THE IMPACT OF GROUP HOMES
ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES
IN BALTIMORE COUNTY, MARYLAND
A Study Prepared by:
GREATER BALTIMORE COMMUNITY HOUSING RESOURCE BOARD, INC.
P. O. Box 66180, Baltimore, Maryland 21239, (410)453-9500
December, 1993
ABSTRACT
This is a study of the impact of the placement of group homes for persons with disabilities upon
property values in a stratified sample of neighborhoods in Baltimore County. It replicates the
methodology of a 1988 Prince George's County study done by the Maryland-National Capital
Park and Planning Commission and the Prince George's County Planning Board. In this study, a
group home is defined as an alternative living unit (ALU) supported either by the State of
Maryland's Developmental Disabilities Administration or the Baltimore County Bureau of
Mental Health.
This study analyzed over 1,000 transactions of residential properties in Baltimore County
neighborhoods where there is a group home; this included neighborhoods where a group home
opened and later closed. In addition, the study included the use of comparable neighborhoods as
a control group. Sales prices of homes were analyzed for a two-year period before and a
two-year period after the group home was established in the neighborhood.
It was found that approximately 50% of the neighborhoods' residential property values were
impacted positively and 50% negatively by group home placement. Some 3 (42.9%) of the 7
neighborhoods with Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation group homes showed an increase
in property value that was higher than the control neighborhoods; 4 (57.1%) of the 7 showed a
decrease. Of the 28 neighborhoods with a Developmental Disabilities group home, 13 (46.4%)
had property value changes higher than the control neighborhoods; 15 (53.6%) of the
neighborhoods with group homes had property value change below that of the control
neighborhoods.
These mixed results indicate that group home placement cannot be considered a certain
predictor/cause of residential property decline or increase. These conclusions are similar to those
of numerous studies that have been done in various communities in the United States and
Canada during the past 15 years.
It must be noted that there are many factors that influence neighborhood property values.
Important factors may include prevailing neighborhood real estate valuation trends, economic
recessionary forces, changes in the location of industrial sites or major transportation highways,
deterioration/improvement of public services and facilities, public school closing/opening,
nearby positive or negative occurrences, decrease/increase in crime, decrease/increase in
vacancies, etc. During this period, several Baltimore County neighborhoods experienced
negative property value change. This study also found that group home placement did not affect
positively or negatively the direction of that change.
*****
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction
II. Methodology
III. Findings of the Study
Appendices:
Statistics on Group Homes in the Study
Relevant Findings from Other Studies
Bibliographies of Other Studies Examined in CRISP's "There Goes the Neighborhood"
*****
I. INTRODUCTION
With the national shift from institutional care to community settings in group homes for persons with disabilities, there is concern among citizens that group homes will affect negatively their neighborhoods. Concern about the impact of group home placement upon property values causes some citizens to oppose group homes in general.
The purpose of this study is to identify the possible impacts of residential property values in
those Baltimore County neighborhoods that have a group home. Initially, the methodology of
the study is described. This is followed by a discussion of the findings of the study. The
Appendices then contain statistics on group homes in the study, relevant findings from other
studies, and bibliographies of other studies examined in the Community Residences Information
Services Program's "There Goes the Neighborhood".
II. METHODOLOGY
A. DEFINITION OF "GROUP HOME"
The State of Maryland defines a "group home" as a residence in which four or more adults are
living. An alternative living unit (ALU) is defined by the State as a residence where three or less
adults are in residence. In this study, group homes are defined as alternative living units (ALUs)
administered either by the State of Maryland Developmental Disabilities Administration or the
Baltimore County Bureau of Mental Health. There were a total of 8 Mental Health Residential
Rehabilitation group homes and 45 Developmental Disabilities group homes in this study.
B. DESIGN OF THE STUDY
This study examines possible impact upon residential property values in three ways:
(1) Sales prices of homes were analyzed for a two-year period before and a two-year period
after the group home placement in the neighborhood.
