Although approximately 10 percent of American families (7.7 million) are poor,1 more than 20

Individual development Accounts An Asset Building Tool Nat i o n a l Co n f e r e n c e of Stat e Le g i s l at u r e s By Josh Lohmer, Christen Lara and Rochelle Finzel December 2008 Although approximately 10 percent of American families (7.7 million) are poor,1 more than 20 percent of households are asset poor; meaning they lack the financial resources to support themselves for 12 weeks at or above the poverty level. 2 Without the cushion that savings and assets afford, an unexpected crises such as a job loss or a health emergency can spell financial ruin for families that are struggling to keep up. Most government programs designed to support low-income families either subsidize the purchase of necessary goods, such as groceries, or aim to increase household earnings. Asset building initiatives, on the other hand, promote savings and investment. Their goal is to make it easier for people with limited financial resources to obtain and preserve productive assets, such as a home, postsecondary education or training, a small business or a nest egg for retirement. Asset building strategies typically encompass both public policy and private sector efforts. In a nutshell, asset building is about helping families construct more stable financial foundations. Policies designed to help low-income families build assets gained traction in the early 1990 s largely due to individual development accounts (IDAs), which are matched savings accounts targeted for a specific use typically home purchase, postsecondary education or small business capitalization. This report provides an overview of IDAs. It also discusses research that has been conducted to determine whether such accounts are effective. Finally, the report presents policy options and challenges for legislators to keep in mind when considering individual development account programs. History of Asset Development Policy The United States has long supported asset development through public policy. The Homestead Act of 1862 provided land for families, and the GI Bill of 1944 continues to make education opportunities available to U.S. soldiers. Homeownership and education have long been supported by the federal government, and these assets remain the foundation of many Americans financial security. 3 Today, the home mortgage tax deduction is perhaps the most well-known government program that helps households accumulate wealth. Many low-income families, however, do not benefit from federal asset building policies. Home equity is the primary source of savings for most middle-income households, 4 but less than 50 percent of families in the lowest income quintile own their home; 5 therefore, they cannot take advantage of the mortgage tax deduction. Low-income households also have limited tax liability, which precludes them from taking advantage of other tax benefits. What Is an Individual Development Account? Individual development accounts were pioneered by Professor Michael Sherraden of the University of Washington St. Louis to encourage lower-income families to save and build assets. In most cases, individual development accounts can be used only for certain investments, such as first-time home purchase, postsecondary education expenses or small business capitalization. 6

2 Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool More recent policies have broadened the use of individual development accounts to include home repair, vehicle purchase or repair, and the purchase of computers or other technologies to help people find and maintain employment. 7 A small number of programs also allow funds to be used to purchase a second home, buy land or pay first and last months rent deposits. 8 Although the field is relatively new and continues to develop, significant research has shown that individual development accounts can be an effective tool to increase homeownership rates and other asset accumulation among lower-income families. 9 Individual development accounts first appeared at the federal level in the welfare reform legislation of 1996, which allowed states to include the accounts in their welfare reform plans and specified that savings in these accounts should be excluded from eligibility tests. The 1998 Assets for Independence Act established a five-year IDA demonstration program and funded it with $125 million. The demonstration period ended in 2003, but Congress has continued to fund the program with roughly $25 million per year. Administered by the Office of Community Services in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the program awards grants for individual development account matching funds to nonprofit community-based organizations, government agencies and financial institutions. Eligibility Individual development account eligibility guidelines vary. Many programs target recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). 10 Other programs require that participants have an annual income below 200 percent of the federal poverty level ($35,200 for a family of three). 11 Some programs use 80 percent of area median income as the eligibility threshold. Generally, programs require account holders to participate in financial education classes. Passed in 2008, the federal Farm Bill authorized a new individual development account program for beginning farmers and ranchers. If Congress appropriates funds for the program, competitive grants to operate individual development accounts will be awarded to nonprofits, tribes and local governments. Eligible participants would receive a 2:1 match of their savings, up to $6,000, toward purchase of farming or ranching equipment, supplies including livestock, land, building, seeds or other necessary items and training. The grant program would operate in at least 15 states, require a 50 percent local funding match and run through 2012. 12 Some individual development account programs aim to help at risk populations. To help foster teens make the transition out of state care, Washington authorized a program that provides incentives for these vulnerable young adults to save money and to meet their housing, higher education, health care and transportation needs. Match Funds Deposits into individual development accounts typically receive matching funds at a ratio ranging from 1:1 to 4:1. Some programs have different match rates for different savings goals, and matching funds come from various sources. The largest source of matching dollars is federal grants, followed by financial institutions, private foundations, and state and local governments. 13 States can provide match money with general fund appropriations, federal and state Temporary Assistance for Needy Families dollars, Community Development Block Grant funds, and tax credits for match contributors and individual account holders. States can use general funds for administrative costs. Federal Office of Refugee Resettlement funds also are available for match contributions. Administration Individual development accounts are administered by community nonprofit organizations or community action agencies in collaboration with state and local entities, banks and credit unions. Some community development corporations and affordable housing agencies also offer the accounts. Financial institutions maintain the accounts and often provide other services to the family, including budget counseling, homebuyer workshops and general financial education. Occasionally, financial institutions also provide funds for match contributions. Scope In 1993, three years before federal welfare reform, the Iowa legislature created an individual development account program. Many community-based organizations also started programs around that time. To date, at least 37 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have created state-supported individual development account programs (although

Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool 3 not all are currently active), and initiatives of some type exist in all 50 states. 14 More than 500 programs and 50,000 accounts exist nationwide in rural, urban and suburban areas, and the field continues to grow. 15 Research on the Use and Effectiveness of Individual Development Accounts Policymakers and program administrators were initially unsure about the target population s ability to build assets, based on common perceptions that low-income families have no extra money to put into savings. Research shows, however, that the poor can and will save if given the right incentives. Studies suggest savings behavior depends not just on income, but also on a combination of factors, such as the structure of policies, institutions and other incentives that both encourage and discourage savings. 16 Indeed, individual accounts have proven to be an effective strategy to increase the assets of working families. According to the largest contributor of matched funds, the federally funded Assets for Independence program, participants have deposited $36.8 million into individual development accounts. Of this amount, $15.4 million has been used to make large asset purchases, supplemented by $33.9 million in matched funds. 17 According to the Assets for Independence program, more than three-quarters of account holders are female and a similar proportion have children. One-third of participants are African American, one-fourth are white, and nearly one-fifth are Hispanic. Nearly 90 percent of participants have a high school diploma, and almost half have previously had a savings account. 18 American Dream Demonstration The American Dream Demonstration was the first study of individual development accounts. Conducted by the Corporation for Enterprise Development and the Center for Social Development at Washington University in St. Louis, the study ran from 1997 to 2003 and followed participants in the Tulsa, Okla., program, which included a 2:1 match for accounts dedicated to homeownership costs and a 1:1 match for other approved uses. According to the study, more than 60 percent of participants who withdrew money used matched withdrawals for housing purposes, most commonly home repair or improvement. Twenty-six percent used a matched withdrawal for home purchase. The average withdrawal was $1,480 per participant; including match funds, the average withdrawal was $3,431 per participant. 19 Overall, the American Dream Demonstration found that individual development accounts can significantly impact participants ability to accumulate assets. The accounts led to higher rates of homeownership and increased families real and total assets. Educational attainment also increased; more participants enrolled in postsecondary education than those who did not have an individual development account. The positive effects were even greater for African Americans, especially in terms of homeownership and retirement savings. 20 Individual development accounts also resulted in positive psychological effects for participants. Interviews conducted with account holders revealed they felt more confident and had a greater sense of responsibility. They said that having a savings account helped them think about long-term goals and future opportunities. 21 Research also suggests positive effects for children of participants, such as improved living conditions, education opportunities and positive models for savings behavior. 22 Assets for Independence Program The Office of Community Services in the federal Administration for Children and Families administers the federally funded Assets for Independence program. The most recent report on this program, based on data received from 368 of the 398 grantees for projects administered through 2006, shows: The average individual development account balance at the end of the year was $714. 23 The average withdrawal from an IDA was $887. Home purchase withdrawals were the largest, averaging $1,441. 24 Match rates varied from 1:1 to 8:1. Some match rates varied depending on the asset goal. The most common rate was 2:1. 25

