N A T I O N A L
HOME OF YOUR OWN
A L L I A N C E
Community Development:
Partnerships in Progress
A presentation
at the
Next Generation Leadership Symposium
President’s Committee on Mental Retardation
September 27, 1996
by
Jay Klein, Director
National Home of Your Own Alliance
H
Community Development: Partnerships in Progress
Written by
Jay Klein, Director
National Home of Your Own Alliance
Institute on Disability/UAP
University of New Hampshire
Next Generation Leadership Symposium
Presidents Committee on Mental Retardation
September 27, 1996
“Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent effort. There must be the will to
produce a superior thing”. - John Ruskin
Introduction
For over 20 years, the major thr
ust of re sidential ser
vices has been to incr
ease the
availability of community housing for persons with developmental disabilities.
Unfortunately
, this pro cess has not assur
ed that persons with dev
elopmental disabilitiese ar
afforded contro l over or even a voice in the most basic decisions
egar
rd ing their homes,
such as, wher
e they liv
e , with whom they e,
livand how they spend their time.espite
D
major accomplishments in community housing and services for persons with
developmental disabilities, most individuals
emain
r guests ,orperhaps worse, boar
ders in
their own homes, subject to theules,
r schedules, dictates, tastes, and
ejudices
pr
of others.
Like most adults, people with developmental disabilities typically want and need a home
of their own wher
e they can be themselv
es and make choices about what they do, with
whom, and when. Choosing and contr
olling one
’s home is a basic act of personal
autonomy
. The reality, however, is that most people with dev
elopmental disabilities who
are recipients of esidential
r
ser
vices liv
e in institutions, gr
oup homes, or community-based
settings.
Person-owned/contr
olled housing and personaliz
ed suppor
t have become par
t of this
nation’s agenda as grassr
oots efforts have challenged the standar
d way of pr
oviding
services for people with dev
elopmental and other disabilities.
Throughout the nation,
individuals, adv
ocates, and inno
vative service providers hav
e made significant mo
ves from
institutions and oup
gr homes to the eation
cr
of housing and suppor
t that permit all people,
including those with the most intensive support needs, to live in homes of their own
choosing.This trend is par
t of a bro ader shift awayom
fr traditional, agency-contr
olled
services toward a focus on suppor
t resourc es that encourage personal contr
ol and full
community inclusion.
Barriers to Homeownership/Control
A lack of personal financial
esour
r c es and systemic dependence on
ograms,
pr
which yb
design limit personal choice,e ar
two major barriers that deny basic oppor
tunities and civil
rights.The finite capacity to eate
cr innovative housing and suppor
t options and the limited
involvement of people in these effor
ts are also barriers to person-o
wned/contr
olled
housing and support.
As of 1992, 346,619 peopleeceiv
r ed serv ices in out-of-home placements. Less than fifteen
thousand, or 4.3%, of those people
eceiv
r ed suppor
ted living ser
vices.This translates to
95.7% of people living in out-of-home placements that
e owned
ar
and contr
olled by
someone else. nUfortunately
, the administrativ
e structures suppor
ting community ser
vices
typically pr
omote congr
egate and agency or ovider
pr
contr
olled appr
oaches to community
residential andelated
r
ser
vices. Housing and esidential
r
suppor
ts are dictated far mor
e
often by government and pr
ovider agency efer
pr ences than yb the needs and desir
es of
persons with developmental disabilities.
Most often, people who elivin congre gate situations obtain a package ofvices
ser in which
housing and suppor
t are linked. Even in so-called community-based settings, such as adult
foster car
e or super
vised apar
tments, a ser
vice provider is compensated for deliv
ering both
housing and support as one service. For people who live in these settings, their association
and the daily pattern of theireslivare dictated y
b their addr
ess. People must buy the
package whether or not they like all of its components.
ecause
B people earoften
congre gated based on their suppor
t needs, a person
’s addre ss determines the lev
el and
type of suppor
t received. If suppor
t needs change or if the person is unable to adapt or
conform to the rhythm of the household, the person ved
is mo
to another esidence.
r
This
linkage betw
e en suppor
t and housing is one factor that has made it difficult, if not
impossible, for individuals to decide ewher
to live and to dev
elop ro ots within their
communities.