(2) Sale information from those neighborhoods that do not have an group home were used as a
control for the studied neighborhoods. This was done by comparing the prices in the entire Zip
Code with those in neighborhoods where group homes were placed.
(3) Sale prices were compared to County-wide averages during the periods.
The date of occupancy of the group home was used as the causal event instead of the date of
sale because it is possible that neighborhood residents may not have become aware of a home's
use for persons with disabilities until after it is occupied. Sales indicators included:
o Number of sales before and after occupancy of the group home.
o Mean sales price before and after occupancy.
If available, the sales data was taken from residential property sales within a one-half mile radius around the group home. This radius was utilized under the assumption that areas beyond this distance could not be affected. If comparable residential sales data for a one-half radius was not available, data from the entire Zip Code was utilized.
In order to examine the effect of group home placement on neighborhood property values for
a two-year period, only group homes established in or before 1992 in predominantly residential
neighborhoods were considered in this study - which began in 1992.
C. SOURCES OF DATA
Four sources of data were used. First, the Greater Baltimore Board of Realtors' Central Maryland Multiple Listing Service (CMMLS) provided residential property sales data for the past 18 months. CMMLS is a reliable national database that is used by Realtors to locate residential listings and recent sales for comparisons when determining a list price for residential sales. CMMLS data is available for a variety of distances, including a one-half mile radius of a residential property.
The second source of sales data was the Lusk Sales Directories for 1983 through 1991. The Lusk Sales Directories are a highly reliable source of sales data, and are the most commonly utilized source by real estate professionals in the Baltimore metropolitan area. The Lusk sales data was used to analyze the mean sales prices two years before and two years after the group home establishment. The earliest occupancy date of the group homes was 1985. Therefore, sales data begins in 1983. Because Lusk data is only available for entire Zip Codes, the effect of group homes that were established over 18 months ago (or having a post-test control time period including times over 18 months ago) is tested for the entire Zip Code rather than the one-half mile radius.
The other sources of data solely were utilized to compare changes in the relevant neighborhoods and control areas to Baltimore County as a whole. The third source of data was the Maryland Association of Realtors' Maryland Real Estate Facts and Forecasts between 1982 and 1989. Finally, the data also was compared to the Baltimore Regional Council of Governments' "Residential Property Sales in Maryland" reports. Analysis included data from this source for 1989 through 1991.
Because of the incompleteness of some of the data and the mixed availability of one-half mile
radius data because of the time factor, exact data was not available for some of the individual
neighborhood studies. In the absence of access to the best data source, the most appropriate data
source was utilized to construct the best analysis for comparison. While one-half mile radius
data is better for assessing neighborhood impact, Zip Code data is comparable.
III. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
A. FINDINGS
It was found that approximately 50% of the neighborhoods' residential property values were impacted positively and 50% were impacted negatively by group home placement. Some 3 (42.9%) of the 7 neighborhoods with Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation group homes showed an increase in property values that was higher than that of the control neighborhoods. On the other hand, 4 (57.1%) of the 7 showed a decrease in property values.
Of the 28 neighborhoods with a Developmental Disabilities group home, 13 (46.4%) had property value change rates that were above those of the control neighborhoods. A total of 15 (53.6%) of the neighborhoods with group homes had property value change rates that were below those of the control neighborhoods.
This mixed result indicates that group home placement cannot be considered a certain
predictor or cause of residential property decline or improvement. This conclusion is similar to
those of the various other studies that have been done in the United States and Canada in the past
15 years.
B. DISCUSSION OF RELEVANT ISSUES
It must be noted that there are many factors that influence neighborhood property values. Important factors may include prevailing neighborhood real estate valuation trends, economic recessionary forces, the location of industrial sites or major transportation highways, public school closing/opening, nearby positive or negative occurrences, felt increases/decreases in crime, increases/decreases in vacancies, etc. By solely considering the total property value change, this study simplifies a complex reality. However, the use of control neighborhoods acts to improve the validity of this study's approach.
