Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

A new blueprint for financing community development – Part III

Frankfort, Kentucky, skyline on the Kentucky River at dusk.

Invest Appalachia supports community economic development projects and businesses across the Appalachian counties of six states.

Sean Pavone/Getty Images

In Part 2 of this three-part series focused on why and how the community development finance field needs to reframe the role of capital technicians and the market, rebalance power relationships, and prioritize community voice. Today we continue that discussion.

Invest Appalachia

Invest Appalachia (IA) is another strong example of how to rebalance power between financial expertise and community voice. On the surface, IA can be described in traditional finance terms—a community investment fund similar to a CDFI that has raised $35.5 million in impact investments and nearly $3 million in grants for flexible and risk-absorbing capital. IA officially opened its doors at the end of 2022. In its first year of operation, it deployed $6.3 million in blended capital (flexible loans alongside recoverable grants) to support community economic development projects and businesses across the Appalachian counties of six states: Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Ohio. Another $6.5 million was deployed in the first eight months of 2024.


However, IA has chosen to operate in a new and interesting way. As a nonprofit, it serves as the manager and general partner for the IA fund. Rather than becoming a CDFI itself, IA, like LTR, contracted with a CDFI, Locus, as the IA fund’s investment manager. Locus supports back-office functions of the IA fund, including portfolio management, underwriting, and coordinating third-party service provision (e.g., servicing, accounting, and administration).

IA also holds itself to a high standard regarding both collaboration and community governance. IA’s partnership-first approach and robust network of relationships taps into the existing community investment ecosystem of philanthropy, CDFIs, and community development nonprofits. A self-described regionally representative organization, IA relies on an interlocking set of stakeholder governance structures to set strategic direction, make funding decisions, approve investments from the IA fund, and provide direct community accountability for adhering to IA’s mission and values. Its board of directors includes regional stakeholders with a diversity of identities and perspectives representing CDFIs, foundations, and community organizations. A grassroots CAC includes community leaders and grassroots community organizations that represent diverse populations. The investment committee is a group of values-oriented investment professionals that includes board members, CDFI partners, and national perspectives. Board members and members of the investment committee are approved by the board, with input from staff, while current members of the CAC nominate and approve new members.

IA’s website states, “Our investment strategy, pipeline, impact goals, and governance are guided and grounded by place-based community stakeholders.” This power shift in who directs capital strategies—from technically expert lenders to those who focus on community priorities—is crucial for moving away from the traditional paradigm of market, scale, and sustainability. Innovative financial structures can meet community needs that traditional capital investors cannot, while the sort of formalized community governance that IA has offers an added layer of assurance that community voice has an equal and enduring place at the table.

In less than two years, IA’s funding has served 115 counties, aided more than 50,000 people (most of them in rural, coal-impacted, or low-income areas), and helped secure an additional $33 million in grants and loans from other funders and lenders. Almost 80 percent of its loans were possible only because of IA’s flexible terms and funding structures—without IA, those projects would have struggled or failed to move forward. Looking ahead, IA has plans to pilot new innovative investment approaches (including collaborating with the federal government and nonprofit intermediaries to use money from the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund), launch a regional initiative to support community-driven downtown development, collaborate with regional partners to increase climate resilience, and continue to create new investment vehicles and raise capital for local needs that are not being addressed by the current investment ecosystem. Under this new model, investment in Appalachia will be grounded in Appalachia.

Ushering in the New

Patient, flexible leadership and funding will be needed for the field of community development finance to evolve from the principles of market, scale, and self-sufficiency and fulfill its promise of increasing equity and opportunity in historically disadvantaged communities. Philanthropy will be essential for this move, but so will public and private developers, other public- and private-sector partners, and, most important, the empowered community residents and organizations who will be in the driver’s seat.

As this transformative arc unfolds, community quarterbacks like LTR and IA will translate the wishes of community residents into creative, flexible local and regional plans to attract financial resources and enable residents to play a meaningful role in how capital is deployed. Leadership development and training organizations, like the Center for Community Investment (whose programs have provided critical support for the leaders and work of CORE, LTR, and IA), will build local capacity and share innovative models with the field to advance the paradigm shift.

