Congregation Sponsored Affordable Housing

Can They Play a Role in Sustainable Urban Development?

Catherine C. Fisher (Loma Linda University), Larry Ortiz (Loma Linda University), Qais Alemi (Loma Linda University), Susan Lares Nakoaka (UCLA)

Across the United States religious congregations are repurposing aging buildings and under-utilized land to build affordable housing (LISC-Local Initiatives Support Corporation, 2020). Declines in U.S. church membership and aging religious buildings pose an increasing economic incentive. This phenomenon is of interest as the United States grapples with an affordable housing crisis. Affordable housing units are notoriously difficult to build due to the cost and lack of available urban land. Low-income housing projects are habitually voted against at the city council level due to local neighborhood opposition and exclusionary zoning laws (Rothwell and Massey 2009).

This research aims to examine how congregations form development partnerships and what successful planning strategies they utilize to gain city approval and accomplish affordable housing construction. Secondly, this research compares faith-based development planning activities to urban planning standards for project design and social integration. Thirdly, this article explores whether congregation members social networks were utilized to obtain support for the affordable housing project. I adapted survey items measuring forms of social capital mediated by organizations for civic engagement and political participation.

The study sample consisted of a total of 33 participants representing faith-based development projects. They were recruited from a sampling frame of 99 development projects between 2008-2023 that were identified in an earlier scoping review of academic and media databases. Data collection consisted of 32 interviews and 31 online surveys of congregation leaders or their affiliated non-profit development staff involved in the planning process.

A key finding of this study is that these congregation-sponsored housing projects advocate for deeper affordability to serve lower income households. In ten cases, these projects created a 55-75 year “ground lease” to ensure the property would remain affordable and not be converted to market rate units in the future. A second key finding is that congregation member relationships played a significant role in overcoming neighborhood opposition, otherwise known as “NIMBYism.” Congregation member relationships positively correlate with the following urban planning standards: obtaining diverse community partnerships and creating onsite social support services to maintain a healthy living environment for low-income residents.

This purposive sample represented diverse mainline religious denominations located across all four U.S. census regions, including Presbyterian, Episcopal, Catholic, Methodist, African American Baptist and Jewish congregations and coalitions.  

Analysis of the survey sample (N = 31) found these congregation-sponsored affordable housing projects produced a total of 2,426 affordable units and most frequently served formerly homeless adults, low-income families with children, and seniors/older adults.

Several key lessons or best practices emerged from qualitative interview analysis (N=32) and were divided into project phases. In the “envisioning stage,” faith leaders describe the importance of obtaining a unified commitment from their congregation members and the denomination governing body to undertake a housing development project. Secondly, participants shared the importance of finding the right developer who would honor the congregation’s vision. One third of the sample reported the congregation created its own affiliated nonprofit community development organization (CDC) to lead the development.

In the “pre-planning phase” a common challenge identified by ten participants was navigating conflicts with the developer partnership over the design of the building and level of affordability of the housing units, as well as negotiating the congregation’s share of revenue. An African American Baptist church leader explained, “…often a developer wants to put the church in the backseat. Our lawyer pushed back and negotiated for a larger percentage of the deal and [percentage] revenue.” Faith leaders recommended arranging for a long-term ground lease with a developer to ensure ownership control and long-term housing affordability, a theme reported by ten (32%) of the study participants.

During “the planning phase,” faith leaders report that one of the biggest challenges were the lengthy waits to secure the state LIHTC tax credit award, and some projects faced significant delays to obtain require public and private funding. The second biggest planning challenge was overcoming neighborhood opposition: survey results found that 39% of congregation-led affordable housing development projects reported “moderate to severe” neighborhood opposition, compared to mild opposition from city government.

In terms of social capital utilization, congregation member community engagement activities were described by 27 survey participants, such as speaking at neighborhood associations and inviting input, conducting door to door outreach, and prompting members to attend city council meetings. Congregation members’ political participation was reported in 25 cases, such as speaking publicly at city meetings, securing the support of key political officials, organizing rallies, and lobbying for reforms to city charters to allow density waivers or new zoning. As one Baptist leader summarized, “we held open houses for three days, welcoming community members. We had 22 [legal] hearings and even spoke at the county board.”

In the “post construction and management” phase, the importance of good property management and tenant social support services emerged as a key theme. Most projects reported providing support services such as community life centers, social/recreational activities, case management, childcare services, and counseling services. Survey participants (75%) reported that the congregation and its nonprofit were directly involved in providing a portion of the social support services to low-income residents.

To compare faith-based development to urban planning standards for design and quality of the social environment, the survey adapted and expanded items from the LEED Neighborhood Development rating system (Charter of the New Urbanism 2000, Szibbo. 2016). Survey responses demonstrate that projects attained a high percentage of selected urban planning standards. An important finding is that 84% of these congregation-sponsored developments were in areas with higher job opportunities and 87% reported they were in diverse mixed-income neighborhoods vs. high poverty areas.

This mixed method study addresses a significant gap in what is known about faith-based housing development and identifies best practices from the standpoint of faith leaders, which can help stimulate future efforts. Comparison to new urbanism standards show promising alignment with urban planning goals to increase socially sustainable affordable housing.

Read the full UAR article here.

References

Charter of the New Urbanism. 2000. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 20(4), 339-341. https://doi.org/10,1177/027046760002000417

Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC). 2020, February. “Putting Faith In a Local-

and Indigenous Solution for Affordable Housing.” Retrieved from

https://www.lisc.org/our-stories/story/putting-faith-local-ingenious-solution-affordable-housing/

Rothwell, Johnathon, and Douglas S. Massey. 2009. “The Effect of Density Zoning on Racial Segregation in U.S. Urban Areas.” Urban Affairs Review 44(6): 779-806. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087409334

Szibbo, Nicola. 2016. “Lessons for LEED® for Neighborhood Development, Social Equity, and Affordable Housing.” Journal of the American Planning Association 82:1, 37-49. doi: 10.1080/01944363.2015.1110709


Catherine C. Fisher, PhD, MSW recently completed her PhD in Social Welfare and Research in the School of Behavioral Health at Loma Linda University. Previously she served as clinical faculty with the Azusa Pacific University Social Work Program. Her research interests include faith-based partnerships, homeless services and housing policies as well as program planning. She has published in the Social Work Research journal and presented at the North American Association for Christians in Social Work (NACSW).

Larry Ortiz, PhD, MSW is a professor at Loma Linda University in the Department of Social Work and Social Ecology, and Director of the Social Welfare & Social Research PhD Program. His research focuses on race and ethnic studies, critical race theory, Latino/a issues, social justice and community practice. He serves on the Board of Accreditation for the Council on Social Work Education.

Qais Alemi, PhD serves as professor at Loma Linda University, School of Behavioral Health, where his research is dedicated to understanding the intricacies of health disparities among marginalized populations. Specializing in the intersection of socio-cultural and economic factors, he explores the nuanced challenges faced by underserved communities, with a particular emphasis on the mental health and psychosocial needs of individuals affected by political violence.

Susan Lares Nakaoka PhD, MSW is the Practicum Director in the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs Department of Social Welfare. Her research and writing focuses on the intersection of race and community development, critical race pedagogy and Asian American and Pacific Islander communities. She is co-director of the Critical Race Scholars in Social Work (CRSSW) collective and lead author in a chapter on LatCrit and social work epistemology in the Social Work, White Supremacy, and Racial Justice, Oxford University Press.

Next
Next

Political Lessons from American Cities: Seattle