4 Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool The study also showed significant differences between individual development account program participants and the study s control group. After three years, more account holders owned their own home or business and had completed some postsecondary education than those in the comparison group. The report also included a study of program administration, which showed that individual development account programs typically offer much more than matching funds. The report found that nearly all programs require counseling for participants on budgeting, credit use, savings, investments and taxes. Participants are required to attend an average of12 hours of financial literacy classes before they can withdraw their savings. 26 Three-quarters of programs provide general financial education. 27 Some also offer microenterprise development classes and postsecondary education training. Many nonprofits that administer individual development account programs also provide case management and help with employment issues, child care or transportation. Research from both programs illustrates that individual development accounts can increase home and business ownership rates and general asset accumulation among low-income families. It also indicates that financial education increases the likelihood that participants will be successful. There are, however, concerns about the programs. High Administrative Costs Individual Development Accounts can be expensive to administer, which may be partly due to the costly training services provided to account holders and the fact that there often are relatively few accounts per program. Cost-efficiency may increase as programs grow in scale. No Increase in Overall Wealth Individual development accounts often lead to some form of asset accumulation, but they do not necessarily increase overall wealth. The terms of these studies, however, were too brief to ascertain whether or IDA account holders see an increase in their net worth over the long-term. Many Unmatched Withdrawals Account holders must use withdrawals for allowable expenses in order to be eligible for match funds. Many participants withdraw unmatched amounts, which may suggest the need for more flexibility in allowable uses or the need for separate mechanisms to pay for short-term needs versus long-term asset goals. In 2006, more participants withdrew unmatched savings for emergencies or other expenses than those who completed the required financial education and made a longterm asset purchase. 28 Policy Options Create a Program Community-level programs exist in all 50 states. Policymakers first may wish to identify existing programs and determine how they might be strengthened and supported. At least 37 states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico have created individual development account programs. States that have no legislation could create a program modeled after those in other states. States may also want to consider account holders short-term needs versus their long-term goals. Program participants frequently make unmatched withdrawals, often for pressing needs that inevitably take priority over saving for a future asset purchase. Expand Uses of Current Programs States with existing programs can examine ways to change statutory language to incorporate other uses of funds, such as car purchase or repair, rent payment or other expenses. States could choose to expand the allowable uses to accommodate some short-term needs and still require long-term savings goals. States that have passed legislation more recently have authorized computer purchase if it is necessary for educational goals or a vehicle for employment purposes. Washington created an individual development account program targeted specifically toward young people who will be moving out of foster care to help them cover housing and medical costs, postsecondary education and training as well as a purchase of a computer. Other states could modify their programs to accommodate specific populations and needs.

Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool 5 Reach Indian Country Current state programs could be amended to allow Native American tribes greater access to individual development account programs. Many Native Americans may qualify to open an account based on their income. If tribal governments are not specifically granted access through legislation to create programs, however, then potentially eligible individuals often cannot participate. 29 States can amend programs so tribal governments are authorized to create individual development account programs. Fund Programs States can provide funding for individual development accounts through general fund appropriations, TANF funds, state TANF maintenance of effort money, or Community Development Block Grant money. Most states provide funds to be used as a match to individual contributions, but some states also fund administrative costs. Table 1 shows the states that provide public funding for individual development account programs. Table 1. Public Funding Sources for State IDA Programs State General Funds Match State General Funds Administration State Tax Credits for IDA Program Contributors TANF Funds for Match or Administration CDBG Funds for Match or Administration Connecticut Indiana Illinois Iowa* Minnesota New Jersey North Carolina Ohio Pennsylvania South Carolina Vermont Washington District of Columbia Illinois South Carolina Washington Utah Arkansas Connecticut Indiana Iowa Kansas Maine Missouri New Hampshire Oregon Arkansas Indiana Michigan New Hampshire New Jersey South Carolina Virginia Arkansas Connecticut Louisiana North Carolina Virginia *In 2008, Iowa created an IDA state match fund within its Department of Human Rights; these funds may not revert to any other fund(s). Sources: Center for Social Development, Washington University, 2006; NCSL, 2008; CFED, 2008. Provide Tax Credits States also provide tax credits to both individual contributors and match donors. Nine states authorize tax credits to contributors (see Table 1). In Oregon, 2005 legislation allows a tax credit against the amount of money withdrawn from an account up to $2,000 or the individual s tax liability if the withdrawal is used for home purchase. Incorporate or Integrate Asset Development Strategies Individual development accounts are one of many tactics that aim to increase low-income families asset holdings. States can examine existing policies and identify ways to integrate them as part of an overall asset development framework. Link Accounts with Federal and State Earned Income Tax Credits (EITC) The federal and state EITC for low-income working families can provide families with a tax refund of up to $4,761. Research shows that families tend to use the refunds to pay off debt or invest in longer-term financial goals. A maximum federal refund of $4,761 would go a long way toward a down payment on a home. Linking these refunds with accounts could build a family s savings. Legislators can work with local outreach campaigns and free tax preparation sites to encourage them to connect the EITC with individual development accounts.

