Philadelphia’s Middle Neighborhoods · variation of local real estate markets across a city. It...

Philadelphia’s Middle Neighborhoods:Demographic and Market Differences by Race, Ethnicity,

and Nation of Origin

Prepared by REINVESTMENT FUND

Published MAY 2017

RESEARCH CONDUCTED BY

Policy Solutions at Reinvestment Fund

Emily Dowdall, Chief of Development and Policy Implementation

Jacob Rosch, Research Associate Ira Goldstein, President

1

Overview Middle neighborhoods are neither the poorest nor the wealthiest neighborhoods in a city, typically

experiencing neither precipitous decline nor rapid appreciation. In many cities, they account for a

significant share of residents and are reasonably affordable to middle income households (earning 80-

120% of median income).1 As relatively stable communities, they are essential to a city’s tax base,

identity, and ability to offer economic mobility and security. In Philadelphia, middle neighborhoods were

home to 41% of the population in 2015 and 42% of the city’s homeowners, and boasted some of the

highest voter turnout rates in the city for primary and general elections.

Yet middle neighborhoods are often overlooked by officials and service providers who are busy

grappling with areas of concentrated poverty, demands for downtown improvements, and gentrification

debates in rapidly developing neighborhoods. Although changes and stressors may not be readily

apparent in middle neighborhoods, several trends indicate that in the absence of strategic intervention,

a very real risk of destabilization exists in some of these areas.

This research brief examines conditions and trends in Philadelphia’s middle neighborhoods

differentiated by their racial, ethnic, and national origin makeup. Although middle neighborhoods tend

to be more diverse than both stronger and weaker areas, several national and local trends raise

questions about the different prospects that demographically distinct communities face. For example:

National studies have shown that members of the black middle class are more financially

vulnerable than their peers of other races.2 Local research has documented the disproportionate

impact of evictions and foreclosures on heavily African American middle neighborhoods.3

The presence of Hispanic residents in middle neighborhoods has increased, and high Hispanic

middle areas are distinct from predominantly white or black areas in some key ways, including

notably lower homeownership rates.

Immigrants made up a rapidly growing share of middle neighborhoods, and areas with larger

foreign born populations appeared in some ways stronger and in some ways more precarious

than other middle areas: home prices were higher and crime rates were lower, but incomes and

home ownership rates fell more steeply in recent years.

A deeper understanding of the dynamics at play in different types of middle neighborhoods can help

guide policy and investment approaches to shore up the inherent strength in these areas, and also head

off decline that could potentially diminish not only residents’ financial health and neighborhood quality

of life, but also Philadelphia’s overall wellbeing.

1 The American Assembly. On the Edge: America’s Middle Neighborhoods. Paul C. Brophy. 2016. 2 Mazumder, Bhashkar. “Black-White Differences in Intergenerational Economic Mobility in the United States” (April 8, 2014). Economic Perspectives, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 1, 2014; Pew Research Center. 2015. “The American Middle Class Is Losing Ground: No longer the majority and falling behind financially.” Washington, D.C. 3 City of Philadelphia Assessment of Fair Housing, 2016. http://www.phila.gov/dhcd/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/afh-2016-for-web.pdf; Reinvestment Fund, “Evictions in Philadelphia” 2017. https://www.reinvestment.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Evictions_in_Philadelphia_brief_Final.pdf

http://www.phila.gov/dhcd/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/afh-2016-for-web.pdf

http://www.phila.gov/dhcd/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/afh-2016-for-web.pdf

https://www.reinvestment.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Evictions_in_Philadelphia_brief_Final.pdf

2

The notable findings of this brief include:

From 2000 to 2015, population growth in middle neighborhoods (5%) outpaced the city as a

whole (2%), but trends varied by race and ethnicity: largely white middle areas were essentially

unchanged while mostly black areas contracted slightly (-2%), and high Hispanic middle

neighborhoods grew by 11%. The population in mixed middle neighborhoods increased 9%.

While predominantly white middle neighborhoods became more diverse, black middle

neighborhoods became somewhat more racially concentrated. Areas with relatively large shares

of Hispanic residents in 2000 became more heavily Hispanic, although majority-Hispanic middle

neighborhoods remained rare: there were only 3 among the city’s 138 middle Census tracts.

The largest group of middle neighborhoods in 2015 was racially and ethnically mixed (43% of

middle tracts) followed by predominantly black middle (32%), predominantly white (14%), and

heavily (though not majority) Hispanic (12%).

Black middle neighborhoods showed signs of elevated housing market stress: adjusted sales

prices fell 5% while rising in other middle areas; mortgage applications were more often denied;

and eviction rates and housing unit vacancy were higher than in other middle neighborhoods.

