Call The Question: Will the Greater Washington Region Collaborate and Invest to Solve Its Affordable Housing Shortage?

A group of public and private sector stakeholders concerned about housing affordability in the Greater Washington region began to meet in June 2014 to discuss how to solve the shortage of affordable housing. These stakeholders, the Greater Washington Housing Leaders Group (GWHLG), seek to elevate and broaden the housing affordability conversation among public-sector, business and civic leaders, as well as residents around the region, so that everyone understands the need to address this crisis before it has negative impacts on both the local economy and our quality of life. This conversation must address the need for housing affordable to residents at all income levels in communities across the region in order for employers to have access to employees and for workers to be able to work in close proximity to their jobs. Low-income housing needs data as referenced in this publication refers to households making less than 80 percent of the area median income (area median income for the Greater Washington region is approximately $109,000 in 2015). These families include people working as teachers, police, fire personnel, local government, secretarial, construction, retail, health, hospitality, and entry level employees

A Call for Mission-based Investing by America's Private Foundations

Among the options that Cohen recommends for foundation investments are program-related investments, recoverable grants, working capital loans, and market-rate deposits. He also provides a plan for transitioning from a traditional portfolio to mission-based investments

A New Ethic of Transparency in Charities: The Shared Goal of Journalists and State Regulators

Transparency for charities is talked about as a core value of the nonprofit sector, but it is a value articulated more often than practiced. Few aspects of the 501(c) tax status are as stridently defended by nonprofits as the provisions that allow nonprofits to keep much of their core information secret from the public, particularly donors, and other information relatively obscure such as investments. In this author’s experience with organizations ostensibly devoted to disclosure, the most virulent pushback came from actually advocating not for disclosure in general terms, but disclosure as applied to specific nonprofit entities, especially when a call for donor disclosure in the operations of the 501(c)(3) foundation arms of public universities unleashed a torrent of criticism that such transparency would work only to the benefit of political reactionaries bent on destroying the nonprofit sector. Confronting a difficult wall of secrecy shielding most nonprofits, regulators must be hard pressed to capture information in anything close to “real time” that can be used to protect taxpayers, donors to nonprofits, and the intended beneficiaries of nonprofits. The case that is suggested in this paper is that state regulators have an opportunity of working with traditional print and online media to promote transparency and to use the tools of journalism to enhance the ability of government to elevate the recognition of nonprofits that are pushing the boundaries of societally productive transparency and uncovering information that nonprofit malefactors are trying to keep hidden from regulators and the public at large

Monetary benefits of preventing childhood lead poisoning with lead-safe window replacement

Previous estimates of childhood lead poisoning prevention benefits have quantified the present value of some health benefits, but not the costs of lead paint hazard control or the benefits associated with housing and energy markets. Because older housing with lead paint constitutes the main exposure source today in the U.S., we quantify health benefits, costs, market value benefits, energy savings, and net economic benefits of lead-safe window replacement (which includes paint stabilization and other measures). The benefit per resident child from improved lifetime earnings alone is $21,195 in pre-1940 housing and$8,685 in 1940-59 housing (in 2005 dollars). Annual energy savings are $130 to$486 per housing unit, with or without young resident children, with an associated increase in housing market value of $5,900 to$14,300 per housing unit, depending on home size and number of windows replaced. Net benefits are $4,490 to$5,629 for each housing unit built before 1940, and $491 to$1,629 for each unit built from 1940-1959, depending on home size and number of windows replaced. Lead-safe window replacement in all pre-1960 U.S. housing would yield net benefits of at least $67 billion, which does not include many other benefits. These other benefits, which are shown in this paper, include avoided Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, other medical costs of childhood lead exposure, avoided special education, and reduced crime and juvenile delinquency in later life. In addition, such a window replacement effort would reduce peak demand for electricity, carbon emissions from power plants, and associated long-term costs of climate change.Lead Poisoning, IQ, Energy Efficiency, Cost Benefit Analysis, Housing, Climate Change

The economic crisis and community development finance: an industry assessment

For thirty years, the community development finance industry—banks, credit unions, loan funds, community development corporations, venture funds, microfinance institutions—has quietly provided responsible, well-designed and well priced credit to lower-income people and communities. These entities have provided this credit with the support of the federal government, through the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, the Low Income Housing and New Markets Tax Credits, the Small Business Association, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and various housing and facilities development programs. The industry has also been supported in its efforts by mainstream institutions such as banks and insurance companies, most frequently motivated by the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) or by concern that CRA-like obligations would be imposed. Philanthropic foundations and supporters and state and local governments have also played their parts. The result: a community development finance industry that has survived and even prospered during recessions and political downdrafts. But the field, and the communities, businesses, and individuals it serves, are hurting now, and fearing bigger hurt. This paper examines this situation and focuses attention on what needs to be done.

