7) Benefits to clients: Typically it is in the agricultural regions that we recognize the poorest living conditions.
The farmers will benefit from an additional cash crop. The cost of housing is the lowest avaialable world wide. Craetes jobs for unskilled workers.
Currently ABT Insulpanel is working with many funding organizations world wide and is building madel homes in Nigeria, South Africa, Sudan, Romania, Pakistan and is also involved in many "Home Shows" in Africa.
8) Key operational partnerships: There have been many strategic partnerships formed over the last year as follows:
1. To reduce the cost of machinery a Turkish Joint Venture manufacturing plant has been established and is producing at least two (2) machine lines per month. 2. A factory in Sivas, Turkey will be in full production this coming August to supply First, Fast, Response Emergency Housing ( a village in 15 minutes).
3. A joint venture has been established in South Africa with a Mining Company that initially will build housing for the previously ignored miners and their families. Then they will supply housing to others in need.
4. A joint venture has been formed with several farming enterprises in Calarasi, Romania to produce low cost housing in that region and then will grow throughout Romania.
5. Joint Ventures are currently being negotiated in Mexico, Pakistan and India.
9) Financial model: Due to the extreme low cost of our houses, we have not as yet needed to source financing for the buyers. However with the added income we offer locally, buyers can afford to purchase or trade straw for homes.
• Costs as percentage of income: 5
• Financing: ABT Insulpanel supplies the machinery, tools, installation and training at cost and relies on it's local partners to supply the needed cash. It is proven that the operation is self supporting in six months after going into production.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: The initial factory opens in August and is targeted to supply 4,000 low cast homes.
• Number of clients in past year: No data available at present.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 90
• Potential demand: This is a global housing solution. Currently we are focusing on wheat growing regions such as most of Africa, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Turkey, Poland, Afghanistan, Russia and etc.
However, an intense Research and Development Program is underway to incorporate other fibers into our panel System such as the following: Rice Fiber Elephant Grass Typhus Australis (a reed blocking many rivers in Africa such as the Senegal Delta crisis) Sugar Cane Fiber and Many Wild Grasses
7) Benefits to clients: When we select a neighborhood, our first step is to buy up the most underpriced properties in the neighborhood. These are the ones that are bringing down the market, convincing buyers, seller, landlords, tenants, agents, and the government that the neighborhood is undesirable.
This act alone, purchasing these particular properties, changes the situation in the neighborhood. Our next step is to hire local construction people to renovate the properties, using locally purchased supplies, which boosts the economy noticeably, increasing real incomes.
Because we are focused on the neighborhood rather than the properties, we do things in an entirely different order and priority than most real estate investors. For instance, our first priority is the landscaping of the front yard, because that has the biggest impact on the neighbors. Every step we take is designed to inspire people in the neighborhood to create wealth, thereby funding our activities through appreciation. We hold street cleanups and community events to inspire further investment on the part of residents in their properties and neighborhood. The response is amazing.
There is a question whether rising prices is a good thing for low income residents. The answer is a resounding yes, when THE reason for low prices is undesirable factors like crime and urban blight. The real cost of decent housing as a function of incomes actually drops during this process, and a dilapidated property that initially cost $70,000 is still affordable and much more desirable when it is tastefully renovated with green building practices and sells for $120,000.
The fact that we make money while transforming neighborhoods means we can do this quickly without any approval or cooperation from anyone other than the residents themselves.
8) Key operational partnerships: Our core team of 12 people includes everyone necessary to run the strategy in one neighborhood, from data analysis, rating properties, escrow coordination, property management, renovation management, and sale. We have three construction crews ready for our next round of renovations.
Our financial partners have been private investors seeking an above market return on investment while supporting a socially conscious strategy that addresses an important social, economic, and moral problem. (By reducing crime in transitional neighborhoods, we reduce not only the number of crime victims, but equally importantly we reduce the number of perpetrators, and the likelihood that crime will appeal to young people as a career. By transforming inner city neighborhoods into safe, beautiful destinations, we reduce urban sprawl.)
In processing and analysing real estate data we use the multiple listing services of each city we work in, and partner with local realtors, construction workers, and all of the people who need to be involved in renovations (utilities, building inspectors, etc.).
9) Financial model: Beyond simply creating decent housing at an affordable price and allowing the market to work, we have partnered with banks and mortgage brokers to provide financing to low-income buyers. We have also made buyers aware of city and other programs available which provide down payment assistance, forgivable second mortgages, and other help.
It is important to realise that in the USA, if you have good credit, you can buy a home regardless of what your income or assets are. Most people do not know this, and I have personally assisted dozens of people in buying their first homes -- people who were absolutely convinced this was impossible. The problem for most people in the USA who find difficulty getting decent housing is not what it appears to be at first glance.
• Costs as percentage of income: 100
• Financing: Private investors provide funds with a two year commitment. Within the two years we pay back the principal investment plus a preferred rate of return (10-18%). The management company then receives a catch-up management fee of the same amount, and additional profits are split 50/50 between the investors and the management.
Conventional mortgage financing secured by each property purchased provides ~2:1 leverage (50-70% LTV).
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: We have been extremely successful for the past 10 years. Our track record includes 115 properties to date, many of which were small apartment buildings, clustered in a succession of five transitional neighborhoods in Northern California, Southern California, and Arizona. The average annual appreciation rate we have achieved is over 30%, and the fund results have far exceeded the preferred rate. Our neighborhood revitalisation efforts have been lauded in the Los Angeles Times, in CNN Money and on CNN aired nationally. We have been written up in Fortune Small Business magazine, and recently were the subject of a documentary news story on HD.net. We have directly provided housing for several hundred people, but the indirect effects of our activities are many times greater.
• Number of clients in past year: Twelve months ago we created a partnership with a private equity firm who is helping us to scale the strategy from our current capacity (approximately 50-100 properties per year) to being able to handle over 100 properties per month. During that t
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 50
• Potential demand: Using this strategy to its fullest extent, we could literally provide housing for everyone in the USA and other countries with similar mortgage financing availability. Part of our plan to take this internationally is to create the financing facility for use where it is lacking. The strategy would clearly be self-sustaining in Mexico, for example, and profits from the US operation could be invested in mortgages there.
The key factor that makes this possible is our ability to order the operations such that value is added and wealth is created at each and every step. We don't run out of money that way, and wherever there is a legitimate housing market we can do this.
7) Benefits to clients: Marketing One of the first steps CAHDCO took was to commission a study of CCOC’s tenants and prospective tenants on CCOC’s housing waiting list to determine interest. The study confirmed our assumption that there was significant interest in the concept by households receiving or eligible to receive a rental housing subsidy. The marketing program, which did not recreate the typical sales techniques used by private developers, was as follows: - Brochures sent to all CCOC tenants and members, - Brochures sent to applicants with appropriate incomes on the Ottawa Social Housing Registry waiting list, - Brochures circulated in the neighbourhood, - Sale signs erected on the property, - Circulation in newsletters of other affordable housing providers, - Articles about the project in community newspapers.
In the last three years, the Clarence Gate units have become increasingly affordable. The rate of increase in market home re-sales is much greater (about 30%) than the rate of increase of the indexed buy-back formulae based on a housing component of the cost of living(about 10%). CAHDCO is currently maintaining a waiting list for potential new purchasers of the Clarence gate affordable units and potential purchasers of affordable units at out next project.
8) Key operational partnerships: CAHDCO Equity - $700,000 (in the form of start-up loan from Centretown Citizens Ottawa Corpoartion) - CMHC insured bank construction loan - $3,240,000 (Bank of Montreal) - Home owner mortgages: most of the affordable owners used CMHC insured high ratio mortgages. - Municipal Relief of Development Charges, Parkland Levy and Building Permit fees, about $7,500/unit. - Municipal relief of Encroachment Fees - approximately $25,000. - CAHDCO received a Federal Government Job Creation Grant to undertake web page development and to provide CAHDCO with a statistical analysis and a data base of potential affordable home ownership clients. - CCOC provided the security for the the bank construction loan and Ontario New Home Warranty Program Letters of Credit ($225,000).
9) Financial model: The key to the projects affordability is modest design and low profit (actually none). 1/3 of the units were sold at market prices to provide a capital subsidy to the affordable units.. Because of the high number of potential customers, the bank offered a reduced mortgage interest rate. CAHDCO worked with a mortgage broker and a community credit union to faciliate mortgages for owners turned down by the bank. Most parking spaces are rented out by the condominium. This revenue reduces common expenses. CAHDCO lobbied to ensure property taxes reflect the controlled, indexed value of the home as opposed to the much higher market price. Further costs savings are created bwecause Owners do some common maintenance tasks to keep costs down.
• Costs as percentage of income: n/a
• Financing: Construction Financing - A CMHC insured loan from the Bank of Montreal was used to provide 85% of the funds necessary to construct the project. The remaining funds were lent to CAHDCO by CCOC. Mortgage Financing - The mortgage package for purchasers included CMHC mortgage insurance. The Bank of Montreal offered a mortgage package that includes a reduction of 1% of their prime mortgage rate for all purchasers, plus special promotions available at the time the mortgage was approved. In situations where the Bank of Montreal would not provide a mortgage, CAHDCO worked with a mortgage broker to find alternative mortgage financing.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: 63% of the units are affordable. To date, none of the affordable owners has asked CAHDCO to exercise their option to buy back their unit. CAHDCO has provided information and documentation about its tenure model to many other non- profit agencies across Canada. We have forwarded documents to groups in Montreal, Halifax, Ottawa, Toronto, Winnipeg, Kelowna and Vancouver. CAHDCO’s experience in developing Clarence Gate also highlights a small role for government in facilitating the production of affordable housing by providing land. While the project was developed under market conditions, our analysis indicates if we had obtained the property at no cost, all of the units could have been affordable, potentially to households with very low incomes.
• Number of clients in past year: None. CAHDCO is currently in the early stages of developing its second project.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 63%
• Potential demand: There are currently about 40,000 households in "core housing need" in Ottawa. Core Housing need is defined as households living in inadequate accommodation and/or paying more than 30% of their income on housing. Across Canada, there are about 1.5 million households in Core Housing Need. CAHDCO's home ownership model can be easily replicated in other jurisdictions. We believe the buy-back option registered on title will be applicable in all other Canadian provinces.
7) Benefits to clients: It is a simple matter of radio and newspaper advertising to let folks know that the RENT TO OWN low cost hames are available and they will come running in their many thousands in every community. The low income folks are starved for the opportunity to easily own a home within their monthly income, for most it is the ONLY opportunity they have ever had. They will jump at the chance to start ownng at a monthly cost lower than their rent and with no down payment and help with upkeep.
I have many calls where the person heard of me by 'word of mouth' - I have many calls where people found me on a search engine - yahoo had me 'on top' under 'housing' recently on their search.
Cities are notorious for the code enforcement personnel to have egos that interfere with practical application of housing construction, especially in certifying plumbers and electricians. Electricians in city limits are nearly always overcharging for service, especially new service where a permit must be obtained. They are making so much easy money in the city limits, even when they do not actually do the work but have their journeyman do it, that they do not want to work outside the city limits, in the county, where restrictions are much less and they cannot charge as much.
RENT TO OWN HOMES intends to have an electrion for a large area that can have several journemen working in any location and keep in touch with the MASTER ELECTRICIAN by cell phone - should be legal since they do it this way all the time, and have been for years.
8) Key operational partnerships: Partners are not necessary except in the financing aspect. If it is kept simple with no restrictions on perceived quality, and let the tenant buyers be their own judge of quality so they can own within their means, and pick their own to fit their desires and needs. Most entities for housing standard set standards so high that cannot be prepared within the cost range that will allow low cost ownership. Many standards are unrealistic, and some unwanted, by low income folks who are not accustomed to them. I have installed central heating in several houses only to have it removed by the tenant/buyers when they only wanted a simple space gas heater that they had lived with all their lives. One family put in a wood burning heater in place of the gas central heater - they eventually finished paying for the house and a deed was given to them.
I have attempted to recruit partners, such as banks and moneyed individuals, they all want to input their ideas as to quality/standards/outside appearrance - their demands would make the house unaccepable to the low income buyers - one banker friend had several of his inherited older houses demolished as 'eyesores' instead of giving them to me - he later said he should have given them to me.
The HOUSING AUTHORITIES of any city will not partner saying the houses would have to meet their 'standards'- their standards cost several thousands of dollars per unit extra making them unaffordable.
9) Financial model: The products are old low value houses restored to be sold for from $50 per month to $300 per month (avg) - in some cases 'given' to folks who can do full scale restoration and remove themselves from 'housing support' and be a benefit to the community.
The model of $5000 cost and $15,000 sale at 10% is the avg 2 or 3 bedroom house in central Texas. This brings a monthly payment of $198.23 which pays back $23,787.60 in the 120 months (10 yrs)-a X 4.75 gain in value. insurance and taxes- Most are comfortable with fire insurance in amount of $10,000, adequate to cover cost of restoration.
We file 'homestead exemptions' at the tax office and make any other tax deductions allowed.