An additional barrier is the criteria used by most lenders in the United States to underwrit
mortgage loans.This criteria disqualifies the majority of people with disabilities
om fr
owning a home:
• Individuals whoeceiv
r e SSI and Medicaid dollars cannot accumulate savings
without jeopar
dizing the benefits that would fund theirtgage
mor payments.
Because of theseesour
r c e restrictions, ecipients
r
of public benefits do not ehav
the ability to accumulate enough money for down payment and closing costs.
For example, people who
eceiv
r e SSI benefits may not hav
e more than $2,000 in
cash re sourc es in their possession at any time.
ndividuals
I
whoeceiv
r e Medicaid
funds hav
e resourc e limitations rangingom
fr $1,000 to $2000, depending on the
laws of the state in which they live.
•
Many individuals who
eceiv
r e SSI and Medicaid benefits also hav
e wages fr
om
employment. For these people, a standar
d formula is used to determine the
amount of eduction
r
in benefitsesulting
r
fr
om earning wages.ince
S both of these
public benefits earmeans tested, benefits would be discontinued if an
individual
’s income w
ere more than the amount determined
y that
b
par
ticular
state. Therefore, anyone who eceiv
r
es public benefits has aeryv limited ability to
contribute to
w ard down payment and closing costs.
•
In cases wher
e individuals hav
e funds fr
om grants, secondar
y loans, or gifts,
many lenders hav
e been unwilling to accept them in lieu of aower’s
borr
contribution.
•
In establishing a borr
ower’s credit status, a lenderequir
r es established good
credit as w
ell as informationegar
r d ing how any past cr
edit pro blems may hav
e
been re solved. An individual who hased
livin their family
’s home, in foster car
e,
a group home, or nursing home is not likely toe hav
established a edit
cr histor
y.
Since the utilities, lease or mor
tgage, and perhaps en
ev the mail w
ere in someone
else’s name, the individual has little opportunity or experience to demonstrate
credit reliability
.
Community D
evelopment: N
ew Hampshir
e’s Story
In order to meet the challenges posed
y the
b barriers pr
eviously described, coalitions which
include people with disabilities, lenders, dable
affor housing agencies, and disability
organizations must be formed.
The focus must shift to eating
cr
a shar
ed vision of
opport unities for homeo
wnership and contr
ol for people with disabilities.
To illustrate ho
w a coalition succeeded in
vercoming
o
these formidable
oadblocks,
r
the
story of the New Hampshir
e Home of Your Own Project will be shar
ed. New Hampshir
e is
a largely ural
r
state whose motto is “Liv
e Free or Die.” In the 1980’s , the state experienced a
radical boom and bust cle
cy that er sulted in the highest number of bank closings in the
nation, high unemplo
yment, escalating oper
pr ty taxes, low vacancy rates due to rising
entr
costs, and a surplus of high-priced
eal restate. v
Een before the recession, N
ew Hampshir
e
communities had dev
eloped a locally-based appr
oach to “taking car
e of our own.” In the
absence of a state income or sales tax, public education is funded
ough thr
local pr
operty
tax, receiving its only supplemental funding
om fr
the state lotter
y. Allocating esour
r
c es
through town meetings and having the largest state legislatur
e in the United States, the
state firmly believ
es in local contr
ol and local go
vernment.
Support services for individuals with developmental disabilities who live in New
Hampshir
e are provided thr
ough twelve local, priv
a te non-pro fit area agencies.These
regional agencies eargoverned by citizen board s primarily composed of people with
disabilities and their family members.
The area agency system was eloped
dev
in the 1980’
s
as a means ofeturning
r
people who had been living in institutions to their communities of
origin. This community-based service system facilitated the closing of the Laconia State
School in 1991, making eNw Hampshir
e the first state in the countr
y without a public
institution for people with developmental disabilities. The state is also unique in its
conscious commitment at all levels to support people in individualized ways. This
commitment is expr
essed in state go
vernment, by professionals in local communities, and
through the effor
ts of families and adv
ocacy gro ups.