During this period, several Baltimore County neighborhoods - including some included in this study - experienced negative property value changes. This was partially due to the persistent economic recession that occurred during this time. During a period of such negative housing value change, the houses that are sold would probably be sold for less than their true market value in a normal (i.e., not economically distressed) market. Therefore, it would be expected that group home placement in such neighborhoods would indicate a lower property value direction. This study also found that group home placement did not affect this change in either a positive or a negative direction.
In conclusion, this study has found that group home placement cannot be said to have caused
residential property value decline in Baltimore County. While some individual neighborhoods
may have witnessed a decline in value, some experienced a positive value growth. Baltimore
County's experience with group homes has been the same as many other communities across the
country, in which hard data indicates no direct linkage between group home placement and
property value. It is hoped that this objective study has helped ease the fears of neighborhood
residents that group homes are linked to neighborhood decline.
STATISTICS ON GROUP HOMES IN THE STUDY
GROUP A: MENTAL HEALTH RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
1. ALU in Catonsville 21228
Established - July, 1990
Pre-Test - July 1988 - June 1990 169 $87,554
Post-Test - July 1990 - June 1992 1 74,900
Change: -14.4%
Control Area
Pre-Test - 1990 median: $117,600.
Post-Test - June 1992 154 121,000
Change: +2.9%
2. ALU in Baltimore 21236
Established - Nov., 1988
Pre-Test - Nov. 1986 - Oct. 1988 0 -
Post-Test - Nov. 1988 - Oct. 1990 0 -
Change: NA
Control Area
Pre-Test - Oct. 1988 1162 96,267
Post-Test - Oct. 1990 72 115,685
Change: +20.2%
3. ALU in Dundalk 21222
Established - Feb., 1991
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Pre-Test - Feb. 1989 - Jan. 1991 15 70,546
Post-Test - Feb. 1991 - Jan. 1993 1224 71,531
Change: +1.4%
Control Area
Pre-Test - Jan. 1991 26 69,200
Post-Test - Jan. 1993 42 73,000
Change: +5.5%
4. ALU in Dundalk 21222
Established - May, 1992
Pre-Test - May 1990 - Apr. 1992 6 76,650
Post-Test - May 1992 - May 1993 11 64,663
Change: -15.6%
Control Area
Pre-Test - Apr. 1992 38 73,500
Post-Test - Oct. 1993 29 76,000
Change: +3.4%
5. ALU in Reisterstown 21136
Established - Apr., 1991
Pre-Test - Apr. 1989 - Mar. 1991 1024 115,009
Post-Test - Apr. 1991 - Mar. 1993 345 140,750
Change: +22.4%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Control Area
Mar. 1991 34 108,000
Mar. 1993 39 117,500
Change +8.8%
6. Catonsville 21228 Dec., 1991
Dec. 1989 - Nov. 1991 1704 119,054
Dec. 1991 - May 1993 116 149,356
Change +25.5%
Control Area
Nov. 1991 35 130,000
Oct. 1993 35 115,450
Change -11.2%
7. Rossville 21236 July, 1991
July 1989 - June 1991 1574 115,726
July 1991 - May 1993 42 99,277
Change -14.2%
Control Area
June 1991 69 115,100
June 1993 31 100,000
Change -13.1%
8. Fullerton 21236 Dec., 1992
Dec. 1990 - Nov. 1992 34 99,966
Dec. 1992 - May 1993 7 97,400
Change -2.6%
Control Area
Nov. 1992 67 118,500
Oct. 1993 30 105,000
Change -11.4%
GROUP B: DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ADMINISTRATION
Date of Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Establishment Sales Price
1. Woodlawn 21207 Nov., 1988
Nov. 1986 - Oct. 1988 0 0
Nov. 1988 - Oct. 1990 1776 $97,980
Change NA
Control Area
Oct. 1988 1449 122,518
Oct. 1990 68 83,800
Change -31.6%
2. Woodlawn 21207 Nov., 1988
Nov. 1986 - Oct. 1988 0 0
Nov. 1988 - Oct. 1990 1776 97,980
Change NA
Control Area
Oct. 1988 1449 122,518
Oct. 1990 68 83,800
Change -31.6%
3. North Catonsville 21228 Mar., 1990
Mar. 1988 - Feb. 1990 967 95,706
Mar. 1990 - Feb. 1992 1570 128,888
Change +34.7%
Control Area
1990 median: $117,600.
