Assets for Independence Act Evaluation:
Second Annual Site Review Report
December 16, 2002

4.	YWCA Of Greater Pittsburgh
	4.1	Project Design And Background
	4.2	Project Administration
	4.3	Participant Recruitment And Screening
	4.4	Financial Education And Training
	4.5	Case Management And Support Services
	4.6	Future Plans
	4.7	Lessons Learned

 

This chapter describes the AFIA project operated by the YWCA of Greater Pittsburgh, located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. This IDA project operates throughout the city of Pittsburgh, targeting those served by the city's housing authority, specifically public housing residents and holders of Section 8 housing vouchers.

According to the 2000 Census, the population of Pittsburgh's central city was 334,600. In 1999, according to the Census Bureau, the poverty rate in the central city was 20 percent. The median family income in 1999 was $38,800. Approximately 48 percent of families with children were headed by a single parent in 2000. Whites make up the majority of the population, accounting for 67 percent of the central city's population. Blacks comprise 27 percent, and Hispanics and members of other races, 6 percent.[25] Approximately 19 percent of adults over age 25 did not finish high school.

With respect to housing, approximately 12 percent of the central city's housing units were vacant, according to the 2000 Census. Housing is inexpensive compared to other many metropolitan areas: the median value of owner-occupied housing was $57,800.

Part of the rationale for the AFIA grant application was to tap the base of potential homeowners served by the public housing authority. Although exact figures are not given, the AFIA grant proposal notes that there are many working people residing in Pittsburgh's public housing, making them good candidates for homeownership. The AFIA proposal notes that earned income is the second most common source of income, after social security and before public assistance. There are racial disparities in these figures. Relatively more blacks than whites have incomes below the national median (53 percent of blacks compared to 28 percent of whites), and homeownership rates are lower for blacks than whites. The vast majority of public housing residents are black.

4.1 Project Design And Background

The key features of this IDA project are:

• A total 4:1 match rate, with a maximum of $1,000 in deposits and a maximum match of $4,000 (including equal federal and nonfederal matches).
• Homeownership is the only authorized use. All mortgage applications must be made with Dollar Bank, the financial partner
• Project requirements consist of a Letter of Agreement, a minimum monthly deposit of $40, completion of an 8-hour homeownership course, and participation (if necessary) in a credit counseling program.
• The target population consists of Section 8 tenants and residents of City of Pittsburgh public housing.
• The project was designed to make use of partners' existing programmatic and staff resources rather than to "reinvent the wheel" by developing project elements specifically for the IDA project.

A total of 140 IDA accounts are funded by the AFI grant. At the time of our second site visit in May 2002, 38 accounts were open and 14 other participants had already bought homes. Thus, funding remains for 88 accounts. Thirty-six accounts had been terminated for non-performance or had dropped out.

IDA Project History

This IDA project involves three partner organizations: the YWCA of Greater Pittsburgh (the grantee), the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh (HACP), and Dollar Bank. The partnership was forged quickly when, only a month before the AFIA application deadline, the HACP heard about AFIA funding availability and quickly convened the other two organizations to suggest they together apply for the grant.

The HACP had previous relationships with both YWCA and Dollar Bank, although the two had not worked with each other before. The YWCA provides case management for the HACP's Family Self Sufficiency (FSS) program, composed of Section 8 recipients. Dollar Bank had been operating a homeownership education course, "Mission: Homeownership," for the HACP since 1998.

The HACP's rationale for bringing these organizations to the table was that each was already familiar with the HACP's constituency, and was known and respected by the HACP. Between them, the three organizations felt they had the expertise required to perform all the key IDA functions. There would be no need to design any of the functions from scratch. The HACP would be responsible for recruitment among its public housing residents and FSS participants, using its existing channels (e.g. newsletters and residents' meetings). IDA participants would be streamed into the bank's existing homeownership education course and credit counseling program, which were well established and were already handling caseloads in the hundreds. The YWCA was a necessary partner because only non-profit entities were eligible for AFIA funding. Additionally, the YWCA could also provide case management through its existing FSS caseworkers. These caseworkers would also be made available to IDA participants who were not FSS participants.