Gains in the foreign born population in middle neighborhoods (+40,840) offset losses of U.S.

born residents (-12,190) during the study period. The share of international immigrants in

middle neighborhoods increased from 10% of the population to 16%. In 2015, more than half of

all foreign-born Philadelphians lived in middle neighborhoods.

Spanish was the most common language after English for residents in middle neighborhoods

with large foreign born populations (60%), followed by Chinese and other Asian languages at

24% and Russian at 8%. Over a quarter of all Asian Philadelphians lived in middle areas with

large high foreign born populations.

The majority of high foreign born and heavily Hispanic middle neighborhoods did not overlap;

one-quarter of Philadelphia’s Hispanic middle neighborhoods were also classified as high foreign

born. More than half of foreign born residents of middle neighborhoods (57%) lived in areas

that fell in the racially and ethnically mixed category.

The authors would like to thank the William Penn Foundation and our partners at Next City for their generous support for this research.

3

Defining Middle Neighborhoods We identified middle neighborhoods using Reinvestment Fund’s Market Value Analysis (MVA).

Reinvestment Fund first developed the MVA in 2001 as a tool for understanding the characteristics and

variation of local real estate markets across a city. It is built on local administrative data and uses a

cluster analysis to condense multiple datasets into a manageable, meaningful typology of market

types at a sub-neighborhood level. Data inputs include home sales prices, mortgage foreclosure

filings, owner occupancy, vacancy, code violations, and construction permits. Our most recent MVA in

Philadelphia identified 10 market categories ranging from strongest (A) to most distressed (I).

We defined all Census tracts falling within the four categories in the middle of that range (D-G) as our

middle neighborhoods. Median sales prices in those areas ranged from roughly 50% below to 50% above

the city’s $96,500 median home sale price ($49,674 to $148,248). It is important to note that our

definition is based on a 2015 snapshot; some of the tracts currently categorized as middle may have

been either strong or distressed in 2000, at the outset of our study period.

4

Race and Ethnicity To measure unique trends in demographically distinct middle neighborhoods, we categorized middle

tracts as predominantly black, predominantly white, heavily Hispanic, or mixed. Using population data

from the Census’ most recent American Community Survey, we defined as predominantly black those

Census tracts where more than two-thirds (66%) of the population was non-Hispanic African American.4

Predominantly white middle neighborhoods were similarly defined as tracts where over 66% of the

population identified as non-Hispanic white.

Because the Hispanic population in Philadelphia is much smaller than either the black or white

population (13.4% of the total compared to 42% and 36% respectively), we defined as heavily Hispanic

those areas where more than 25% of the population was Hispanic. To ensure our categories were

mutually exclusive, we classified as mixed those tracts where over 66% of the population was white or

black and over 25% of the population was Hispanic, or where none of those thresholds were met.

Census Tracts Population, 2015

Predominantly Black Middle Neighborhoods (Over 66% Black and Under 25% Hispanic)

44 182,313

Predominantly White Middle Neighborhoods (Over 66% non-Hispanic White and Under 25% Hispanic)

19 88,504

Heavily Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods (Over 25% Hispanic and Under 66% White or Black)

16 89,176

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 59 278,045

All Middle Neighborhoods 138 638,038

4 Unless otherwise noted, all population data in this report were drawn from the most recent American Community Survey (ACS) five-year Sample (2011-2015). The ACS is a national household survey used to generate population-wide estimates at a variety of geographies. Sale price data was obtained from the City of Philadelphia.

5

National Origin In Philadelphia, middle neighborhoods were home to a large and growing number of immigrants.

Citywide, 52% of all foreign born residents lived in a middle neighborhood. We defined as high foreign

born those middle tracts where more than 25% of the population was born outside the United States.

We applied the same threshold as we did for the Hispanic population because foreign born

Philadelphians make up a similar share of the total population (12.7%).

It is worth nothing that while there is some overlap between the Hispanic and foreign born populations

they are distinct groups: 19% of foreign born residents identified as Hispanic, and 18% of Hispanics were

foreign born.

Census Tracts Population, 2015

High Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods (Over 25% Foreign Born)

25 135,324

Low Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods (Under 25% Foreign Born)

113 502,714

All Middle Neighborhoods 138 638,038

Philadelphia’s Middle Neighborhoods:

Population and Demographic Trends While much attention has been paid to residential surges in strong markets in and around Philadelphia’s

downtown, the growth rate in middle neighborhoods actually surpassed the city average. Seventy-six

percent of the net population uptick Philadelphia experienced since 2000 occurred in middle

neighborhoods. Not all middle neighborhoods experienced that same change. In fact, most of the

residential expansion in middle neighborhoods took place in mixed tracts, where it was up 9%, and

heavily Hispanic tracts, where the population rose by 11%. (For a full set of tables and figures illustrating

demographic, economic, and social trends in each neighborhood type, see Appendix A)

Population Change

2000 2015

Number Change, 2000 to 2015

Percent Change, 2000 to 2015

Black Middle Neighborhoods 186,040 182,313 -3,727 -2%

White Middle Neighborhoods 88,049 88,504 455 1%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 79,986 89,176 9,190 11%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 255,313 278,045 22,732 9%

All Middle Neighborhoods 609,388 638,038 28,650 5%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 1,517,536 1,555,072 37,536 2%

Between 2000 and 2015, while Hispanic and mixed middle neighborhoods were growing, the population

in predominantly black and predominantly white middle areas declined or held constant. In the white

neighborhoods, the overall population remained steady as the number of white residents dropped and

the number of nonwhite residents swelled. In the black neighborhoods, in contrast, the number of black

residents increased and the number of nonblack residents fell.

