You would think federally funded housing weatherization and housing rehabilitation program are on the same side; after all both serve low- and moderate-income homeowners. But these programs are funded by different agencies with different funding mechanisms, eligibility criteria, and administrative processes, according to a Fall 2010 Communities and Banking Journal, (“Coordinating Homeowner Assistance: Weatherization and Housing Rehabilitation").
These differences fragment the delivery of services to clients. The Ford Foundation and the Energy Programs Consortium tackled the problems the differences cause in 2002 when they developed a pilot program to show how local entities could combine weatherization and housing rehab assistance. They also had the University of North Carolina’s Center for Urban and Regional Studies evaluate the program.
The center found that:
1. many clients need money and technical assistance for several different problems such as new insulation and leaky roofs, but the funding agencies make it hard to provide timely, comprehensive assistance;
2. the programs’ income limits don’t match up; and
3. the programs have different funding cycles and expenditure requirements.
These and other findings suggest that “programs are structured in ways that prevent local agencies from achieving greater efficiencies and providing better, more comprehensive services by coordinating funding from the separate programs.”
Ok. So what’s the solution? Look at things from the clients’ point-of-view. At least that’s the approach Tim Brown’s IDEO uses to design everything from tooth brushes to floor plans. Brown sees clients and customers as collaborators, not “objects of analysis or, worse, as the hapless target of predatory marketing strategies.