WE notify and encourage tenants to call us in cases needed repair
• Costs as percentage of income: ??
• Financing: Shares in RENT TO OWN HOMES INC are for sale to finance the project - the corporation was founded in 1995 with five million shares of stock and wishes to sell one million shares for $10 per share with intentions to set up operations in several communities locally here in West Texas, including Midland, the President's home town, which has 4200 empty houses, most of them low value in the older parts of town but all viable for restoration for the low income folks.
Each house developed and sold will show a 4X + increase in value and will increase value of stock when fully registered and reported.
The financing would be used to purchase a defunct lumber yard; use part for LANDLORD'S CAFE and offices and bins for restoring lumber, doors, windows, fixtures etc.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: About 100 have benefitted from the RENT TO OWN HOMES project, fifty can be pointed to as still living in the home that was originally sold to them. Many others are still in homes that the note was sold to a Mortgage company and the tenants paid off the note. It is better for RENT TO OWN HOMES for it not to be necessary to sell notes (at the big discount) in order to raise funds but show profit from operations and sell shares to raise funds for expansion. I have been stymied by four major surgeries, lack of cooperation by financial institutions, conspiracy against me by the DEALERSRE, law suits and bad tenants. I expect to be very effective with funding to start LANDLORD'S CAFE to post bad tenants and get help from all landlords in identifying baddys.
• Number of clients in past year: ONly 6 in the last year, due to surgery and age related physical capabilities loss I am slowing down considerably and concentrating on finding help for the project, as I am doing at this moment.I repeat, what has been done here can be replicated a
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 100
• Potential demand: Magnitude is app 30,000,000 folks considered 'low income', with only about 15,000,000 empty houses to restore and supply. About one million houses are demolished each year across the nation as 'eyesores' - 56,000,000 since 1950 - most could have been saved and restored under this plan - that can be extrapolated into the future and maybe all old houses can be saved for use as low income homes.
The demand will always be there for there will always be lower income.
Thomas Jefferson said; FREE PEOPLE ARE NEVER EQUAL - - - EQUAL PEOPLE ARE NEVER FREE
WORK abolishes three evils; boredom, vice and poverty !
If the number of houses restored and sold for avg of $20000 were to be 10,000,000 out of the 15,000,000 available and not considering the 1,000,000 per year we could save from the demolitionists, the currency would be around $100,000,000,000.
7) Benefits to clients: In Phase I, the temporary structures were designed by outside experts with some materials sourced locally and some from outside the disaster affected area. Village level committees, with representation from among marginalized communities, minorities and women, were formed to identify genuine beneficiaries and the neediest within them, with priority for widows and women-headed households. This was accompanied by advocacy with government for quick and fair damage assessment and opening bank accounts for families to eventually receive compensation amounts. The package of materials needed for the Phase II semi- permanent shelter was jointly decided with the village level committee and donor organisation so that an adequate shelter could be created to safely house men, women, children, household belongings and domestic animals. Labour for construction in Phase II was contributed by the family and food support was extended during this phase. Alongside these processes, advocacy was done with government for timely release of compensation amount to facilitate construction of the final home. In Phase III, food support was extended while families constructed their homes.
In all three phases children’s activity centres were organized to keep children and adolescents engaged while adults cleared debris, completed the necessary paperwork related to claims and bank accounts and did the actual construction.
8) Key operational partnerships: Phase I: The key partnership in this phase was with the Council of Architecture, the apex architectural body created by an Act of the Indian Parliament who gave us technical support and procured materials, international donors who gave financial support, local community leaders who played a key decision making role in deciding beneficiaries and keeping the processes fair and equitable. The government was also a key partner for providing land at this time.
In Phase II the key partnerships were with the donors for financial and technical support, with the government for compensation assessment and release, the banking system for facilitating the paperwork to enable the speedy opening of thousands of new accounts. In Phase III, an important partnership was with suppliers of building materials for speedy supply of large quantities of materials at reasonable rates.
9) Financial model: In this case, more than a question of ‘affording’ the emphasis was on creating housing which was in harmony with the situation of the local people, responsive to their needs – both practical and cultural. Such harmony was also concerned that the intervention did not reduce the beneficiaries to ‘receivers of charity’ or ‘victims’ or shower them with excessive facilities beyond their ken. Often, such inputs find their way into the second-hand market because recepients just sell such 'aid' items. A reasonable family contribution in the form labour to clear debris or construction was part of the reconstruction intervention so that families could participate and contribute at all times to their home and did not just come and occupy a readymade house.
• Costs as percentage of income: 0
• Financing: The costs involved were: Immediate shelter: Rs 6000 per unit Temporary shelter materials: Package of bamboo, bricks, cement, roof tiles, door worth Rs 7000 Food support: Cereals, pulses, tea, sugar worth Rs 3000 Government compensation contribution: ranged between Rs 45,000 - 90,000 depending on damage of original home. Labour contribution by family: estimated worth Rs 15,000
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: About 6500 homes were built through the 3-Phase process described. The process was completed over a two year period from February 2001 to March 2003. We were the first to complete a housing programme of this scale in our area and other initiatives continued till the end of 2005.
• Number of clients in past year: The programme was concluded three years ago but the experience was applied after the Asian tsunami in 2004
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 100
• Potential demand: This approach could be used in all disaster affected areas where speedy restoration of normalcy is critical.
7) Benefits to clients: Because most families do not plan nor do they recognize they are liable for most of the costs associated with senior housing (thinking Medicaid will pay), and after extensive research, ElderLife concluded the best way to reach the target population is through participating senior housing facilities just as a student loan is offered at the university through a financial aid office. This is executed by a team of caring ElderLife managers called “Huggers™” who maintain relationships with the senior housing facilities’ staff. Building relationships with both elder care providers and family members is critical to the success. Huggers™ focus on generating awareness at the senior housing facilities. ElderLife Counselors are responsible for counseling families on the applicability of an elder care loan, guiding these families through the application process, and servicing the loan once it is approved. The Plan is offered through these facilities when the issue of costs is addressed. That is the point where most families realize they need care that is costly and that “Medicaid” pays for very little. It is important not to take advantage of the senior facing this surprising situation, which is why the Plan is designed to be available primarily to the adult caregivers overseeing the well being of their senior. The facility staff which families rely on heavily during a difficult time period is comprised of caring individuals with a focus of helping seniors obtain proper housing. Facilities are managed by a regional Manager assigned by the housing provider’s main office to oversee the management of facilities. Each Hugger oversees a region of facilities. Huggers collaborate with the provider’s regional managers, build bonds with the staff at each facility, monitor family traffic, train new staff and speak with families about the program. ElderLife takes great care to administer the program with a “higher purpose” philosophy, ensuring that seniors are properly assisted.
8) Key operational partnerships: ElderLife serves as the link between senior housing facilities and financial institutions which provide it with funds to lend to families. Consequently, for the program to work and for families to be able to access its Family Payment Plan as a solution, senior housing providers must offer the Plan and banks must be willing to provide ElderLife with available loan capital to disburse to those in need. On the senior housing side, a growing acceptance of ElderLife’s solution is evidenced by the fact that five of the largest senior housing providers in the nation offer ElderLife’s Family Payment Plan today. These relationships began in late 2003 when ElderLife launched a pilot test of the Family Payment Plan in a select group of communities in each of the above mentioned providers’ portfolio of assisted living communities in Maryland and Virginia. The staff in these facilities who are trained by ElderLife’s Huggers are the ones that bring the Family Payment Plan to the family’s attention. From there, the family calls ElderLife’s Family Service Center where Plan Counselors employed by ElderLife and trained in both consumer finance and senior housing issues, begin the process of guiding families through the issue of paying for their elderly loved ones’ housing needs. ElderLife has identified a number of national lending sources to provide it with lending capital to disseminate to approved families and is working on national line to accommodate a rollout to all 50 states.
9) Financial model: “How does one help low to middle income seniors who do not have enough income or assets to access needed senior housing?” What if the adult children could step in were they provided with a simple solution? When families call ElderLife, its Counselors focus on who can come to the seniors’ aid. This resulted in daughters, sons, in-laws, cousins, grandchildren, even neighbors or church friends lending a hand by co-signing a loan to help the senior move into a housing community providing oversight needed. Most of ElderLife’s seniors have income just above Medicaid thresholds, but are in the $12,000 - $25,000 income group. With senior housing averaging $36,000 a year the gap must be filled. The Family Payment Plan opens doors by bringing families and communities to the seniors’ aid.
• Costs as percentage of income: 83%
• Financing: Revenue is earned through interest charged on the loans to the family members. The senior housing facilities also pay ElderLife a fee for the training of their staff in order to ensure accurate program dissemination. Combined these two fees ultimately create a self-sustaining, profitable consumer loan program. It has been self-funded by the founders of the company since 2000. Years 2000 – 2003 were “R&D”, wherein families, seniors, senior housing companies, banks, advocates, government agencies were consulted to help ElderLife fashion a sound family loan program. Years 2004 – 2005 a small equity investment funded a controlled test of the program. ElderLife is presently working on an investment to fund a national rollout which will take two years to complete.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: ElderLife has: proven that providers and consumers are willing to pay for the Family Payment Plan; enrolled five of the top 50 national providers; improved occupancy by 3% in several senior housing facilities; and built a history of actual loan data which confirms; (a) the criteria for identifying good loans, and (b) that this program is a desired solution to middle-class families. Over 500 phone calls from inquiring families have been fielded with one in five applying for the program. Over 1,000 senior housing communities would like to offer the program to date.
• Number of clients in past year: Roughly half of the 500 calls have come to ElderLife over the past twelve months. The information from these calls has enabled ElderLife to refine a sound, predictable process of helping a family finance their senior loved ones’ housing.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 65%
• Potential demand: Of the roughly 38 million seniors today, roughly 4 million seniors are in some senior housing setting today. Another 3.1 million seniors qualify as a “gap income group” set of seniors with a potential need for senior housing and care services, but are not financially able to pay for the entire cost. Over 24 million adults serve as a caregiver to an elderly person according to a MetLife study. ElderLife is working hard and carefully, as there is an entirely new sector of consumer loans being created with its “family elder care loan”/”Family Payment Plan” and market disciplined has to be maintained for the target population to be serviced fairly as opposed to being taken advantage of. If all 3.1 million seniors who qualify as “gap income group” potential users were able to use a loan, at an average loan of $14,000, a $43 billion dollar new consumer loan market could be created.
7) Benefits to clients: This is a direct service program for the populations to whom we provide affordable housing. The community has come to value our willingness to be public serving and refer those with needs to our Housing Authority.
8) Key operational partnerships: This program is still agency based, but the Social Services of adult protection; Social Services; nursing home/hospital social workers serve to funnel those who have unmet need to our programs. They then serve to locate items if needed to furnish household needs where necessary. However, all coordination is through our agency to limit the "run-around" effect to those served.
9) Financial model: Services are provided for free; housing is Federal subsidy model programs; grants provide portions of rent (where applicable); payment arrangements, over time, are used based on need.
• Costs as percentage of income: n/a
• Financing: The largest need is in house hunting and movement of goods. This is done entirely through donation of time and services.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: This is a extremely rural area with a low population density; higher than national average poverty and essentially no access to non-profit agency assistance. Our total assisted is only 13 persons, but that is over 8% of our total tenant population. We believe access to relocation assistance would have a major impact in higher population areas and would serve to diseminate marginalized populations out of pocket areas of poverty and serve as a de-concentration tool. HUD's interest in de- concentration is thwarted by the lack of access to other housing due to access barriers created by isolation and poverty.
• Number of clients in past year: 7
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: all
• Potential demand: How many would elect to leave substandard housing, but lack the resources to relocate to safe, decent housing? Demand, especially in the elderly/disabled populations, we feel would be immense. Moving elderly/disabled to more rural areas where costs are lower and affordable housing has less demand on units would also have an effect on the cost of programs. Moving families from metropolitan areas into smaller rural housing markets where schools have a lower student to teacher ratio and where costs of living are lower would have a major impact on life outcomes. The program could be used to shift populations back to rural areas.
7) Benefits to clients: My initiative is an integral component of a National Initiative, the National Organic Produce Initiative (NOPI) which is a grass roots program involving local, provincial and national authorities and is designed to mobilize the agricultural, environmental and socio- economical beneficiation value-chain around a cooperative, communal, integrated and ethical empowerment formula, which shall vest the ownership of land to all those who can maintain its fertility & beauty, whilst producing for themselves and the markets in a sustainable way. The delivery of these technology applications is built around the principles of Private Public Partnerships (PPP) a cooperative coalition between all levels and departments of government, NGO’s, private sector enterprises and beneficiary communities, with the identification of responsible and dutiful leadership in communities, institutions and commerce, the identification of Local Economic Development (LED) hubs and beneficiary communities comprising of Historically Disadvantaged Individuals..(HDI’s) .n’Kozi Homes and Kitchen Garden are founding members of NOPI, the South African Council on Organic Development and Sustainability (SACODAS), (a stakeholderer’s forum and implementation arm of the NOPI) and the Western Cape Hemp Initiative, affiliated to the National Hemp Initiative. SMADEV is an integral part of the NOPI/SACODAS deliverable, Sustainable Integrated Villages of Agro-Ecology(SIVA) which is at the center of this National initiative to transform the way land is managed and n’Kozi Homes is a key component for the provision of innovative housing.. A project “Grow your own House” which aims to grow and process hemp into building materials has been initiated and plans to deliver 300 houses in the pilot project.
