Community Development Funding

I’ve worked in community development finance long enough to see a pattern — one that either accelerates or strangles access to capital in emerging market communities. Here it is: Municipal investment in CDFIs is the difference-maker. I’ve seen what happens when cities put real dollars behind local CDFIs. In places like Philadelphia, the city stepped up with capital during the pandemic, deploying funds through trusted CDFI partners. That decision kept small businesses alive, especially in Black and Brown neighborhoods where banking relationships were limited or non-existent. In Chicago, the city doubled down by using CDFIs to deploy grants and loans through the Neighborhood Opportunity Fund and Recovery Plan programs. Entire blocks began to come back to life — with community-owned businesses hiring locally and reinvesting into the very neighborhoods they grew up in. But I’ve also seen the flip side — where cities don’t invest in their CDFIs. And the results are painful. Business dreams delayed or abandoned. Local jobs never created. Disinvestment becomes generational. When municipalities don’t put resources behind local CDFIs, they send an unspoken message: “You’re on your own.” And in the communities we serve — that message can be the nail in the coffin for growth, ownership, and economic mobility. CDFIs are built for this work. We know the neighborhoods. We know the entrepreneurs. We take the calls at night, we sit down at kitchen tables, and we structure deals that traditional lenders won’t touch. But we can’t do it on vision alone. We need capital. If you’re a municipal leader or economic development stakeholder reading this — investing in your local CDFI isn’t a political favor. It’s economic infrastructure. It’s how you build a stronger, more inclusive city. Period. Let’s stop talking about equity…..and start funding it. #CDFI #MunicipalInvestment #CommunityDevelopment #EconomicJustice #AccessToCapital #EmergingMarkets #PublicPrivatePartnerships #BlackBusiness #LatinoEntrepreneurs #WealthBuilding #LocalFirst #CDFIPower

New research from the Urban Institute confirms what #FHLBank members see every day: when local lenders have reliable access to Federal Home Loan Bank advances, communities see more #housing and #communitydevelopment #lending. That increase in lending is one of the most practical ways to expand #housingsupply and improve #affordability over time. The Urban Institute finds that increases in FHLBank borrowing are associated with higher overall lending by small #banks, with even larger gains in residential and commercial real estate lending that support housing and community development. More credit flowing into mortgage and development pipelines helps get more homes built, preserved, and financed. These results reinforce that FHLBank advances are not an end in themselves, but a catalyst that turns balance sheet #liquidity into mortgages, small business loans, and neighborhood investment, exactly the kinds of projects that relieve pressure on tight housing markets. By stabilizing the cost and availability of mortgage credit, FHLBank liquidity helps keep borrowing costs lower than they otherwise would be, saving homeowners money and supporting more sustainable, affordable homeownership. Advances and targeted community lending programs also channel capital into affordable housing production and preservation, supporting projects that add to the housing stock, especially in underserved markets where supply constraints are most acute. The FHLBanks are member-owned cooperatives that exist to provide dependable, cost-effective liquidity so local lenders can keep serving families, small businesses, and communities in all economic conditions. That support enables members to finance affordable rental housing, first-time homebuyer opportunities, and community facilities that would otherwise struggle to pencil out. This study validates that FHLBanks turn stability into possibility and capital into community impact by powering lending that helps build and preserve affordable housing, create jobs, and strengthen local economies, helping ease the affordability crunch while expanding housing supply over the long term. https://lnkd.in/eTUx2bcd

$12.6B Signal Everyone's Missing in Disadvantaged Communities 🏗️ Think clean energy only benefits wealthy neighborhoods? California just revealed a groundbreaking approach that's flipping the script on who wins in the energy transition. Let's decode this overlooked opportunity: 1. The Historical Challenge • Disadvantaged communities bear most pollution burden • Heavy transport routes concentrated in poor areas • Clean tech jobs often bypass these neighborhoods • Previous transitions left these communities behind 2. The Market Signal • $12.6B hydrogen infrastructure program launched • 40% of benefits required to go to disadvantaged areas • Federal funding already secured ($1.2B) • Focus on high-impact sectors like ports and transport 3. The Hidden Opportunity • Technical colleges developing hydrogen job training • High-paying careers without 4-year degrees • Manufacturing and maintenance jobs incoming • Community support already building Here's the key insight: While most see disadvantaged communities as challenging markets for clean tech, smart companies are discovering they're actually ideal launch points - combining critical infrastructure, eager workforce, and now significant federal support. Question for energy leaders: Are we thinking too narrowly about where to deploy clean energy solutions? What opportunities are we missing by overlooking these communities? #CleanEnergy #EnergyEquity #CommunityDevelopment