Feb. 1992 48 125,000
Change +6.3%
4. North Woodlawn 21208 Dec., 1988
Dec. 1986 - Nov. 1988 0 0
Dec. 1988 - Nov. 1990 634 140,518
Change NA
Control Area
Nov. 1988 690 131,190
Dec. 1990 29 112,900
Change -13.9%
5. Sparks 21152 Jan., 1991
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Jan. 1989 - Dec. 1990 449 153,056
Jan. 1991 - May 1993 7 446,414
Change +191.7%
Control Area
Jan. 1991 5 143,000
Dec. 1992 8 160,900
Change +12.5%
6. Baltimore 21209 Dec., 1989
Dec. 1987 - Nov. 1989 265 151,031
Dec. 1989 - Nov. 1991 553 158,678
Change +5.1%
Control Area
1990 median: $164,772.
Nov. 1991 17 140,000
Change -15.0%
7. Baltimore 21209 Oct., 1990
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 0 0
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 36 156,591
Change NA
Control Area
1990 median: $164,772.
Sept. 1992 11 174,047
Change +5.6%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
8. Owings Mills 21117 Oct., 1988
Oct. 1986 - Sep. 1988 0 0
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 1287 176,593
Change NA
Control Area
1990-1991 change: 0%.
1990 median: $123,450.
Change NA
9. East Reisterstown 21136 June, 1989
June 1987 - May 1989 184 115,927
June 1989 - May 1991 1115 88,669
Change -23.5%
Control Area
1990 median: $116,390.
Apr. 1991 34 108,000
Change -7.2%
10. North Catonsville 21228 Aug., 1989
Aug. 1987 - July 1989 416 117,342
Aug. 1989 - July 1991 (Oct. 1991) 1601 137,405
Change +17.1%
Control Area
June 1990 416 117,342
Oct. 1991 73 128,000
Change +9.1%
11. Cockeysville 21093 Aug., 1989
Aug. 1987 - July 1989 354 187,340
Aug. 1989 - July 1991 1299 193,513
Change +3.3%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Control Area
1990 median: $163,350. 1990-1991 change: +1%.
Oct. 1991 47 175,000
Change +7.1%
12. Reisterstown 21136 Oct., 1990
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 992 115,682
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 173 123,327
Change +6.6%
Control Area
Sep. 1990 23 107,990
Sep. 1992 31 125,000
Change +15.8%
13. Baynesville 21234 Nov., 1990
Nov. 1988 - Oct. 1990 1709 99,197
Nov. 1990 - Oct. 1992 84 86,566
Change -12.7%
Control Area
Nov. 1990 7 64,500
Oct. 1992 69 109,665
Change +70.0%
14. West Randallstown 21133 Nov., 1990
Nov. 1988 - Oct. 1990 771 $107,020
Nov. 1990 - Oct. 1992 78 109,028
Change +1.9%
Control Area
Dec. 1990 40 $117,900
Oct. 1992 32 107,300
Change -9.0%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
15. Randallstown 21133 Oct., 1990
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 764 107,910
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 129 111,141
Change +3.0%
Control Area
Sep. 1990 34 112,000
Sep. 1992 32 107,000
Change -4.5%
16. Fullerton 21236 Oct., 1990
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 1546 114,813
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 3 94,800
Change -17.4%
Control Area
Sep. 1990 23 107,990
Sep. 1992 49 106,940
Change -1.0%
17. Pikesville 21208 May, 1990
May 1988 - Apr. 1990 671 106,965
May 1990 - Apr. 1992 839 154,109
Change +44.1%
Control Area
1990 median: $109,513.