8) Key operational partnerships: A key partnership has been established with Diverse International, a private engineering company that has a contractual arrangement with National Government to deliver the NOPI.(National Organic Produce Initiative) Agreements have been established with technology partners from the European Union; European Fibre Technologies for technology transfers in hemp production and hemp fiber production for the manufacture of hemp building materials. Agreements have been established with consultants from the Clean Development Mechanism-Joint Initiative-Carbon Credits for the sale of Carbon Credits to EU companies that is designed to finance this initiative. Business partners and strategic relationships with various role players that share the same vision and are central to this initiative have been established and in addition to the aforementioned, these include: Greg Wright Architects; Tony Cooksey of TCA Engineers; SolarDome SA for Passive Solar; Sunfed for Photovoltaic; RTC Solar Energy for Vacuum Tube Solar Heaters; Jo Jo Tanks for waterless EcoSan Toilets; Kaiulani Civils for Infrastructures; FreeCom Group and STORM for enabling ICT technologies; Peter Harley Construction and Civil for infrastructure and construction; Khula Construction; Top Ecology Co Ltd – Japanese Environmental Solutions for clean water technologies; and Shenzhen Puxin Science & Technology Co., Ltd from China for waste recycling and biogas solutions.
9) Financial model: The government housing subsidy programs ensure affordability with top-off financing and micro-financing readily available. The employees will be paid above the minimum requirements ensuring their abilities to own the homes with requirements of skills transfer thereby assuring sustainability. Promotion of; sweat equity through direct participation in the building process; do- it-yourself (DIY) to the capable through basic kits with add-on options; the creative use of fashioning trash into building resource materials; competitions for most creative recycling; direct marketing approach based on multi level marketing (MLM) models to mitigate the labor expense component aiding the exponential growth of homeowners and skills transfer through this community based labor exchange system.
• Costs as percentage of income: 21%
• Financing: The initiative is financed through the exchange of carbon credits to EU countries facilitated through Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Joint Initiative (JI) Carbon Credits to EU countries and is designed to be self- sustainable and profitable beyond the initial funding. "Beneficiaries" contribute through sweat equity, skills transfer and/or direct purchase within the community exchange system. Other sources of funding beyond the initial investments are derived from income generating activities such as production and processing of agro- ecological products with local marketing and export to EU countries ensures the financial stability of this initiative.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: The outcome so far has been the necessity to create this innovative delivery mechanism designed to overcome the constraints and many challenges in selling to the poor while not threatening the incumbent and entrenched with interests in maintaining the status quo. With acceptance of this initiative as a strategic National Initiative and the integration of the technologies and various diversified institutions into a PPP,(Public Private Partnership) securing the technology partners and financing, the initiative is beginning to implement the pilot projects. The clients that have benefited so far are those families that are living in the prototype models that we have built and the recipients of the technological components.
• Number of clients in past year: The current program which has integrated all the diversified components into a homogenous deliverable is in start-up phase. Clients have benefited through the acquisition and use of technological components from the various facets that make up thi
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 96%
• Potential demand: In South Africa alone, excluding present demand, it is estimated there is a backlog of over 10 million houses within the affordable housing sector and this gap continues to widen. Any client groups, in any regions or countries could benefit through the replication of this initiative as it serves as a development model providing all the necessary components for sustainability, scalability and technological integration and is relatively simple to adapt to any environment with only the basic requirements of water and land. The overall market is in excess of 5 M.
7) Benefits to clients: Kuyasa lends to clients who are recipients of the state housing subsidy. The threshold for the lowest subsidy is a monthly income of R3 500, and Kuyasa takes this income level as the maximum monthly income for clients. There is no set minimum income, as Kuyasa evaluates each claim independently and includes informal employment and remittances in income calculations. We collect demographic information on all clients and as such are able to calculate the effectiveness of our delivery targeting, whereby with an average household size of five 25% of our clients live on under US$1 a day, 50% on under US$1.60 a day and 85% on under US$2.6 a day. We therefore believe that we are targeting the lower end of the microcredit market, combining institutional sustainability with our mandate to reach the poorest communities. Our profiling also breaks down the view of the poor as homogenous and we are able to address the requirements of different segments of the “poor” according to need.
Kuyasa is able to target the marginalised through three main conduits: those who have qualified for a housing subsidy; our loans officers, who are drawn from the communities we service and are ideally placed to mobilise savings groups and spread information about Kuyasa; and past and existing clients who notify their communities about Kuyasa’s activities. To date, these methods have been more than adequate in reaching our target market, and the main constraint has been Kuyasa’s access to loan finance to lend on to the poor.
8) Key operational partnerships: The two key partnerships to Kuyasa’s success have been those with our founding NGO, the Development Action Group (DAG), which saw the need for credit facilities for the low- income population and conceived of a micro lending institution to meet this need, and the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA), for their provision of the initial wholesale funding which comprised Kuyasa’s start-up loan portfolio. Apart from this initial relationship with DAG, Kuyasa has operated independently. The link with government is, however, a fundamental one to Kuyasa’s existence. The state subsidy system has ensured low-income tenure, provided the means for communities to build and created momentum around the process of housing delivery, including through such enabling organizations as the People’s Housing Process. In the light of this environment, Kuyasa was able to concentrate on credit provision. The principal constraint to public involvement in replicating the kinds of projects Kuyasa undertakes is the belief of government that the provision of financial services to the poor is the responsibility of the private sector. The lack of interest by the private financial sector in providing such services is indicative of a fundamental market failure. Consequently, the gap in the market is currently only met by microfinance institutions.
9) Financial model: Kuyasa was established as a non-profit financial organization and as such our mandate is to target low- income and marginalized populations. The financial sustainability of our clients is our major concern and Kuyasa’s departure point was to develop a micro finance strategy and product that met the needs of our clients while ensuring the best possible repayment rates. The main mechanism by which we guarantee client affordability is through ensuring Kuyasa’s clients pay interest on their loans which is set at levels below the rates of formal banking institutions for comparable loan sizes in less risky loan markets. Additionally, we do not require clients to be formally employed, to provide collateral in the form of physical assets or to be literate.
• Costs as percentage of income: 65%
• Financing: Kuyasa uses wholesale loan finance to finance loans to clients, rather than using grant funding. This ensures that Kuyasa will become financially sustainable, reducing our dependency on donors and ensuring our ability to continue financing low-cost housing into the foreseeable future by accessing commercial loans from the banking sector. Kuyasa is engaged in discussions with the formal banking sector in South Africa, with the aim of securing long-term access to wholesale finance and to facilitate the integration of the low-income market into the formal financial sector. We anticipate reaching full sustainability by the end of 2006. Operational shortfalls, capacity building and research projects are financed by grants from a variety of international funders.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: We have disbursed over R23 million to 5214 clients, 74% of which are women. 94% of our clients earn under R3 500 a month, with 50% earning under R1 500. The average family size of our clients is five people, meaning that our loans have potentially impacted on the lives of some 25 000 people. Our outstanding loan balance is R8.9 million, with write offs currently at 5%, cost recovery at 65% of total expenses and as at March 2006, we were meeting 84% of our operating expenses. Over R9 million worth of savings have been mobilised and added to the housing process, adding value to over R40 million worth of government subsidies. Our clients take loans for a variety of housing purposes, including New Homes: 57%; Extensions: 23%; Thermal Efficiency: 16% and Finishes: 4%.
• Number of clients in past year: 1654 people received loans from Kuyasa in the period August 2005 – July 2006
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 94%
• Potential demand: Conservative government estimates put the current housing backlog in the Cape Metropolitan area at 260 000 units, while to date, some 215 041 people have received a house (completed or under construction) in the Western Cape area, meaning there is a potential market for Kuyasa products of some 475 000 people. With an average loan of R5 000, this amounts to R2.3 billion in potential market worth within the Western Cape. Clearly the key constraint to Kuyasa’s expansion is access to commercial credit and not a limited market for our product.
7) Benefits to clients: Use the casting methods developed by the 'concrete block' industry to produce the building blocks/panels. Purchase land and build a paper house on it and then sell to the low income folks as any sale would be done.
8) Key operational partnerships: The originators of this building method lives in Texas and would be glad to see their efforts succeed.
9) Financial model: Seed funding to get started.
• Costs as percentage of income: ??
• Financing: no financing yet
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: Not started yet. Do not know effectiveness. Although this one house and other structures can be seen up close here in Texas
• Number of clients in past year: none
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: ??
• Potential demand: 50 million people
7) Benefits to clients: LCM-APC-Core Spacer System (: LCM uses a Aluminum Plastic Composite formwork system that are strong, reusable up hundreds of times are easy to erect and dismantle. And most of all it is a very cheap and easy to use formwork system design to cast house like casting the ground beams system, imagine casting ground beam, then another ground beam on top of the beam and another till roof beam. This systematic methods will allow hundreds of houses to be in a week with just a handfull of unskill workers. www.casthome.com
8) Key operational partnerships: LCM is offered to any interested parties willing to be LCMer house caster, all a LCM house caster need is only a unit of LCM Foaming Generator, train and technology transfered on all LCM house casting knowhow. The LCM Starter package is inclusive of all rights to utilize LCM methods and we will provide training and supervision till you are expert in LCM multiple applcations other then just house casting.www.casthome.com
9) Financial model: I spend millions on R & D on LCM house casting, for just a few thousand dollars, anyone can cast houses LCM ways. Please see how LCM ways and applications at my website : www.casthome.com
• Costs as percentage of income: 50
• Financing: House will be cast not built by bricks and blocks or precast. House cast will be 10 time faster and 2 to 3 times cheaper. I believe this will be the system where all small units of economical and durable house will be cast around the world in the very near future.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: I have started to train people to cast in more then 10 countries.
• Number of clients in past year: More then 10.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 50
• Potential demand: I believe with the rigth advertising and rigth people who believe in my system, I can cast millions of units of LCM house before I die. I am now 46 years old.
7) Benefits to clients: We encourage sharing of these best practices at our interactive development site http://www.solaroof.org and our discussion forum at the Yahoo Groups site http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solaroof/. These sites are linked with many other sustainable development groups and initiatives. A online social enterprise and e-learning framework, will expand the existing SolaRoof internet community, providing support to start up, develop and promote projects.
Several collaborators are focused on establishing networks of educational community centres for sustainable development, both in the developed and the developing world.
Dream Farm developed by the Institute of Science in Society is based on Professor George Chan’s Integrated Farming & Waste Management System. Prof. Chan is linked with ZERI (Zero Emission Research Initiatives) and has over 40 years experience developing it in over 70 countries.
Another example is the One Village Foundation - a US based NGO - now seeking to establish several Multi-purpose Community & Unity Centres Africa. This is part of a larger effort to work with the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) to further develop the existing GEN Africa chapter.
Other linked networks with particular focus on the Open Source methodology are Global Villages, Open Leader, Open Co-op, Open Source Ecology and Demo Tech to list a few.
The above together with many aligned businesses - of which Nottingham University, Max Fordham, Alcoa and The Alom Group are key - will raise awareness and credibility.
Commercial projects will contribute to the cost of implementation and production within poor communities though an Honour Payment system. This open source approach is designed for DIY and grassroots production and ideal for small enterprise development. Another key advantage to the SolaRoof system is that parts can be manufactured with minimum industrial infrastructure, resulting in value added local production and significant job creation.
8) Key operational partnerships: Key commercial partners:
- Nottingham University School of Built Environment, UK - Head of School Prof. Riffat;
- Max Fordham, Engineers, UK – Senior Director Mr. Watts;
- The Alom Group, Malaysia - Director Mr. Yiin.
Life Synthesis with the above partners form a global consultancy committed to R&D, design, manufacturing, delivery, sales and marketing. These partners are central to our expansion and credibility within the industry, government and funding bodies.
Partners planning to co-launch SolaRoof pilot projects:
- One Village Foundation, US – refining and developing best practices for emerging markets and adopting Solaroof into Unity Centre scheme that includes training, health care, ICT, business incubation, etc;
- Khutso Foundation, South Africa - set in the Waterberg Biosphere, is dedicated to showcasing - through environmental solutions - the empowerment of impoverished African communities in transforming the poorest of the poor;
- Gamspirit, The Gambia – exploring best practices for ecotourism with minimum footprint and maximum local involvement such as with SolaRoof designs that are included in ecovillage, spa and farming aspects of the project;
- Institute of Science in Society, UK – dedicated to the promotion of sustainable & integrated farming practices in the UK and other parts of the world.
9) Financial model: Mechanisms for ensuring affordability of SolaRoof technologies will depend on each particular project. However in our projects, we are planning Community centres as a central point for organizing commmunity based social enterprises. These enterprises promoting local economic development taking direct or indirect advantage of SolaRoof technologies will lead to income growth that will make these housing developments more affordable.
