This dissertation examines the allocation of funds over the entire tenure of the HOPE VI, a public housing competitive grant, to determine if the program adhered to its program goals. This study focuses on the application and selection phases of HOPE VI. Moreover, this study looks to the scholarship on redistributive politics to gain an understanding of any deviations from projected program results. Within the context of an institutional policy analysis approach, this dissertation explores the consequences of using competitive grants as a policy tool for the HOPE VI program and postulates on its effects on program outcomes. An empirical analysis of the grant applicants and grant recipients finds that overall, large developments had a better rate in receiving grants and received more grants on their initial attempt. However, small public housing developments, which were not the focus of the HOPE VI program, submitted four times as many applications with a success rate of fifty-two percent. Overtime, cities with smaller populations are awarded more grants.