Developments in the banking industr
y, housing mar
ket, and the dev
elopmental ser
vice
system in the 1980’
s motivated New Hampshir
e to identify the housing needs of people
with dev
e lopmental disabilities as a top priority in the’s state
first Compr
ehensiv
e Housing
Afford ability S
t rategy (CHAS) cr
eated in 1991.The CHAS was a policy and planning
document that the nited
U
States Office of Housing and U
r ban Development (HUD)
require d states to draft (with extensiv
e public input) in or
der to re ceive specific federal
housing and community dev
elopment esour
r
c es. The CHAS listed federal, state, and other
private funds av
ailable for state inv
estment in housing and itovided
pr
a compr
ehensiv
e
set of priorities, goals, and objectiv
es to ensur
e that housing needs identified in the state
e ar
addre ssed in a coor
dinated manner
.
In July 1991, the A
dministration of eDvelopmental D
isabilities (ADD)eleased
r
a equest
r
for
proposals for a demonstrationoject
pr which would seek to fosterwne
and expanded
appro aches to community housing which would be
e consistent
mor
with having a home of
one’s own. At a minimum, ADD wanted theoject
pr to generate appr
oaches that would: (1)
separate wher
e one lives from the ser
vices and suppor
ts one re ceives; and (2) tailor
supports to the individual
’s preferre d residence, whether it be a pur
chased home,ented
r
apart ment, or some form of shar
ed housing.They asked that suppor
t and technical
assistance be offer
ed to people with disabilities and their families in securing a home of
their own, including dev
eloping, buying,enting,
r
or other
wise securing economically and
personally appr
opriate housing; accessing
ental
r subsidies,ehabilitation
r
funds,
community block grants, tax tificates,
cer
tax cr
edits, housing ust
tr funds, and exper
t legal
assistance; and securing vices
ser and suppor
ts desire d by the individual which would
ensure his/her health and safety
, and pro mote social and family
elationships
r
and
community par
ticipation.The project was to be fundedy bADD at $100,000 a eyar for thr
ee
years ($300,000); this epr
r esented 75% of the totalequir
r e d. The grant ecipient
r
would
provide an additional $100,000 in matching funds.
The Institute on D
isability
, a University Affiliatedrogram
P
at the U
n iversity of N
ew
Hampshir
e (funded y
b ADD), decided to apply for the grant and began putting together a
proposal to meet ADD’
s guidelines.The directors of the D
isability Rights Center ew
(N
Hampshir
e’s designated rotection
P
and A
d vocacy Agency) and theevelopmental
D
Disabilities Council agr
eed to collaborate on the oject.
pr During the initial planning
meetings, discussion center
ed aro und how the re quire ment for the matching dollars would
be met.
The Institute on Disability agr
eed to ser
ve as the lead agency in this endeav
or, which
included the management of all aspects of the
ee thr
year demonstration oject.
pr Thus, the
New Hampshir
e Home of Your Own pr
oject was cr
eated. n
I addition, the nstitute
I
would
contribute staff time, trav
el costs, office space, equipment, and supplies.
The
Developmental D
isabilities Council contributed $10,000 per
earyto offset the cost of
ongoing pr
oject researc h. Staff and boar
d members of the council eed
agr to attend all
meetings and ev
ents coord inated b
y the pro ject. The Disability Rights Center pledged to
provide a blend of legalesear
r c h on issues of guar
dianship
, trusts, futur
es planning, and
labor law elated
r
to personal assistancevices.
ser n
I addition, the D
i sability Rights Center
agreed to super
vise a summer law student who, during
ears ytwo and thr
ee, would wor
k
on legal issues associated with the
oject.
pr Staff of the Disabilities Rights Center also eed
agr
to attend meetings and otherents
ev coord inated b
y the pro ject.
The New Hampshir
e Housing Finance A
uthority (HF
A ), the state agency that spearheaded
the CHAS pr
ocess, was appr
oached next.The HFA was asked to consider theoposed
pr
Home of Your Own pr
oject as a evhicle by which it could affirmativ
ely addr
ess its
identified priority of affor
dable housing for people with elopmental
dev
disabilities.
n I
appro aching the HF
A, the In stitute needed to understand its mission.
We learned that the
New Hampshir
e Housing Finance Authority is a state-mandated agency which finances
single and multi-family housing for
w and
lo moderate income people.
The HFA uses the
proceeds fr
om bond issues to make loansectly
dir or to pur
chase mor
tgages fr
om the state
’s
lending institutions.ventually
E
, the board of the New Hampshir
e Housing Finance
Authority acted on aecommendation
r
om
fr the Authority’s executive director to re serve up
to 1.8 million dollarsver
o the three years of the pr
oject on behalf of 25 eligible households.
