Individual and Neighborhood Impacts of Neighborhood Reinvestment's Homeownership Pilot Program

The benefits of owning versus renting a home have been extolled by policy makers for many years, and there is substantial recent research to support those views. Yet the research supporting these claims largely has been conducted on general samples of homeowners. Low- and moderate-income homeowners may have a different experience due to difficulties in keeping up with housing-related payments or a difference in the quality of the homes being purchased. A major objective of this report is to assess the impacts of home ownership on a sample of low- and moderate-income homebuyers.We also know very little about the experience of lower-income homebuyers after they purchase their homes. To what extent do low-income homebuyers experience unexpected costs associated with maintenance or repairs? What proportion of low-income buyers take out home equity loans and what do they use the funds for? What proportion of low-income homebuyers default on their loans? What do buyers feel are the greatest advantages and challenges to owning a home? Answers to these questions may provide insight into how prospective lower-income homebuyers can be better prepared for home ownership.The research described in this report involved a sample of persons who graduated from home-ownership classes taught by eight NeighborWorks organizations that participated in the Neighborhood Reinvestment Homeownership Pilot program. Neighborhood Reinvestment has encouraged its affiliated NeighborWorks organizations to offer services designed to increase access to home ownership among low- and moderate-income families. Building on Neighborhood Reinvestment's Campaign for Home Ownership, the Homeownership Pilot program was designed to assist low- and moderate-income households to obtain home ownership by providing them with counseling, down-payment assistance and affordable loans.This report is the third of three reports on the implementation, outcomes and impacts of the Homeownership Pilot program. The first report, entitled An Assessment of Neighborhood Reinvestment's Homeownership Pilot Program: A Preliminary Report (2000), covered the early implementation of the Pilot. The second report, entitled Supporting the American Dream of Home Ownership: An Assessment of Neighborhood Reinvestment's Homeownership Pilot Program (2002), covers the outcomes of the Homeownership Pilot, including the number of persons counseled and new homebuyers assisted. This final report was designed to:1. Assess the proportion of customers trained by NeighborWorks organizations who go on to buy homes, as well as the factors that predict who among those graduating from the homeownership training go on to buy homes and who do not.2. Assess both the social and financial impacts of buying a home on the program participants.3. Assess the postpurchase experience of low-income homebuyers.4. Assess the loan repayment experience of a sample of the affordable loans held by Neighborhood Housing Services of America (NHSA).5. Assess changes in the Pilot program target areas before, during and after the Pilot program was in effect

Supporting the American Dream of Homeownership: An Assessment of Neighborhood Reinvestment's Home Ownership Pilot Program

Based on recommendations from a group of NeighborWorks organization (NWO) directors, Neighborhood Reinvestment initiated the Campaign for Home Ownership in 1993. That campaign provided NWOs with both funding and technical assistance to expand homeownership opportunities in the communities they serve. Based on the experiences of organizations involved with that campaign, Neighborhood Reinvestment staff distilled a model homeownership assistance strategy they call Full-Cycle Lending. This model includes six components: partnership building, pre-purchase home-buyer education, flexible loan products, property services, post-purchase counseling and neighborhood impact. Based on the success of this first five-year Campaign, Neighborhood Reinvestment supported a second five-year campaign called the Campaign for Home Ownership 2002.In 1998 Congress authorized $25 million for a NeighborWorks Home Ownership Pilot program designed to leverage additional local support and test new strategies for assisting first-time home buyers. In less than four months, the Neighborhood Reinvestment Home Ownership Campaign staff developed and implemented specific program guidelines for the distribution of funds to local NWOs. These guidelines allowed NWOs great flexibility in the use of Pilot funds including using the funds for upgrading computers, hiring staff, developing marketing plans and programs, capitalizing loan funds, providing down payment assistance as well as other uses.Campaign staff developed guidelines for three funding categories, A, B, and C, designed to respond to the different needs of NWOs. Category A grants (up to$500,000) were to assist NWOs that were already assisting 30 or more home buyers a year increase the number of home buyers assisted. Category B grants (up to $500,000) were to assist NWOs that were already assisting a large number of new home buyers enhance the positive impacts of home ownership on their target areas by undertaking other neighborhood improvement activities as well as increasing the number of home buyers assisted. Category C grants (up to$50,000) were to assist NWOs that were assisting a relatively low number of new home buyers build their capacities to do so. A total of 35 Category A grants were made, nine Category B grants and 40 Category C grants.To assist Campaign and Pilot sites in achieving their goals, Neighborhood Reinvestment provides several types of technical assistance. The semi-annual Neighborhood Reinvestment Training Institute offers a variety of courses on developing homeownership promotion programs and home-owner education methods. Neighborhood Reinvestment has also developed an extensive array of marketing materials that can be used by Campaign and Pilot organizations. Finally, Neighborhood Reinvestment Campaign and field staff assist participating organizations with special challenges as they arise.This report is the second of three reports evaluating the outcomes, implementation process and impacts of the Pilot. The outcome evaluation was designed to document the results of the Pilot including the number of persons trained and/or counseled, the number of new home owners assisted, and the value of housing units purchased, built or rehabilitated with the assistance of the Pilot organizations. This evaluation is based on information provided to Neighborhood Reinvestment by participating NWOs. The process evaluation was designed to document and evaluate the efforts of Neighborhood Reinvestment and participating NWOs in planning and implementing the Pilot programs. This part of the evaluation is based on interviews conducted in two rounds of site visits to eight Category A and B Pilot programs -- once in the fall of 1999 and once in the spring and summer of 2001. Finally, the impact evaluation was designed to assess the influence of the Pilot on the participating NWOs and their clients. The evaluation is based on interviews with NWO staff and focus groups of new home owners assisted in the eight sites visited

