Community development corporation
A community development corporation (CDC) is a not-for-profit organization incorporated to provide programs, offer services and engage in other activities that promote and support community development. CDCs usually serve a geographic location such as a neighborhood or a town. They often focus on serving lower-income residents or struggling neighborhoods. They can be involved in a variety of activities including economic development, education, community organizing and real estate development. These organizations are often associated with the development of affordable housing.
- Real estate development
- Economic development
- Nonprofit incubation
- Youth and leadership development
- Community planning
- Master planning for retail and community development
- Community organizing
- Lessening neighborhood tensions
- Facilitating community and stakeholder participation in local programs and activities
- Facilitating community access to targeted grants
In some jurisdictions in the United States, a CDC is by definition targeted towards direct investment in the community, while a “community development advocacy organization” is a category eligible for recognition as a tax-exempt charity or service organization.
- Abyssinian Development Corporation
- Accion USA
- Bedford Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation
- Chicanos Por La Causa
- Mexicantown Community Development Corporation
- Coalfield Development Corporation
- Sunshine State Economic Development Corporation
- ^ “Guide to the Bedford-Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation publication and photograph collection ARC.124”. New York Public Library. Brooklyn Historical Society. 9 December 2011.
- Florence Contant (1974), Community development corporations: an annotated bibliography, Exchange Bibliography (530), US: Council of Planning Librarians, ISSN 0010-9959 – via Internet Archive
What is HUD Doing to Support Community Development?
What is Community Development?
Community development activities build stronger and more resilient communities through an ongoing process of identifying and addressing needs, assets, and priority investments. Community development activities may support infrastructure, economic development projects, installation of public facilities, community centers, housing rehabilitation, public services, clearance/acquisition, microenterprise assistance, code enforcement, homeowner assistance and many other identified needs. Federal support for community development encourages systematic and sustained action by State, and local governments.Where Can Individuals Find Assistance?
Individuals looking for assistance can:
- Find rental, homebuyer, and homeowner assistance
- Find resources for homeless persons, including, youth, veterans, and the chronically homeless
- Find help for victims of foreclosure, and Hurricane Sandy, and persons living with HIV/AIDS.
What is HUD Doing to Support Community Development?
The Office of Block Grant Assistance administers funds allocated to State and local governments to address locally identified community development needs.
- CDBG Entitlement Program provides annual grants on a formula basis to entitled cities and counties to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons.
- CDBG State Program allows States to award grants to smaller units of general local government that develop and preserve decent affordable housing, to provide services to the most vulnerable in our communities, and to create and retain jobs.
- CDBG HUD Administered Non-Entitled Counties in Hawaii Program provides annual grants on a formula basis to Hawaii, Kauai, and Maui counties to provide decent housing and a suitable living environment and expand economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons.
- CDBG Insular Area Program provides grants to four designated insular areas: American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands to provide decent housing and a suitable living environment and expand economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons.
- CDBG Program Colonias Set-Aside requires the border states of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas to set aside a percentage of their annual State CDBG allocations for use in the Colonia to help meet the needs of the Colonias residents in relationship to the need for potable water, adequate sewer systems, or decent, safe and sanitary housing.
- Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program is the loan guarantee provision of the CDBG Program and provides communities with a source of financing for economic development, housing rehabilitation, public facilities, and large-scale physical development projects.
- CDBG Disaster Recovery Program provides flexible grants to help cities, counties, and States recover from Presidentially-declared disasters, especially in low-income areas, subject to availability of supplemental appropriations.
- The Neighborhood Stabilization Program provided grants to communities that suffered from foreclosures and abandonment to purchase and redevelop foreclosed and abandoned homes and residential properties. Congress authorized NSP grants between 2008 and 2011; no new funds are available.
- Brownfields Economic Development Initiative provides grants to assist cities with the redevelopment of abandoned, idled and underused industrial and commercial facilities where expansion and redevelopment is burdened by real or potential environmental contamination.
What Information Does HUD Provide?
The HUD Exchange provides a hub for the latest Community Development resources, updates, and information including, tools and templates, research, evaluations, best practices, guides, training manuals, as well as:
- Email Updates – To receive CPD communications about program policy, upcoming trainings, resources, reporting deadlines, technical assistance, and more, sign up on the HUD Exchange Mailing List.
- Training Opportunities – For information on upcoming events, self-paced online training, and recorded webinars, go to Training and Events.
- Grantee Information – To view amounts awarded to organizations under HUD programs over the past several years, go to CPD Allocations and Awards. To learn more about the agencies and organizations that have received funding, visit About Grantees.
- In-depth Advising – To learn about extended communication or long-term assistance available to CPD grantees, visit Technical Assistance.