In addition, they pr
omised to contribute $100,000 to be used
y tw
b enty-five participants
over three years in no-inter
est forgiv
a ble loans for closing costs,
enovations
r
and do
wn
payments up to 2% of the pur
chase price.The funds w
ere provided with the stipulation
that they be matched by an additional $100,000 to be used for the same purposes. New
Hampshir
e Housing Finance A
uthority staff agr
eed to meet monthly withoject
pr staff and
offer extensiv
e technical assistance.
They also agr
eed to par
ticipate in numer
ous meetings
and in formal pr
esentations about the oject
pr thro ughout the state and the countr
y.
At this point, an additional $100,000 to match the pool of funds
ovided
pr by the Housing
Finance Authority for closing costs,
enovations
r
and do
wn payments was still needed.
The
state Division of Mental Health and Developmental Services demonstrated their
commitment to the pr
oject’s objectives by matching the $100,000.The Division contracts
with the tw
elve area agencies to versee
o
community ser
vices and to pr
ovide case
management and family suppor
t. With the Division’s encouragement and suppor
t all
twelve area agency dir
ectors agr
eed to par
ticipate in the pr
oject. After selecting two
individuals to par
ticipate in the pr
oject, each agency was en
giv$8000 from the Division’s
$100,000 match pool, to be used as unr
estricted grants for wn
do payments, closing costs,
renovation, and long term maintenance.
The Division assigned a staff person tokwor
specifically with the oject
pr to assist in the homeo
wnership pr
ocess for par
ticipants.The
contribution of this staff person
’s time was used to ver
co a portion of the pr
oject’s match
require d by the Administration on eDvelopmental D
isabilities. nI addition, other iDvision
staff agr
eed to meet fr
equently with pr
oject staff to assist individuals to achiev
e
homeownership andeceiv
r e personaliz
ed assistance.
In a short period of time, thenstitute
I
organiz
ed a steering committee of chief collaborators
who met, at a minimum on a quar
terly basis, setting the ection
dir
of the pr
oject and making
policy decisions.
These collaborators included theectors
dir of the N
ew Hampshir
e
Housing Finance A
uthority
, the Division of M
ental Health and D
evelopmental ervices,
S
the
Developmental D
isabilities Council, the isabilities
D
Rights Center
, and the n
I stitute on
Disability
. In addition to the steering committee and staff
om fr
their agencies, both housing
and legal consultants eed
agr to be inv
olved in pro ject activities. M
any other individuals,
including ar
ea agency staff
, family members, friends, neighbors,
eal restate agents, lenders,
affordable housing agency staff
, the state’s community loan fund, and community leaders
agreed to assist individuals inery
evregion of the state town
o their o
w n homes.
At the pro ject’s end, twenty Home of Your Own par
ticipants had pur
chased their wn
o
homes. Focusing on individuals
’ needs, desir
es, and pr
eferences, the pr
oject demonstrated
that serv ice funds and disability-r
elated entitlements, if used imaginativ
ely, can allow
people to own homes.
What Changed?
Homeownership gave participants an opportunity to make housing and support choices
that reflected their individual needs and
efer
pr
ences. For some individuals, it was the first
time they had aoice
v in wher
e the furnitur
e went, what pictur
es and decorationsent
w on
their walls, who came ough
thr their door
, and, most impor
tantly, who shar
ed their space
and their lives.
Support became mor
e personaliz
ed when it was not dictated
y the
b rigid pr
otocols
require d when numer
ous people liv
e together in one facility
. With homeow nership
, the
agency esponsible
r
for pr
oviding suppor
t no longer w
o ned or leased the house; the
individual did. As needs change, suppor
t can be modified accor
dingly
, in the person
’s
home. People are not moved when the need for a w
neserv ice or suppor
t arises and,
therefore, are able to sustain stable and typical connections to their
w communities.
ne
Ownership can serve as the platform for community membership.