6

The net result was that white middle neighborhoods became more diverse and black middle

neighborhoods became somewhat more racially concentrated. The share of black residents living in

black middle neighborhoods grew from 82% to 84%, while the share of white residents living in white

middle neighborhoods declined from 90% to 82%.

Hispanic middle neighborhoods saw more ethnic concentration as their Hispanic population more than

doubled during the study period, growing from 20% of the population in 2000 to 38% in 2015.

Dominant Population Percent Dom. Pop.

2000 2015 Change 2000 2015

Black Middle Neighborhoods 151,873 153,901 1% 82% 84%

White Middle Neighborhoods 79,337 72,265 -9% 90% 82%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 15,648 33,480 114% 20% 38%

Black Middle Neighborhoods:

Historic significance and current threats to stability Middle neighborhoods have been vital hubs for Philadelphia’s historically sizable African American

middle class, members of which, due to a number of barriers, did not move to the suburbs at the same

rate as their white counterparts in decades past. The city’s black middle neighborhoods—including parts

of Overbrook and Wynnefield, Cedarbrook, and the Oak Lanes—have been where these families built

wealth and provided stable settings for generations of children.

Over the last 15 years, however, worrying trends in housing values and incomes have begun to threaten

the stability of some black middle neighborhoods. Although these areas still maintain a strong tradition

of homeownership, rates of foreclosure and eviction pose serious threats to their long term stability.

While home values across Philadelphia climbed 33% since 2000, sales prices in black middle

neighborhoods declined (when adjusted for inflation). In 2000-2001, the median home sales price in a

black middle neighborhood was just over $82,000—higher than the median for the city and for other

middle neighborhoods. By 2014-2015, however, the median sales price in black middle neighborhoods

had fallen to $78,250.

Median Home Price* 2000-2001 2014-2015 Change

Black Middle Neighborhoods $82,584 $78,250 -5%

White Middle Neighborhoods $72,949 $120,000 64%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods $68,682 $70,000 2%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods $77,629 $98,000 26%

All Middle Neighborhoods $75,702 $92,500 22%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods $72,812 $96,500 33%

Note: Figures adjusted to 2015 dollars. Property transaction data from Philadelphia Office of Property Assessment.

7

Black middle neighborhoods also saw declining incomes and employment during this period. They began

with higher unemployment rates than other middle neighborhoods, but relatively robust household

incomes. In 2000, the median household income in these neighborhoods was higher than the rest of the

city and middle neighborhoods overall. And while inflation-adjusted incomes fell across Philadelphia,

they fell more steeply in black middle neighborhoods: by 2015, the median household income in those

areas lagged behind both the city and middle neighborhoods as a whole.

Median Household Income Unemployment Rate

2000 2015 Change 2000 2015 Change

Black Middle Neighborhoods $45,873 $37,177 -19% 11.1% 14.9% 3.8%

White Middle Neighborhoods $47,040 $45,207 -4% 7.8% 12.6% 4.8%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods $42,860 $34,980 -18% 9.8% 16.7% 6.8%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods $41,343 $37,311 -10% 9.5% 13.4% 4.0%

All Middle Neighborhoods $43,747 $38,085 -13% 9.8% 14.2% 4.4%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods $42,319 $38,253 -10% 10.5% 13.9% 3.4% Note: All figures adjusted to 2015 dollars.

During this period, vacancy rates in these neighborhoods were higher and increased more than in other

middle neighborhoods.

Vacancy Rate

2000 2015 Change

Black Middle Neighborhoods 9.3% 13.1% 3.8%

White Middle Neighborhoods 6.7% 10.2% 3.5%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 8.4% 10.8% 2.5%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 8.8% 11.4% 2.6%

All Middle Neighborhoods 8.6% 11.7% 3.1%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 10.8% 13.3% 2.5%

Despite these disquieting trends, homeownership in black middle neighborhoods remained relatively

strong. Between 2000 and 2015, the share of households that owned their home declined across the

city by 7 percentage points; in black middle neighborhoods, ownership rates fell only 4 points.