A league of their own: demographics, motivations and patterns of use of 1,955 male adult non-medical anabolic steroid users in the United States

Background: Rule violations among elite-level sports competitors and tragedies among adolescents have largely defined the issue of non-medical anabolic-androgenic steroid (NMAAS) use for the public and policy makers. However, the predominant and oft-ignored segment of the NMAAS community exists in the general population that is neither participating in competitive sports nor adolescent. A clearer profile of NMAAS users within the general population is an initial step in developing a full understanding of NMAAS use and devising appropriate policy and interventions. This survey sought to provide a more comprehensive profile of NMAAS users by accessing a large sample of user respondents from around the United States. Methods: U.S.-based male NMAAS users (n = 1955) were recruited from various Internet websites dedicated to resistance training activities and use of ergogenic substances, mass emails, and print media to participate in a 291-item web-based survey. The Internet was utilized to provide a large and geographically diverse sample with the greatest degree of anonymity to facilitate participation. Results: The majority of respondents did not initiate AAS use during adolescence and their NMAAS use was not motivated by athletics. The typical user was a Caucasian, highly-educated, gainfully employed professional approximately 30 years of age, who was earning an above-average income, was not active in organized sports, and whose use was motivated by increases in skeletal muscle mass, strength, and physical attractiveness. These findings question commonly held views of the typical NMAAS user and the associated underlying motivations. Conclusion: The focus on cheating athletes and at risk youth has led to ineffective policy as it relates to the predominant group of NMAAS users. Effective policy, prevention or intervention should address the target population(s) and their reasons for use while utilizing their desire for responsible use and education

Graphic Interlude: Creating the Enemy

This graphic interlude features pictures illustrating this issue’s topic: creating the enemy.Cet interlude graphique est composé d’images qui illustrent le thème de ce numéro : la mer comme symbole, métaphore et unité d’analyse

Monetary benefits of preventing childhood lead poisoning with lead-safe window replacement

Previous estimates of childhood lead poisoning prevention benefits have quantified the present value of some health benefits, but not the costs of lead paint hazard control or the benefits associated with housing and energy markets. Because older housing with lead paint constitutes the main exposure source today in the U.S., we quantify health benefits, costs, market value benefits, energy savings, and net economic benefits of lead-safe window replacement (which includes paint stabilization and other measures). The benefit per resident child from improved lifetime earnings alone is $21,195 in pre-1940 housing and$8,685 in 1940-59 housing (in 2005 dollars). Annual energy savings are $130 to$486 per housing unit, with or without young resident children, with an associated increase in housing market value of $5,900 to$14,300 per housing unit, depending on home size and number of windows replaced. Net benefits are $4,490 to$5,629 for each housing unit built before 1940, and $491 to$1,629 for each unit built from 1940-1959, depending on home size and number of windows replaced. Lead-safe window replacement in all pre-1960 U.S. housing would yield net benefits of at least $67 billion, which does not include many other benefits. These other benefits, which are shown in this paper, include avoided Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, other medical costs of childhood lead exposure, avoided special education, and reduced crime and juvenile delinquency in later life. In addition, such a window replacement effort would reduce peak demand for electricity, carbon emissions from power plants, and associated long-term costs of climate change

Theories of power in interprofessional research : developing the field

This guest editorial introduces a special issue on theories of power in interprofessional research. Building on the intentions of the late Professor Scott Reeves, Distinguished Editor of this Journal, the identification that the notions of power have been visible yet relatively inconsistent in interprofessional research warranted a focused attempt to draw together scholarship from across the globe. Power runs throughout and often dictates interprofessional dynamics yet the visibility of theoretical engagement with the subject has not reflected this. We would therefore like to invite submissions which attempt to address the issue of power in interprofessional contexts, utilizing theory to explore empirical phenomena, case studies, conceptual thought or evidence review. The piece below provides a brief, speculative overview of theoretical contributions which focus on power and how they may be used to inform interprofessional research. Including examples of previous application of theory, possible approaches to framing and insight into conflictual, consensual and constitutive modes of thought the aim here is to suggest ways in which potential contributors might frame their submissions. Given that coherent inteprofessional engagement is influenced by power systems and struggles, the need to bring together work which attempts to understand and respond to this has become a pressing contemporary concern