The Effects of Low- and Moderate-Income
Homeownership and Neighborhood Context
on Resource Generation:
A Multilevel Analysis
Michal Grinstein-Weiss, PhD
Yeong Hun Yeo, MSW
Johanna K.P. Greeson, MSS, MLSP
Mathieu Despard, MSW
Roberto Quercia, PhD
January 2009
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Homeownership
Wealth and asset accumulation
Community growth
Promotion of positive social outcomes
Represents 60% of the total wealth among the
American middle class
Largest source of saving
Retsinas & Belsky, 2002; Rohe & Stewart, 1996; Shlay, 2005
Homeownership (cont.)
Considerable gap between lower- and high-
income households (Herbert, Haurin, Rosenthal, & Duda,
2005)
Therefore, much of what is known about
positive effects is biased
Policy has expanded its focus to include
opportunities for low-income households, racial
and ethnic minority households
But, do the positive effects of homeownership
generalize to these populations?
Homeownership & Social Capital
Social capital refers to connections within
networks and the resources that are
exchanged via those connections (Bourdieu, 1977)
Arises in stable and vital communities
Used to explain a variety of positive
outcomes
Micro- or individual-level (e.g., academic
achievement, Hao, 1994)
Macro-level (e.g., government efficiency, Putnam,
1993)
Homeownership & Social Capital (cont.)
How is social capital generated in
neighborhoods and communities?
How does social capital operate in low-income
neighborhoods?
A secondary-mortgage pilot program for low- and
moderate-income (LMI) households
Started in 1994 in North Carolina by Self-Help
Credit Union
Expanded nationally in 1998 through a partnership
with the Ford Foundation ($50 million grant) and
Fannie Mae ($4 billion commitment)
Self-Help used the Ford Foundation grant to
purchase mortgage loans from lenders across the
country for delivery to Fannie Mae
Program Description
The Self-Help Ventures Fund’s
Community Advantage Program (CAP)
CAP made it possible