Homeownership as a Share of Occupied Housing Units

2000 2015 Change

Black Middle Neighborhoods 63% 59% -4%

White Middle Neighborhoods 72% 66% -6%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 70% 54% -16%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 59% 51% -8%

All Middle Neighborhoods 64% 56% -8%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 59% 53% -7%

8

By some leading indicators like mortgage originations, foreclosures, and evictions, black middle

neighborhoods evidenced signs of stress. To sustain high rates of homeownership, residents need access

to mortgage credit, including reasonably low-risk products for both home purchase and refinancing. But

mortgage applications in black middle neighborhoods were denied at a higher rate than other areas of

the city. In 2014-2015, 31% of applications that residents in black middle neighborhoods submitted to

mortgage lenders were denied or withdrawn. Citywide and in other middle neighborhoods, 27% of

purchase mortgage applications were denied or withdrawn.

Applications for Home Purchase

Mortgage

Home Purchase Mortgage

Originations

Acceptance Rate

Denial Rate

Black Middle Neighborhoods 3,060 2,108 69% 31%

White Middle Neighborhoods 2,099 1,667 79% 21%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 1,326 976 74% 26%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 3,815 2,724 71% 29%

All Middle Neighborhoods 10,300 7,475 73% 27%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 25,045 18,249 73% 27%

Note: Data are from Home Mortgage Disclosure Act filings.

These parts of the city also had higher foreclosure and eviction rates than other middle neighborhoods

and the city as a whole.

Foreclosure Filings as a Share of Sales, 2015

Eviction Filings as a Share of Renters, 2015

Black Middle Neighborhoods 35% 10%

White Middle Neighborhoods 21% 5%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 33% 7%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 28% 8%

All Middle Neighborhoods 29% 8%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 22% 7%

9

Yet trends over time were encouraging across middle neighborhoods, including predominantly black

areas. The graphs below show foreclosures as a share of home sales and eviction filings as share of

renter households. In both cases, rates in black middle neighborhoods remained above the city and

middle neighborhood average, but like other areas of Philadelphia, fell since reaching peaks in 2010-

2012.

Foreclosure Filings per 100 Home Sales, 2004 to 2015

Eviction Filings per 100 Renter Households, 2010 to 2015

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Mixed Middle

Hispanic Middle

Black Middle

White Middle

All MiddleNeighborhoods

All PhiladelphiaNeighborhoods

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Mixed Middle

Hispanic Middle

Black Middle

White Middle

All MiddleNeighborhoods

All PhiladelphiaNeighborhoods

10

A sign of strength for black middle neighborhoods was the decline in violent and nonviolent crime rates.

In 2014 and 2015, these neighborhoods had lower rates of violent crime than the city, and lower

nonviolent crime rates than the city and other middle areas. Since 2006, crime fell more sharply in black

middle neighborhoods than in other parts of the city.

Part-one Violent Crimes, Per 1,000 Residents*

Part-one Nonviolent Crimes, Per 1,000 Residents*

2006-07 2014-15 Change 2006-07 2014-15 Change

Black Middle Neighborhoods 12.8 9.0 -30% 35.6 25.0 -30%

White Middle Neighborhoods 8.1 5.5 -32% 37.7 32.7 -13%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 12.5 9.8 -22% 35.6 31.3 -12%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 11.9 8.4 -29% 39.2 33.9 -14%

All Middle Neighborhoods 11.7 8.4 -29% 37.5 30.8 -18%

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 13.8 10.2 -26% 44.9 35.3 -21%

Note: Part-one violent crimes include homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault; part-one nonviolent crimes

include burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Data aggregated from the Philadelphia Police Department.

Share of Residents with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher

2000 2015 Change






All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 17.9% 25.4% 7.5%

Residents in black middle neighborhoods continued to have comparably high levels of educational

attainment (20.9% of residents had a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to 19.4% in all middle

areas). Yet these neighborhoods lacked access to high performing public schools. Schools located in

these areas performed below the city and middle neighborhood averages. These figures do not account

for enrollment patterns such as the share of residents enrolled in their catchment school, in other public

or charter schools, or in private and parochial schools.

Share of Students Proficient or Advanced in Grades 3–5, 2014-15

Reading Math






All Philadelphia Neighborhoods 31% 17% Note: Data are from Pennsylvania Department of Education.