- Assistance with Program or Reporting System Questions – If you have a question related to DRGR, IDIS, or NSP, submit your question and get a response through Ask A Question.
If you are an organization with a policy question related to Brownfields Economic Development Initiative, CDBG, or Section 108 Loan Guarantee, contact your local HUD Field Office for assistance.How Can My Organization Receive Funds?
CDBG funds are allocated to states, counties and cities on a formula basis. If you are an interested citizen, contact your local municipal or county officials for more information. It is possible that you live in a jurisdiction or area that is a direct or indirect grantee. You will find grantee contact information in the About Grantees section of the HUD Exchange.
How to Build a Case for Community Development and Affordable Housing
In the new administration, housing programs will feel the pressure of budgetary cuts and tax reform. Advocates should be careful not to put down other programs in the process of defending their own, or everyone will lose.Chris Estes -April 25, 2017
Since the general election, many in the affordable housing and community development fields have expressed concern that both impending budget pressures and tax reforms will be disastrous for programs that provide affordable housing.
It might be easy to assign these challenges to the outcomes of the national election and an assumption that there’s a lack of support for housing and community development by the majority party.
The reality is that despite tremendous progress and success in our work, we still have not built strong enough political will at the national level to adequately respond to the country’s affordability and community development challenges regardless of which party is in the majority or in the White House.
And yet, in this administration, there is going to be increased pressure across the full spectrum of affordable housing programs. If we are not careful, this could lead to a segmented, narrow defense of each program by different coalitions that could end up working against one another. This is especially easy to do in an environment where funding for housing affordability has fallen steadily further behind demand over the past two decades.
Early in my career I observed that in order to get attention for the issues we were most passionate about, or as a response to funding cuts, housing advocates sometimes emphasized their differences from or even denigrated parts of the affordable housing spectrum.
This could come in the form of homeless advocates emphasizing the need for short-term rental assistance over rental-production programs, or Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) advocates emphasizing that program’s “efficiency” when compared to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)/Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs, or homeownership advocates arguing that rental housing traps people in low-income communities. I have personally heard these arguments from the mouths of dedicated and well-meaning advocates and practitioners at the local, state, and federal levels.
Happily, I have also witnessed the opposite when people who work in each of those areas spoke positively about the full housing spectrum, how it all works, and the funding needed to improve neighborhoods, communities, and individuals and families. I have also heard much more of this kind of messaging from national organizations in the last few years. I hope that everyone would understand that in order to achieve the kind of public support and political will needed to secure funding to adequately respond to the nation’s housing challenges, we need everyone speaking positively about these connections and successes at all levels of housing.
As president and CEO of the National Housing Conference, I was especially pleased with the conversation at our legislative outlook plenary at the Solutions for Affordable Housing convening last December. We had an excellent group of panelists, who represented perspectives from across the continuum: David Gasson of Boston Capital; Cy Richardson of the National Urban League; Nan Roman of the National Alliance to End Homelessness, and Christopher Ptomey of Habitat for Humanity. All of the national leaders emphasized the interconnection between programs in their advocacy to legislators and were great models for all of us in this work.
Even if we perfect our messages around the important cross-sector benefits and work together to support the full housing continuum, that will still not be enough to build adequate public support, political will, and funding. That’s because far too often, especially at the state and federal levels, the only people doing the advocacy for affordable housing are the developers, syndicators, and agencies administering these programs.
While all these groups certainly should be involved in advocacy and education efforts, we are still missing an important ingredient to change the narrative, perception, and power of this work—the residents themselves. Even when residents have been involved, most regularly around ending homelessness and promoting entry-level homeownership, there’s often too much emphasis on the personal transformation of the individual without acknowledging the programs and staff that also made it possible.
Traditionally there has been a lot of resident involvement regarding public housing and project-based developments because there was some funding for resident organizing. However, the vast majority of the efforts I have seen are oriented toward problems in these developments (which should be highlighted and addressed) and not toward supporting the value and benefits of this housing stock and funding.
There is going to be increased pressure across the full spectrum of affordable housing programs. If we are not careful, this could lead to a segmented, narrow defense of each program by different coalitions that could end up working against each other.
Engaging and empowering residents is not easy, or simple to do. But there are some tremendous examples out there, especially the work the Center for Community Change is doing to organize residents of tax credit properties on the West Coast as grassroots advocates for the spectrum of affordable-housing programs. Residents plan and organize advocacy efforts to speak out in support of affordable housing at the local level. They have also been active in supporting local and state funding initiatives that have successfully increased resources for affordable housing production.