This scheme of dramatically increasing agricultural and infrastructure productivity and efficiency will ensure the affordability of our products to low income marginalized populations in the target regions.
SolaRoof low cost housing because it is closely linked with income generation, will be used to fund and/or subsidize housing for workers.
• Costs as percentage of income: 200
• Financing: Initially, we rely on finance from private sources, though our own commercial activity and funding bodies. As our technology enables productivity, it is geared towards profitability, and consequently self-sustaining. The expenses of set-up can in most cases comfortably be paid back within 1-2 years, and thus make finance available to new users. As our structures are protective against climate change, pests, drought, floods etc, the potential for secure livelihoods are far greater than with traditional farming methods, and up to 10 times more productive than field production.
As a social enterprise with a unique and innovative approach to poverty alleviation, we will also approach all significant NGOs and individuals, media, internet as well as use carbon credit schemes to boost funding.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: SolaRoof concept has been validated by several proof of concept greenhouses. There are 500+ members of the global community and many of these are considering and planning to build SolaRoof structures. Many more would like to get involved in other ways. The SolaRoof Community is not a business, but encourages leadership by individual and group initiatives. The method of collaborative and grassroots activity has often been effective where governments and universities have lacked in action. The next step is therefore to complete pilot projects for hands-on experience and training, and finalise initial supply chain management systems. Life Synthesis will encourage, enable and promote the Community so it can keep growing in parallel to our other activities.
• Number of clients in past year: We estimate that hundreds have benefited from our online activity at our public forum, and several functional projects have been built,for example: www.solarbubblebuild.com. We also worked with www.ecoshelter.org
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 50
• Potential demand: The potential and realistic demand for SolaRoof structures is enormous, and too vast to quantify in currency or number of clients!
Our market is truly global as SolaRoof is adaptable to all climates and all cultures, and can be applied in rural as well as urban settings.
With the effects of global warming and climate change are becoming increasingly noticeable and to many life-threatening, we aim to be prepared to tackle demands for energy efficient buildings as well as house displaced environmental refugees (expected to be 50 million within the next couple of decades).
Additionally, we aim to improve any house that is not currently providing adequate protection against the elements, for humans, animals and plants!
Overall market is therefore potentially much greater than 5 million people/several billion dollar industry.
7) Benefits to clients: Obviously, a Resources, Information & Organisations ( R.I.O. )Centre / organsation will be set up and its mission, vision, goals, strategies and action plans communicated to all interested parties through all available media of communication. RIO Centre will be the one stop centre as well as the clearing house for this project. All needs and supplies will be facilitated by this organisation working with the government, private sector, suppliers or any interested parties in this project.
8) Key operational partnerships: Key partnerships will be established with: Government - Provision of funds, land and / or infras. Business communities - Above plus other related resources. Social communities - Human resources to administer programs. Suppliers / Manufacturers - Resources at discounted prices.
9) Financial model: Funding can come from the government, private sector, individuals, foundations and even the creation of self- funding by beneficiaries can be arranged.
• Costs as percentage of income: 0 %
• Financing: Funding by both public & private sectors. Need to be financially self-sustainable. Beneficiaries are to contribute as much as they can voluntarily in kind or in other forms. Other sources of funding are from international supporting entities and from religious communities. Financial sustainability will be dependent on availability of resources garnered. Ownership of tents are proposed to be by outright loan and repayable through easy payment schemes over flexible period of time. Purchase of tents are to be for needs' basis and not for business transaction, rent or sell otherwise to prevent abuse.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: None - This is just a concept for feasibilty studies.
• Number of clients in past year: None yet.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 70%
• Potential demand: Greater than 5 Million
7) Benefits to clients: Aside from the suggestion of MMC, I think there is merit in learning from UK planning policy (PPG3). Developers in any economic climate assume a profit level and, as in the UK, this can evolve into private finance making real contributions to the local community in open space contributions, free land for affordable housing, children's play facilities etc.... Governments will be keen to maximise economic/social output without actual financial input and this is an ideal policy approach to ensure than landowners/developers make the contributions as part of their schemes via planning - does SA have a requirement to obtain planning permission?
8) Key operational partnerships: None! I am a Christian who happens to be a Development Mangager for a Housing Association. Pure coincidence but I feel a real passion for achieving affordable housing solutions for those in need - regardless of nationality i guess!
9) Financial model: As part of their planning permission, developers should be forced to give X% of the land free to a social body (Govt, Hdg Assoc etc) to build on. This subsidy should allow minimal additional financial input to make projects 'stack'.
• Costs as percentage of income: ??|
• Financing: If sustainable planning policy is achieved, affordable housing in emerging nations should be self financing (free land, build cost = rental income over, say, 40 yrs).
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: I don't want to win £5k - just offer some experience! :-)
• Number of clients in past year: Nationally, thousands. Since Right to Buy in the UK, we have been playing catch up as a sector. Getting there but will never meet need - as per emerging countries - our efforts will not cure the world.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 80
• Potential demand: Taking a strategic approach, technically, the entire population could benefit from appropriate housing policy.
7) Benefits to clients: It makes their housing more plentiful and less expensive because such housing is not taxed.
8) Key operational partnerships: I am on the Board of the Center for the Study of Economics in Philadelphia and the Center has fully adopted and applied my research and formulas.
9) Financial model: There is no additional cost at all to any govt. that would adopt my proposal. In fact, it would be cheaper than equivalent taxes that govts. are currently levying.
• Costs as percentage of income: 100
• Financing: This tax cost nothing more than equivalent taxes (could be less).
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: This tax (the only good tax) has always been successful - I can email you 238 empirical studies proving this. The clients (taxpayers) number in the thousands.
• Number of clients in past year: I induced 23 localities in Pennsylvania to adopt my suggested tax, always with successful economic results.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 30
• Potential demand: I should think that ALL cities, especially those that are less-developed,would benefit from my studies and experience.
7) Benefits to clients: Jaunapur Slum resettlement scheme is the result of various successful and tested cluster planning pilots built over the past twelve years by Anangpur Building Centre. • Rehabilitation of 212 families at Proyog Vihar in Naraina, Delhi. • Rehabilitation of 1984 riot affected victims, 1400 families, at Rohini, North Delhi, • Pilot scheme for Slum In-situ up gradation in high density Area (625 d.u /hectare) for 1850 households at Bhoomiheen Camp, Delhi. • Pilot scheme for 1229 families at Papankala, Delhi. • Leprosy colony for 800 families, Delhi. However, these were mere planning and cost-effective technology exercises where the sustainability factor was not part of these projects at that point of time when they were built. The Jaunapur Slum Resettlement Scheme was the first instance addressed for Sustainable Human Settlement Design in a holistic manner. This project and the publicity it generated has instilled fear on decision makers that it would expose far too many flaws with the government policies. In fact this was admitted by the Additional Commissioner (Slum & JJ Dept) Star News: Telecast on ‘News Hour’ Date: 18.02.2000 Reporter: Radhika Bordia Radhika: Officials admit that endorsing this innovative project will expose the flaws in the system. Manjit Singh: Anything that we talk of Jaunapur, anything & everything that we are going to do in this project… now there are certain resistances within the system…You see, these are the things that will be exposing lot of systems, which are already operating in the city…vis-à-vis this project. So all kinds of these negative vibrations also keep coming onto that…and whatever is possible within my own power as Slum Commissioner, or, looking after the Building Centre, I am doing that…But I got to be taking the clearances, the approvals, from number of other agencies within the system. Details of the Jaunapur Slum Rehabilitation Project have been placed at the website: www.anangpur.com, www.anangpur.org.
8) Key operational partnerships: The Project started with Slum Department as its main partner. The Municipal Partner: All the administrative works for the project was the responsibility of the Slum & JJ Department, right from procuring land, taking the final decision of what need to be done, and getting the money from the related government agencies. Co-ordination with other government agencies like the Water Board or the Electric Dept. of Delhi etc The Business Partner: All the suggestions and options for the rehabilitation scheme including the choice of land, choice of material, choice of construction methodology, choice of systems of roads, drainage, water supply, electrification including design inputs and project management was the responsibility of the private partner – the Anangpur Building Centre. The Implementing Partner: The Nizamuddin Building Centre was the executing partner and had representatives of both the business as well as the municipal partner on its board. Its task was solely implementing the scheme as finally approved by the municipal partner and receives payment from the municipal partner. An amount of 16 crores (US $ 3.2 million) was deposited by Delhi Government, all in advance, in the account of Slum Department MCD that remained as its fixed deposit. Similarly the slum department has taken money for many other projects. The salaries amounting to 200 crores INR annually of the Slum Department are met in this manner. This is a Big Business anyway.
9) Financial model: The scheme proposed by the Centre proved the inappropriateness of the existing norms for slum resettlement schemes. On comparing, a dramatic difference was found between the Slum Wing’s estimate of Rs. 280 million (US $ 7 million*) for infrastructure development alone, and the Nizamuddin Building Centre’s offer to implement the entire scheme including skeletal housing (support system and roof), the cost of infrastructure, such as roads, water supply & drainage, decentralized sewage disposal, street lighting and horticulture within Rs. 180 million (US$ 4.5 million*). Total cost per unit of the scheme given by us was Rs. 44,000.00 (US$1100.00) per unit as opposed to Rs. 80,000 (US$ 2000) per unit by the PWD (The cost estimated was in the year 1998. Value of 1 US$ is taken as 40.)
• Costs as percentage of income: N.A
• Financing: An amount of Rs 16 crore (US $ 3.2 million*) was sanctioned by the Ministry of Environment and deposited with the Slum & JJ Department, Municipal Corporation of Delhi for the implementation of the project.
In addition to the above resources the beneficiary families were expected to contribute in terms of labour and material for providing the walling material of the dwelling units to complete the Skeletal Units proposed to be provided to them. The families were offered assistance in transporting the existing walling material form their current dwelling to the settlement site as a part of the scheme. Assistance was given in making permanently finished walling elements as already used in the pilot scheme. (The cost estimated was in the year 1998. Value of 1 US$ is taken as 40.)
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: The pilot project proved effective so far in proving a policy of building on high land and utilizing cost effective construction technology. The stakeholders have become co-petitioners before the Supreme Court, pleading that this scheme be completed and allotted to them. But the MCD has spared no effort, to abort this project for the fear of exposure. On Dec7th 05, the hon. Chief Justice spent an entire day on this case and said that he was upset by the untruths that have been presented before him. As of now, after a long period of tireless struggle, though the next hearing was scheduled on the 25thAug 06, the crestfallen slum dwellers, have withdrawn the case, intending to fight for justice on the streets. They assert that they lost faith in the highest judicial system of the country.
• Number of clients in past year: The Project received world wide recognition:Listed as a 'Good Practice' under the Best Practices of United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS)-Habitat, Nairobi. Recognition by EXPO-2000, Hannover. Finalists for 'World Habitat Awards' 2003
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: N.A
• Potential demand: We say it is greater than 5 million people because the largest single investment that a man makes in his lifetime is the home he builds. The solution tries to contribute to the “JOY OF LIVING”, which is the right of every citizen- in totality in a very human way. Anangpur Building Centre (where I live) or the Slums at Jaunapur have the same ideology but differs only in the scale. The requirement of today is an Appropriate Human Settlement Design at an affordable cost. With the identical logic applied for the Jaunapur Project we have worked out different solutions that are applicable to all economic levels in varied contexts with minor changes in the physical design. One on- going project, worth mentioning is the “Vedaville Sustainable Township” in Jamaica, over an area of 1200 acres. This project promises to be the largest sustainable development project in the world.
7) Benefits to clients: So far we are still at the prototype stage. I forsee two possibilities.
1> Disaster relief agencies buy units in bulk and distribute them in crisis.
2> The low cost of the units would allow them to be sold on the free market.
8) Key operational partnerships: Well, I've been talking to Pregis and Dow about custom materials. Hexacomb cardboard (the product Pregis makes) is incredibly strong and lightweight, and was used in the past to make structural panels for buildings. Dow's Thermax insulation boards are the closest off-the-shelf product to the custom panel material we envisage using in the long run.
For assembly, 3M makes some spectacularly good, but expensive products. We have had initial discussions with them about the specification for a long-term-use bonding solution.
9) Financial model: An integral part of the hexayurt approach is open intellectual property. The building geometry, the design concept, the sketches, the IP as a whole is all public domain. This means anybody can set up commercial manufacture, and hopefull this keeps prices low. Eventually I would like to see the components in the infrastructure pak also under open intellectual property licenses so that eventually the world can enjoy a building system which is comprehensive, open and cheap.
• Costs as percentage of income: 0
• Financing: Right now, I'm financing the operation by selling units to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (as part of the Strong Angel III demonstration) and doing custom work for people going to Burning Man. My friend Alex Gordon-Brander comissioned a large unit made from a custom laminate which is currently sitting in the warehouse out back drying.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: So far, we've built some prototypes. I've lived in them for a while and they worked very, very well. The next year should see much more widespread testing, and perhaps some field trials.