11

High Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods: Nodes of Growth As a group, foreign-born arrivals in middle neighborhoods offset declines in the U.S.-born population;

the number of immigrants grew by 40,840, while the number of native born residents dropped by

12,190. High foreign born middle neighborhoods were located in Olney, East Oak Lane, and parts of

Northeast, South, and Southwest Philadelphia. In 2000, 23% of residents in those neighborhoods were

born outside the U.S., and by 2015 that share had increased to 36%. (For a full set of tables and figures

illustrating demographic, economic, and social trends in each neighborhood type, see Appendix A)

Number of Foreign Born Residents

Percent Foreign Born Residents

2000 2015 Raw Chng. Pct. Chng. 2000 2015

High Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods

26,942 48,623 21,681 80% 23% 36%

Low Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods

36,226 55,385 19,159 53% 7% 11%

All Middle Neighborhoods 63,168 104,008 40,840 65% 10% 16%

Citywide 137,205 197,563 60,358 44% 9% 13%

Within middle neighborhoods, residential increases were notably sharper in areas that had larger

foreign born shares. The population in high foreign born middle areas expanded by 15% since 2000,

compared to 2% growth for other middle areas.

Population

2000 2015 Raw Change Percent Change


117,944 135,324 17,380 15%


491,444 502,714 11,270 2%

All Middle Neighborhoods

609,388 638,038 28,650 5%

Citywide 1,517,536 1,555,072 37,536 2%

12

English remains the most common language spoken in Philadelphia, and it is also the first language of

arrivals from a number of countries, contributing to its being the most prevalent language by far even in

areas with many immigrants. After English, Spanish was the most common language spoken in high

foreign born middle neighborhoods, and in Philadelphia overall. Chinese and other Asian languages,

particularly Vietnamese and Mon-Khmer, were relatively common in high foreign born middle areas,

accounting for 24% of non-English languages spoken in the home. Citywide, Asian languages were the

predominant foreign language in 17% of Census tracts.

Predominant Language Spoken in the Home, Excluding English

Spanish Chinese Other Asian Russian Other


60% 12% 12% 8% 8%


58% 8% 5% 1% 27%

All Middle Neighborhoods 59% 9% 7% 2% 24%

Citywide 57% 12% 5% 3% 23%

Two key strengths of high foreign born middle neighborhoods were relatively low rates of serious crime

and relatively high performing public schools.

High foreign born middle neighborhoods had lower rates of crime per 1,000 residents than the city and

other middle neighborhoods (7.0 part-one violent crime rate compared to 10.2 for the city in 2014-

2015). The rate of part-one nonviolent crime was lower as well: the average rate of part-one nonviolent

crime per 1,000 residents was 35.3 per year in Philadelphia and only 25.2 per year in high foreign born


Part-one Violent Crimes, Per 1,000 Residents*

Part-one Nonviolent Crimes, Per 1,000 Residents*

2006-07 2014-15 Change 2006-07 2014-15 Change


10.4 7.0 -32% 29.9 25.2 -16%


12.1 8.7 -28% 39.5 32.3 -18%

All Middle Neighborhoods 11.7 8.4 -29% 37.5 30.8 -18%

Citywide 13.8 10.2 -26% 44.9 35.3 -21%

Note: Part-one violent crimes include homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault; part-one nonviolent crimes

include burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Data aggregated from the Philadelphia Police Department.

13

The average proficiency levels in schools located in high foreign born middle neighborhoods exceeded

the city average performance in both reading and math. In the 2014-15 school year, 31% of Philadelphia

public school students scored proficient or advanced in reading in elementary school (grades 3 through

5), compared with 37% in schools in high foreign born middle neighborhoods. In math, 17% of students

were proficient or advanced citywide and 27% were proficient in schools located in high foreign born


Share of Students Proficient or Advanced in Grades 3–5

Reading Math

High Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods 37% 27%

Low Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods 31% 18%


Citywide 31% 17%

Note: Data from Pennsylvania Department of Education.

High foreign born middle neighborhoods have experienced some of the largest home price increases

and some of the largest declines in homeownership in Philadelphia. Between 2000-01 and 2014-15

housing prices in these neighborhoods rose 25%. Over the same time period, the share of residents who

owned their home in these neighborhoods declined by 14 percentage points, from one of the highest

rates in the city to a rate below the city average.

Median Home Price Homeownership Rate

2000-01 2014-15 Change 2000 2015 Change


$79,831 $100,000 25% 65% 51% -14%


$75,564 $90,000 19% 64% 57% -6%


$75,702 $92,500 22% 64% 56% -8%

Citywide $72,812 $96,500 33% 59% 53% -7%

Note: Figures adjusted to 2015 dollars. Property transaction data from Philadelphia Office of Property Assessment.

14

The twin trends of rising prices and falling homeownership could indicate the growing presence of

investor-owners, who may have bid up the price of residential properties if they saw a growing demand

for rentals. An additional sign of investor ownership is the heightened share of sales conducted in cash—

transactions completed without the use of a mortgage. A comparison of the number of home purchases

in 2014- 2015 with the number of new mortgage loans shows that in high foreign born middle

neighborhoods, nearly 60% of all purchases were a cash sale, the highest rate of all middle

neighborhoods and also greater than the citywide percentage.

