Kidsdata.org provides four measures related to housing affordability and resources:

• Fair Market Rent, by Unit Size: Estimated monthly cost of rent and tenant-paid utilities in standard-quality rental housing.
• Households with a High Housing Cost Burden: Estimated percentage of households that spend at least 30% of household income on housing costs.
• Children Living in Crowded Households: Estimated percentage of children ages 0-17 living in households with more than one person per room of the home.
• Children Living in Households with a Broadband-Connected Device: Estimated percentage of children ages 0-17 living in households with a desktop, laptop, tablet, smartphone, or other computer connected to high-speed internet service. This measure is provided for children in households overall, by age group, household English proficiency, income level, number of parents in the home, and race/ethnicity.

Housing plays a critical role in children's health and well being, beyond providing immediate shelter (1, 2). Children and families need affordable, stable, safe homes, adequate household resources, healthy neighborhoods, and access to quality opportunities, education, and services—all of these factors are intricately connected and influence life outcomes at all ages (1, 2, 3). However, housing system inequities persist, limiting access to safe, affordable housing and related resources for vulnerable groups, including low-income families, people of color, and those with disabilities (1, 3, 4).

The U.S. has set a public health objective of reducing the proportion of families whose housing costs represent more than 30% of total household income, the level at which housing is considered affordable (2). California housing is among the most costly in the nation, creating a significant challenge for many of the state's middle- and low-income families (4, 5). According to 2021 estimates, only 39% of low-income children in the U.S. and 27% of low-income children in California lived in affordable housing (6). Spending more than 30% of income on housing may mean forgoing food, health care, or other essential items, which is associated with an increased risk of disease and mental health problems (2, 6). Families with a high housing cost burden also may struggle to afford important resources such as broadband-connected devices, which are increasingly important for education, employment, access to health care, social connections, and other family needs (7). Statewide and nationally, this digital divide has a disproportionate impact on rural populations, people with disabilities, families of color, and those with less education (7).

In some cases, a lack of affordable housing can result in families living in crowded households (2). Residential crowding is linked to poor health outcomes, including infectious disease transmission, sleep problems, stress, and mental health difficulties (2). Even when families are not in crowded homes, unaffordable or unstable housing can disrupt children's health and diminish their opportunities for educational success due to increased chances of moving, changing schools, and interrupting instruction (1, 2, 8).

Fair market rents vary widely across California regions, from $770 (Modoc County) to $3,339 (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties) per month for a two-bedroom unit in fiscal year 2020.

In 2021, an estimated 42% of California households were housing cost-burdened, meaning they spent at least 30% of income on housing. This figure is down from 49% in 2010 but remains higher than national estimates which were 38% or lower over this period. Among counties with data in 2016-2020, estimates ranged from 28% (Inyo) to 47% (Los Angeles) of households experiencing a high housing cost burden.

The share of California children ages 0-17 living in crowded households (i.e., in homes with more than one person per room) was 27% in 2022, nearly twice the estimate for children nationwide. Similar to other housing and economic measures, percentages vary at the local level; for example, across California cities, school districts, and legislative districts with data in 2016-2020, the proportion of children experiencing household overcrowding ranged from 1 in 125 to nearly 2 in 3.

According to 2022 estimates, 96% of California children lived in households with a device connected to high-speed internet service, similar to 95% nationally. Children's internet access at home varies by region and demographic characteristics, with larger shares of children in English-proficient households, children living with two parents, children in higher-income families, and Asian American, multiracial, and white children having broadband-connected devices in the home compared with children in other groups.

Affordable, stable, safe housing and adequate household resources are linked directly to positive health, academic, and economic outcomes for children and families (1, 2). Affordable housing is in extremely short supply across the U.S., and California's housing costs are among the highest in the nation (3, 4). Certain groups are disproportionately affected by the state's housing crisis, particularly lower-income families, immigrants, young people, those with disabilities, and communities of color (2, 3). These disparities are the results of decades of discrimination in housing policies and practices (1, 2).

California has enacted a host of policy changes to improve the affordability and supply of housing, and both state and local governments have expanded funding to address high housing costs and homelessness (3). While these are significant steps forward, many more investments and efforts will be needed across sectors and levels of government to fully address the state's housing problems (2, 5). Policymakers can support housing solutions while prioritizing equity, mitigating family poverty, helping vulnerable families stay in their homes, and promoting family stability (2, 5, 6).

In addition to the challenges of obtaining affordable housing, many California families have limited resources at home, including access to high-speed internet, which is increasingly critical for education, employment, health care, social connections, and other important needs and services (7, 8). Disparities in access to digital resources persist across urban and rural areas, by income, education, race/ethnicity, and disability status (7). Public and private sectors can collaborate to close this digital divide and ensure that all children and families have equitable opportunities for success.

Policy and practice options that could improve housing affordability and resources, reduce inequities, and promote the well being of children and families include:

• Advancing the Statewide Housing Plan, which aims to ensure that every Californian has a safe, stable, and affordable home (3)
• Incentivizing and streamlining the development of new housing for low-income populations; as part of this, supporting equitable land use decisions and other regulation changes that lower costs for new housing construction, especially near transportation, jobs, schools, and other services (2, 3, 5, 9)
• Preserving and rehabilitating existing affordable rental properties, while strengthening protections for low-income renters against discrimination, displacement, and unjust evictions or rent increases (2, 3, 6, 10)
• Increasing federal funding for affordable housing solutions—such as making Housing Choice Vouchers available universally to low-income households—along with capital investments in affordable rentals (2, 3, 9, 11)
• Establishing a state funding source sufficient to address the housing needs of California's vulnerable populations, and providing local governments funding flexibility in pursuing strategic housing solutions (2, 5)
• Integrating equity across all housing efforts, and targeting housing system inequities and barriers that cause vulnerable groups to disproportionately experience housing problems (1, 2, 3, 7)
• Strengthening cross-sector collaboration and community capacity to better identify families and youth at risk of homelessness and intervene early with coordinated programs that offer case management and support services, housing subsidies or cash assistance, and eviction prevention services (1, 2, 3, 11)
• Expanding local, regional, state, and federal efforts to ensure high-speed internet is accessible and affordable to all households; for example, raising awareness about, and evaluating the adequacy of, existing public programs and subsidies, while removing barriers to broadband expansion and maximizing public-private initiatives (7, 8)
• Promoting equitable, linguistically appropriate, community-based services that increase access to broadband-connected devices and digital literacy education (7, 8)