• Number of clients in past year: we are still at the prototype stage
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 0
• Potential demand: I would estimate that the "middle three billion" are potential clients.
The income spread between $1 and $10 per day covers something like three billion people. A hexayurt housing system may cost as little as $300, but let's ballpark at $500. That represents a couple of month's income for the upper end of the poor, and just over a year's income for the lower end. Given that in the first world, mortgages are typically written for two or three times annual income, the possibilities are large.
7) Benefits to clients: THE DELIVERY MODEL IS THE TRIPLE -HELIX OF RESEARCH - INDUSTRY-GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION FOR PRODUCT/PROCESS INNOVATION ,ITS DEVELOPMENT AND DIFFUSION UNDER THE AEGIS OF INDUSTRY AND THE GOVERNMENT.THIS IS REQUIRED GIVEN THE CONSERVATIVE INDUSTRY STATUS AND APPROACH PARTICULARLY FOR INNOVATIVE PRODUCTS WHICH THE INDUSTRY DO NOT PROMOTE AS SUCH GIVEN THE RISK UNLESS PROVEN. MANY OF SUCH PROVEN INNOVATIVE PRODUCTS BEING INTRODUCED ARE COSTLY PRODUCTS LARGELY OUTSIDE THE RUBIC OF THE PRESENT CONTEXT.THE RISK COVERAGE BEING PROVIDED UNDER GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT FOR TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND DIFFUSION,THE INDUSTRY HAS BEEN PROMTED TO GET TECHNICALLY AND FINANCIALLY INVOLVED FOR BETTER DIFFUSION OF THE PRODUCT RANGE IN THE MARKET. THE STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT AT THE LAB-LEVEL WOULD NOT HAVE ENTHUSED THE INDUSTRY BUT FOR THE SUPPORT AS ABOVE.THE PROMOTIONAL FUNDING AS PART OF THE SOCIETAL PROGRAM OG RRL,TRIVANDRUM AND CSIR-WIDE SUPRA EFFORT AS A SOCITAL PROGRAM WILL ENSURE SUBSIDISED DIFFUSION OF THE INNOVATIVE PRODUCTS THROUGH CONSTRUCTION EFFORTS AIMED AT THE WEAKER SEGMENTS.EARLIER UNDER THE AEGIS OF THE NATIONAL BUILDING ORGANISATION ,A GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY,RRL,TRIVANDUM HAS DIFFUSED ITS TECHNOLOGY FOR LIGHT WEIGHT BRICKS THROUGH CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS FOR THE MARGINALISED GROUPS FOR COMMUNITY PROJECTS.THE ADDED ADVANTAGE OF ECO-FRIENDLY ASPECTS DO COVER THE COSTS FOR THE GOVERNMENT ALSO,PARTICULARLY FOR FLY ASH,TANNERY SLUDGE AND AGRO- WASTES.THE MODEL ALSO FACILITATES UPGRADATION AND DIVERSIFICATION IN INDUSTRY THROUGH THE SUPPORT FOR INNOVATION IN ITS PRODUCT RANGE WHICH WILL FURTHER HELP IN SOCIO-ECONOMIC REALM GIVEN THE TRADITIONAL NATURE OF THE BRICK AND TILE INDUSTRY IN KERALA AND ITS DECLINE IN RECENT YEARS. BUT FOR THIS GOVERNMENT -RESEARCH SUPPORT THE INDUSTRY WOULD HAVE COLLAPSED OR GONE FOR THE HIGH COST ROUTE OF IMPORTED TECHNOLOGY GIVEN ITS ELITIST AND MECHANISED NATURE.
8) Key operational partnerships: RESEARCH -KERALA GOVERNMENT AND TILE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION LINKAGES,TIFAC-FLY ASH MISSION -DEPARTMENT AND INDUSTRY LINKAGES FOR DEVELOPMENTAL AND ENGINNERING EFFORTS,LINKAGES WITH FOREIGN UNIVERSITY LIKE TNO AND UNIDO IN THE EARLY YEARS OF THE PROGRAM FOR POLICY ,TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT AS WELL AS EXPERTISE BUIOLD-UP IN CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT AND REAERCH BASED BUSINESS PROMOTION IN TRADITIONAL INDUSTRY BASED ON AN INNOVATIVE PRODUCT RANGE.LINKAGES WERE ALSO BUILT-UP WITH SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES IN KERALA FOR SCALE-UP STUDIES AND FOR SETTING UP QUALITY CONTRO LABS IN INDUSTRIAL PREMISES THROUGH RRL,TRIVANDRUM INVOLVEMENT AIMED AT PRODUCT DIFFUSION,INNOVATION,QUALITY UPGRADATION,PROCESS OPTIMISATION AND TRAINING OF PERSONNEL ASWELL AS TECHNICAL CONSULTANCY AND TROUBLE SHOOTING.THIS WAS ALSO PART OF A CSIR TASK FORCE AND NETWORKED PROGRAM INVOLVING CBRI,ROORKEE,A CSIR NODAL LAB IN THE BUILDING SECTOR
9) Financial model: AS ALREADY MENTIONED THE FINANCIAL MODEL IS ONE OF THE TRIPLE HELIX WITH GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT IN AN ENTRPRENEURIAL MODE INVOLVING INDUSTRY WHO PROVIDE ONLY A PART FUNDING TO ENSURE INDUSTRY WITH RESEARCH PROVIDING THE INNOVATION AND TRAININF FOR NEW TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT FUNDED PARTLY BY RRL,TRIVANDRUM AND CSIR TASK FORCE NETWORK FUNDS.
• Costs as percentage of income: 20-
• Financing: THE INITIATIVE IS FINANCED INITIALLY MAINLY BY GOVERNMENT FOR INNOVATION SUPPORT AND DIVERIFICATION OR UPGRADATION IN TRADITIONAL INDUSTRY,BASED ON VALUE ADDED PRODUCT RANGE UTILISING LOACAL RESOURCES AND INDUSTRIAL WASTES. THIS INDIRECTLY PAYS UP THE COSTS TO A LARGE EXTENT THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL EXTERNALITIES FOR THE GOVERNMENT BESIDES HELPING TO REVIVE A LIMPING INDUSTRY BY WAY OF INNOVATIVE PRODUCT DIFFUSION UNDER MARKET CONDITIONS AND SUPPORTED THROUGH NETWORKED INITIATIVES AND SUPPORT ,TILL SUSTENANCE LEVELS ARE REACHED WHICH IS ESTIMATED TO BE ATTAINED IN 4- 5 YERAS TIME WHEN PAY BACK WILL BE SUFFICIENT AND SELF- SUSTAINING.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: THE OUT COME OF THE PROJECT HAS HELPED TO BRING OUT INNOVATIVE PRODUCTS OF APPEAL TO INDUSTRY AND HAVING EVIDENCED MARKET VALUE IN THE BUILDING CERAMICS SECTOR. THIS HAS RESULTED IN DIVERSIFICATION AND QUALITY UPGRADATION IN TILE INDUSTRY IN KERALA THROUGH QUALITY LABS AND PERSONNEL TRINING AS WELL AS NEW PRODUCT ENGINEERING AND COMMERCIALISATION.CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY SCHEMES UNDER INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT INITIATIVE AND INVOLVEMENT FUELLED BY RESEARCH INNOVATION AND RESEARCH BASED BUSINESS HAS GENERATED FRUITFUL OUTCOME OF A SELF-SUSTAINING NATURE IN A DECLINING INDUSTRY WITH TECHNOLOGY AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT AS WELL AS MARKET POSSIBILITIES FOR A CREDIBLE PAYBACK. A BUSINES INCUBATOR FOR DEMONSRATION AND TRIAL MARKETING HAS BEEN SETUP AS PART OF CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT
• Number of clients in past year: IN THE LAST YEAR ALONE 3 INDUSTRIES OF KERALA DIRECTLY AND MANY INDUSTIES AS PART OF THE TILE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN BENEFITTED. FLY ASH INDUSTRIES COULD HAVE A READY OUTLET FOR WASTE PRODUCTS DUMPED IN LARGE QUANTITIES IN THEIR CORTYARD CA
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 30-
• Potential demand: THE POTENTIAL DEMAND MAY EXCEED 2-3 MILLION IN THE MEDIUM TERM GIVEN THE TRIPLE HELIX SUPPORT WITH INVOLVEMENT OF RESEARCH AND INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT IN THE ENTRPRENEURIAL PHASE AND DIFFUSION TRIAL PERIOD.THE TILE INDUSTRY HAS ASSESSED GOOD LOCAL MARKET AND EXPORT MARKET DEMAND IN THE MEDIUM -LONGER TERM GIVEN THE FEATURES OF THE PRODUCT LIKE INNOVATION,PROVEN TECHNOLOGY,ENTERPRISE SUPPORT FOR DIFFUSION IN THE START-UP AND SCALE-UP PHASE.A BURGEONING MARKET IS EMERGING WITH RESURGENCE IN ECONOMU WITH TRANSITION OF THE MARGINALISED SEGMENT NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT INITIATED COMMUNITY SCEMES BUT ALSO BECAUSE OF INDIVIDUAL GROWTH POTENTIAL AND PROFILE GIVEN THE ECONOMIC TRANSITION AND DEMAND FOR INNOVATION OF A LOW COST NATURE TO SUPPLANT TRADITIONAL ATERIAL WITH TECHNOLOGICAL PRODUCTS WHICH USE RENEWABLE OR LOCAL RESOURCES,AND ARE ECOSAFE.
7) Benefits to clients: EWS I – income 200, Plot size 35.32, no. of plots 1962, population 19620 EWS II – income 300, Plot size 35.52, no. of plots 1500, population 15000 EWS III – income 400, Plot size 35.52, no. of plots 800, population 8000 EWS total 66.35% LIG I – income 450, Plot size 44.62, no. of plots 182, population 910 LIG II – income 500, Plot size 55.82, no. of plots 617, population 3085 LIG III – income 600, Plot size 93.03, no. of plots 265, population 2950 LIG total 10.82% MIG I – income 1100, Plot size 139.54, no. of plots 626, population 6260 MIG II – income 1800, Plot size 223.26, no. of plots 265, population 2650 MIG total 13.87% HIG I – income 1800+, Plot size 325.59, no. of plots 180, population 1850 HIG II – income 1800+, Plot size 474.43, no. of plots 75, population 750 FLATS – income 1800+, Plot size 613.94, no. of plots 40, population 3200 HIG total 9.02%
Moreover, the township also provides spaces for with facilities and amenities like Community science centre, playground, Formal and Informal Commercial activities, police station, swimming pool, fire station, police station, sports club, library, museum, open air theatre, auditorium, community Hall, petrol pump. However, these facilities have not come up in totality. But, perhaps, it is now the right time for the commercial development to come up with the population already at the site. Because of the increased real estate value of the spaces, 20 years after, it would be more commercially feasible.
8) Key operational partnerships: Aranya Housing working with the Indore Development Authority and the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board in 1981. The township funded by HUDCO and the World Bank was to be primarily designed for the EWS, without any external subsidies.
9) Financial model: not applicable
• Costs as percentage of income: -
• Financing: not applicable
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: Today, all the 4000 dwelling units appear closer to private & corporate housing built on the periphery of the site. It is heartening to see them clad in the similar clothing & attending schools as their educated neighbours. Aranya, since its inception & realisation, has created unprecedented awareness not only in the professional & the academic world, but has also given another view to implementing agencies. It has been a case study & inspiration to many similar projects. Generally, the Urban poor housing are planned in isolation segregated from the other sectors of the community. But, we realise that towns have to be a mosaic, the rich & poor must live together. Moreover, understanding the sociological process where in due course of time the divide between the two would diminish
• Number of clients in past year: Aranya, has been a case study and inspiration to many projects all over. For example, the West Bengal Housing Development Corporation's did a project at Udyan, Kolkata, where Cross subsidisation of EWS plots with the Higher Income Housing on the pe
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 76%
• Potential demand: At least 76% of the original inhabitants of Aranya Housing were low income i.e. less than Rs1000/ month . However, we must acknowledge and appreciate that most of them have prospered and grown to the extent that they can no longer be called poor. Aranya has also refuted the argument that in such schemes the beneficiaries i.e. slum dwellers normally go back to their original site after selling the allocated plot. On the contrary, our post occupancy survey of 1995-96 shows that almost 90% of EWS housing is used and incrementally upgraded by the original allotee.