Purchase Mortgage Originations, 2014-15

Home Purchases, 2014-15

Share of Purchases Not Using a Mortgage


1,148 2,842 60%


6,327 13,306 52%


7,475 16,148 54%

Citywide 18,249 40,418 55%

Along with income, educational attainment among residents living in these neighborhoods has not kept

pace with the rest of the city, although there were gains. Today, a smaller share of residents in high

foreign born middle neighborhoods holds a bachelor’s degree or above than in other middle areas.


2000 2015 Change


14.9% 17.4% 2.5%


14.1% 20.0% 5.9%


Citywide 17.9% 25.4% 7.5%

Diverging income and home price trends could lead to increased housing cost burdens in these

neighborhoods, which could have ripple effects on household stability and spending on other necessities

(e.g., medical expenses, food, child care) as well as discretionary goods and services (including purchases

on local commercial corridors). The drop in homeownership rates also challenges the traditional notion

that middle neighborhoods are a place to build family wealth through home equity. Some similar market

trends were observed in heavily Hispanic middle neighborhoods.

15

Heavily Hispanic Neighborhoods: Expanding Populations and Changing

Housing Markets Heavily Hispanic middle neighborhoods comprised 12% of all middle neighborhood tracts in Philadelphia

and were home to 14% of the residents living in Philadelphia’s middle neighborhoods. Most of these

tracts were located in the Lower Northeast, along with some in Olney, Kensington, Eastern North

Philadelphia and South Philadelphia. In many ways the trends in Hispanic middle neighborhoods were

similar to trends in high foreign born Census tracts: both had population expansions along with signs of

economic and housing market fragility. However, for the most part, these were not the same

neighborhoods.

Only 4 of the 16 high Hispanic middle neighborhoods in Philadelphia also met the high foreign born

threshold. Of those tracts, two were located in the Northeast near Oxford Circle, one was in Olney and

another was centered on 7th Street in South Philadelphia. Most high foreign born middle neighborhoods

were classified as mixed middle neighborhoods, where no single racial group predominated. In fact, of

the 104,008 foreign-born residents who lived in Philadelphia’s middle neighborhoods, nearly 60,000

(57%) lived in a mixed middle neighborhood and 17,620 (17%) lived in Hispanic middle neighborhoods.

All Census Tracts

High Foreign Born Tracts

Total Foreign Born Population

Share of Foreign Born Population

Black Middle Neighborhoods 44 1 14,994 14%

White Middle Neighborhoods 19 2 12,216 12%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 16 4 17,620 17%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 59 18 59,178 57%

All Middle Neighborhoods 138 25 104,008 100%

Although geographically there is only some overlap between Hispanic and high foreign born middle

neighborhoods, both have experienced similar trends in income, homeownership, and population

growth. In both areas, median incomes declined more steeply than in other middle neighborhoods and

in the city overall. Both areas also experienced substantial declines in homeownership, while at the

same time undergoing larger-than-average population growth. Hispanic and high foreign born middle

neighborhoods also lagged behind other middle areas in terms of educational attainment.

Median Household Income* Homeownership Rates Population Growth

2000 2015 Change 2000 2015 Change 2000 2015 Change

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods

$42,860 $34,980 -18% 70% 54% -16% 79,986 89,176 11%


$45,341 $37,612 -17% 65% 51% -14% 117,944 135,324 15%

All Middle Neighborhoods $43,747 $38,085 -13% 64% 56% -8% 609,388 638,038 5%

All City Neighborhoods $42,319 $38,253 -10% 59% 53% -7% 1,517,536 1,555,072 2% Note: Figures adjusted to 2015 dollars. Property transaction data from Philadelphia Office of Property Assessment.

16

Two areas where Hispanic and high foreign born middle neighborhoods differ is in housing prices and

unemployment trends. While prices in high foreign born middle neighborhoods grew by 25%, in Hispanic

areas they were essentially flat, up just 2%. These diverging price trends suggest different risks to

neighborhood stability and different potential solutions. Contrasting unemployment rates also indicated

somewhat different dynamics: unemployment in heavily Hispanic middle neighborhoods exceeded all

other middle area categories, at 16.7%, while high foreign born middle areas had rates below both the

middle neighborhood and city average, at 12.9%.

Median Home Price* Unemployment Rate

2000 2015 Change 2000 2015 Change

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods

$68,682 $70,000 2% 9.8% 16.7 6.8%


$79,831 $100,000 25% 8.6% 12.9% 4.3%


$75,702 $92,500 22% 9.8% 14.2% 4.4%

All City Neighborhoods $72,812 $96,500 33% 10.5% 13.9% 3.4% Note: Figures adjusted to 2015 dollars.

Hispanic and high foreign born middle neighborhoods also had different access to high quality public

schools. While student performance in the schools located in high foreign born neighborhoods exceeded

the city average, it lagged in Hispanic middle neighborhoods.

