Reports and Studies

This paper examines the rationale for mixed-income approaches to affordable housing development, as well as the record of such developments in meeting their objectives, from the perspective of housing developers and those responsible for designing housing programs and policies. The drivers of the recent, renewed emphasis on a mixed-income housing projects are also examined and analyzed. The potential benefits this mixed-income approaches are summarized based on existing literature and interviews with key informants. Overall, this paper finds mixed-income approaches can have an important role in getting additional affordable units built, ensuring high-quality housing, and deconcentrating poverty. However, mixed-income housing is not a silver bullet to overcoming the difficult challenges faced by families seeking to escape from poverty or the realities of housing markets. Because mixed-income developments are complex, present unique risks, and often house fewer needy families than other types of development, mixed-income approaches must carefully consider the local housing market, the population to be served, financing options, the scale of the project, and the community context. This paper concludes by discussing the implications of these findings and suggests guiding questions for developers and policy makers considering mixed-income projects and policies. Complete info »

Congress included a special $5 million, mixed-income demonstration program in Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation's FY 2003 appropriation. The purpose of the set-aside was to explore approaches for serving households with incomes less than 30 percent of the area median ("extremely low income" or "ELI" households) in mixed-income communities. This paper shares highlights of the 21 grant applications (17 of which have been selected for funding) and how the special congressional funding made a distinct difference in the projects. Complete info »

Metropolitan Atlanta is experiencing a foreclosure boom as the number of failed mortgages more than doubled in less than five years, between 2000 and 2005. These foreclosures impose significant costs not only on borrowers and lenders, but also on municipal governments, neighboring homeowners and others with a financial interest in nearby properties. As a result, foreclosure avoidance strategies must involve not only federal, state and local public agencies, but also responsible mortgage industry officials, consumer groups, and community-based, not-for profit organizations. This report was commissioned by Doug Dylla at NeighborWorks America to help build awareness of foreclosure problems and craft a comprehensive foreclosure-avoidance strategy for metropolitan Atlanta. The work presented here serves as a companion to the Foreclosure Prevention Forum cosponsored by NeighborWorks America and the Atlanta Federal Reserve on May 23, 2005. The forum brought together more than 150 leaders from the mortgage industry, state and local government, the advocacy community, and academic and policy researchers. These participants generated a variety of collaborative approaches to address issues related to mortgage failures and foreclosures in the Atlanta region.

The report was written and researched by Mark Duda and William Apgar. It expands on research presented by Duda at the forum and is intended to characterize the current situation with respect to mortgage failures in metropolitan Atlanta, as well as previous research completed by the authors on foreclosure avoidance in Chicago and Los Angeles. The foreclosure data used in this report were generously provided by EquiSystems, LLC, producer of the Atlanta Foreclosure Report. Complete info »

The recent rise in nonprime mortgage foreclosures has opened a new and costly chapter in many of the nation's most distressed urban neighborhoods. Particularly problematic is the fact that today's foreclosures impose significant costs not only on borrowers and lenders, but also on municipal governments, neighboring homeowners and others with a financial interest in nearby properties. While there is an extensive literature on the impact that delinquency, default, and foreclosure have on lenders, borrowers, and other entities that are direct parties to the mortgage transaction in question, the costs that these mortgage failures impose on municipalities and other third parties are far less well understood. This is due to two factors. First, municipal and other third party costs are difficult to identify, and therefore often go undetected. Second, even where identified, the activities that generate costs often blend in with other governmental functions, or are otherwise difficult to quantify, reinforcing the tendency for them to remain invisible.

This study attempts to fill that void. Using the City of Chicago as a case in point, this study presents a conceptual framework that makes explicit the various costs of foreclosure, especially as they relate to local governments and courts. By carefully reviewing the foreclosure process as it plays out in Chicago, the paper isolates 26 separate costs incurred for the provision of 'foreclosure related services.' These costs reflect actions undertaken by 15 separate governmental units that are part of the overall municipal infrastructure underlying the foreclosure process. While in some cases these municipal activities are limited to simple and relatively inexpensive ministerial duties of agencies like the Recorder of Deeds, in more complex foreclosure scenarios these municipal costs can reach tens of thousands of dollars. In extreme cases, the concentrated foreclosures can put downward pressure on area property values and indirectly rob area homeowners of hundreds of thousands of dollars of home equity. Complete info »

As one NeighborWorks executive director quipped, "New rural America? What's wrong with the old rural America?"

We all like the old rural America. But as the Kellogg Foundation's recent series, Perceptions of Rural America, amply illustrates, our perceptions are outdated. All too often we allow fond memories and impressions passed down for generations to cloud our ability to see not only what is truly happening in rural America but what can happen.

In a very real sense this symposium was not about "out with the old and in with the new" but rather "here is a clarion call to recognize and encourage innovation so that what we all truly value in rural America can be preserved." Over 150 participants from 35 states, the District of Colombia, Indian Country and Puerto Rico, all engaged their colleagues and themselves in a series of lively discussions about the new rural America on December 10 in San Francisco.