7) Benefits to clients: The project is thoght to reach low income and marginalized populations, these are the only population we work with. We don?t have other field of work, for example we don?t sell houses
8) Key operational partnerships: Un Techo Para Mi Pais is financed through our association with companies and their contributions, the private donations and the national and international organizations. In August 2005, Un Techo Para Mi País signed an aid program with the International Development Bank (IDB) in order to support this Project, expand the presence and stability of this institution , and improve their activities technically, specially in the social interacting stage. As a guarantee to our openness, the consultancy firm Price Waterhouse Coopers is in charge of our auditing. As you can see partners are esencial for us because we don?t sell any product in order to get income
9) Financial model: nowadays our house cost USD 850 and the beneficiares only pay the 10% of the cost, USD 85, this is a very low cost for a hosue in Uruguay. Our team of social interaction and alocation are in charge of visit the families previous the construction in order to control the adecuate payment of the house. We usually visit the familiy weekly and charge the USD 85 in 8 so the familiy doesn?t have to pay al the amount togheter
• Costs as percentage of income: 0
• Financing: The project is non-profitable, we are inanced through our association with companies and their contributions, the private donations and the national and international organizations. The beneficiares constibute to 10% of the expenses of the program. Our strategy in the long term is that more and more people become aware that 30000 families in Uruguay need a decent house and the contribution of everyone in required in orden help those families. Beyond that our realtions with companies is growing every year as we become attractive for them in their Corporate Social Responsiblity department
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: - 272 homes we built, that means that 272 families have a decent home now - Implementation of the project along the country, in the provinces of Florida, San José, Paysandu y Lavalleja. - Mobilization of 1800 volunteers. Without them, none of the above would have been possible. - 2 massive campaigns were carried out for the positioning and expansion of the Project.
• Number of clients in past year: 160
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 100
• Potential demand: The project is present in 8 countries of Latinamerica and it could be aplicable in all the world, so greater tahn 5 million would be the answer
7) Benefits to clients: (1)DRAS offers high potential technology of affordable and safe housing for the whole globe. An efficient production and delivery system makes it most popular in the world, with in few years.
(2)With this technology localised production units are to be established for manufacturing the precast components at village levels. Demonstration houses are to be erected. Manufacturing / delivery / erection tasks of this housing is to be organised by these local units. As DRAS offers 'ready to use end product of house', the delivery model can be as simple as supplying ready-made products at the doorstep of the beneficiary. Where as the financing and collection of repayments is to be parallelly organised by the experienced financing or banking systems / entrepreneurs.
(3)Finance packages are to be worked-out and wide publicity is to be given about such packages among all the anticipated beneficiaries
(4)Hence, it needs either a dedicated network of NGOs or efficient commercial corporations with their franchise network or public - private partnership ventures / co- operative corporate companies to utilise this technology on sustainable basis.
(5)If the commercial banks can offer long-term housing loans, the DRAS can be quite affordably owned by the poor families around the world with less than US $0.5 as repayment per day per family, as per the financial figures worked out in the Indian context. Similar financial figures may be reflected in respect of other developing countries also.
HENCE THE DELIVERY MODEL OF D.R.A.S., PARTICULARLY IN FINANCIAL TERMS IS QUITE VAIBLE AND GOING TO BE MOST POPULAR, SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS VERY MUCH AFFORDABLE.
8) Key operational partnerships: No doubt, that the final beneficiaries of DRAS technology are low-income and marginalised groups of the society. But, as a TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE ORGANISATION we cannot reach them effectively in a big way, around the globe. Hence, WE WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THIS TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE (on mutually agreable terms and conditions) WITH A GOOD INTERNATIONAL N.G.O. OR A NETWORK OF N.G.Os or a proven public-private partnership systems or even with any popular commercial corporations with high social responsibilities.
Partners are to establish precast componants' production units of their own or their franchaise network, at village levels. Delivery of precast components & erection of DRAS housing is also to be organised by these units. Whereas, the financing & collection of repayments is to be parallelly organised by an efficient financing / banking system. As DRAS offers 'Ready to use end product of house', the delivery model can be as simple as supplying ready-made products at the door-step of users.
With in a fraction of million U.S. dollars investment, our SPERC will (technically) prove that, this innovative housing system would be effective and efficient disaster resistant affordable shelter technology. If any of the said partners from any part of the globe are willing to come forward for producing DRAS units, and are ready to fund this financial support, we offer it as a technology package on mutually agreeable terms.
9) Financial model: The beneficiary of poor family can afford to own a permanent disaster resistant house(DRAS), if they can afford to repay the long-term loan of only Rs.20/- (less than US $0.5) per day per family. (Please refer the below item 9-b for details.)
• Costs as percentage of income: 20%
• Financing: SIMPLE HOME-LOAN FROM BANKS, ENABLES AFFORDABILITY OF DRAS FOR POOR FAMILIES. To illustrate it, cost details are presented in the Indian context:
(1)A DRAS unit costs about Rs. 40,000/-(lessthan US$900 only)for a 250 sq.ft. size, which offers safe shelter for a family of 3 to 5 members. If this amount is offered on a long-term loan by commercial banks at the current interest rates, IT MAY COST ONLY Rs.20/-(LESSTHAN US$0.5) PER DAY REPAYMENT PER FAMILY, WHICH WOULD BE QUITE AFFORDABLE FOR ANY POOR FAMILY.
(2)DRAS can be built for Rs.150/-(about US$3.5)per sq.ft., where as the conventional housing costs about Rs.300/- (about US$7.0)per sq.ft. Even a thached hut of mud walls, costs about Rs.100/-(say US$2.25)per sq.ft., which is highly vulnerable to fire / cyclones / earthquakes
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: This whole innovative technology, DRAS is at the demonstration stage and have demonstrable success. We are to reach out to big NGOs / co-operative / commercial corporate companies, who have to produce it in mass for delivering them to the marginalised groups of the society. We just believe that, this competition on affordable housing would be a right opportunity to identify dedicated partners for DRAS.
• Number of clients in past year: Not applicable at this juncture.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 80%
• Potential demand: The magnitude of DRAS potential would be simply in millions per year, since DRAS is the basic need of more than six billion human beings of the globe. Say for example, if a developing country like India has to meet the shortfall of rural housing over next ten years, it needs more than one million rural shelter units to be built per year. Similarly for the other developing countries of the world. Using the conventional technologies and available resources, it would be almost an impossible task for India or for any other country. In this context, this innovation offers technical solution, even without the intervention of their Government. It offers disaster resistant shelters with in the affordability of rural poor, and safe rehabilitation housing, during emergencies. If it is popularised, its potential would be in millions per year.
7) Benefits to clients: Mechanism in place to reach out the low income / marginalised are as follows; Firstly;Briefing session will be held as to bring / organise Shop-stewards in the factories, Workers' Trade Unions and Employers' Unions for information about the project objectives. Secondly; to organise open public meetings of the workers entirely for information dissemination as well as issusing hand-outs materials about the Housing Project to be given to workesr during the gathering session. Thirdly; as far as orphans and marginalised are concerned there will be a briefing session to the Community Staleholders / Leaders such as Chiefs of the targeted communities, Community Counsillors, Prisets , CBOs, NGOs, etc. Then this activity will be followed by public gathering for more clarifiaction and having discussion with every body. The primary puropse is to solicit support from all stakeholder and gain popular support for project implementation. Apart from this is to embark on security suport and storage facilities for the material to be purpose where necessary. But most importantly is to mobilise the community in general to own the project as theirs but not beloging to somebody else. The community will remain as the watchdogs of the project and the custodians of the project. The community will also play a vital role to identify the need people and who are the orphans and to priorities the orphans accordingly.
8) Key operational partnerships: My partners are as follows; Firstly; Local structures composed of the Chiefs,comunity councillors, priests, Their role will be justifying whether the targeted beneficiaries are the real one and the members of the targeted areas / community through te provision of police clearance where necessary. They will also enhance community mobilisation to the project beneficiaries. Secondly; Another one will be Workers' Trade Unions / shop stewards of the targeted factories.Their role as well will be organising the workers to get appropriate information and communivcate between the Project Committee, Project Facilitaor and the workers.Also the Shop stewards will up date us with teh status of the employee(s)since sometimes are being expelled, the that will enable us to now or dicide in time what to do with our project beneficiary. Thirdly;Busines Communities / Owners are the main partners to mobilise their employees about the project and sensitise the project beneficiaries carry out the project. Sometime will assist on how to get the beneficiaries monthly payments through "stop-order system." Fouth; Governmnet relevant departments such as department of labour, social welfare and local government (Land Survey) are teh main partners to provide technical know how to secure land for our project (Land Survey), select the orphans (welfare departmnet)workers (labor. Importantly these department will be providing advice, supervision to able addr
9) Financial model: They will be grouped into respective groups. 1 group will be made of 10 beneficiaries.The group will make stockfel / small-loan to one person at the time to organise materials. each member to pay $50.00 per month for the period of ten months which is the Project Duration.Means 9 beneficiaries are contributing to one person and next month to the other person till ten months.
• Costs as percentage of income: 20%
• Financing: It is sustainable since the registration of $16.60 per person will be regarded as "Coordination Fees" That is to say each beneficiary wll be contributing $16.60 to the expenses of the program. The programm also initiate partnership to plough the feilds (crops) of the orphans or marginalised and share the products.Such products will be property of the program. Financial sustainability may be through investing the money to get profit and sometimes where possible buy LAND and develop it for residential purposes that will benefit the program in the long term. For most of the government officials, private sectors have no accommodation and office space and even an ordinary people to stay.This could directly be long-term initiative which is related to teh project growth.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: The project idea is new but based on the present demand of housing systems. I have learnt this when I was implementing Micro-Ptojects Programme finaced by European Union that many people have no shelter even we were addressing water, sanitation, roads and agricultural projects. Orphans have shelter, workers are working very hard but unable to build their houses due to little wages. Therefore the total statistics of people working at Maputsoe and Maqele Factories who are the targted ones and non-working households together with the orphans in the communities targeted is almost 127, 000 population. The project is higly expected to address 70% of this total population successfully towards povery reduction
• Number of clients in past year: Not yet implemeted but the project aimed to benefit at 70% of the vulnerable housedholds throughout the country.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 70%
• Potential demand: The project MOSTLY will be expeted to be implemented in the following sub-towns, communities / rural communities, towns following is pilot. Communities; Tsikoane, Bela-Bela, Corn-Exchange Kolonyama, Pitseng and Kolonyane the populationis almost for these communties is 100, 000 -200,000 people. Sub-town; Mapoteng, Tsakholo and Peka the population to benefit is approximately 200, 000- 300, 000, Town; Leribe, Berea and Maseru the population here is between 100,000 - 500, 000 people for these three towns.
7) Benefits to clients: As young impaired high school graduates coming from small towns are particularly subject to exclusion, rotary flats are meant for them. Financial situation of the applicants will be the main criterion of granting the rotary flats. The graduates from families with the lowest income per member will have precedence. By obtaining the rotary flats impaired university graduates will avoid returning to small towns, where they would not have any chances for individual and professional development. Taking up employment they will not only cease to collect social benefits from the national budget but also supply it with the money from their income taxes. The image of an impaired person within the society will change as well. They will be no longer perceived as inferior, helpless and care demanding but as the employees and citizens of full value and enjoying full rights.
8) Key operational partnerships: The project of building rotary flats for the impaired is nationwide and will be implemented in cooperation with local governments, Towarzystwo Budownictwa Społecznego (Social Construction Association), Państwowy Fundusz Rehabilitacji Osób Niepełnosprawnych (National Fund for the Rehabilitation of the Impaired) and ‘Normal Future’ Foundation. Rotary flats should be built in every city over 20 thousand inhabitants and managed by the local TBS’s (Towarzystwa Budownictwa Społecznego - Social Construction Associations). Their construction should be financed by local governments and PFRON (National Fund for the Rehabilitation of the Impaired). Applications for granting rotary flats will be considered by a commission featuring the representatives of the local governments, PFRON (National Fund for the Rehabilitation of the Impaired), TBS (Social Construction Association) and the Foundation. ‘Normal Future’ will also be engaged in creating partnerships with local governments and local TBS’s (Social Construction Associations) and in accepting applications for the rotary flat granting.
9) Financial model: As rotary flats are meant for the impaired graduates with low incomes, no financial contribution will be required from the applicants. They will be required to present their income certificates and university diplomas as well as their family income certificates. The main criterion of granting a rotary flat will be the income per family member.
• Costs as percentage of income: 0
• Financing: The rotary flats will account for the resources of local Towarzystwa Budownictwa Społecznego (Social Construction Associations). Construction will be financed by local governments (50%) and PFRON (National Fund for the Rehabilitation of the Impaired) (50%). Moreover, we will apply to European Union for financial aid for building rotary flats. The impaired will not participate in construction costs because they will live in rotary flats only for a few years. We are going to spread the idea of building rotary flats for the impaired graduates all over Poland. In our opinion housing help for the young and active impaired should be one of the priorities of all local governments. We expect that in long term local governments in every city over 20 thousand inhabitants will participate in financing rotary flats.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: One of the effects of our project will be the growth of employment among the impaired graduates who have obtained rotary flats. Our project will also enable the impaired to develop professionally and to actively participate in social life. They will finally make use of their enormous intellectual potential. Moreover, the national budget will benefit from higher activity of the impaired as the measures spent so far on social benefits will be allocated for other goals. We assume that it will be a long-term project and 3 to 5 rotary flats will be built a year in every city. We estimate that the number of the impaired graduates who will benefit from this kind of assistance will also systematically increase. In 5 years time 50 graduates will be living in rotary flats.
