Risk-assessment practices in the private rental sector : implications for low-income renters (Final Report)

This report focuses on risk-assessment practices in the private rental market, with particular consideration of their impact on low-income renters. It is based on the fieldwork undertaken in the second stage of the research process that followed completion of the Positioning Paper. The key research question this study addressed was: What are the various factors included in ‘risk-assessments’ by real estate agents in allocating ‘affordable’ tenancies? How are these risks quantified and managed? What are the key outcomes of their decision-making? The study builds on previous research demonstrating that a relatively large proportion of low-cost private rental accommodation is occupied by moderate- to high-income households (Wulff and Yates 2001; Seelig 2001; Yates et al. 2004). This is occurring in an environment where the private rental sector is now the de facto main provider of rental housing for lower-income households across Australia (Seelig et al. 2005) and where a number of factors are implicated in patterns of ‘income–rent mismatching’. These include ongoing shifts in public housing assistance; issues concerning eligibility for rent assistance; ‘supply’ factors, such as loss of low-cost rental stock through upgrading and/or transfer to owner-occupied housing; patterns of supply and demand driven largely by middle- to high-income owner-investors and renters; and patterns of housing need among low-income households for whom affordable housing is not appropriate. In formulating a way of approaching the analysis of ‘risk-assessment’ in rental housing management, this study has applied three sociological perspectives on risk: Beck’s (1992) formulation of risk society as entailing processes of ‘individualisation’; a socio-cultural perspective which emphasises the situated nature of perceptions of risk; and a perspective which has drawn attention to different modes of institutional governance of subjects, as ‘carriers of specific indicators of risk’. The private rental market was viewed as a social institution, and the research strategy was informed by ‘institutional ethnography’ as a method of enquiry. The study was based on interviews with property managers, real estate industry representatives, tenant advocates and community housing providers. The primary focus of inquiry was on ‘the moment of allocation’. Six local areas across metropolitan and regional Queensland, New South Wales, and South Australia were selected as case study localities. In terms of the main findings, it is evident that access to private rental housing is not just a matter of ‘supply and demand’. It is also about assessment of risk among applicants. Risk – perceived or actual – is thus a critical factor in deciding who gets housed, and how. Risk and its assessment matter in the context of housing provision and in the development of policy responses. The outcomes from this study also highlight a number of salient points: 1.There are two principal forms of risk associated with property management: financial risk and risk of litigation. 2. Certain tenant characteristics and/or circumstances – ability to pay and ability to care for the rented property – are the main factors focused on in assessing risk among applicants for rental housing. Signals of either ‘(in)ability to pay’ and/or ‘(in)ability to care for the property’ are almost always interpreted as markers of high levels of risk. 3. The processing of tenancy applications entails a complex and variable mix of formal and informal strategies of risk-assessment and allocation where sorting (out), ranking, discriminating and handing over characterise the process. 4. In the eyes of property managers, ‘suitable’ tenants can be conceptualised as those who are resourceful, reputable, competent, strategic and presentable. 5. Property managers clearly articulated concern about risks entailed in a number of characteristics or situations. Being on a low income was the principal and overarching factor which agents considered. Others included: - unemployment - ‘big’ families; sole parent families - domestic violence - marital breakdown - shift from home ownership to private rental - Aboriginality and specific ethnicities - physical incapacity - aspects of ‘presentation’. The financial vulnerability of applicants in these groups can be invoked, alongside expressed concerns about compromised capacities to manage income and/or ‘care for’ the property, as legitimate grounds for rejection or a lower ranking. 6. At the level of face-to-face interaction between the property manager and applicants, more intuitive assessments of risk based upon past experience or ‘gut feelings’ come into play. These judgements are interwoven with more systematic procedures of tenant selection. The findings suggest that considerable ‘risk’ is associated with low-income status, either directly or insofar as it is associated with other forms of perceived risk, and that such risks are likely to impede access to the professionally managed private rental market. Detailed analysis suggests that opportunities for access to housing by low-income householders also arise where, for example: - the ‘local experience’ of an agency and/or property manager works in favour of particular applicants - applicants can demonstrate available social support and financial guarantors - an applicant’s preference or need for longer-term rental is seen to provide a level of financial security for the landlord - applicants are prepared to agree to specific, more stringent conditions for inspection of properties and review of contracts - the particular circumstances and motivations of landlords lead them to consider a wider range of applicants - In particular circumstances, property managers are prepared to give special consideration to applicants who appear worthy, albeit ‘risky’. The strategic actions of demonstrating and documenting on the part of vulnerable (low-income) tenant applicants can improve their chances of being perceived as resourceful, capable and ‘savvy’. Such actions are significant because they help to persuade property managers not only that the applicant may have sufficient resources (personal and material) but that they accept that the onus is on themselves to show they are reputable, and that they have valued ‘competencies’ and understand ‘how the system works’. The parameters of the market do shape the processes of risk-assessment and, ultimately, the strategic relation of power between property manager and the tenant applicant. Low vacancy rates and limited supply of lower-cost rental stock, in all areas, mean that there are many more tenant applicants than available properties, creating a highly competitive environment for applicants. The fundamental problem of supply is an aspect of the market that severely limits the chances of access to appropriate and affordable housing for low-income rental housing applicants. There is recognition of the impact of this problem of supply. The study indicates three main directions for future focus in policy and program development: providing appropriate supports to tenants to access and sustain private rental housing, addressing issues of discrimination and privacy arising in the processes of selecting suitable tenants, and addressing problems of supply.

