Legacy, Transition, and Growth: The Case of BRIDGE Housing Corporation" concerns the issues that a leading regional nonprofit housing company faced after its charismatic founder, Don Terner, tragically and unexpectedly died. It covers the difficulties faced by the incoming president, who had to preserve the memory of her predecessor while charting new courses for the company. The unusual circumstances illuminate the universal problems of leadership succession in successful businesses. In particular, the case explores the challenges posed created by the growth of an aggressive and entrepreneurial housing development firm with a strong sense of social purpose. Furthermore, the case reveals that a policy of continued growth opened up several alternatives for expanding business, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.

This case study examines the business model of the Preservation of Affordable Housing, Inc., (POAH) and its applicability to nonprofit housing providers. POAH is one of the premier socially conscious low-income housing developers and owners in the United States. Its primary mission is to purchase large, multi-family properties and refinance them for long-term affordability. As of 2010, POAH has rescued and refinanced more than 4,900 units of affordable rental housing in eight states and the District of Columbia. Since its founding in 2001, POAH has been unique among preservation owners not only for its business model - which attends closely to the bottom line of every transaction - but also for its commitment to policy and regulatory reform affecting a range of housing affordability issues. This case invites the readers to explore many dimensions of organizational strategy for nonprofit housing companies. In the world of nonprofits POAH is unusual in many ways including its origins-as it was formed in order to complete an acquisition of a significant subsidized low-income housing portfolio its organizational structure, which combines for-profit and nonprofit companies its financial model which emphasizes returning profits to the company and increasing cash flow as opposed to developer fees and especially property management fees its ability to influence government officials to modify regulatory policies to suit the needs of nonprofit housing groups. Finally, the case explores the larger importance of POAH for the low-income housing field.

The case study presents facts pertaining to the Community Preservation and Development Corporation (CPDC), one of the best-known nonprofit housing development companies in the United States, at a time of fundamental transition--a new chief executive officer has been installed after several months of the board of directors running the company. Working with the founder, Eugene Ford, the first chief executive had made a specialty of using a variety of complicated financial arrangements to revive assisted low-income housing projects that had become or were at risk of becoming dilapidated, crime-ridden disasters. The organization had become famous for blazing new trails in providing services for the low-income residents of its housing projects, particularly related to technology. Federal, state, and local government agencies, private corporations, foundations, and universities had joined with CPDC in its development and resident service projects. But despite the worthy redevelopment projects and dazzling programs, CPDC was a house divided. Concerned about CPDC's difficulties in accounting and reporting its revenues and expenditures, members of the board of directors became more involved in running the organization and contributed to the departure of the organization's founding CEO. Fundamentally, CPDC was afflicted with what might be called organizational schizophrenia, with two different lines of business, each with its own organizational structure, funding mechanism, and supporters on the board of directors. The case presents the reader with the question of what strategies and ultimately business model the incoming CEO should adopt to keep the organization viable and fulfill its mission. HKS Case Number 1924.0

This case study explores the factors that are important in analyzing the health and soundness of a project in a growing nonprofit housing company with multiple program areas. A new loan officer at a community development financial institution must decide whether to recommend approval of an application by Greater Miami Neighborhoods (GMN) for financing the construction of a mixed-income condo building in downtown Miami. GMN recently has become the largest nonprofit developer and owner of low-income housing in Florida, with fifty-eight affiliates and subsidiary legal entities responsible for the development, preservation, and management of more than 6,000 units of low-cost rental and for-sale homes. It has grown by taking on new and far-flung real estate projects-including Lighthouse Bay, a 1,100-unit apartment complex in Jacksonville, Florida-and acquiring its own property management and construction companies. But the organization has also experienced a few setbacks-including a rejection in the final round of a large loan from the MacArthur Foundation. It is up to the inexperienced loan officer-and readers of the case study-to find ways to assess the situation and decide whether GMN has been experiencing mere growing pains or a more serious organizational illness. HKS Case Number 1922.0

Zenovia Evans, mayor of the small Chicago suburb of Riverdale, was determined to save the subdivision of Pacesetter which had once been her home. As part of her efforts to save the deteriorating neighborhood, Mayor Evans joined a wide-ranging and innovative campaign to bring affordable housing to the entire Chicago metropolitan area, a region with a troubled history of race and class relations. Several influential business and civic leaders, learning of the predicament of inner-ring suburbs just south of the city, decided to lend a hand. They helped the Village of Riverdale devise a plan to renovate, rather than demolish, the subdivision and helped Pacesetters developers find programs that could provide the substantial funding that was needed to carry off the project. HKS Case Number 1890.0

Zenovia Evans, mayor of the small Chicago suburb of Riverdale, was determined to save the subdivision of Pacesetter which had once been her home. As part of her efforts to save the deteriorating neighborhood, Mayor Evans joined a wide-ranging and innovative campaign to bring affordable housing to the entire Chicago metropolitan area, a region with a troubled history of race and class relations. Several influential business and civic leaders, learning of the predicament of inner-ring suburbs just south of the city, decided to lend a hand. They helped the Village of Riverdale devise a plan to renovate, rather than demolish, the subdivision and helped Pacesetters developers find programs that could provide the substantial funding that was needed to carry off the project. HKS Case Number 1890.0

In the early 1980s, The Ford Foundation, among other funders, help create a new type of organization designed to finance the renewal of older, inner city neighborhoods, both through housing renovation and other investments. The Local Initiatives Support Corporation will not undertake projects itself but, instead, will serve as a sort of bank, choosing among proposals submitted by nonprofit development entities. But LISC was by no means making no-strings-attached grants. Instead, it wanted to assure itself -- and those providing its capital -- that it was getting a return on its investment. When a team of consultants is called in to measure LISC's return on investment, it must first consider how such a return might even be defined. Should LISC consider only financial data as regards the repayment of the loans it makes? Or should it consider the catalyzing effects of the organizations it supports on their surrounding neighborhoods? How or should such effects be measured? HKS Case Number 1370.0

In the early 1980s, The Ford Foundation, among other funders, help create a new type of organization designed to finance the renewal of older, inner city neighborhoods, both through housing renovation and other investments. The Local Initiatives Support Corporation will not undertake projects itself but, instead, will serve as a sort of bank, choosing among proposals submitted by nonprofit development entities. But LISC was by no means making no-strings-attached grants. Instead, it wanted to assure itself -- and those providing its capital -- that it was getting a return on its investment. When a team of consultants is called in to measure LISC's return on investment, it must first consider how such a return might even be defined. Should LISC consider only financial data as regards the repayment of the loans it makes? Or should it consider the catalyzing effects of the organizations it supports on their surrounding neighborhoods? How or should such effects be measured? HKS Case Number 1370.0