in the table above. In each case study location, we complemented the data with key informant interviews to better understand the context behind the data. We also analyzed the correlation between select five-year (2012-2016) ACS census estimates and the eviction rate, mortgage foreclosure rate, and the housing loss rate at the census tract-level.

Eviction

Definition: An eviction occurs when a landlord forcibly expels a tenant from their rental property, resulting in the renter’s involuntary move from their home. Landlords may evict a tenant for “just causes,” such as the renter’s failure to pay rent, taking on boarders, damaging property, causing disturbances, or breaking the law. But in many American cities, landlords can evict renters even if they pay rent on time and follow their lease agreement. Based on our estimates, on average 2.6 percent of all renter households were evicted each year between 2014 and 2016. Yet the scale of the issue varies by state, and even within states.

Legal Process: Typically, an eviction court record is generated after a landlord files an eviction notice with the local court and serves a tenant with a notice to appear in court. At the hearing, the judge may rule that the eviction is justified and order the tenant to leave by a particular date, or the judge may dismiss the eviction. Almost all formal evictions in the United States take place in civil court, where renters lack the right to an attorney. As a result, most renters do not appear in eviction court and receive a default eviction judgment. Because eviction data, including the data used here, is gathered primarily from court documents, the numbers reflect these “formal evictions” conducted through the court system.

But evictions can occur informally, or outside of the legal system entirely, such as when a landlord imposes a rent hike, gives verbal notice to vacate, or performs an illegal lockout. In some places, experts estimate that these “informal evictions” account for half or more of all evictions. However, informal evictions often elude tracking, limiting attempts to fully account for housing loss.

As such, while the eviction data reported below provides some insights into the breadth of eviction in U.S. states, it does not capture the significant scope or impacts of informal processes that forcibly displace tenants.

A Note About the Eviction Measure We Focus On: Some studies suggest that anywhere between 60 to 80 percent of all eviction filings eventually result in the removal of a tenant from their home, regardless of the court case outcome.⁶ Yet we sought to be absolutely certain that our data, as well as the resulting analysis, represented actual evictions. While we admit that our eviction-related findings are most likely an undercount, the numbers still paint a bleak picture in many localities across the country. The decision to focus on recorded instances of eviction fits within our general belief that formulation of housing policy must be increasingly data-driven if decision-makers are to sufficiently direct outreach, funding, and resources to the most distressed communities.

It is important to note, however, that an eviction filing can have deleterious impacts itself—even if a case does not lead to a formal eviction judgment. In many jurisdictions, an eviction filing enters the public record and becomes part of an individual’s rental history, unless the eviction is formally dismissed in court.⁷ As a result, an eviction filing often appears on background check results as a red flag, and may dissuade potential landlords from renting to these individuals.⁸

Mortgage Foreclosure

Definition: A mortgage foreclosure occurs when a person who has taken out a mortgage to pay for a house, known as a borrower, loses their rights to that property. Usually, if a borrower fails to make multiple mortgage payments in a timely manner, the foreclosure process begins. The lender—most often a bank—applies to a court for authority to sell the property. Money received from the resulting sale is applied to debts on the property, including payments to the lender.⁹ Based on our estimates, 1.5 percent of all homeowners with mortgages were foreclosed upon between 2014 and 2018. Yet the scale of the issue varies by state, and even within states.

Legal Process: In states with a judicial foreclosure process, proceedings typically take place before a judge, who determines whether the homeowner is in default, assigns property ownership to the mortgage lender, and determines a date upon which the property will be sold. These proceedings usually last between six and 18 months. Once the foreclosure is completed, the individual or family living in the house—usually the homeowner, but sometimes a renter—must vacate, and the property is put up for sale at public auction. In the case that there is no highest bidder or no bids are made at the minimum asking price, the title remains with the mortgage lender.

In states with a non-judicial foreclosure process, a mortgage lender can immediately send a “notice of foreclosure” or “notice of default” to a borrower in default, as well as to the recorder of deeds. In these states, the lender can set the date of the property’s sale, while the homeowner can sue to stop the foreclosure process.¹⁰

In the event of foreclosure of a rental property, tenants are subject to immediate eviction upon transfer of title.

A Note about the Mortgage Foreclosure Measures We Focus On: To be sure that we only counted instances where a homeowner defaulted on their mortgage payments and lost their house in a foreclosure, we avoided any “pre-foreclosure” datasets, which record any homeowners in default. This is because many of these houses may be foreclosed upon but never actually sold. We chose instead to analyze mortgage foreclosure sales exclusively. For the purposes of this report, a “mortgage foreclosure sale” includes foreclosure sales, short sales, and REO sales—three common types of real estate transactions resulting from payment default and foreclosure processes.

Tax Foreclosure

Definition: Tax foreclosures occur when a local government sells a homeowner’s property after the homeowner falls exceedingly behind on their property taxes. All U.S. states have laws that permit the placing of a lien on the property for the amount of property taxes past due. If the taxes remain unpaid after a certain period of time, municipalities auction the lien or the property to private purchasers and investors. Prior to tax foreclosure, most owners have a right to redeem their property by paying the tax sale purchaser the purchase price, plus interest, penalties, and other costs. A failure to redeem leads to tax foreclosure.

Many argue that tax foreclosure laws serve an important purpose in ensuring that local governments recover tax revenue needed to provide essential services. However, these laws often produce profits for tax sale purchasers at much higher rates than ordinary investments. Most banks, for example, provide interest on savings accounts at less than 1 percent, while many states permit tax sale purchasers to recover interest at rates of 18 percent or more. Such excessive penalties can make it near impossible for homeowners to stave off tax foreclosure.