TY  - RPRT
AU  - Hall, Jon
AU  - Berry, Mike
CY  - Melbourne
L1  - internal-pdf://2338985469/Â鶹Éç_Final_Report_No108_Public_housing_shifti.pdf
M3  - FR
N1  - Since the mid-1990s a number of pressures have combined to fundamentally change the client profile of most Australian State public housing authorities (SHAs). During the early part of that decade, the client base of most authorities was dominated by couples with children, and almost a third of households were in full-time employment and paying market rents.
With the introduction of the 1996 Commonwealth State Housing Agreement and the introduction of targeting to ‘most in need’, SHAs have been confronted in the past decade with the twin pressures of a static or declining stock base, and persistent, growing demand. 28
These factors have reshaped the client profiles of most SHAs in Australia. As the higher-income (predominately two-income) clients have left public housing they have been replaced by mostly pension- and benefit-dependent, single-income households
From 1995/96 the Commonwealth Government gave considerably greater priority to ensuring that new public and community housing allocations were targeted to those most in need, that is, those with the lowest incomes and/or in dire or emergency situations. Many SHAs responded by introducing segmented waiting lists whereby ‘priority applicants’ received first call on available allocations.
Targeting has had three key consequences.

NV  - RMIT
PB  - Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute Limited
PY  - 2007
RP  - Since the mid-1990s a number of pressures have combined to fundamentally change the client profile of most Australian State public housing authorities (SHAs). During the early part of that decade, the client base of most authorities was dominated by couples with children, and almost a third of households were in full-time employment and paying market rents.
With the introduction of the 1996 Commonwealth State Housing Agreement and the introduction of targeting to ‘most in need’, SHAs have been confronted in the past decade with the twin pressures of a static or declining stock base, and persistent, growing demand. 28
These factors have reshaped the client profiles of most SHAs in Australia. As the higher-income (predominately two-income) clients have left public housing they have been replaced by mostly pension- and benefit-dependent, single-income households
From 1995/96 the Commonwealth Government gave considerably greater priority to ensuring that new public and community housing allocations were targeted to those most in need, that is, those with the lowest incomes and/or in dire or emergency situations. Many SHAs responded by introducing segmented waiting lists whereby ‘priority applicants’ received first call on available allocations.
Targeting has had three key consequences.

ST  - Public housing: shifting client profiles and public housing revenues
T2  - Â鶹Éç Final Report No. 108
TI  - Public housing: shifting client profiles and public housing revenues
UR  - /research/final-reports/108
ID  - 151
ER  -