Apr. 1992 18 112,100
Change +2.4%
18. Fullerton 21234 Feb., 1992
Feb. 1990 - Jan. 1992 1535 95,565
Feb. 1992 - May 1993 206 96,979
Change +1.5%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Control Area
Jan. 1992 52 97,000
May 1993 56 100,875
Change +4.0%
19. Owings Mills 21117 Nov., 1989
Nov. 1987 - Oct. 1989 526 170,491
Nov. 1989 - Oct. 1991 482 168,589
Change -1.1%
Control Area
1990 median: $123,450.
Oct. 1991 66 130,203
Change +5.5%
20. North Woodlawn 21208 Dec., 1990
Dec. 1988 - Nov. 1990 1034 140,518
Dec. 1990 - Nov. 1992 227 105,138
Change -25.2%
Control Area
Nov. 1990 29 112,900
Nov. 1992 28 134,015
Change +18.7%
21. West Randallstown 21133 June, 1990
June 1988 - May 1990 586 107,443
June 1990 - May 1992 901 115,701
Change +7.7%
Control Area
1990 median: $106,080.
May 1992 36 114,900
Change +8.4%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
22. Fullerton 21236 July, 1991
July 1989 - June 1991 1574 115,726
July 1991 - May 1993 91 83,193
Change -28.1%
Control Area
Jan. 1991 46 115,100
Dec. 1992 67 109,500
Change -4.9%
23. Rodgers Forge 21212 Feb., 1985
Feb. 1983 - Jan. 1985 0 0
Feb. 1985 - Jan. 1987 0 0
Change NA
Control Area
Jan. 1985 244 105,042
Jan. 1987 272 122,106
Change +16.2%
24. West Randallstown 21133 Mar., 1991
Mar. 1989 - Feb. 1991 844 109,921
Mar. 1991 - Feb. 1993 132 107,544
Change -2.2%
Control Area
Feb. 1991 32 99,000
Dec. 1992 35 119,000
Change +20.2%
25. Glenmont 21239 Aug., 1990
Aug. 1988 - July 1990 514 57,979
Aug. 1990 - July 1992 511 63,597
Change +9.7%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Control Area
1990 median: $109,760
June 1992 46 68,000
Change -35.3%
26. North Woodlawn 21207 June, 1990
June 1988 - May 1990 1360 98,947
June 1990 - May 1992 2900 102,820
Change +3.9%
Control Area
1990 median: $89,890.
May 1992 66 90,185
Change +0.4%
27. North Catonsville 21207 June, 1991
June 1989 - May 1991 1868 98,492
June 1991 - May 1993 158 116,937
Change +18.7%
Control Area
May 1991 52 90,000
May 1993 28 86,500
Change -3.9%
28. Rosedale 21206 July, 1986
July 1984 - June 1986 0 0
July 1986 - June 1988 0 0
Change NA
Control Area
June 1986 242 73,874
June 1988 243 66,449
Change -10.1%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
29. Rosedale 21206 Mar., 1990
Mar. 1988 - Feb. 1990 685 64,631
Mar. 1990 - Feb. 1992 1016 65,647
Change +1.6%
Control Area
1990 median: $78,960.
Feb. 1992 5 74,000
Change -6.3%
30. Parkton 21053 Jan., 1991
Jan. 1989 - Dec. 1990 69 167,949
Jan. 1991 - Dec. 1992 15 176,428
Change +5.4%
Control Area
Dec. 1990 0 0
Dec. 1992 0 0
Change NA
31. Woodlawn 21207 Mar., 1990
Mar. 1988 - Feb. 1990 1110 96,977
Mar. 1990 - Feb. 1992 1601 107,960
Change +11.3%
Control Area
1990 median: $89,890.