The true value of any Symposium may rest not so much in the degree to which participants are stimulated in the moment, but the degree to which the content of the day adds value to the community development field over time. In that spirit, we offer this synopsis of the day. We are deliberately not trying to capture every stray thought but, rather, highlight those elements that are most likely to draw you into further inquiry. Complete info »

A series of articles from Fall 2003 NeighborWorks Bright Ideas including articles from Comptroller of the Currency, John D. Hawke, Jr. and Kendall McDaniel, an economist with the Center for the Study of Rural America, a unit of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Complete info »

Real estate owned (REO) housing resulting from the recent foreclosure crisis threatens to destabilize low- and moderate-income neighborhoods across the country. Nonprofit organiza-tions seeking to redevelop these properties into affordable housing face weak market condi-tions and operate with limited resources and capacity. This study presents a framework through which nonprofits can analyze REO redevelopment opportunities for 1- to 4-unit properties within their communities. The paper specifies the conditions necessary for REO redevelopment and discusses how local market conditions, the geographic distribution and the physical characteristics of REOs, their ownership and legal status, internal organizational capacity, and public policies each affect nonprofit efforts to acquire, rehabilitate, sell and rent REO properties. Finally, this paper considers the unique difficulties of the current situation relative to past vacant-housing scenarios and concludes that many nonprofits may wish to pursue alternative, non-redevelopment strategies. Complete info »

In spite of a diminishing supply of public resources, many nonprofit housing developers are expanding their roles and their portfolios to address an increasing need for decent affordable housing. But as nonprofit housing organizations mature, the traditional project-by-project funding system fails to support their broader development goals. This paper stresses the urgent need for equity, or "organizational capital," to help nonprofit housing organizations build their capacity and their impact. Unlike conventional financing, organizational capital is underwritten against a borrower's balance sheet, or its organizational ability to repay. Whereas project-based loans are tied to one particular project, organizational loans can be a source of liquidity whenever an organization needs it: on the front end of a deal, for general business operations or during periods of organizational expansion. Despite its many advantages, there is an extremely limited supply of organizational capital in nonprofit affordable housing. This research outlines the practical challenges to organizational investing and uncovers the underlying barriers that have prevented a nonprofit organizational capital market from emerging. These findings lead us to explore nonprofit housing organizations in a "closed system" of standardized reporting and rational decision-making. The study concludes that while a new nonprofit reporting system would greatly encourage organizational investing in housing, the private markets alone will not bring organizational lending to scale. The final sections of the paper discuss the public policy implications of a closed nonprofit capital system and highlight some innovative approaches taken by lenders to overcome the obstacles of organizational investing and advance a new model of lending in nonprofit affordable housing. Complete info »

The NeighborWorks Campaign for Home Ownership 2002, in creating a framework for expanding NeighborWorks organizations' work with first-time homeowners, has also had the positive outcome of pooling the collective talent and creativity within the network. The campaign has given dedicated people who are the well-spring of local organizations' talent a chance to come together, share their wisdom and be inspired by their colleagues' ideas.

Winning Strategies is a natural response to the enthusiasm and collective thought expressed through the campaign. Documenting these strategies as case studies has been an important piece of the campaign's work, in part because these written reports can disperse accounts of successful models to distant locales and a range of audiences. The objectives in publishing Winning Strategies are:

• To describe and record in a straightforward way NeighborWorks organizations' innovative approaches to helping families overcome barriers to home ownership;
• To illustrate how NeighborWorks organizations are implementing the comprehensive approach to home ownership called Full-Cycle LendingSM, itself formalized under the aegis of the campaign; and
• To offer NeighborWorks organizations and others interested in home-ownership promotion a way to learn from and perhaps replicate existing work in the field.

Complete info »

In the midst of all the foreclosures sweeping the country, and the turmoil on Wall Street, nonprofit housing organizations are quietly going about the work of stabilizing communities hard hit by the crisis. Most have had frontline responsibility for counseling families threatened with foreclosure. With their assistance tens of thousands of families have restructured their budgets, negotiated with servicers to modify their loans, and saved their homes. Other families, too far along in the foreclosure process to stop it from happening, have received help transitioning to new housing arrangements.

While the work with distressed homeowners must continue, nonprofits are feeling increased pressure to deal with the growing foreclosed housing stock. These units are causing incalculable harm to neighborhoods, and any hope of housing recovery must ensure that these units are swiftly put back into productive use or demolished. This collection of 14 case studies outlines strategies that nonprofit organizations across the country are using to begin the process of repairing damaged communities.

The stakes are enormous. Vacant housing invites vandalism, and becomes a hub for gangs and crime. Virtually all case study subjects reported that, within weeks of housing becoming vacant, thieves break into the units and strip them of their valuable copper plumbing and wiring, heedless of any destruction they leave in their wake. In Phoenix a half-finished, abandoned subdivision was used as an informal "Home Depot" as other homeowners broke in and helped themselves to fixtures and appliances. In Cleveland, vandals remove not just the copper but the aluminum siding from vacant houses. In photos these houses have a desolate, post-disaster look, like the aftermath of a hurricane. When units get demolished the vacant lots soon sprout grass and trash, adding to the community's forlorn appearance.

Vacant, deteriorated units place a downward pressure on housing values that puts nearby neighbors in a bind. In order to sell their units they will have to reduce the price, as no one will pay top dollar to live in a blighted neighborhood. Yet their ability to refinance into a more affordable mortgage may be compromised by the drop in property values; in some cases this leads to additional foreclosures and the downward cycle continues.

Intervening in these troubled neighborhoods is challenging. In some markets housing prices are still falling, making it hard to determine the value of the units. Bank asset managers and servicers often lack detailed knowledge of the markets, or even of the units they have in their own inventory. This leads them to overvalue their properties and hold out for more than they are worth, delaying the process of acquiring and renovating them for resale to new homebuyers. Finally, the complex ownership structure of mortgages which were rolled into collateralized debt obligations and other investment vehicles makes it very difficult to establish who owns properties and who has authority to negotiate their sale.08 Complete info »