Work Requirements in Public Housing: Impacts on Tenant Employment and Evictions

In recent years, many have debated adopting work requirements in the public housing program, and a limited number of public housing agencies (PHA) have implemented these policies through the flexibility provided by the Moving to Work program. One such agency—the Charlotte Housing Authority (CHA)—has implemented a work requirement across five (of 15) public housing developments that mandates households to work 15 hr weekly or face sanctions. This article evaluates this policy and presents the first empirical analysis on the outcomes of a work requirement on employment and evictions. We find that, following work requirement enforcement, the percentage of impacted households paying minimum rent (a proxy for nonemployment) decreased versus a comparison group. Analysis of additional data on both employment and hours worked indicates similar results regarding employment gains, but no increase in average hours worked. We find no evidence that work requirement sanctions increased evictions, and very modest evidence that enforcement increased the rate of positive move-outs such as moves to unsubsidized housing

Individual Development Accounts and Post-Secondary Education: Evidence From a Randomized Experiment

This paper presents evidence from a randomized field experiment testing the impact of a 3-year matched savings program on educational outcomes 10 years later. We examine the effect of an Individual Development Account (IDA) program on educational enrollment, degree completion, and increased education level. The IDA program, which ran from 1998 to 2003 in Tulsa, Oklahoma, provided low-income households with financial education and matching funds for qualified savings withdrawals, including a 1:1 match for educational uses. We find a significant impact on education enrollment and positive, but non-significant impacts on degree completion and increase in level of education. We also examine the interaction between gender and treatment assignment and find that the IDA had a strong positive effect on increased educational attainment for males, but not for females

Long-Term Follow-Up of Individual Development Accounts: Evidence From the ADD Experiment

Long-Term Follow-Up of Individual Development Accounts: Evidence From the ADD Experimen

Homeownership as Public Policy: Trends in North Carolina and Beyond

The importance of homeownership is deeply embedded in our society. Historians, writers, and the average person attribute intrinsic value to owning one's home. Walt Whitman, for example, wrote "A man is not whole and complete. ..unless he owns a house." Society also associates more tangible social and economic benefits with ownership such as enhanced pride in the community and tax advantages. These benefits, however, elude many low- and moderate- income households because they lack the financial resources to purchase a home. Public officials also herald the virtues of homeownership and have developed policies to increase homeownership for low - and moderate-income households. Government assistance for homeownership at the federal level appeared decades ago with the creation of the Federal Housing Administration, and more recently, state and local governments have taken an active role in the promotion of homeownership. Although homeownership policies and programs involve investment of public dollars, strong political support for these policies exists across communities and among levels of government. As a result, there are many publicly-sponsored homeownership programs operating in communities throughout the country. In the rush to jump on the homeownership bandwagon, however, the potential pitfalls of homeownership programs are often overlooked by their sponsors. In addition, program planning may be minimal and evaluation of programs may be completely absent from the process. This article examines the popularity of homeownership and its desirability as a policy outcome in our society. We begin by discussing the homeownership ideology and ownership trends in the United States. Within this discussion, we present the advantages and disadvantages of homeownership for both the individual and society. We then narrow our discussion to homeownership and related policies and programs in North Carolina. We consider the patterns and trends of homeownership, analyze the affordability of ownership for lower-income households, discuss the intergovernmental aspect of homeownership efforts, and consider some of the public and private strategies used to increase homeownership in the State. Next, we highlight homeownership efforts in two North Carolina cities: Charlotte and Durham. Finally, we offer some concluding remarks and recommendations on the development of homeownership policies and programs in local communities