What has resulted is a decentralized program in which key activities (recruitment, case management, and financial education) are dispersed across three organizations. This decentralized arrangement leveraged each partner's expertise and made the most of pre-existing programs and resources. However, it has also resulted in a situation in which responsibility does not match up with accountability. Responsibility for critical project activities (recruitment, account management, and the delivery of the financial literacy and asset-specific training) resides in organizations other than the grantee, the one organization ultimately accountable for grant performance. The decentralized structure and the lack of enforceable accountability has made it difficult for the grantee to exert much control over how these activities are conducted.

 top of page

---

4.2 Project Administration

Organizational Partners and Their Roles

The grantee is the YWCA of Greater Pittsburgh. Established in 1891, the YWCA provides services to Pittsburgh's low-income population in many areas of self-sufficiency and social service, including housing, employment, and health. For example, it provides employment and training services, offers health counseling, and operates a transitional housing facility, among other activities. Most relevant for the IDA project, the YWCA provides case management services for the HACP's Family Self-Sufficiency Program, a program open to Section 8 rental assistance voucher recipients.[26] The IDA project and the FSS program are managed by the same YWCA staff member.

The Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh operates public housing developments throughout the city, the Section 8 subsidy program, and employment and self-sufficiency programs. The IDA liaison with the HACP is the Homeownership Opportunities Manager. Along with the IDA project, he has responsibility for coordinating all homeownership programs throughout the city for the HACP.

Dollar Bank is a large institution considered to be one of the most active locally in serving the low-income population. It offers a range of products and services targeted to the low-income households, such as its "Mortgages for Mothers" program. Since 1998 the bank has been under contract with the HACP to provide a homeownership course and credit counseling to public housing residents (the "Mission: Homeownership" program). The bank also provides homeownership assistance of its own, such as grants up to $3,000 that can be applied to down payment. The bank services about 250 to 300 clients at any one time with its homeownership course and credit counseling. It also sponsors large- scale public outreach events for these programs. Dollar Bank is the sole provider of matching funds for this project. The bank's stature locally, its familiarity with this population, its ability to service large numbers of people in its homeownership programs, and its willingness to provide the entire amount of the matching funds required by AFIA made it an obvious choice as an IDA partner organization.

The key functions of the IDA project are divided as follows. Although all three partners publicize the IDA project in the course of their other activities, the lead organization for recruitment is the HACP, since it has ready access to the target population of public housing residents. Project orientation and some case management is the responsibility of the YWCA, since the YWCA already provides case management to FSS clients. Financial literacy training, credit counseling, and related financial case management are all provided by Dollar Bank as part of its pre-existing homeownership program, "Mission: Homeownership." As can be seen, virtually all the IDA functions were superimposed onto each organization's existing programs and services. Apart from grant administration, which is performed by the YWCA as the grantee, no "new" program components were developed specifically for the IDA project. This was a deliberate decision that was made to leverage what was already there, rather than reinvent the wheel.

Although all three partners had originally agreed upon the project's initial requirements and policies, differences in organizational philosophies soon emerged, and these have created tensions that have affected the project. As a social service agency, the YWCA viewed IDAs as a tool for self-empowerment and savings discipline. It did not believe in instituting participation requirements that might discourage participants. Thus, it established a fairly low minimum required deposit of $10 per month and had high tolerance for low-activity accountholders. The YWCA viewed IDA success in terms of the potential to transform lives, even apart from attainment of savings goals.

Dollar Bank, in contrast, viewed IDAs as one financial incentive among the many that it offers. It viewed a "successful" IDA account as one that resulted in an approved mortgage (with Dollar Bank) and a home purchase. Thus, the bank favored restricting IDA participation to those most likely to become mortgage ready. Based on its extensive track record helping the poor purchase homes in the Pittsburgh area, the bank felt that it, more than either of its partners, was in the best position to identify those most likely to succeed. It saw no value in spending resources to sustain IDA accountholders who were unlikely to become mortgage ready in the required time.