Lenders ecogniz
r
e d most forms of public benefits as ower
borr income.Traditional
underw riting criteria looks at income to debt ratios
ound
ar 30%. Accepting that many
borrowers did not hav
e an emplo
y ment histor
y, lenders allo
wed the use of a budget-based
appro ach rather than an income to debt ratio in determining the
ower’s
borrability to pay
the mort gage. n
I dividuals
’ prior living historiesere
w consider
ed by lenders in determining
credit status.The fact that a perspectiv
e borrower had not had an oppor
tunity to establish
credit did not automaticallyevent
pr them fr
om qualifying for a mor
tgage.
Budgets w
ere personaliz
ed and er structured such that the agency committed the line item
for housing to mor
tgage payments (principle, inter
est, taxes and insurance).n Imaking this
commitment, agencies found that in addition to the stabilizing effectwnership
homeo had
on people
’s lives, it also offer
ed a constancy in housing costs not always
ailable
av on the
speculativ
e rental mar
ket. In dedicating the housing budget line to homeo
wnership ersus
v
other forms of housing, individuals, lenders, and
viceser
providers locked into a cost and a
source of payment thatemains
r
mor
e constant v
oer time.
Participants used agency budgets to verify their income and to demonstrate an ongoing
commitment of suppor
t in order to obtain their mor
tgages. nI some cases, agencies,
families, and friends contributed money
warto
d down payment, closing costs, and long
term maintenance. Agency staff
, family members, and friends
erewclosely inv
olved in
assisting people to choose and chase
pur homes, and in planning for and ensuring
personaliz
ed suppor
t. Through this pr
ocess a gr
eater re spect and understanding of the
person was gainedy ball individuals oviding
pr
suppor
t.
Lenders ackno
wledged that people on public benefits did not
e funds
hav fr
om savings
because esour
r
c e limitations pr
event them fro m accumulating significant moneys.
Downpayments and closing costs
erewallowed from sourc es other than the borr
ower. A
mix of priv
a te, local, state and federal funds, made
ailable
av thr
ough grants, lo
w or no
interest loans, or funds withovisions
pr
for ecaptur
r
e on resale was av
ailable. Funds for
down payment, closing costs,
enovations,
r
and long term maintenance
erewsecure d and
made av
a ilable to borr
owers.
New Hampshir
e lenders became familiar with non-traditional income
eams,
strdiffer
ent
procedure s, and ne
w forms of documentation and,
y doing
b
so, tapped a w
nemark et of
highly motiv
ated home buy
ers. What these ne
w borrowers bring to the mor
tgage pr
ocess
are stable income str
eams in the form of benefits and ongoing suppor
t. This suppor
t,
provided by social ser
vice agencies, can include monitoring of home maintenance, help
with paying bills, asell
w as guidance and inter
vention befor
e problems arise.nI New
Hampshir
e, this par
tnership betw
e en the banking industr
y and the human ser
vice system
has proved mutually beneficial.
Future of the New Hampshire Partnerships
Encouraged yb the success of the ew
N Hampshir
e Home of Your Own demonstration
project, the original funders continued the initiativ
e for an additional thr
ee years. They set
aside funds for up to 20 w
neindividuals eachear
y to hav
e the re sourc es and suppor
t
needed to become homeo
wners. Sp ecifically
, the New Hampshir
e Housing Finance
Authority committed $4.2 million in mor
tgage funds ver
o three years, an av
erage of
$70,000 per individual. In addition, they committed $100,000 annually for down payment
and closing costsver
o three years. The Division of M
ental Health and D
evelopmental
Services and the ea
ar agencies hav
e matched this amount, making $200,000 ear
a yfor thr
ee
years av
a ilable for do
wn payment, closing costs,
enovation,
r
and long-term maintenance.
This commitment of funds make it possible for up to 60 individuals to obtain mortgages
from the New Hampshir
e Housing Finance A
uthority and to access appr
oximately $10,000
per mortgage for do
wn payment, closing costs,
enovation,
r
and long term maintenance.
The New Hampshir
e Housing Finance Authority uses under
writing standar
ds similar to
those discussed above.
Recognizing the need to have a person to facilitate the initiative and continue the work
with individuals and agencies, the
ew NHampshir
e Housing Finance A
uthority
, Division of
Mental Health and D
evelopmental ervices,
S
and the eNw Hampshir
e Developmental
Disabilities Council each committed $20,000ear
a yfor thr
ee years to fund a pr
ogram
coordinator position.The program coor
dinator wor
ks out of a state
wide affor
dable housing
organization, the ew
N Hampshir
e Community Loan und.