• Number of clients in past year: Our program will run in 2007. Nobody has benefited from our program over the last year.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 90
• Potential demand: In Poland the number of the physically impaired taking up studies has recently been increasing. For example at the moment there are 200 impaired students at Warsaw University. The number of the impaired students at other Polish universities is smaller but it is growing as well. This situation will create an increasing demand for rotary flats. Housing help in the form of rotary flats will be provided in every Polish city over 20 thousand inhabitants. During first 10 years almost 100.000 people will benefit from it.
7) Benefits to clients: First and foremost all our beneficiaries are our farmer members and are on our data base , we keep interacting through our network which enables us pass important information to our farmer members in addition we have democratically elected group executives which headed by the chairman run the day to day activities of a farmers group.we also have buying centre in all our project ares which also work as rural group offices so any vital information can easly get to them through our standard communication or use group sms because all our farmerleaders have mobile pnones where we communicate most instant information
8) Key operational partnerships: we have made two important patnerships with the) Afrofreshfoods europe) fruit buyers in Holand and (Coetze Natural Product Pty S.A ). Vanila and Coffee farmers in South africa this is in addition to individual farming contracts with all our farmer members to gaurantee them premium prices at farm gate during the season. We have farmers contracts with 503 coffee and vanilla farmers,501 organic fruit farmers,2500 arabic coffee farmers and 7,000 rice farmers.our partners range from busines to social the fruit farmers are supported by the dutch gorvernment to train and build an ultra modern fruit processing machine in uganda in addition to a nucleus irrigation farm to help train farmers and earn from sales out the products on the farm.The coffee and vanilla farmers are supported by a swiss funded agency specialising in promoting export of organic products from africa (epopa)this help in funding for mobilisation ,training and identifying sustainable markets for organically certisified farmers from africa.
9) Financial model: We have introduced a product called Harvest Gaurantee Scheme which enables a farmer to apply and be evalueted to own any social improvement such as a house in 14 working days.The farmer may not need to have cash at hand to enable him or her to secure scholastic materials to take back their children to school or any other domestic requirement.what the farmer needs is to undergo an evaluation and make a request for any service or product urgently required at the household level.the same applies to community requirements.
• Costs as percentage of income: 20%
• Financing: Building is not our business ,we are just doing this as a baseline indicator to improve the livelihood of the rural farmers . it is self sustaining but because of the little capital involved we can not move faster as we anticipated,the beneficiaries contribute a 75% and pay the balance of 25%in one years time to enable other beneficiaries qualify for the same gaurantees.This kind of hold other applicants who cant get the service unless their colegues clear their oustanding gauranteed facility
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: we have just started and 5 out 7400 farmers have applied and been approved awaitng costruction.The farmers have to also adress biodiversity issues as part of their obligation by planting atleast 10 fruit trees in compound as part of an enviromental protection and food security their daily incomes.In future it becomes a suppliment income generation in the home
• Number of clients in past year: we have 10004 fully registerd farmers who have been linked up to potential markets and have improved economically by taking our advices and training as tools of operation.This is our gender balance statistics 45% male adults,25% youth and 40% wome
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 90
• Potential demand: 100,000 - 500,000 Uganda is a country which relies on agriculture as a number one export from coffee , fish ,cocoa ,vanilla etc all the economic base in in agriculture so there is huge potential to spread he project to all parts of the country leading to the above figures.
7) Benefits to clients: We reach out to people through women groups, churches, Local Government Development Centers etc. We Organiza seminars and forums for poor widos, Poor old men and women who don't have a helping hands within the rural villages we are able to reach. during these forums, we call for nomination for building supports from these community women groups we work with. After the nomination deadlines, some people will be sellected based on the criterias for the years support after which we carry out our project for the selected poor people. Atimes, the organization will provide little money, materials such as woods, nails, local roofs for the person and allow him/her to emply people to build the house at his/her wish . The organization also render monitorig service to the housing project to make sure the project is been carried out whenever support is been given to someone. The estimated costs for building 100 local houses (3 bed rooms and pallor) for year 2006 is N1.5m which is about $11,100 and throuh donations, contributions from the Community Development Unions, Local Government Areas, Churches, Public and Private Sectors, the Organization have been able to build and complete 67 houses in 5 Communities remaining 33 houses still under construction in the other five communities, since the Oranization selected 10 houses for each community (100 houses for 10 Communities). Although other people who can afford the buildings build for themselves using the same technigues as our initiative since we trained people during our housing maintenance workshops in communities. Since 2004, the organization has provided 217 houses for people for poor people (2004-50 Houses, 2005 =100 houses and 2006- 67 completed while 33 under construction.
8) Key operational partnerships: Our partners are the Community Development Unions of the various communities, Local Government Area Councils, Churches, Women Trade Gruops Public and Private Sectors and individuals. These are the partners that work with us. They help through donations, volunteering works, provision of local building materials for the building projects. The organization also wish to write agencies and international donors for support to enable us reach out to more people within the rural communities and villages in Nigeria. The roles of these partners are to proide support, ideas and suggestions on how to carr out effective projects to enable us achieve our major aim which is to provide home/shelter for the selected poorest men and women within rural primitive communities.
9) Financial model: Actually, almost everyone can afford the major building products or materials, which is the red mud sand and water. Then, the raffia palm leaves used for the roofing work can as well be produced personally since raffia palm tree is all over rural communities, instead of buying from the market to spend money. The organization have been able to teach people to make use of these local materials so as not to waste money buying expensive modern building materials. The financial scheme of the organization towards the house initiative will suit almost everybody living within these ryral communities eccept the poorest ones among us.
• Costs as percentage of income: 5
• Financing: this initiative is financed through donations and contributions from indivuals, Community Development Unions, Women Trade Groups, Churches, Public and private groups and the local government area councils. The initiative is not profitable at all. The beneficiaries's contributions don't involve money rather, they volunteer to support through other ways. The other sourcec of funding for the initiative is from the organization's money from other departments or the Rural Links International (NGO) and its department for rual development projects. Most of the money where gotten through grants and awards from international organizations like International Youth Foundation, LEAP Africa and Nokia. The Oganization will also introduce sales in the cities to help get more funds for the initiative.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: The achivement of the initiative have felt so much within the rural communities where we operate for now. Atleast 217 buildings have been built by the organization through this initiative. These 217 houses have benefited the entire house holds of the 217 families that got our free support program. Meanwhile, the entire Communities /Villages with over 45,000 people are now aware of the products and materials for affordable house and can as well build their houses on their own.
• Number of clients in past year: In the 2004, 50 houses where built free for 50 families with a total population of about 350 people living in the houses. In the year 2005, 100 buildins where givin free to 100 poor eople within 10 communities. the total number of people living
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 7
• Potential demand: The demend for the product is on the increase. In some regions like the northern part of Nigeria, the type of the product we use can benefit them very well since they are in a very hot weather region of the country. Up to 500,000 people - 900,000 will benefit from the product. In countries like Mali, Niger and other poor countries, the products will help alot and almost 400,000- 600,000 people can benefit from it in a country like mali and Niger.
7) Benefits to clients: Habitat Kyrgyzstan builds simple, decent and affordable houses together with low-income families in need of housing. It is not uncommon that several hundred families apply for 10 new Habitat homes. The families are selected by a family selection committee from hundreds of applying eligible families. The families we select live under seriously substandard housing conditions, are willing and able to repay the interest free long term mortgage loan and are willing to actively take part in the building of the house. We also train the families before, during and after the building process. Topics cover issues from maintaining the household budget to building skills or house maintenance.
Each family has to contribute 500 'sweat equity' hours toward completion of their future homes. After the houses are built, Habitat Kyrgyzstan provides them to these families for no-interest mortgage for 10-15 years.
8) Key operational partnerships: Habitat Kyrgyzstan continuously partners with the government of Kyrgyzstan and City Council of Bishkek, the capital. Today 44 houses are built on a plot of land donated by the government in 2000. Next year we will start building more cane-reed houses on another plot of land of 600 m3, valued at USD 20,000, donated by the City of Bishkek, and with technical support from our private partner Chelebi company.
Our houses built with the new technology are highly appreciated by the Construction and Architecture Commission under the President of the Republic. The city’s Architecture and Construction Committee supports us in designing the houses and getting authorizations and construction permits for project implementation. The municipality helps with provision of access to water and electricity.
Chelebi is a Kyrgyz –Turkish joint venture, having been active in the Kyrgyz market since the late 90’s. The company started its activities in Kyrgyzstan by selling construction materials. Two years ago they established a factory near Bishkek, producing water and sanitation pipes that we also use for our floor heating system. Chelebi represents a two-fold sustainability factor for us. On the one hand, they supply us diverse construction materials at considerably reduced prices, and their local production of pipes reduces our dependence on imported goods, on the other.
9) Financial model: Our major financial resource is our revolving fund funded by donors and by the monthly mortgage repayments of all our homeowner families. The fund is used for the up-front investment. The loan bears no interest and has a life time of 15 years. Due to the savings of up to 60$/month through this project, the families will be able to pay the monthly instalments, and the revolving fund will help us to help more poor families. Every year we increase the fund and the number of served families, so we will be able to help more poor families in communities, improve their homes with energy efficient heating systems.
• Costs as percentage of income: 0
• Financing: Construction of cane-reed houses is financed by sponsorships and grants.In May 2006 Habitat Kyrgyzstan received a World Bank grant of $116,000 for 10 cane-reed houses.
We believe the project is financially sustainable because we have mortgage payments and desiganated funds allocated from the Habitat area office, apart from other Habitat affiliate tithes.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: Since its establishment in 1999, Habitat Kyrgyzstan Foundation has provided over 166 families with decent place to live. Cane-reed technology was introduced in autumn 2004, and since then we build only cane-reed houses. Up till now we constructed 12 individual cane-reed houses and 4 duplexes for 8 families. By the end of this year we expect to finish 4 more duplexes.
• Number of clients in past year: Last year 9 families received a Habitat house. Since January of this year another 8 families moved into cane-reed houses.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 95%
• Potential demand: There is a high demand for Habitat houses because of its fair terms – no-interest, long-term loan. Since low-income families cannot afford buying a house or receiving a mortgage in a bank, they approach Habitat for help. Habitat families are selected on open-contest. Usually over 300 families apply for 15 houses.
Cane-reed houses can be build in any region where cane- reeds grow. We intend to transfer this technology to neighboring Habitat affiliate in Tajikistan.
7) Benefits to clients: Land prices are extremely high within the urban centers of our country. When a housing scheme is initially announced in a semi-reputable area, speculators and investors tend to purchase the plots in bulk. These same investors hold onto the plots until the values increase two- and three- fold. The result is that low income groups always remain ignored and large areas of land remain undeveloped for decades. This vicious cycle continues to deprive the average person. We, at Saiban, have developed a four step filtration system to ensure the target market is being reached. The first step is an appraisal form; the second step is a pre-screening verification done by one of our employees. The third step is a reception area on our site: the client is required to come live in a 10' x 10' unfinished room with their entire family and all of their belongings for the period of 7-15 days. The reception area holds communal kitchens and bathrooms for 10-12 families. Once this test is passed, the person must start living on the plot within a period of 1-45 days. The fourth step of the filtration process is that the individual will not be given full title for a period of 3- 5 years and must keep that as his/her primary residence for that period. These steps have proven successful in allowing us to continually benefit low-income groups.
8) Key operational partnerships: During the years we have established partnerships within all segments of society. In some of our projects, we have key partnerships with the government (where they subsidize the land). In other projects we hold partnerships with businesses in hopes to assist the residents of our communities through micro-finance endeavours. Yet in other partnerships, we establish relationships with NGOs in the social, health, and education sector to develop those areas within our communities. These partnerships are all complimentary to our projects and allow us to perform our tasks and objectives in a more effective manner.
9) Financial model: Saiban goes to great extremes to ensure that products are affordable to the target populations. As mentioned above, in some projects we obtained land from the government, thus allowing us to pass on savings to the consumer. In other areas, where such subsudies are not possible, as is the case in our Lahore project, we have established a relationship with a reputable financing institution that will specifically cater to our consumer needs.
• Costs as percentage of income: N/A
• Financing: All projects of Saiban are designed to be self- sustainable. No beneficiary is given anything for free. The concept we hold to is that all beneficiaries shall recieve their plots on a no profit-no loss basis from Saiban. However, to ensure sustainability, Saiban retains rights to 10% of all residential plots and all commercial plots of the housing scheme. Once the entire scheme is developed and residents are occupying their homes, Saiban proceeds to sell the retained plots at the open market rate. The income generated from those plots is recylced into the following projects.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: Our project has had a tremendous amount of success thus far. In addition to recieving several national and international awards, Saiban has replicated the project in four different areas of Pakistan. Additionally, Saiban has provided support for the government in replicating these projects as well. In total, we have benefitted over 8000 people thus far.