A second factor was the bank's strong sense of ownership of the IDA project, because the project was folded into its homeownership program and because it contributed a match equal to the AFIA grant amount. (Indeed, because Dollar Bank is the entity with which IDA participants have the most direct contact, many participants view the IDA project as "the bank's program.")

These factors caused tension between the partners in the first year of the project, and continued to do so into its second year. The bank was frustrated by having to provide services—maintaining accounts and providing the homeownership course and credit counseling—to individuals who were unlikely to succeed. This frustration was all the sharper because a staff shortage made it difficult to serve its large number of homeownership program clients. In June 2001 Dollar Bank conducted an internal review of its operations with respect to all of its homeownership programs, including the IDA project. Subsequently, the bank unilaterally instituted a number of changes:

1. It stopped attending the monthly meetings between the IDA partners, at which account activity was reviewed and policies discussed. This effectively ended regular and systematic communication between the partners. At the time of our second site visit in May 2002, communication between the partners occurred on an ad hoc basis.
2. It terminated low-activity accounts - that is, those who were not demonstrating a commitment to the project by making regular deposits, attending class, and keeping credit counseling appointments (17 of the 65 accounts open at that time).
3. It raised the minimum monthly deposit from $10 to $40.
4. It adopted a three-tier triage system that effectively restricts IDA participation to those who can become mortgage-ready within one year.
5. It announced that it would no longer accept responsibility for account monitoring and follow-up (such as sending termination letters to low-activity accounts). These tasks fell to YWCA as the grantee, and the YWCA struggles to perform them without additional staff resources.

Staffing

The staff associated with the IDA project, and their responsibilities, are summarized below.

At the YWCA, a project director oversees the IDA project as well as the organization's FSS program. To assist with recruitment, she has written articles that have appeared in housing authority and YWCA newsletters and has made presentations about the IDA project to Dollar Bank's "Mission: Homeownership" participants. She is assisted by an administrative staff person who conducts MIS-IDA activities as well as account monitoring and follow-up. FSS caseworkers conduct IDA program orientations and nominally are responsible for case management of IDA participants, although in fact they rarely hear from those who are not FSS participants. Executive oversight of the IDA project is provided by the Senior Director of Asset Development and Equitable Housing.

At the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh, the Homeownership and Opportunities Manager is responsible for the IDA project, as well as for all the PHA's homeownership programs and the Family Self-Sufficiency program. It is essentially a one-person operation. He conducts the initial eligibility check, reviewing the self-reported application information. He also conducts outreach through HACP channels such as presentations at resident councils and newsletter articles. However, staffing constraints limit the amount of time that can be spent on these activities.

At Dollar Bank, there is one trainer/credit counselor who provides the classroom-based homeownership training and personalized credit counseling. She has been the consistent presence since the early days of the IDA project. At the time of our May 2002 site visit, she was carrying a caseload of approximately 300 individuals, of which 30 were IDA participants. In the past, there has at least twice been a second trainer/counselor, but staff turnover has been a problem. Until June 2001, when this task was devolved to the YWCA, the trainer/counselor also conducted account monitoring. A clerical staff person informally continues to monitor IDA accounts, however, to make sure the bank is "on top of" IDA account performance. The Vice President for Community Development oversees the project and becomes involved only when higher-level policy issues arise.

The pivotal roles played by the HACP and Dollar Bank are essentially unfunded mandates. In retrospect, staffing levels at the three organizations were probably insufficient to take on the additional IDA tasks. All three organizations suffer from staffing shortages and are hard pressed to conduct some of the administrative and substantive functions of the IDA project. As described in more detail later, it was a staffing shortage that led the bank to adopt a triage system for IDA applicants and to reduce its account monitoring role, and that has compromised the HACP's recruitment efforts.

 top of page

---

4.3 Participant Recruitment and Screening

The target population for this project is public housing residents and Section 8 tenants served by the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh who are paying at least $350 per month out of pocket for rent. The target population for the IDA project has not changed since the project's inception.