This isn’t charity - it’s shared infrastructure. The CDFI Fund isn’t a handout. It’s a proven system that keeps capital flowing into communities - and fuels real returns for banks, investors, and the economy. When we protect the pipeline that connects capital to community, we protect one of the best ROI stories in banking. When we talk about protecting the CDFI Fund, we’re not just talking about community impact - we’re talking about return on investment for the entire financial system. For decades, Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) have helped banks expand access to capital in markets that traditional lending alone can’t always reach. These partnerships are not just good for communities - they’re good for business. Every dollar invested through a CDFI has historically leveraged up to twelve dollars in additional private capital, according to Treasury reports. That’s a multiplier effect that most asset classes would envy. The ROI is clear: For banks, CDFI partnerships enhance CRA performance, strengthen brand reputation, and deepen customer relationships in emerging and underserved markets. For communities, these investments fund small businesses, affordable housing, childcare centers, and health clinics - assets that build local economic resilience. For the economy, this flow of capital creates jobs, stabilizes neighborhoods, and fosters innovation at the local level. If the CDFI Fund were dismantled, this ecosystem - this pipeline of capital and trust - could be severely disrupted. The infrastructure that connects banks, investors, and communities is not easily rebuilt. I’ve seen firsthand how this works in practice. A regional bank partners with a CDFI to finance a small business expansion in a rural area. The CDFI absorbs some of the early risk, supported by federal funding, leveraged by private sector funding and philanthropic grants, and the bank provides senior debt. That small business grows, hires ten new employees, and deposits its earnings right back into the bank that believed in it. That’s not just social ROI - that’s economic ROI in motion. Eliminating the CDFI Fund isn’t about cutting bureaucracy; it’s about cutting a proven engine of growth. The New Markets Tax Credit Program, also administered through the CDFI Fund, has generated billions in private investment and created or retained hundreds of thousands of jobs nationwide. These are tangible outcomes - measurable, reportable, and repeatable. The CDFI Fund represents more than programs and partnerships - it represents possibility. It’s proof that when capital connects with purpose, growth becomes shared, sustainable, and real. Protecting this pipeline means believing in a financial system that works for everyone - and that’s an investment worth defending. #ProtectThePipeline #CRA #CDFI #AccessToCapital #CommunityDevelopment #NMTC

🌱📑 Demystifying Mindful Regeneration: S106 Agreements and Social Value 🌳When new developments are planned, councils often require developers to sign Section 106 agreements (S106). These legally binding agreements ensure that developers contribute to local communities impacted by their projects. But how do S106 agreements work? And how are the funds used? Let's break it down: ➕ Calculating Contributions: Contributions are based on factors like development size, type, and council guidelines. Often calculated per unit or square footage, they're negotiated individually, ensuring positive community contributions without overburdening services. 💷 Utilisation of Contributions: S106 funds are used in various ways: 🏠 Affordable Housing: Developers either build affordable housing or contribute to funds for future builds. 🚌 Local Infrastructure: Improvements can include roads, transport, parks, or community facilities. ✏️ Education: S106 funds can support schools, classrooms, and resources. 🏥 Healthcare: Contributions may fund new clinics or support existing facilities. 🌿 Environmental Improvements: Funds can improve local environments, creating green spaces or supporting wildlife habitats. 💸 Transparency and Spending: While S106 funds must be spent according to agreements, there's no geographic requirement. This allows councils to pool contributions for larger projects benefiting wider areas. Many councils now publish S106 information, demonstrating funds are spent transparently and effectively. 💡Innovative Usage: Some councils use S106 funds in innovative ways: ❇️ Co-working Spaces: Creating affordable workspaces for entrepreneurs and freelancers. ✳️ Community Gardens: Providing green spaces for residents to grow food and learn about sustainability. 🟢 Green Energy Projects: Supporting renewable energy projects, reducing carbon emissions, and promoting sustainability. 🟩 Digital Skills Programs: Funding programs teaching residents to use technology, preparing them for digital economy jobs. ✅ Cultural and Artistic Projects: Supporting local arts initiatives like public art installations, theaters, or music festivals. 🌇 Examples: 🦖Cambridge City Council: Created Cambridge Science Park, a tech hub promoting local economic growth and job creation. 🦎 Southwark Council: Funded Bankside Open Spaces Trust, creating numerous public gardens, parks, and green spaces. 🐢 Bristol City Council: Supported Bristol Energy Cooperative, generating renewable energy and reinvesting profits into local sustainability projects. I would love to hear your experience and what you wish would have happened… Next up: Green New Deal, proposed legislation in the US aimed to address climate change and economic inequality. #mindfulregeneration #S106 #Section106 #innovation #DoingThingsDifferently #publicfunding #socialvalue Pepper Barney FRSA FIPM The Mindful Regenerist

Community housing projects don’t stall because they’re bad. They stall because the capital stack is out of order. Developers go to the bank first because it feels like the biggest win. Senior lenders wait for soft commitments and equity before issuing a term sheet. So the deal sits. The lender waits. The window closes. Everyone thinks the other side is the problem. It’s not the project. It’s the sequence. I put together a breakdown of how capital actually moves from pre-development to permanent: • What each stage covers • Who funds it • What their “out” is • And how to structure the stack so every source has a reason to say yes For developers trying to get to “yes.” And for CDFIs, fund managers, and impact lenders who want deals to arrive structured — not aspirational. The framework is in the document below. No opt-in. Just the structure. If your $2M–$20M deal feels stalled, this is probably why. #CommunityDevelopment #AffordableHousing #CapitalStack #ImpactInvesting #CDFI #HousingFinance