• Number of clients in past year: 235
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 100
• Potential demand: Considering the service and products we provide, it becomes clear that the demand is potentially enormous. We at Saiban have successfully demonstrated various models that cater to all populations earning as little as US $1/day, and as much as $7/day. In a country like Pakistan, where the average income is about US $4/day and the population is growing rapidly, our product will be able to market to a segment much greater than 5 million people. Considering that Saiban has adapted and evolved the product successfully across diverse districts and provinces in within Pakistan, it is with a high level of confidence that we anticipate being able to provide models to diverse groups of varying countries of the developing world. The housing problem is one that is faced by every person on this earth. We, at Saiban, have been working on a solution for the average man/woman of the world.
7) Benefits to clients: As explained above, delivery is integrated into the model. We do not build and deliver. We only enable the people to do it all.
8) Key operational partnerships: The initiative needs to sets of partners. Without them NOTHING is possible. So they have to sign up contractually before we start anything.
These are the people, firstly. That is all the persons or households in a slum or shanty block, a geographically clear separate “estate” or multi unit area must all sign in with no exceptions. This is up to them. We are not involved. No NGO nor Donor nor State participation takes place for this event. Actually there is no practical problem in this.
Secondly all the landowners of the blocks involved including the block on which the new building shall come up must sign in. this happened to be State Agencies in our first project. In our current project it has started with private landlords coming in first.
There are and should be no other partners. We do only transparent work.
9) Financial model: The Model is entirely based on a Financial Principle that what the people lack is a capital market and that the market system will provide the best deal for all.
• Costs as percentage of income: 300
• Financing: This is a self sustained program that is financed by the Market and any sponsors who make money at the end of the project like in any financial investment.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: The project is now closed. We are planning a further project on the same lines. 4,000 persons were housed in modern housing and the State and Utilities also benefited. Besides other investors, commercial suppliers etc at normal terms.
• Number of clients in past year: The last year we have not had a program in operation.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 100
• Potential demand: The program will benefit any poor people community in an urban area in a normal developing country or a forward thinking developed country. It cannot be applied in situations where the Authorities have ossified thinking or who are suspicious of open markets. This situation is more prevelant in developed countries than developing ones and so this project has greater applicability in developing countries.
7) Benefits to clients: The Ambiente Housing System is packaged and transported by way of traditional 40ft shipping containers.
Our Housing System comes with a manufacturers warranty underwritten by Lloyds of London. This provides the home owner with several significant benefits including lower homeowners insurance, even in areas prone to flooding, Hurricane and Earthquake. Financing is made easier for both the Government, commercial and private sector Abersham Technologies has a short term, rapid growth plan of creating large volume manufacturing facilities around the world as well as introducing the infrastructure of distribution and networking of approved contractors worldwide. Currently we are setting up the infrastructure to service areas from Europe, the Caribbean, North America and Far Northern Regions of Canada. Mechanisms such as licensed resellers and the internet are being used to reach out to populations that will benefit from our product.
8) Key operational partnerships: Key operational partnerships are essential to the success of providing affordable housing to those in need. Abersham Technologies although in early days of commercialization, has formed several significant alliances that will make our endeavors more successful.
8. Lloyds Of London Partnering with the Worlds largest insurers, Lloyds of London provide the warranty for all Ambiente Products. Through a very close relationship with Lloyds of London, home owners of an Ambiente product will benefit from additional products offered such as reduced home owners insurance in high risk areas. The insured warranty provides easy financing for the homes in remote locations typically very difficult.
The British Research Establishment (BRE). A world renowned establishment that provides building code approval. BRE provides initial input and recommendations in product design relative to location and the performance required for building code approval.
University Of Manitoba A leading department of composite product testing, who Started with a live 2 year evaluation of the Ambiente Housing System in extreme cold climate. The results and recommendations of the University were instrumental in the Code approval needed for construction in Canada.
University Of Maine An ICC accredited test and research centre currently working with Abersham Technologies in gaining building code approval in the USA and ultimately a blanket ICBO accreditation on the Ambiente Housing System. Our alliance with the U Of M will also play an important part of product development for future housing and commercial building products.
Ashland,AOC,BASF,Owens Corning, PPG, Chemique What makes composites so flexible are the incredible resources available from the raw material suppliers. With literally thousands of systems available from such companies, allows Abersham to provide a housing system to meet virtually any performance or cost.
FreightLiners An alliance with FreightLiners, UK to use the railway infrastructure previously used for coal logistics, to collect waste glass at strategic knode points and deliver by rail to the our manufacturing facility.
NHBA A member of the National Home Builders Association.
9) Financial model: Low cost homes does not necessarily mean low performance. When we receive an inquiry for a housing project, the price of coarse is always the focus point. However we put at first the price to the back of our minds and concentrate on what we believe are the main points as discribed earlier ( performance and acceptability)
Once we have all the information and considerations given to the look and performance of the home, the next step is assess the monies available to buy the product and decide which raw materials allow us to produce a home for the given price.
We already have financial schemes and arrangements with several low-income as well as marginalized populations.
• Costs as percentage of income: n/a
• Financing: Our initiative is self financed. Our organization is a profit making organization with profits allowing the expansion of manufacture, the creation of infrastructure to both grow the sales and marketing as well as distribution, servicing & approved contractor networks. Financial sustainability comes from excellent management as well as product performance.We believe with keeping these two principles in place we have a great future in providing the world with a roof over it’s heads.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: The outcome of our project so far has been to name a few points, the development and patenting of both a turn key manufacturing process and composite housing system in 64 regions around the world. Over $10m invested into the commercialization of the Ambiente Housing System. Into Phase 1 of a 2 phase build of a 8000 house per annum manufacturing facility in the UK. Many groups around the world subscribing to their own manufacturing facilities some of which have already taken exclusivity on market regions. Winner of the CFA(Composite Fabricators Association) pinnacle award in 2001 for innovation and best use of composite materials. In-depth due diligence and risk assessment by Lloyds of London producing a minimum 25years insured warranty. Completion of several demonstration units currently providing orders and interest from around the world. Winner of several recycling awards the accreditations. Licensed trader of recycling PRN’s in Europe.
• Number of clients in past year: First clients to benefit in 1st qtr of 2007
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 80%
• Potential demand: Being flexible in house design, performance and cost basically opens up every housing market in the world. We do not see the size of market restrictive. The demand for housing is outpacing the capacity to build. What is also widening the gap is that traditional materials are becoming harder and more expensive to use and do not perform. We see our market greater than 5million people. Our system offers far more than traditional build can. We are in a dramatically changing construction market. For the first time the pressures once only experienced by the poor of the world with the lack of suitable homes which can perform is now effecting most income brackets and is at our own doorsteps.
7) Benefits to clients: We use networking and low-cost marketing to reach beneficiaries. We mail out thousands of flyers. We also have an effective website www.optionsforhomes.ca that people use to contact us. Finally, we depend on word-of- mouth, especially from our satisfied buyers. We hold information sessions every two weeks to offer people the opportunity to buy into existing projects, or discuss prospective developments. We hold these information sessions on weekends at churches, libraries and community centers, helping to keep our marketing costs low. We often get hundreds of people to attend our information sessions and from those who attend we get buyers. At our information sessions we explain our financing approach and begin the task of identifying the help people need. In many cases, because it can take two years between the time people commit to buy and the time they move in, we work with them to clean up their credit, increase their savings and therefore be in a stronger position to buy. One of the challenges in what we do is that people have to qualify for mortgages even if they are low income earners. Sadly, there is a strong correlation between income and the ability for qualify for a mortgage. There are always people that need our help but cannot take advantage of our system because they cannot qualify for a mortgage. Ultimately the ability to provide housing to even those that do not qualify for mortgages would require far more resources than we are able to muster at present. In East Africa good news spreads easily. We will have no problem getting interested clients. The challenge is offering affordable mortgage finance. The cheapest mortgages in Uganda are at 16%. This is choking the housing market. We are starting Homeownership Savings Clubs. People who save for three years will get a mortgage that is three times their savings. Our rates will be several percentage points lower than "market" rates. We will return savings to savers, with interest, after 10 years.
8) Key operational partnerships: We have partnered with mortgage lenders (banks) to offer conventional mortgages to our clients on the understanding that any additional help we offer is classified as equity. This makes mortgage qualification easy. We have also established an excellent relationship with one of Toronto's leading condominium builders. The company prefinances some of our construction work and also defers certain payments, thus reducing our interest expense during construction. We also use innovative approaches to land acquisition. We always employ a Vendor-Take-Back (VTB) mortgage that allows us to tie up land without paying for it in full, another measure that improves our cash flow. Finally, we have convinced municipal, town and provincial governments to begin offering financial support to first time homebuyers to supplement our Alternative Mortgage. Some jurisdictions are offering grants. Others have agreed to defer taxes and development charges (which in Toronto can be more expensive than the land itself). We treat these concessions in the same way as the Alternative Mortgage. They all serve to increase the buyer's equity but are payable in full when the home is sold or rented. When they are repaid, they are ploughed back into the system to assist more buyers. Our relationships to Governments, while not absolutely necessary for our model to work, improve afforability. More equity from several sources makes homes more affordable.
9) Financial model: We offer the Alternative Mortgage through our affiliate, Homeownership Alternatives (HOA). The Alternative Mortgage usually offers the equivalent of 10% to 15% in equity to a buyer. We also work with municipal and provincial governments to offer additional assistance in the form of grants and soft loans. When combined, this help can represent as much as 40% to 50% of the value of the property in some of our developments. We negotiate agreements such that when homeowners pay back loans and grants, that money is ploughed back to help other people buy homes.
• Costs as percentage of income: 200
• Financing: Options for Homes is financially self-sustaining. We meet our operating costs from modest development fees charged to each unit we sell. However, our capacity to assist more buyers is a function of the amount of money that HOA (Home Ownership Alternatives) accumulates, which is a function of time. As more of the homebuyers we assisted in the past sell their homes and pay their Alternative Mortgages, they contribute more funds to HOA. HOA can then assist more first time homebuyers. HOA also provides seed capital to start new developments. In some cases HOA purchases land and offers some construction financing. It has increased our capacity to do more affordable housing projects. We hope to develop a similar institution in East Africa.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: Our program has benefited over 1,520 clients in the Toronto area. We are especially proud of the people that we have helped become homeowners that would otherwise not be homeowners. In 2002, Options for Homes received an award from Canada Housing and Mortgage Corporation, a government entity that is charged with "making housing possible in Canada." With the award, the Government of Canada endorsed our approach. It has been great for marketing. Numerous articles about our program have appeared in the Toronto press. Our model, while novel and unique, is now accepted as a legitimate affordable housing delivery approach. Our credibility enables us convince municipal and provincial governments to offer affordable housing finance assistance to low income buyers in their jurisdiction.
• Number of clients in past year: Our developments take two to fours years from inception until the sale of the last unit. Therefore, judging by our record since the founding of Options for Homes, we help an average of 150 people become homeowners each year.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 40
• Potential demand: We want to implement our model first in East Africa and then in other developing countries. In East Africa, annual demand for housing exceeds 1 million units a year but formal housing development accounts for less than 5% of it, all of which is targeted at high income earners. As a result there is a massive and growing backlog especially for middle and low income earners. Our target is to deliver at least 10,000 units of affordable housing each year within the next 3 years. Our initial clients will probably consist of the lower-middle to middle income brackets, which, by Canadian standards, are low income earners. Still the application of our model will significantly increase housing supply. We hope that our focus delivering a solution as opposed to seeking profits will motivate other developers to step in and meet the chronic housing needs of East Africa.
7) Benefits to clients: Working with the appropriate state government departments and local people, we identify a community that has a need for our houses. At community meetings, families most in need are selected and an agreement is signed with the recipients that they will participate in the construction in exchange for the house. Since these people are living in extreme poverty, they are not required to pay any money.
Our long term goal is to enable the transfer of our construction method to other communities in Mexico and other countries with similar conditions. We are documenting the process in a simple manual which will eventually be available on our website.
8) Key operational partnerships: There are a number of local businesses who are giving us discounts for materials, and the social department of the state government gives us information about where the most needy communities are located. We were given a grant for one house by our local Rotary organization and for another house by a Rotary group in British Columbia, Canada. There is a great involvement of the local community in this project, providing volunteer work and financial contributions.
9) Financial model: Our beneficiaries provide "sweat equity", as they, and their friends and neighbors, participate alongside our volunteers in the building process. We do not ask our beneficiaries to pay anything.
• Costs as percentage of income: 0%
• Financing: The beneficiaries do not contribute financially. Currently, our funding is from grants and donations by private individuals and organizations.
10) Effectiveness
• Project outcomes: We started building in 2004 and have built five houses so far benefitting 17 people. In 2004/2005, we built three houses for a total of four adults and 6 children. In 2006, we have so far built two houses for 3 adults and 4 children.
• Number of clients in past year: In this past year, 7 people have benefitted.
• Percentage of clients that are poor or marginalized: 100
• Potential demand: According to the 2000 census in Mexico, there are 17 million people living in extreme poverty. We are completing a manual that is intended to enable others, almost anywhere in the world, to replicate our methods and technolgoy.