17

Conclusion Middle neighborhoods have long been important to Philadelphia as areas of economic stability and

opportunity, moderately priced housing, and a reasonably high quality of life. Those qualities have likely

been a factor in the recent residential growth in those areas—where almost three-quarters of the city’s

vaunted population turnaround of the past decade took place. At the same time, a closer look reveals

signs of fragility in some of these neighborhoods. Indicators of strength and instability varied greatly for

middle neighborhoods according to the race, ethnicity, and national origin of their residents.

To bolster the inherent strength of middle neighborhoods, the field of public health offers a pertinent

lesson: preventive care is more effective and cost efficient that reactive treatment. In introducing his

recent book, On the Edge: America’s Middle Neighborhoods, which compiles new research on middle

neighborhoods, Paul C. Brophy writes of the need to think of our community treatments as both

vitamins and aspirin—“Of course, we need medicine to heal communities in deep need—the aspirin. But

what tools do we have to keep neighborhoods healthy in the first place? We need vitamins, too.”5In

many cases, attention is understandably focused on communities where years of divestment and

neglect have led to declines in population and blight. But relatively stable communities, like the middle

neighborhoods described in this work, require attention as well.

To ensure that all middle neighborhoods remain vital, elected officials, civic leaders, community-based

organizations, and key institutions may need to consider strategic interventions to enhance opportunity

in healthy areas and stabilize areas that have shown signs of stress. Depending on the characteristics

and assets of a particular neighborhood (e.g., safe and clean parks and recreation facilities, major

employment centers, proximity to stronger neighborhoods), effective strategies might be adapted from

those frequently deployed in either distressed areas or in strong ones. In the proper situation,

interventions such as housing counseling and targeted home finance tools, job training, vacant property

cleanup, investment in public facilities, or commercial corridor improvements could serve to inoculate

middle neighborhoods from destabilizing influences.

5 The American Assembly. On the Edge: America’s Middle Neighborhoods. Paul C. Brophy. 2016.

18

(This Page Intentionally Left Blank)

19

Appendix A: Middle Neighborhood Characteristics and Trends

This section includes the full set of tables developed for the report. Tables for predominantly black, white, Hispanic, and

mixed middle neighborhoods are presented beside similar tables for high foreign- and low foreign-born middle

neighborhoods.

Population and Demographic Trends Count of

Tracts Population

2000 2015 Change

Black Middle Neighborhoods 44 186,040 182,313 -2%

White Middle Neighborhoods 19 88,049 88,504 1%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 16 79,986 89,176 11%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 59 255,313 278,045 9%

All Middle Neighborhoods 138 609,388 638,038 5%

Citywide 384 1,517,536 1,555,072 2%

Count of Tracts

Population

2000 2015 Change


25 117,944 135,324 15%


113 491,444 502,714 2%

All Middle Neighborhoods 138 609,388 638,038 5%

Citywide 384 1,517,536 1,555,072 2%


Share of Foreign Born Residents

2000 2015 # Chng % Chng 2000 2015

Black Middle Neighborhoods 11,481 14,994 3,513 31% 6% 8%

White Middle Neighborhoods 8,255 12,216 3,961 48% 9% 14%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 10,998 17,620 6,622 60% 14% 20%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 32,434 59,178 26,744 82% 13% 21%


Citywide 137,205 197,563 60,358 44% 9% 13%


Share of Foreign Born Residents

2000 2015 # Chng % Chng 2000 2015


26,942 48,623 21,681 80% 23% 36%


36,226 55,385 19,159 53% 7% 11%


Citywide 137,205 197,563 60,358 44% 9% 13%

20

Economic and Housing Home Price Trends Median Income* Home Prices*

2000 2015 Change 00-01 14-15 Change

Black Middle Neighborhoods $45,873 $37,177 -19% $82,584 $78,250 -5%

White Middle Neighborhoods $47,040 $45,207 -4% $72,949 $120,000 64%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods $42,860 $34,980 -18% $68,682 $70,000 2%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods $41,343 $37,311 -10% $77,629 $98,000 26%

All Middle Neighborhoods $43,747 $38,085 -13% $75,702 $92,500 22%

Citywide $42,319 $38,253 -10% $72,812 $96,500 33%

Median Income* Home Prices*

2000 2015 Change 00-01 14-15 Change


$45,341 $37,612 -17% $79,831 $100,000 25%


$43,395 $38,190 -12% $75,564 $90,000 19%

All Middle Neighborhoods $43,747 $38,085 -13% $75,702 $92,500 22%

Citywide $42,319 $38,253 -10% $72,812 $96,500 33%

Note: All figured adjusted to 2015 dollars

Unemployment Rate

2000 2015 Change






Citywide 10.5% 13.9% 3.4%

Unemployment Rate

2000 2015 Change


8.6% 12.9% 4.3%


10.0% 14.5% 4.5%


Citywide 10.5% 13.9% 3.4%

Note: Employment rates are measured among the civilian population aged 16 years or old