21 million new businesses since 2021 — our challenge is making sure every entrepreneur has the capital, tech, and support to succeed. In my latest piece for ImpactAlpha, I do a deep dive into one corner of this work: unlocking impact investing capital for community development financial institutions (CDFIs) At Mastercard Strive USA, we’re investing in the connective infrastructure that bridges this divide — helping unlock scalable, investable pathways for CDFIs to reach impact investors. In my op-ed, I share examples from Strive grantees leading this work: • Aeris Insight Inc. — creating standardized, investor-grade data that helped rated CDFI loan funds grow $70M more in assets than peers between 2017–2023. • CNote — directing $390M+ to community lenders, with 90% of participating investors making their first-ever CDFI deposit. • Momentus Securities has— pioneering securitization of small business loans, starting with a $20M transaction and pointing toward a $5B annual market. These innovations show what’s possible when philanthropy de-risks and invests in systems, and when investors see CDFIs not as niche players but as core engines of inclusive growth. https://lnkd.in/eqEFbsES

April Impact Funding Roundup: 450+ funding opportunities -> 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 $𝟭𝗕 𝗶𝗻 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀, 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝘂𝗿𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲-𝗱𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗲. 🌍 The numbers are useful. The signals underneath them are more interesting. 𝗙𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝘂𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆. Across sectors the competitive threshold has quietly shifted. The question being asked everywhere this month isn't what your organization will do. It's what will still be functioning when the grant ends. Proposals that answer that question are winning. Proposals that don't are losing ground they may not realize they've lost. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗿𝗮 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗽𝗶𝗹𝗼𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴. Across sector after sector, we're seeing funders explicitly screen out isolated interventions in favor of models that can be adopted, replicated, or institutionalized. Evidence isn't enough anymore. Evidence plus an adoption pathway is the new floor. 𝗟𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁. This isn't language in a values statement anymore. It's showing up as hard eligibility criteria, sub-granting mandates, and selection logic that disadvantages proposals where local actors are downstream rather than central. The organizations that built genuine local partnerships before this funding cycle are better positioned than those building them now. 𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗰𝗹𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁. Some funding categories that barely existed two years ago are now multi-funder, multi-geography, mainstream priorities. Technology-facilitated GBV, Nonclinical mental health workforce infrastructure, Loss and damage financing frameworks, Community-owned conservation governance. If you're working at these intersections, the window is open. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗱. In global health and food systems especially, funders are no longer asking whether interventions work. They're asking why they aren't everywhere, and funding the cost and market barriers that explain the gap. This is a meaningful shift in what "research" means in these sectors, and what kinds of organizations get funded to do it. 𝗦𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗿. Whether it's a startup accelerator, a Horizon Europe innovation action, or a bilateral development finance call, funders are asking for the scaling plan at the concept note stage, not the final report. Organizations that treat scale as a future problem are being filtered out before the full application. None of this means the funding landscape is getting easier. It means the bar has moved, and it's worth knowing where it moved to. Save this if you're raising funds in Q2. Share it with someone who should see it.

For decades, Washington covered much of the cost of resilience projects. Now, communities are being forced to figure it out alone. While long-term funding solutions exist, most take years to implement. The challenge? Cities need money today. I work with communities to identify risks, prioritize resilience strategies, and turn data into action. But too often, great plans stall because funding is uncertain. The good news? There are ways to fund resilience now—without waiting on Washington. Five ways cities can fund resilience today: - Leverage Civic Crowdfunding – Platforms like ioby and local resilience funds can jumpstart community-driven projects with immediate impact. - Microfinance for Climate Resilience – Small-scale resilience loans help individual homeowners, small businesses, and farmers make affordable flood and heat adaptations. - Resilience Impact Bonds & Pay-for-Success Models: Private investors are ready to fund resilience projects—cities just need to structure deals that deliver measurable risk reduction. - Direct-to-Community Resilience Grants: Some cities are skipping the bureaucracy and setting up small-scale grant funds that get money into neighborhoods quickly. - Regional Cost-Sharing Agreements: Local governments can pool their resources for resilience projects, reducing costs and increasing impact. These aren’t just ideas—they’re real-world funding strategies that cities and counties have used to move projects forward. I’ll be sharing a deeper dive into resilience funding later this week—so stay tuned! I help communities make resilience planning actionable—mapping risks, prioritizing solutions, and creating strategies that don’t sit on a shelf. If your city needs a simple, clear, data-driven resilience plan that’s built for action, let’s talk. #Resilience #ClimateFunding #LocalGovernment #CommunityResilience #ClimateFinance #FundingSolutions