Feb. 1992 31 90,900
Change +1.1%
32. Rosedale 21206 June, 1990
June 1988 - May 1990 824 64,325
June 1990 - May 1992 960 66,077
Change +2.7%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Control Area
May 1990 8 87,400
May 1992 11 94,500
Change +8.1%
33. Cub Hill 21234 July, 1989
July 1987 - June 1989 430 98,793
July 1989 - June 1991 1628 89,027
Change -9.9%
Control Area
1990 median: $94,570.
Oct. 1991 65 94,750
Change +0.2%
34. Baltimore 21204 July, 1988
July 1986 - June 1988 0 0
July 1988 - June 1990 767 223,737
Change NA
Control Area
1990 median: $165,750.
1991 median: $162,500.
1990-1991 change: -2%.
35. Eudowood 21234 July, 1988
July 1986 - June 1988 0 0
July 1988 - June 1990 1380 98,690
Change NA
Control Area
1990 median: $94,570.
1991 median: $96,500.
1990-1991 change: +2%.
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
36. North Randallstown 21133 July, 1988
July 1986 - June 1988 0 0
July 1988 - June 1990 628 107,582
Change NA
Control Area
1990 median: $106,080.
1991 median: $110,500.
1990-1991 change: +4%.
37. North of Perry Hall 21236 Apr., 1989
Apr. 1987 - Mar. 1989 1259 115,818
Apr. 1989 - Mar. 1991 1661 116,699
Change +0.8%
Control Area
1990 median: $107,573.
July 1991 69 115,100
Change +7.0%
38. Bird River 21162 Dec., 1990
Dec. 1988 - Nov. 1990 0 0
Dec. 1990 - Nov. 1992 14 114,126
Change NA
Control Area
Nov. 1990 1 90,000
Nov. 1992 20 102,000
Change +13.3%
39. Carney 21234 Oct., 1990
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 1693 99,204
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 65 83,216
Change -16.1%
Average
Address and 2-Year Periods Sales Price
Control Area
Sep. 1990 73 95,490
Sep. 1992 58 109,500
Change +14.7%
40. Rossville 21237 Oct., 1990
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 430 NA
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 68 91,642
Change NA
Control Area
1990 median: $98,975.
Sep. 1992 19 87,000
Change -12.1%
41. Rosedale 21237 Oct., 1990
Oct. 1988 - Sep. 1990 430 NA
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 61 104,274
Change NA
Control Area
1990 median: $92,500.
Oct. 1990 - Sep. 1992 19 87,000
Change -5.9%
42. Rossville 21221 July, 1989
July 1987 - June 1989 159 87,848
July 1989 - June 1991 982 84,066
Change -4.3%
Control Area
NA
*****
RELEVANT FINDINGS FROM OTHER STUDIES
A. INTRODUCTION
All of the objective studies that have been conducted in the United States and Canada in the
past 15 years concerning the effect of group home placement show no negative effects on
property values, neighborhood safety, or quality of life. This section summarizes the studies that
are the most relevant to this examination.
B. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT STUDIES
1. Review of 58 National Studies
"There Goes the Neighborhood..." - published by the Community Residences Information Services Program (CRISP) in 1990 - is a summary of the 58 studies that have been done of the effects of group homes and treatment facilities on the neighborhoods in which they are placed. A total of 25 studies consider the impact upon residential property values. Some 22 of these studies deal with facilities for the mentally retarded and developmentally disabled, 5 with the mentally ill, and 9 with facilities serving both groups. There are 9 studies that are concerned with formerly institutionalized or service-dependent populations in general.
No studies were found to indicate a negative impact of group home placement upon any aspect of neighborhood life. The studies found that group home placement had not lowered property values or increased turnover, had not increased crime, and had not changed the neighborhood's character. The group homes had not deteriorated or become conspicuous institutional landmarks. The studies did find that all communities had come to accept group homes, and that group home residents have benefitted from the access to a wider community life (Community Residences Information Services Program, "There Goes the Neighborhood...", White Plains, New York: CRISP, 1990, p. 92).