If we are going to change the affordable housing narrative (for example, get rid of the idea that it is only for people who don’t work), it is vital that we fully harness the power of having the people who benefit most from affordable housing programs (especially in rental housing) be the faces and voices of our advocacy and education efforts.
All of this is not to say that everyone in the field must agree on every policy point or not focus on their area of expertise. We can come together under a broad, big tent to see our common interdependence and interconnectedness.
This can happen around broad themes like:
- Affordable housing as infrastructure (for our low- to moderate-income workforce and vulnerable populations)
- Protecting vital housing programs at HUD and the USDA
- Protecting the LIHTC in tax reform efforts
- Ensuring safe and sustainable homeownership
Within those themes and goals, many coalitions and efforts can be developed to educate and engage policymakers from both parties and the public about why this work is so vital to economic sustainability and community well being.
While there is much political uncertainty at the federal level, housing affordability challenges are finally beginning to penetrate the political consciousness in most cities that are growing in population, and we have begun to see more focus from local politicians on these issues. The challenge will be for these cities to move beyond the partisan blue/red labels and work in broad coalition with one another, framing themselves as engines of economic growth, entrepreneurship, finance, and opportunity that are vital to the national economy and all regions of the country.
Likewise, affordability, housing quality, stability, and community development are also significant issues in more rural and exurban settings, as well as in cities that are experiencing economic and population decline. These regions cut across blue and red state divides and create opportunities for coalition building from different states that can bring legislators from both parties together to see affordable housing and community development efforts as vital infrastructure.
There is no doubt that both difficulties and change lie ahead for this work at the federal level. How we respond to both threats and opportunities, and how we position our work to be more successful, better understood, and more supported, is up to all of us. I remain hopeful that there is a path forward, one that brings us together, not apart, and one that includes those who experience these challenges firsthand.
Housing Policy Guide
APA’s Housing Policy guide identifies policy solutions for planners and local, state, and federal elected officials that address housing challenges — including accessibility, affordability, and availability — plaguing rapid and slow growth communities nationwide.
Housing Policy Guide
The Housing Policy Guide promotes specific, actionable guidance that builds upon the policy ideas first identified in our 2006 Housing Policy Guide and integrates the policy principles that make up our Planning Home Action Agenda.Get the Guide
Policy Guide Working Group Chair Jennifer Raitt describes how the new guide addresses trends that have emerged since 2006 — like public and private finance, resiliency, and zoning — and how APA members and planners can use the guide as a tool to effect change not only in their communities but also at the state and federal levels.
Advocate for Policies That Address Factors Driving the Housing Crisis
Today’s housing challenges demand better tools and better planning.
Shape state and federal housing policy outcomes by contacting your elected officials today:
- Share APA’s six-point Planning Home Action Agenda with your state representative, senator, and governor.
- Urge your U.S. representative and senators to support the highest possible funding levels for critical housing and community development programs like CDBG, HOME, and Choice Neighborhoods.
This guide was approved by the APA Delegate Assembly on April 14, 2019, and ratified by the APA Board of Directors on May 14, 2019.
- Membership Overview
- Join as a Planner
- Join as a Student
- Join as a Commissioner
- Join as an Academic
- Join From Outside the U.S.
- Membership for Allied Professionals & Citizens
- Membership Renewal
- Member Directory
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Member Dues
- Knowledge Center Overview
- Applied Research
- Research KnowledgeBase
- Topic Based Resources
- Planning Advisory Service
- APA Library
Education and Events
- AICP Overview
- Why AICP?
- Get Certified!
- Candidate Pilot Program
- Certification Maintenance
- Advanced Specialty Certification
- AICP Fellows
- AICP Commission
- AICP Programs
Policy and Advocacy
Housing, Theory and Society
|Discipline||Housing studies, urban studies, social policy|
|Edited by||Hannu Ruonavaara|
|Former name(s)||Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research|
|ISO 4||Hous. Theory Soc.|
|Journal homepageOnline accessOnline archive|
Housing, Theory and Society is a quarterly peer-reviewed academic journal covering the fields of housing studies, social theory and social policy. The editor-in-chief is Hannu Ruonavaara (University of Turku) and it is published by Routledge. It was established in 1984 as Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, obtaining its current name in 1999. According to the Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2017 impact factor of 1.167.
- ^ “Housing, Theory and Society”. 2017 Journal Citation Reports. Web of Science (Social Sciences ed.). Clarivate Analytics. 2018.
|This article about an urban planning journal is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.|
See tips for writing articles about academic journals. Further suggestions might be found on the article’s talk page.
- Routledge academic journals
- English-language journals
- Publications established in 1984
- Quarterly journals
- Urban studies and planning journals
- Humanities journal stubs
- Urban studies and planning stubs