1. A Collaborative, Multiple Design, Process and Outcomes Evaluation of a Local Habitat for Humanity Project Phillip J. Decker, University of Houston-Clear Lake* Roger Durand, University of Houston-Clear Lake* Christine Eriks, University of Houston-Clear Lake Natalie Ainsworth, Bay Area Habitat for Humanity Rachel Ward, Bay Area Habitat for Humanity *Co-presenters

2. Abstract  In this poster presentation the findings from a collaborative, multiple design, process and outcomes evaluation of a Habitat for Humanity (HFH) project are reported. Background: Habitat for Humanity is a widely known, charitable housing organization that builds affordable housing in partnership with families in need. Evaluation questions: What problems were experienced by partner family adult members, their resident children, and HFH volunteers with an HFH project's implementation? What were the project's social and financial outcomes? Data and Methods: Utilizing multiple, varying time series, process and outcomes evaluation designs, baseline evidence was gathered from participants in a local, Houston area HFH project, including members of the local board of directors, volunteers, faith- based stakeholders, construction workers, partner family adults and their children. The evaluation was designed collaboratively with project participants working with professional evaluators. Follow-up data are now being gathered. Discussion: Both the collaboration and evaluation results are discussed.

3. Background  Habitat for Humanity (HHFI) is a widely known, charitable housing organization that builds affordable housing in partnership with families in need.  The houses built by HFH are constructed at no profit and interest is not charged on loans. Building costs are financed by donations and new homeowners house payments.  The local Bay Area affiliate of Habitat (BAHFH) serves two counties in Southeast Texas. Over the years it has worked with local communities to revitalize and stabilize neighborhoods.

4. Evaluation Questions  In this evaluation research, two questions were investigated:  1. What problems were experienced by partner family adult members and their resident children with an HFHI project's implementation?  2. What were the project's social and financial outcomes?

5. IMPORTANCE OF THIS EVALUATION  To date, there is surprisingly little evaluation evidence about HFH projects on which to improve implementation, to enhance outcomes, or even to emulate activities in different settings.  In this study improvements to the lives of 100 partner families were studied as were the economic contributions of BAHFH projects to the communities involved.  Additionally, problems in project implementation were investigated by means of process evaluations.

6. Data and Methods  The evaluation was designed collaboratively with project participants working with professional evaluators  Multi-level (individual and community), multiple, time series, process and outcomes evaluation designs were utilized.  Baseline survey evidence was gathered from stakeholders including members of the local board of directors, volunteers, faith-based stakeholders, construction workers, and families.  Economic impact data were collected over time, including data on capital expenditures for home building and land acquisition; household spending by partner families; volunteers’ contributions; the value of “sweat equity” in homes; and spending on construction materials.

7. Process Evaluation Findings: Program Implementation  Fifty-two (52) % of Habitat homeowners reported it was easy to maintain the insides of their home; 48% said the same about the exterior.  An appreciable majority (73%) of homeowners reported feeling (“very much” or a “good deal”) well-prepared for homeownership as a result of Habitat training.  A total of 90% of Habitat owners reported (good to excellent) contact with construction site managers.  Four of five faith based donors who were interviewed reported being “highly satisfied” with the information received from BAHFH

8. Principal Findings: Social Impact  66% of partner families reported feeling safer in their home at night  38% of partner families reported better racial harmony in their Habitat neighborhood compared to their previous one  76% of partner families reportedly developed relationships with other community members  38% of partner families reported less stress in family relationships.  76% of partner families reported their children now having more close friends  74% of partner families reported school now being more important to their children

9. Principal Findings: Economic and Community Impact  BAHFH activities injected more than $3.3 Million into the local community  62% of partner families reported improvements in their personal financial situation.  96% of volunteers reported feeling that their Habitat contribution had a positive community impact  2 of 3 community residents reported feeling that the HFH homes improved the overall value of the neighborhood.

10. Discussion  BAHFH implemented a relatively –problem free project that clearly has had positive effects on the lives of partner families, on the community, and on the local economy.  This poster adds to the growing body of knowledge about "best practices" for participatory and collaborative evaluations. These best practices include the clarifying of expectations, careful listening, and about teaching -- not only by example.

11. Some Useful References  Liliana Rodriguez-Campos and Rigoberto Rincones-Gomez, Collaborative Evaluations: Step-by-Step. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2013.  Michael Quinn Patton, Developmental Evaluation. New York: The Guilford Press, 2011.  David Fetterman, Empowerment Evaluation in the Digital Villages, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2012.