Crash Risk Assessment with Cooperative Systems

Crash risk is the statistical probability of a crash. Its assessment can be performed through ex post statistical analysis or in real-time with on-vehicle systems. These systems can be cooperative. Cooperative Vehicle-Infrastructure Systems (CVIS) are a developing research avenue in the automotive industry worldwide. This paper provides a survey of existing CVIS systems and methods to assess crash risk with them. It describes the advantages of cooperative systems versus non-cooperative systems. A sample of cooperative crash risk assessment systems is analysed to extract vulnerabilities according to three criteria: market penetration, over-reliance on GPS and broadcasting issues. It shows that cooperative risk assessment systems are still in their infancy and requires further development to provide their full benefits to road users.

Sex offenders in denial : a study into a group of forensic psychologists' attitudes regarding the corresponding impact upon risk assessment calculations and parole eligibility

A considerable proportion of convicted sex offenders maintain a stance of innocence and thus do not engage in recommended treatment programs. As a result, such offenders are often deemed to have outstanding criminogenic needs which may negatively impact upon risk assessment procedures and parole eligibility. This paper reports on a study that aimed to investigate a group of forensic psychologists’ attitudes regarding the impact of denial on risk assessment ratings as well as parole eligibility. Participants completed a confidential open-ended questionnaire. Analysis indicated that considerable variability exists among forensic psychologists in regards to their beliefs about the origins of denial and what impact such denial should have on post-prison release eligibility. In contrast, there was less disparity regarding beliefs about the percentage of innocent yet incarcerated sex offenders. This paper also reviews current understanding regarding the impact of denial on recidivism as well as upon general forensic assessments.

Developing risk assessment tools for fleet settings : where to from here?

The costs of work-related crashes In Australia and overseas, fleet safety or work-related road safety is an issue gaining increased attention from researchers, organisations, road safety practitioners and the general community. This attention is primarily in response to the substantial physical, emotional and economic costs associated with work-related road crashes. The increased risk factors and subsequent costs of work-related driving are also now well documented in the literature. For example, it is noteworthy that research has demonstrated that work-related drivers on average report a higher level of crash involvement compared to personal car drivers (Downs et al., 1999; Kweon and Kockelman, 2003) and in particular within Australia, road crashes are the most common form of work-related fatalities (Haworth et al., 2000).

V2V/V2I augmented maps : state-of-the-art and contribution to real-time crash risk assessment

A number of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) are currently being released on the market, providing safety functions to the drivers such as collision avoidance, adaptive cruise control or enhanced night-vision. These systems however are inherently limited by their sensory range: they cannot gather information from outside this range, also called their “perceptive horizon”. Cooperative systems are a developing research avenue that aims at providing extended safety and comfort functionalities by introducing vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) wireless communications to the road actors. This paper presents the problematic of cooperative systems, their advantages and contributions to road safety and exposes some limitations related to market penetration, sensors accuracy and communications scalability. It explains the issues of how to implement extended perception, a central contribution of cooperative systems. The initial steps of an evaluation of data fusion architectures for extended perception are exposed.