The studies that evaluated the effect of group home placement on residential property values
are listed in the next section of the Appendix, Bibliography of Other Studies Examined in
CRISP's "There Goes the Neighborhood..."
2. Group Homes and Property Values: A Second Look
Authors Christopher and Christine M. Mitchell analyzed sales price as a percentage of list
price, as well as the number of days the property was market-listed before and after the group
home was occupied. Some 3 of the 5 homes showed no significant difference in both measures;
2 had measures post-occupancy that were more positive than the before measures.
3. Illinois State Crime Study
This State-wide study - Daniel Lauber, Impacts on the Surrounding Neighborhood of Group
Homes for Persons with Developmental Disabilities, Evanston, Illinois: Planning
Communications, 1986 - found that the crime rate for persons with developmental disabilities
who live in group homes is substantially lower that for the general population.
*****
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF OTHER STUDIES
EXAMINED IN CRISP'S "THERE GOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD..."
Baron, Richard C. Community Opposition to the Mentally Ill and the Strategies that Respond. Philadelphia: Horizon House Institute for Research and Development, 1978.
Boeckh, John, Michael Dear, and S. Martin Taylor, "Property Values and Mental Health Facilities in Metropolitan Toronto," Canadian Geographer 24 ((1980):270.
Breslow, Stuart. The Effect of Sitting Group Homes on the Surrounding Environs. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University, 1976.
Caulkins, Zack, John Noak, and Bobby J. Wilkerson. The Impact of Residential Care Facilities in Decatur: A Study of Residential Care Facilities Located Within the City of Decatur. Decatur, Illinois: Macon County Community Mental Health Board, 1976.
City of Lansing Planning Department. The Influence of Halfway Houses and Foster Care Facilities Upon Property Values. Lansing, Michigan: City of Lansing, 1976.
Coleman, Allison R. The Effect of Group Homes on Residential Property Values in Stamford, Connecticut. Stamford, Connecticut: St. Luke's Community Services, 1989.
Community Residences Information Services Program. There Goes the Neighborhood. White Plains, New York: CRISP, 1990.
Dear, Michael, "Impact of Mental Health Facilities on Property Values," Community Mental Health Journal 13 (1977):150.
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Effects of Subsidized and Affordable Housing on Property Values: A Survey of Research. Sacramento: State of California, 1988.
Developmental Disabilities Program. An Analysis of Minnesota Property Values of Community Intermediate Care Facilities for Mentally Retarded. Policy Analysis Series; Issues related to Welsch v. Noot/ No. 11. St. Paul, Minnesota: DDP, 1982.
Dolan, Lawrence W., and Julian Wolpert. Long Term Neighborhood Property Impacts of Group Homes for Mentally Retarded People. Princeton, New Jersey: Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, 1982.
Farber, Stephen, "Market Segmentation and the Effects of Group Homes for the Handicapped on Residential Property Values," Urban Studies (1986):519-525.
Gale, Dennis E. Group Homes for Persons with Mental Retardation in the District of Columbia: Effects on Single-Family House Sales and Sales Prices. Washington, D. C.: Center for Washington Area Studies, George Washington University, 1987.
Gardner, Patty, George Pfaff, and Suzanne Irwin. Community Acceptance of Group Homes in Ohio. Columbus, Ohio: Association for the Developmentally Disabled, 1982.
General Accounting Office. An Analysis of Zoning and Other Problems Affecting the Establishment of Group Homes for the Mentally Disabled. Gaithersburg, Maryland: U. S. General Accounting Office, 1983.
Glubiak, Peter G. Local Zoning and Residential Care Facilities: Conflicts and Solutions. Louisville, Kentucky: University of Louisville, 1983.
Goodale, Tom, and Sherry Wickware, "Group Homes and Property Values in Residential Areas," Plan Canada 19 (June, 1979):154.
Human Services Research Institute. Becoming a Neighbor: An Examination of the Placement of People with Mental Retardation in Connecticut Communities. Cambridge, Massachusetts: HSRI, 1988.