Recruitment has been difficult for this project. Respondents believe there is a sufficiently large pool of eligible potential applicants (approximately 4,500 Section 8 voucher holders). The fact that Dollar Bank does not have trouble filling non-IDA slots for its "Mission:Homeownership" program suggests that there is ample demand for this sort of assistance. The difficulties seem to stem from staffing constraints that have compromised the amount of attention paid to this aspect of project operations. Initially, recruitment was to be conducted primarily by the HACP using its existing channels such as newsletter articles and presentations before resident councils. Although the HACP was in some ways the logical choice for this task, recruitment was an unfunded mandate assigned to an HACP office that is essentially a one-person operation with many other responsibilities.

Recruitment failed to produce large numbers of applicants for the pipeline largely because there was little staff time to devote to it at the HACP. The YWCA has attempted to help by working with the HACP in the summer of 2001 to develop an outreach plan. This has suffered from limited follow-through. The YWCA continues to assist with recruitment, for example by writing articles periodically for the HACP newsletter and by actually doing the production work on mass mailings to potential participants using the HACP's mailing list of tenants. Dollar Bank also promotes IDAs at its outreach events. But ultimately neither HACP nor Dollar Bank are accountable for recruitment success; the YWCA is. Because the responsibility for recruitment was not backed by adequate capacity and by enforceable accountability, when problems arose with the original strategy, the task fell to the grantee. In consequence, at the time of our second visit the project had filled only about 38 percent of its funded accounts.

With respect to participant screening, the HACP performs the initial eligibility check against AFIA guidelines. Eligible individuals are then referred to the bank for a financial assessment. It is the bank that determines whether an applicant can be accepted into the IDA project.

From the beginning, the IDA project intended to serve individuals most likely to succeed. One project principal characterized the project as "cherry-picking from the neediest population." Nevertheless, project requirements were not stringent in the beginning. For example, the minimum deposit was low ($10/month), and the project carried a sizable number of low-activity accounts in its first year. In June 2001 these requirements were made significantly more stringent. Minimum monthly deposit was raised four-fold, and a triage system was instituted at Dollar Bank that allocates more staff time to those who are the most "mortgage ready."

What prompted these changes was Dollar Bank's staffing challenges. The bank had experienced high turnover in its trainer/credit counselor positions in recent years, and it was stretched thin trying to serve a caseload in the hundreds with only one principal trainer/credit counselor. In June 2001 the bank undertook a systematic internal review of all of its homeownership programs, including the IDA project. It concluded that, while it was easy for the counselor to identify people's "mortgagability" at the initial assessment meeting, the bank was dedicating the same amount of staff time to everyone, even those whose credit and other problems were so severe that they were clearly "long shots." At the time of our first site visit, for example, every participant in any of Dollar Bank's programs could attend the homeownership course and receive long-term, one-on-one credit counseling, even if they were very far from being "mortgage ready." Thus, the bank concluded that valuable staff time was being spent on individuals who might never become mortgage ready.

Dollar Bank developed a new way of operating all of its homeownership programs, including the IDA project. It focuses staff resources on participants who are likely to result in approvable mortgage applications in a "reasonable" period of time. Under this system, instituted in June 2001, only individuals who are felt to be "good bets" for becoming mortgage ready would continue to receive intensive one-on-one staff service. Others would receive less intensive services until they had made enough progress to "graduate" to the ranks of the nearly mortgage-ready.