Incorporating parameter uncertainty into quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA)

Modern statistical models and computational methods can now incorporate uncertainty of the parameters used in Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessments (QMRA). Many QMRAs use Monte Carlo methods, but work from fixed estimates for means, variances and other parameters. We illustrate the ease of estimating all parameters contemporaneously with the risk assessment, incorporating all the parameter uncertainty arising from the experiments from which these parameters are estimated. A Bayesian approach is adopted, using Markov Chain Monte Carlo Gibbs sampling (MCMC) via the freely available software, WinBUGS. The method and its ease of implementation are illustrated by a case study that involves incorporating three disparate datasets into an MCMC framework. The probabilities of infection when the uncertainty associated with parameter estimation is incorporated into a QMRA are shown to be considerably more variable over various dose ranges than the analogous probabilities obtained when constants from the literature are simply ‘plugged’ in as is done in most QMRAs. Neglecting these sources of uncertainty may lead to erroneous decisions for public health and risk management.

Development and evaluation of the Clinician Suicide Risk Assessment Checklist

This paper describes the development and evaluation of a new instrument - the Clinician Suicide Risk Assessment Checklist (CSRAC). The instrument assesses the clinician's competency in three areas: clinical interviewing, assessment of specific suicide risk factors, and formulating a management plan. A draft checklist was constructed by integrating information from 1) literature review 2) expert clinician focus group and 3) consultation with experts. It was utilised in a simulated clinical scenario with clinician trainees and a trained actor in order to test for inter-rater agreement. Agreement was calculated and the checklist was re-drafted with the aim of maximising agreement. A second phase of simulated clinical scenarios was then conducted and inter-rater agreement was calculated for the revised checklist. In the first phase of the study, 18 of 35 items had inadequate inter-rater agreement (60%>), while in the second phase, using the revised version, only 3 of 39 items failed to achieve adequate inter-rater agreement. Further evidence of reliability and validity are required. Continued development of the CSRAC will be necessary before it can be utilised to assess the effectiveness of risk assessment training programs.

When non-significance maybe significant: lessons learned from a study into the development, implementation and evaluation of a risk assessment tool for fleet settings

Introduction This study reports on the development of a self report assessment tool to increase the efficacy of crash prediction within Australian Fleet settings Over last 20 years an array of measures have been produced (Driver anger scale, Driving Skill Inventory, Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire, Driver Attitude Questionnaire, Driver Stress Inventory, Safety Climate Questionnaire) While these tools are useful, research has demonstrated limited ability to accurately identify individuals most likely to be involved in a crash. Reasons cited include; - Crashes are relatively rare - Other competing factors may influence crash event - Ongoing questions regarding the validity of self report measures (common method variance etc) - Lack of contemporary issues relating to fleet driving performance

When non-significance may be significant : lessons learned from a study of the development, implementation and evaluation of a fleet risk assessment tool

This paper reports on the development and implementation of a self-report risk assessment tool that was developed in an attempt to increase the efficacy of crash prediction within Australian fleet settings. This study forms a part of a broader program of research into work related road safety and identification of driving risk. The first phase of the study involved a series of focus groups being conducted with 217 professional drivers which revealed that the following factors were proposed to influence driving performance: Fatigue, Knowledge of risk, Mood, Impatience and frustration, Speed limits, Experience, Other road users, Passengers, Health, and Culture. The second phase of the study involved piloting the newly developed 38 item Driving Risk Assessment Scale - Work Version (DRAS-WV) with 546 professional drivers. Factor analytic techniques identified a 9 factor solution that was comprised of speeding, aggression, time pressure, distraction, casualness, awareness, maintenance, fatigue and minor damage. Speeding and aggressive driving manoeuvres were identified to be the most frequent aberrant driving behaviours engaged in by the sample. However, a series of logistic regression analyses undertaken to determine the DRAS-WV scale’s ability to predict self-reported crashes revealed limited predictive efficacy e.g., 10% of crashes. This paper outlines proposed reasons for this limited predictive ability of the DRAS-WV as well as provides suggestions regarding the future of research that aims to develop methods to identify “at risk” drivers.