Effects of an Individual Development Account Program on Retirement Saving: Follow-Up Evidence From a Randomized Experiment

Using data from a randomized experiment that ran from 1998 to 2003 in Tulsa, Oklahoma, we examine the 10-year follow-up effects on retirement saving of an Individual Development Account (IDA) program. The IDA program included financial education, encouragement to save, and matching funds for several qualified uses of the savings, including contributions to retirement accounts. The results indicate that, as of 2009, 6 years after the program ended, the IDA program had no impact on the propensity to hold a retirement account, the account balance, or the sufficiency of retirement balances to meet retirement expenses

First-time homebuying: attitudes and behaviors of low-income renters through the financial crisis

We use psychological theory to investigate how attitudes toward homebuying relate to first-time home purchases over the past decade. Homeownership rates in the US have dropped to 20-year lows, but whether views toward homebuying shifted due to the financial crisis is not known because studies have not compared attitudes for the same respondents pre- and post-crisis. We address this gap with 2004–2014 panel data from low-income renters. We find that a negative shift in homebuying attitudes is associated with a decline in first-time home purchases. Older renters aged more than 35 years at baseline report the greatest declines in homebuying intentions. Younger renters aged 18–34 also report diminished homebuying intentions, yet express highest overall levels of homebuying intentions pre- and post-crisis. Blacks report greater homebuying intentions although their odds of home purchase are 29 per cent lower than whites. Homebuying norms and favorability are associated with homebuying intentions but not with actual purchases, while perceived control over homebuying influences both outcomes

Contemporary Neighborhood Planning: A Critique Of Two Operating Programs

Contemporary neighborhood planning has developed, in part, as a reaction to the failures of traditional comprehensive planning. Critics of comprehensive planning suggest that it has favored business interests, has accomplished few tangible results, has excluded citizens from meaningful participation, has ignored the needs of local areas, and has failed to achieve a more equal distribution of public goods (Chapin, 1967; Friedman, 1971; Perin, 1967). In response to these criticisms, as well as to federal pressure for citizen participation, neighborhood based planning programs have been established in a number of cities throughout the country. These neighborhood level programs are meant to supplement comprehensive planning programs, and differ from them in a number of ways. First, these programs are typically problem oriented rather than comprehensive in nature. Second, they focus on geographic subareas rather than the city as a functional whole. Third, they allow considerable input from the citizenry. Last, they typically adopt a short term rather than a long term perspective. (Center for Governmental Studies, 1976; Rafter, I98O; Zuccotti, 1974.

Coordinating Housing and Social Services: The New Imperative

Historically, liberals and conservatives have disagreed over the causes of poverty. Recently, however, their attitudes toward existing public programs to assist the poor have converged. Liberals and conservatives alike have criticized these programs for failing to move people out of poverty. More specifically, public housing and other programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) have been faulted for having built-in incentives that discourage recipients from increasing their incomes. The lack of coordination among the various social assistance programs has also been criticized. A person may receive job training, for example, but have to drop out because child care is unavailable. Overall, the current array of housing and social services has not effectively assisted poor families in attaining self-sufficiency. An important goal of housing and social programs should be to help individuals and families achieve self-sufficiency. This notion is reflected in recent housing and social service legislation, including the Family Support Act of 1988 and the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990. These acts seek to restructure housing and social services to provide incentives and support for self-sufficiency, rather than simply maintaining recipients at a minimum standard of living