As before, applicants attend an initial one-on-one financial assessment session in which the trainer/counselor reviews the credit report and helps the applicant develop a homeownership strategy. She then groups applicants into one of three categories based on her assessment of their potential to become mortgage-ready within a "reasonable" period of time, defined as:

1. Less than 6 months
2. From 6 to 12 months
3. More than 12 months

Only individuals in groups (1) and (2) are eligible to open IDA accounts, attend the homeownership course, and receive one-on-one credit counseling. The bank's own data suggested that very few of those in group (3) ever result in mortgage applications; thus, these individuals receive only quarterly meetings with the trainer/counselor, although they can call for help when needed. They cannot open IDA accounts, attend the homeownership course, or receive formal one-on-one counseling until they "graduate" up to group (2). Individuals are told of their group assignment and encouraged to work hard to "graduate" to the next level.

After one year of experience with this triage system, Dollar Bank was very satisfied with the results. Restricting eligibility has meant that class size in the homeownership course has been reduced from about 50 to 15. Because the course is taken closer to the time of home purchase, the information is retained better. Bank staff members now have time to operate a peer support group. The bank also has observed a powerful motivational effect as individuals engage in friendly competition to "graduate" to the next level.

Dollar Bank instituted the triage system as an internal decision affecting all of its homeownership programs. From the perspective of the IDA project, however, it was a decision taken unilaterally. Although both the YWCA and the HACP were not happy with what they perceived as the non-collaborative nature of the process, they both acknowledge that the triage system appears to be moving people through the IDA process efficiently, while not "abandoning" those with more severe financial problems.

 top of page

---

4.4 Financial Education and Training

Financial education and training consists of Dollar Bank's pre-existing homeownership course. The course was not altered in any way because of the IDA project. Because homeownership is the only authorized use in this project, financial literacy and financial training are one and the same. The bank utilizes a homeownership curriculum developed by the Fannie Mae Foundation that covers topics such as how to shop for a real estate attorney, and explains a Purchase and Sale agreement. A total of eight hours of classes are offered: four sessions of two hours each. Unlike classes at some other sites, childcare and dinner are not provided for the evening classes. It is impossible to know whether this deters some people from attending; certainly attendance is high even without them. Classes are held throughout the year; participants enroll for the next available session. They are held for participants of any of the Bank's homeownership programs, not just for IDA participants. Bank staff feels that mixing IDA clients with non-IDA clients works well since all of them have the same general profile, and in fact gives IDA clients the benefit of interacting with a larger peer group.

One-on-one credit counseling is provided in tandem with the course, typically monthly. The content of the homeownership course has not changed over time but, as noted in the previous section, the timing of the services associated with it has changed. Before the triage system was instituted in June 2001, monthly one-on-one credit counseling had been available to everyone, for periods lasting from several months to over two years. With the institution of the triage system, only participants within one year of being mortgage ready are eligible to receive one-on-one credit counseling.

The staff time freed by adoption of the triage system has enabled Dollar Bank to also provide peer support sessions. Peer support became a priority when the bank identified in its internal review that many homeownership-program participants who were ready for home purchase nevertheless hesitated to enter the housing market. The main reasons were motivational ones rather than ineligibility: many individuals were intimidated by the housing market and knew no one in a similar position. The peer support sessions are held every three weeks on a drop-in basis and often feature successful former participants who have purchased homes. The bank notes that these have had powerful motivational effects.

The financial education activities were highly regarded by the IDA participants we interviewed.[27] They spoke very favorably of the homeownership course and the trainer/counselor. Many felt that she was overworked with such a large caseload, but they felt she was accessible to them and very helpful. Participants viewed the IDA project as Dollar Bank's program and are unclear about the role of the YWCA. Accountholders did not appear to receive - nor to expect - support services or extensive case management from the bank, nor from the YWCA. By definition, participants have already determined that homeownership is their goal (in contrast to projects that allow a more "exploratory" mindset where participants can determine the specific use after the account is opened). They viewed the IDAs as a helpful vehicle to get them to where they already knew they wanted to go. Participants clearly viewed IDAs as a financial product—a useful financial incentive—rather than a transformative program to help them rethink their lives.