Planning for transit system reliability using productive performance and risk assessment

Urban transit system performance may be quantified and assessed using transit capacity and productive capacity for planning, design and operational management. Bunker (4) defines important productive performance measures of an individual transit service and transit line. Transit work (p-km) captures transit task performed over distance. Transit productiveness (p-km/h) captures transit work performed over time. This paper applies productive performance with risk assessment to quantify transit system reliability. Theory is developed to monetize transit segment reliability risk on the basis of demonstration Annual Reliability Event rates by transit facility type, segment productiveness, and unit-event severity. A comparative example of peak hour performance of a transit sub-system containing bus-on-street, busway, and rail components in Brisbane, Australia demonstrates through practical application the importance of valuing reliability. Comparison reveals the highest risk segments to be long, highly productive on street bus segments followed by busway (BRT) segments and then rail segments. A transit reliability risk reduction treatment example demonstrates that benefits can be significant and should be incorporated into project evaluation in addition to those of regular travel time savings, reduced emissions and safety improvements. Reliability can be used to identify high risk components of the transit system and draw comparisons between modes both in planning and operations settings, and value improvement scenarios in a project evaluation setting. The methodology can also be applied to inform daily transit system operational management.

Planning for transit system reliability using productive performance and risk assessment

Urban transit system performance may be quantified and assessed using transit capacity and productive capacity for planning, design and operational management. Bunker (4) defines important productive performance measures of an individual transit service and transit line. Transit work (p-km) captures transit task performed over distance. Transit productiveness (p-km/h) captures transit work performed over time. This paper applies productive performance with risk assessment to quantify transit system reliability. Theory is developed to monetize transit segment reliability risk on the basis of demonstration Annual Reliability Event rates by transit facility type, segment productiveness, and unit-event severity. A comparative example of peak hour performance of a transit sub-system containing bus-on-street, busway, and rail components in Brisbane, Australia demonstrates through practical application the importance of valuing reliability. Comparison reveals the highest risk segments to be long, highly productive on street bus segments followed by busway (BRT) segments and then rail segments. A transit reliability risk reduction treatment example demonstrates that benefits can be significant and should be incorporated into project evaluation in addition to those of regular travel time savings, reduced emissions and safety improvements. Reliability can be used to identify high risk components of the transit system and draw comparisons between modes both in planning and operations settings, and value improvement scenarios in a project evaluation setting. The methodology can also be applied to inform daily transit system operational management.

Pressure ulcers in the adult intensive care unit : a literature review of patient risk factors and risk assessment scales

Background: Critically ill patients are at high risk for pressure ulcer (PrU) development due to their high acuity and the invasive nature of the multiple interventions and therapies they receive. With reported incidence rates of PrU development in the adult critical care population as high as 56%, the identification of patients at high risk of PrU development is essential. This paper will explore the association between PrU development and risk factors. It will also explore PrU development and the use of risk assessment scales for critically ill patients in adult intensive care units. Method: A literature search from 2000 to 2012 using the CINHAL, Cochrane Library, EBSCOHost, Medline (via EBSCOHost), PubMed, ProQuest and Google Scholar databases was conducted. Key words used were: pressure ulcer/s; pressure sore/s; decubitus ulcer/s; bed sore/s; critical care; intensive care; critical illness; prevalence; incidence; prevention; management; risk factor; risk assessment scale. Results: Nineteen articles were included in this review; eight studies addressing PrU risk factors, eight studies addressing risk assessment scales and three studies overlapping both. Results from the studies reviewed identified 28 intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors which may lead to PrU development. Development of a risk factor prediction model in this patient population, although beneficial, appears problematic due to many issues such as diverse diagnoses and subsequent patient needs. Additionally, several risk assessment instruments have been developed for early screening of patients at higher risk of developing PrU in the ICU. No existing risk assessment scales are valid for identification high risk critically ill patient,with the majority of scales potentially over-predicting patients at risk for PrU development. Conclusion: Research studies to inform the risk factors for potential pressure ulcer development are inconsistent. Additionally, there is no consistent or clear evidence which demonstrates any scale to better or more effective than another when used to identify the patients at risk for PrU development. Furthermore robust research is needed to identify the risk factors and develop valid scales for measuring the risk of PrU development in ICU.