Iglhaut, Daniel M. The Impact of Group Homes on Residential Property Values. Largo, Maryland: Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission and the Prince George's County Planning Board, 1988.
Jaffe, Martin, and Thomas P. Smith. Sitting Group Homes for Developmentally Disabled Persons. Chicago: American Planning Association, 1986.
Kanter, Arlene S., "Recent Zoning Cases Uphold Establishment of Group Homes for the Mentally Disabled," Clearinghouse Review 18 (October, 1984):515.
Knowles, Eric S., and Ronald K. Baba. The Social Impact of Group Homes: A Study of Small Residential Service Programs in First Residential Areas. Green Bay, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin, 1973.
Lauber, Daniel. Impacts of Group Homes on the Surrounding Neighborhood: An Evaluation of Research. Evanston, Illinois: Planning/Communications, 1981.
__________. Impacts of the Surrounding Neighborhood of Group Homes for Persons with Developmental Disabilities. Evanston, Illinois: Planning/Communications, 1986.
League of Women Voters. Yes -- But in My Neighborhood? Siting Community-Based Residential Facilities in Seattle. Seattle, Washington: LWV, 1984.
Lindauer, Martin S., Pauline Tung, and Frank O'Donnell. The Effect of Community Residences for the Mentally Retarded on Real Estate Values in the Neighborhoods in Which They are Located. Brockport, New York: State University of New York, 1980.
Linowes, Lisa, "The Effect of Group Care Facilities on Property Values." Chicago: American Planning Association, 1983.
Louisiana Center for the Public Interest. Impact of Group Homes on Property Values and the Surrounding Neighborhoods. New Orleans, Louisiana: Louisiana Center for the Public Interest, 1981.
Muhlin, George L., and A. E. Dreyfuss. Community Reactions to Neighborhood Based Residential Mental Health Facilities in Westchester County. Scarsdale, New York: Social Area Research, 1984.
Pace University Nichaelian Institute for Sub/Urban Governance. Group Homes for Mentally Disabled People: Impact on Property Values in Westchester County, New York. White Plains, New York: CRISP, 1988.
Piasecki, Joseph R. Community Response to Residential Services for the Psycho-Socially Disabled: Preliminary Results of a National Survey. Philadelphia: Horizon House Institute for Research and Development, 1975.
Research Group, The. The Impact of Community Residences on Property Values in the Westfield, Massachusetts, Area. Northampton, Massachusetts: The Research Group, 1985.
Ryan, Carey S., and Ann Coyne, "Effects of Group Homes on Neighborhood Property
Values," Mental Retardation 23 (October, 1985):241.
Scott, Nancy J., and Robert A. Scott, "The Impact of Housing Markets on Deinstitutionalization," Administration in Mental Health 7 (Spring, 1980):210.
Suffolk Community Council. The Impact of Community Residences Upon Neighborhood Property Values. Smithtown, New York: Suffolk Community Council, 1984.
Wagner, Christopher A., and Christine M. Mitchell. Group Homes and Property Values: A Second Look. Columbus, Ohio: Metropolitan Human Services Commission, 1980.
Wagner, Christopher A., and Christine M. Mitchell. The Non-Effect of Group Homes on Neighboring Residential Property Values in Franklin County. Columbus, Ohio: Metropolitan Human Services Commission, 1979.
Wiener, Dirk, Ronald J. Anderson, and John Nietupski, "Impact of Community-Based Residential Facilities for Mentally Retarded Adults on Surrounding Property Values Using Realtor Analysis Methods," Education and Training of ther Mentally Retarded 17 (December, 1982):278.
Wolch, Jennifer, and Stuart A. Gabriel. Spillover Effects of Human Services Facilities in a Racially Segmented Housing Market. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 1983.
Wolpert, Julian. Group Homes for the Mentally Retarded: An Investigation of Neighborhood Property Impacts. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University, 1978.