 top of page

---

4.5 Case Management and Support Services

Case management is nominally the responsibility of the YWCA through its Family Self Sufficiency caseworkers. The project was originally designed so that IDA participants who are enrolled in the HACP's FSS program would receive IDA case management in the course of their FSS case management (but even non-FSS members could have access to these caseworkers if desired). Other public housing residents would obtain case management through the HACP. At the time of our first site visit in June 2001, there were two FSS caseworkers. At our May 2002 site visit, there was one caseworker for a caseload of 275 FSS clients, with plans to hire two more. In fact, the role of the FSS caseworkers has been primarily to conduct the initial orientation session in which IDA project rules and requirements are explained.

Sometimes this occurs well after the IDA account has been opened because the account is opened by Dollar Bank and information does not always flow smoothly between the two organizations. There is no indication that such lags have caused significant problems, however. Some IDA-related case management does appear to occur for FSS participants, but those who are not FSS participants have no relationship with the FSS caseworkers and rarely call on them.

Effectively, most of the IDA related case management is financial in nature and occurs in the course of the credit counseling provided by Dollar Bank. Most respondents noted that if an IDA participant has a problem, she would be most likely to call the bank's trainer/credit counselor. The IDA participants we interviewed spoke highly of her dedication and helpfulness. However, because the bank is not in the business of providing the type of comprehensive case management that a social service agency would, it appears that the type of assistance offered is that directly related to financial matters ("what should I do if I can't pay my utility bill this month?") rather than to more general life situations ("what should I do if I lose my job?"). However, because the project so explicitly screens for those who are very likely to succeed in attaining their savings goal, this financial focus is not necessarily a problem. Thus, decisions about which types of clients to serve, can have important implications for what services need to be provided.

Failure to demonstrate a commitment to the project is met with a form letter indicating that deposits must be resumed or the account will be terminated. There are no formal criteria for deciding when to terminate an account. A combination of factors is considered, including failure to make regular deposits, keep credit counseling appointments, and attend class. Since the three-tier selection system was adopted, however, low-activity accounts have been less of a problem almost by definition, as such individuals are unlikely to be accepted into the project in the first place.

 top of page

---

4.6 Future Plans

The partnership challenges of this experience were cited as reasons for choosing not to continue this project after the AFIA grant expires. The HACP is not in a position to continue this project on its own. Dollar Bank will not renew its participation, regarding it as more efficient to simply fund and operate such a project internally rather than collaboratively. For its part, the YWCA would also not renew this particular partnering arrangement, although it remains interested in pursuing IDA opportunities with other partners. Each of the three partner organizations, however, remains convinced of the value of IDAs to this population. At the time of our 2002 site visit, the YWCA was in the midst of applying for state funding for a 100-account IDA program. The proposed new IDA program would be managed more centrally by the YWCA and would apply to all YWCA clients (not just to the HACP population). The YWCA feels strongly that the AFIA grant provided valuable experience. It hopes to apply these lessons learned to extending IDAs to a larger population.

 top of page

---

4.7 Lessons Learned

To make the most of existing resources, this project "piggybacked" IDA functions onto the existing programmatic infrastructure at three partner organizations. It resulted in a decentralized project, illustrating both the advantages and disadvantages of such an approach. These have important implications for other projects that are considering such an approach.

On the plus side, the project avoided developing systems for case management, financial education, and recruitment that were redundant with what already existed. However, these organizations were already overburdened in significant ways. The IDA functions were added to the existing responsibilities of the already overworked staff at all three organizations. The lack of administrative funding to support these additional responsibilities meant that these were unfunded mandates at each organization. When the YWCA's partners proved unwilling or unable to conduct their activities, these additional tasks fell to the grantee by default.

There were also issues of accountability. Decentralization contributed to a situation in which the grantee has little influence over functions that critically affect project performance, such as recruitment, screening, and the conduct of financial education. But the grantee has little leverage in how its partners operate their portion of the project or in enforcing project requirements, such as obliging participants to come in for their orientation meetings.