21

Housing Stock, Vacancy, and Tenure Trends

Vacancy Rate Homes Built Since 2000

2000 2015 Change

Share of Homes

Number of Homes

Black Middle Neighborhoods 9.3% 13.1% 3.8% 2.0% 1,644

White Middle Neighborhoods 6.7% 10.2% 3.5% 1.8% 680

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 8.4% 10.8% 2.5% 1.2% 392

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 8.8% 11.4% 2.6% 4.3% 4,629

All Middle Neighborhoods 8.6% 11.7% 3.1% 2.8% 7,345

Citywide 10.8% 13.3% 2.5% 4.2% 27,987

Vacancy Rate Homes Built Since 2000

2000 2015 Change

Share of Homes

Number of Homes


7.0% 10.0% 3.0% 2.2% 1,076


9.0% 12.1% 3.1% 3.0% 6,268

All Middle Neighborhoods 8.6% 11.7% 3.1% 2.8% 7,345

Citywide 10.8% 13.3% 2.5% 4.2% 27,987

Owner Occupied Homes as Share of all Housing Units

Change

2000 2011-15

Black Middle Neighborhoods 63% 59% -4%

White Middle Neighborhoods 72% 66% -6%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 70% 54% -16%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 59% 51% -8%


Citywide 59% 53% -7%

Owner Occupied Homes as Share of all Housing Units

Change

2000 2011-15


65% 51% -14%


64% 57% -6%


Citywide 59% 53% -7%

22

Purchase Mortgages, Foreclosures, and Evictions Home Purchase

Mortgage Applications

Acceptance Rate

Purchase Mortgage

Originations

Home Purchases

Cash Sales

2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15

Black Middle Neighborhoods 3,060 69% 2,108 4,655 55%

White Middle Neighborhoods 2,099 79% 1,667 3,138 47%

Hispanic Middle Neighborhoods 1,326 74% 976 2,167 55%

Mixed Middle Neighborhoods 3,815 71% 2,724 6,188 56%

All Middle Neighborhoods 10,300 73% 7,475 16,148 54%

Citywide 25,045 73% 18,249 40,418 55%

Home Purchase Mortgage

Applications

Acceptance Rate

Purchase Mortgage

Originations

Home Purchases

Cash Sales

2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15


1,601 72% 1,148 2,842 60%


8,699 73% 6,327 13,306 52%

All Middle Neighborhoods 10,300 73% 7,475 16,148 54%

Citywide 25,045 73% 18,249 40,418 55%

Foreclosures Filings as a Share of Sales

Eviction Filings as share of Renter Units

2015 2015






Citywide 22% 7%

Foreclosures Filings as a Share of Sales

Eviction Filings as share of Renter Units

2015 2015

High Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods 24% 6%

Low Foreign Born Middle Neighborhoods 31% 8%


Citywide 22% 7%

23

School Performance and Educational Attainment Reading Percent Prof/Adv

in Grades 3 to 5 Math Percent Prof/Adv

in Grades 3 to 5






Citywide 31% 17%

Reading Percent Prof/Adv in Grades 3 to 5

Math Percent Prof/Adv in Grades 3 to 5


37% 27%


31% 18%


Citywide 31% 17%


2000 2015 Change






Citywide 17.9% 25.4% 7.5%


2000 2015 Change


14.9% 17.4% 2.5%


14.1% 20.0% 5.9%


Citywide 17.9% 25.4% 7.5%

PHILADELPHIA 1700 Market Street, 19th floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 TEL 215.574.5800 FAX 215.574.5900

REINVESTMENT FUND is a catalyst for change in low-income communities. We integrate data, policy and strategic investments to improve the quality of life in low-income neighborhoods.

www.reinvestment.com www.policymap.com

real estate early education

healthcare healthy food

housing k-12 education

data & analysis

clean energy

BALTIMORE 1707 North Charles Street, Suite 200B Baltimore, MD 21201 TEL 410.783.1110

Reinvestment Fund is an equal opportunity provider.

Reinvestment Fund has published a range of reports about related to housing and market impact. For details, please visit the Reinvestment Fund’s Policy Publications site at:

WWW.REINVESTMENT.COM/IMPACT/RESEARCH-PUBLICATIONS

2012

What if Pennsylvania Had Not Had HEMAP?

2014

Strategic Property CodeEnforcement and its Impactson Surrounding Markets

2014

Philadelphia Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Diversion Program: Update

2016

West Philadelphia ScatteredSite Model: An AffordableHousing Impact Study

Philadelphia’s Middle Neighborhoods · variation of local real estate markets across a city. It...

Documents

Transcript of Philadelphia’s Middle Neighborhoods · variation of local real estate markets across a city. It...