F
In addition, the D
i vision of
Mental Health and Developmental Services committed $25,000 to match $25,000 made
available by the National Home of Your Own Alliance.
This $50,000 was used to suppor
t
training and technical assistance activities for individuals with disabilities, families, agency
support people and lenders.
Home of Your Own: A N
ational n
I itiative
The Administration on eDvelopmental D
isabilities, continued’sitcommitment to
homeownership in funding a e-year
fiv
cooperativ
e agre ement with thenstitute
I
on
Disability/U
A P at the U
niversity of N
ew Hampshir
e to create a national technical
assistance center
, called the N
ational Home of Your Own Alliance.
The Alliance is curr
ently
working in thirteen states to dev
elop local demonstrations of homeo
wnership
. The Alliance
intends to negotiate agr
eements in an additional ten states
ver othe next eyar; building
coalitions of housing and disability organizationsy led
individuals
b
with disabilities, their
families, friends, and adv
ocates. Each stateeceiving
r
technical assistance
omfr the Alliance
agrees to institute a pilot oject
pr to assist a specified number of peoplewn
to or
o lease their
own homes. nI addition, the Alliance is building a national information clearinghouse,
performing policyesear
r c h, and conductingesear
r c h related to people, with disabilities
owning and contr
olling their homes.
Although the experience with the
ewNHampshir
e project has gr
eatly influenced the
National Home of Your Own Alliance, it is not believ
ed that any one appr
oach can or
should be pr
escribed.The Alliance wor
ks with each state thr
ough a steering committee
composed of epr
r esentativ
e s of the coalition with ong
str participation fr
om people with
developmental disabilities. Alliance members assist stateselop
to dev
a technical assistance
plan which epr
r esents the unique cultur
e of each egion.
r
The hope is that states will allocate
technical assistanceesour
r c es toward certain parameters whiche ar
believed key for
successful initiatives: intensive planning with individuals and agencies, collaboration of th
organizations and individuals in the housing
ena, ar
flexibility in under
writing loans and
accessing funds for wn
do payment, closing,enovation,
r
and long term maintenance costs.
The work of the National Home of Your Own Alliance has spurr
ed the cre ation of
initiatives on homeo
w nership and contr
ol throughout the countr
y. The locus of contr
ol is
centere d on the person with a disability
, who dire cts what goes on within their home.
The
state initiativ
es offer an unpr
ecedented oppor
tunity to understand mor
e about the impact
homeownership and contr
ol can hav
e on the liv
e s of people with disabilities and the
systems that support them.
In addition, the N
a tional Home of Your Own Alliance has influenced national housing
policy in av
enues that cr
eate oppor
tunities for individuals with elopmental
dev
disabilities
to own and contr
ol their homes.nI particular, the Alliance has had major success in its
work with Fannie Mae, the nation
’s largest secondar
y mortgage lender
. The Alliance was
instrumental in helpingannie
F
Mae shape the first national secondar
y mark et mortgage
product targeted ex
clusively to the needs of borr
owers with disabilities.
This 50 million
dollar single-family underwriting experiment is designed to accommodate the needs of
individuals with disabilities and families who
e a hav
child with a disability
. The
experiment will initially be piloted in eleven states and the District of Columbia. The
underw riting criteria used combines under
writing flexibility nev
er seen befor
e in the
lending industr
y. During ev
e ry stage of the pr
oducts’ development, the Alliance offer
ed ongoing consultation, linkages with state coalitions, and the technical expertise of housing
experts.
In translating the lessons learned to a national scope,ew
theHampshir
N
e Home of Your
Own demonstration oject
pr continues to fulfill its mission.
The initiativ
e was cr
eated to
develop, implement, ev
aluate, and disseminate an appr
oach to assist individuals with
disabilities buy theirwn
o homes and be included in their communities. AsWilliams,
Bob
commissioner of ADD said when
eferring
r
to this initiativ
e, “We have the oppor
tunity and
responsibility to use whate w
do here to reinvigorate the Americaneam
dr we all call
homeownership. People with disabilities for far too long have been denied the right and
opportunity to char
t and contro l their liv
e s and futur
es. The Home of Your Own initiativ
e
is about changing the power dynamic.”