This project also illustrates the hazards of depending on one source of matching funds. Dollar Bank's match funding gave it significant leverage in its dealings with the other organizations involved, and allowed it to implement important programmatic decisions unilaterally. Adding to this was the bank's strong sense of ownership of its homeownership program.

However—and this is significant—these factors do not appear to have compromised project quality. Indeed, the project is very well regarded by participants and appears to be doing well in terms of the number of people who have achieved their savings goals. The challenges that have beset this project have to do principally with partnership challenges.

This case study illustrates the factors to consider in adopting a similarly decentralized approach. Particularly when partners undertake key responsibilities, it is essential to "kick the tires" of the intended partnership in great detail, to avert problems later. Among the factors to probe carefully are:

• Organizational philosophies. Is everyone on the same page about project priorities? Do the partners share the same vision of what an IDA project is all about, what constitutes "success"? Are there issues of project "ownership" that could compromise how partners relate to each other?
• Organizational capacities. Do partners really have the capacity (staffing, expertise) to take on the additional IDA functions? Is this an unfunded mandate? If so, what is the recompense that would make a partner willing to take it on?
• Mechanisms for accountability. Are there mechanisms in place to ensure that each partner is accountable for its performance? What would be the implications for the project if a partner cannot, or refuses to, fulfill its role? Who then would take on the task, and can that entity realistically do so?

Among the lessons learned noted by project respondents themselves are the following:

• In a project involving multiple partners, it is critical to identify roles and responsibilities ahead of time, not reactively, and to understand each other's differing philosophies. There may be important philosophical differences that are not apparent at first, for example about whether IDAs are primarily a mechanism for self-empowerment program or simply a financial tool, and these have important implications for IDA policies. The differences between nonprofit organizations and for-profit firms were a surprise to each of the partners, in terms of each organization's transparency, its priorities, and general "world view."
• The lead project organization should carefully examine potential partners' organizational capacities in advance of committing to specific roles and responsibilities. One of the partners noted that even a clear delineation of responsibilities cannot compensate for deficits in the organizational capacity of partners to carry out their roles. It is important to understand partners' staffing levels as well as the nature of staff members' expertise.
• Even if—especially if—responsibility for key programmatic elements is dispersed across several organizations, there needs to be one strong central point of control. Some of the challenges associated with this project arose from the fact that project elements that were critical to the success of the project - most notably, recruitment and the provision of financial literacy training - were outside the control of the grantee, and the grantee had little voice in how these activities were conducted.
• One needs to expect that project tasks will take require more staff effort than may initially appear necessary. Both Dollar Bank and the YWCA felt the IDA project has consumed more time and resources than expected and were frustrated by having to accomplish these tasks in already strained staffing situations where staff were already overburdened.
• Organizations contemplating IDA projects should try to learn as much as possible about what they entail in advance. Highly recommended were the Corporation for Enterprise Development's training workshops and other IDA resources.
  

 top of page

---

Notes

[25] These figures are for non-Hispanic blacks and whites. [Return to Text]

[26] The FSS program provides employment-focused case management and asset development assistance. Participants enter into a five-year FSS contract that specifies the actions to be taken by the public housing authority and the client. Participants have the opportunity to accrue escrow "savings" as their earned income increases and their rental subsidy decreases. The participant can claim the balance of the escrow upon successful completion of the FSS contract, and many apply it toward homeownership. In June, 2001 there were approximately 260 FSS participants (of which about 15 had opened IDA accounts). One year later there were approximately 275 FSS participants. The only intersection between the IDA project and the FSS program is that IDA accountholders who are FSS participants can, upon completion of their FSS goals, deposit the escrow amount (up to $1,000) into their IDA account—thereby obtaining a 4:1 match on that money. [Return to Text]

[27] We spoke to five IDA participants in our first site visit and one participant during our second site visit. [Return to Text]