6 Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool Remove the Asset Test from Public Assistance Programs Many public assistance programs include an asset test. Applicants are denied assistance if they have more assets than the law allows. Although TANF excludes individual development accounts from this test, states could remove the asset test from public assistance programs altogether to encourage savings through multiple avenues. Virginia removed its asset limit after only small number of applications were denied due to excess savings. 30 Promote Collaboration between Individual Development Account programs and the Family Self-Sufficiency Program States could examine ways to integrate individual development accounts with the Family Self-Sufficiency program for public housing recipients. These account holders often use their savings for the same purposes individual development account programs approve. Integration could help families increase the amount they can save through both accounts and could decrease administrative costs if programs shared resources and aligned guidelines. Incorporate Financial Education and Asset Management Most individual development account programs require that account holders participate in financial education classes. As families begin to build a savings account, they need to know how to properly manage and protect their assets. Rising consumer debt, identity theft, payday lending and home foreclosures make it important that providers, consumers and state legislatures understand their respective roles in ensuring that consumers understand the basics of financial management. Build an Asset Policy Coalition States can build coalitions to address the various ways families can build assets. At least 14 states and several municipalities currently have asset-building coalitions. Such coalitions usually include a mix of public and private sector partners, such as banks, credit unions, government agencies, nonprofits and financial advisors. 31 California. The Asset Policy Initiative of California includes more than 30 nonprofit, public and private sector leaders from across the state. The coalition focuses on various policy initiatives to create, leverage and preserve assets. Specific initiatives include creating a state financial education task force, state earned income tax credit, children s savings accounts and other educational savings accounts for low-income families. The coalition addresses homeownership concerns through a homeownership trust fund, a refundable renter s credit and zoning. To help consumers protect assets, the coalition supports legislation to curb predatory lending and expand health insurance coverage. The coalition worked with the state Legislature to pass a resolution calling for research on asset poverty. It has developed state and national partnerships and garnered media attention for asset development in general. 32 Delaware. In 2001, encouraged by state treasurer Jack Markell, Delaware Governor Ruth Ann Minner created a statewide Task Force on Financial Independence. Policy priorities include asset facilitation, incentives, protection and removal of barriers to asset accumulation. Specific policy priorities involve financial literacy, state and federal earned income tax credit, expanding current health care programs, and supporting policies that help consumers maintain assets. The task force has accomplished many goals: Financial education now counts as a work activity for TANF recipients. The Delawareans Save! IDA Collaborative received additional funding to expand the program. The Department of Labor created a fact sheet for unemployed workers that outlines available resources. Due to public education campaigns, more families have claimed the earned income tax credit. The state also adopted an economic self-sufficiency standard to calculate the amount needed to raise a family without public support. The Economic Development Office uses the standard to award certain state funds. 33 Illinois. The Illinois Asset Building Group began meeting in 2003. Led by the Heartland Alliance and the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, the coalition has identified policy priorities for education, health insurance, access to financial institutions, housing, small businesses, consumer protection, transitional jobs and transportation. The group supported legislation to expand health care coverage to low-income families, to regulate the payday lending industry and

Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool 7 to provide rental subsidies. 34 In September 2007, the state of Illinois launched its own commission, Assets Illinois, with $300,000 in funding from the Illinois Housing Development Authority. The state Department of Human Services has since allocated an additional $250,000 to support education individual development accounts in FY 2009. Michigan. The Michigan Asset Building Coalition was formed in 2005 to help low-income families save and invest, build financial security, leverage resources, and complete higher education and skills training. Although the coalition focuses on various asset-building policies, it is currently working to create a stable funding source, expand eligible uses of funds, and collaborate with the Michigan Foreclosure Task Force regarding the mortgage crisis. The coalition successfully excluded 529 college savings from public benefit eligibility consideration, expanded the pool of recipients, and helped establish a Housing and Community Development Trust Fund. 35 Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania state representative Dwight Evans, Secretary of Banking Bill Schenck and Governor Edward Rendell led an effort to create a statewide Task Force for Working Families. Priorities of the task force include financial education, moving families beyond living paycheck to paycheck, creating small businesses and fair treatment of consumers by financial institutions. The governor s budget included funding for the task force s recommended policy priorities. The Office of Financial Education has since established a clearinghouse of financial education resources, and the task force is working to advertise the availability of the earned income tax credit. 36 Washington. The state of Washington allocated $2.8 million for asset building over the 2007-2009 biennium. Of that amount, $1 million will go to individual development account program providers across the state; the remaining $1.8 million will be administered by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development to provide free startup advice, ongoing consultation and grant awards to local asset- building coalitions, many of which provide individual development account programs. In 2007, the department s Asset Building Unit awarded 13 grants totaling $624,000 to local coalitions that will serve more than a dozen Washington counties and leverage more than $2 million in local funds. 37 The Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development also is a major partner within the Washington Asset Building Coalition, an independent group of more than 50 organizations formed in 2006 to expand statewide asset-building efforts by focusing on the following priorities: Create a range of private and public prosperity products for asset building; Develop and promote public and lending policies for asset building; Market savings, smart borrowing and benefits such as the earned income tax credit; and Expand financial literacy opportunities and results statewide Challenges Individual development accounts are a relatively new policy option within the growing field of asset development. Several challenges face the individual development account community. Reach More Individuals When more than one in five families in America is considered poor, 50,000 accounts is a small number. Bringing these programs to scale and reaching more families is a challenge that policymakers may wish to consider. Shift from Demonstration to Permanent Programs Because the individual development account field is relatively new, many state programs created at the turn of the century were structured as demonstration programs. As a result, many have either been terminated or are currently winding down. Shifting legislative goals from short-lived to longer-term programs is necessary if such programs are to be available in the future. Find and Retain Match Sources Match rates allow a low-income family to turn small savings into a substantial asset. Securing and maintaining public and private funding sources is critical to the success of individual development account programs.

8 Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool Provide Follow-up Services Protecting assets that families worked hard for is essential to long-term financial security. Homeownership is a way to build financial security, but it also can be a quick path to foreclosure and onerous debt if families do not have the tools to protect their assets. A recent study found that when individual development account holders receive homeownership education, foreclosure rates can be as low as one in more than five hundred participants. 38 Recognize that Homeownership Might not Be Right for Everyone Research suggests that the mortgage tax deduction is very effective for those who have low incomes and little tax liability. Studies also show that low-income families often do not stay in their home long enough to benefit from appreciation. The high cost of housing and a possible housing market decline can result in an overall financial loss for families. Instead of focusing solely on homeownership, individual development accounts can be a tool to address other housing needs, such as rent deposits. Conclusion A growing number of experts and policymakers view asset building as a strategy to reduce poverty and build wealth for low-income families, and research has shown that individual development accounts can be an effective asset-building tool. These accounts are not for everyone, but they have shown the potential to move some families who are living paycheck to paycheck to more stable and resilient financial footing. State lawmakers can play a vital role in pursuing innovations that make individual accounts more effective and affordable, and states have an opportunity to take the lead in shaping the overall future of asset-building policy.

Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool 9 Notes 1. U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P60-233. Carmen DeNavas-Walt, Bernadette D.Proctor and Jessica Smith, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2007). 2. Corporation for Enterprise Development, 2007-2008 Assets and Opportunity Scorecard (Washington, D.C.: CFED, 2008), 3. 3. Karen Edwards and Lisa Marie Mason, State Policy Trends for Individual Development Accounts in the United States: 1993-2003: Policy Report (St. Louis: Washington University Center for Social Development, May 2003), 1. 4. NCSL tabulations of wealth using the 2004 Survey of Consumer Finance. 5. Brian K. Bucks, Arthur B. Kennickell and Kevin B. Moore, Recent Changes in U.S. Family Finances: Evidence from the 2001 and 2004 Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Bulletin 92 (February 2006): tables 8 and 22. 6. Edwards and Mason, State Policy Trends for Individual Development Accounts in the United States, 1. 7. See for example, 2008 Iowa Laws, (chapter number not yet assigned) SB 2430. 8. Corporation For Economic Development, A Look at the Growing Individual Development Account Field: Results from the 2003 Survey of IDA Programs (Washington, D.C.: CFED, 2003), 24. 9. Gregory Mills et al., Assets for Independence Act Evaluation: Impact Study: Final Report prepared for the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (Cambridge: Abt Associates Inc., February 2008), iv. 10. Ibid., 5. 11. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2008 Poverty Guidelines (Washington, D.C: DHHS, 2008), http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/08poverty.shtml. 12. U.S. House of Representatives, Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 110-234. 110 th Cong., 2d sess., May 22, 2008. 13. Ray Boshara, Individual Development Accounts: Policies to Build Savings and Assets for the Poor, Welfare Reform and Beyond, Policy Brief No. 32 (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, March 2005), 2; CFED, A Look at the Growing Individual Development Account Field, 24. 14. Corporation for Economic Development, Resource Guide: Individual Development Accounts, Assets and Opportunity Institute (Washington, D.C. CFED, September 2007), 3. 15. Corporation for Economic Development, Individual Development Accounts: Providing Opportunities to Build Assets (Washington, D.C. CFED, January 2007), 2. 16. See, generally, Peter Tufano and Daniel Schneider, Using Financial Innovation to Support Savers: From Coercion to Excitement. Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper No. 08-075, pre-press version (April 2008); forthcoming in Access, Assets and Poverty, Rebecca Blank and Michael Barr, eds: (Russell Sage, 2009). 17. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Community Services, Assets for Independence Program: Status at the Conclusion of the Seventh Year: Interim Report to Congress (Washington, D.C.: Office of Community Services, 2007), vi. 18. Ibid., xi. 19. Gregory Mills et al., Evaluation of the American Dream Demonstration: Final Evaluation Report (Cambridge: Abt Associates Inc., August 2004), v. 20. Ibid., vii. 21. Margaret Sherraden et al., Saving in Low-Income Households: Evidence from Interviews with Participants in the American Dream Demonstration (St. Louis: Washington University Center for Social Development, January 2005), 147. 22. Ibid., 159-161. 23. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Community Services, Assets for Independence Program: Status at the Conclusion of the Seventh Year: Interim Report to Congress, xiii. 24. Ibid., xiii. 25. Ibid., x.

10 Individual Development Accounts: An Asset Building Tool 26. Ibid., 26. 27. Ibid., 26. 28. Ibid., vi. 29. Alisa Larson, Individual Development Account Handbook and Tribal IDA Program Profiles: A Guide to IDA Programs in Native Communities (First Nations Development Institute, September 2003); Juliet King, Sara Hicks, Karen Edwards, and Alisa Larson, American Indian Tribal Communities and Individual Development Account (IDA) Policy (St. Louis: Washington University, Center for Social Development, April 2003). 30. Mark Golden, Asset Policy In Virginia, presentation at Fourth Annual State IDA Conference, St. Louis, April 20-22, 2005. 31. Brandeis University, Heller School for Social Policy and Management Institute on Assets and Social Policy, State and City Asset Building Initiatives (February 2008), 2-6. 32. Heather McCulloch, Promoting Economic Security for Working Families: State Asset Building Initiatives (Washington, D.C.: Fannie Mae Foundation, July 2005), 9-11. 33. Ibid., 11-12. 34. Ibid., 16-18. 35. The Michigan Asset Building Coalition, Compiled Notes and Commentary from the June 26, 2008 Reconvening (The Michigan Asset Building Coalition, 2008), 7. 36. Heather McCulloch, 13-15. 37. Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development, http://www.cted.wa.gov/ site/932/default.aspx, Sept. 14, 2008. 38. Robert Friedman, Affordable Home Ownership Done Right (Washington, D.C., Corporation for Enterprise Development, 2008), 1.

7700 East First Place Denver, Colorado 80230 (303) 364-7700 William T. Pound, Executive Director 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., #515 Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 624-5400 www.ncsl.org 2008 by the. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-58024-542-5