Leaders in community development across sectors will need to help the field change deep-seated ways of acting and attitudes, test new approaches, make appropriate incentive and policy changes, and move from a narrow problem-oriented point of view to a systems-change perspective. The technical and political barriers to this shift are indeed substantial, but they can be overcome, as the innovative projects discussed here, from Appalachia to Southern California, demonstrate. By following these new models, the field has an opportunity to build a consensus around a new approach to financing community development, so that it can finally tackle the problems it was created to solve.

This article was first published in the Stanford Social Innovation Review. Read the original article


Read More

National Museum of African American History and Culture, a Smithsonian museum with unique exhibits on African American history, culture & community, Washington, D.C., USA

The National Museum of African American History and Culture, a Smithsonian museum with unique exhibits on African American history, culture & community, Washington, D.C., USA

Getty Images, PurpleImages

Florida’s Anti-DEI Politics Will Destroy the Culture Museums are Created to Support

Recently, I sat in my museum’s annual public programming meeting, expecting the usual work of dreaming up the next year: what our community needs and what children deserve. But when Florida’s anti-DEI measure, SB 1134, came up, the room shifted from possibility to fear.

That meeting is usually the best part of our jobs. This time, however, the conversation turned to risk: what would become too dangerous to defend and what would be dropped before anyone even had to tell us to drop it. One of our managers finally said, “Culture is dead.” What I heard was more precise: culture is not dead. It is being killed.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer.

Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer arrives to the chambers of the U.S. House of Representatives ahead of President Trump's State of the Union address on February 24, 2026. (Nathan Posner/Anadolu/Getty Images)

Nathan Posner/Anadolu/Getty Images

In Two Months, Trump’s Cabinet Has Lost Three Women

President Donald Trump’s second Cabinet was never exceptionally diverse from the start. And in the past two months, three women have been fired or resigned.

The first to go, on March 5, was ex-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the face of the Trump administration’s mass deportation agenda. Then, less than a month later, Trump ousted former Attorney General Pam Bondi. And on Monday, embattled Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer announced her resignation.

Keep ReadingShow less
American flag on a military uniform

Amid rising tensions with Iran, critics warn Trump-era military policies, discrimination, and leadership decisions are weakening U.S. readiness and national security.

adamkaz/Getty Images

Uncle Sam Wants You—Just Not Women or People of Color

As Trump’s War in Iran causes unprecedented global volatility, revealing significant weaknesses in our military, the President and his Secretary of War can’t seem to stop playing the politics of prejudice. A year ago, without explanation, Hegseth fired the first ever female Chief of Naval Operations and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a Black man. The latter was an F-16 pilot who once said in a recruitment commercial: “When I’m flying…You don’t know…whether I’m African American…You just know I’m an American Airman, kicking your butt.” Turns out when he wasn’t flying his boss figured out his race and kicked him off his post. Now, Hegseth has interfered with promotions for over a dozen Black and female senior officers across all branches, including blocking four outstanding Army officers–two Black men and two women–from becoming one-star generals. What was presented as "anti-woke" posturing is clearly little more than a thinly-veiled and targeted culture war. These racist, sexist, superficial “leaders” gotta go.

The war against wokeness is morally and strategically wrong, distracting us all from real missions. Instead of swiftly ending an ill-defined, illegal, indefinite war with Iran (that is not going well, to say the least) or addressing an ongoing manpower shortage, Hegseth went out of his way to unilaterally stop the advancement of four diverse officers with long careers of “exemplary service,” despite questionable legal authority to do so and against the counsel of the Secretary of the Army. Allegations of racial and gender bias are apropos, but it’s also just plain stupid. Roughly 43% of active duty troops are people of color while their leadership is overwhelmingly white, and women are leaving the military at a rate 28% higher than men. At a time when the military could use all the talent it can get, why is Hegseth keeping competent leaders from leading and disqualifying and disenfranchising over half the talent pool?

Keep ReadingShow less
America at 250: Patriotic Lament From Her Darker Sons

As the United States nears its 250th anniversary, Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson explores the nation’s founding contradictions, enduring racial inequalities, and the ongoing struggle to align democratic ideals with reality.

Getty Images

America at 250: Patriotic Lament From Her Darker Sons

As the United States approaches its 250th birthday, the nation confronts a moment that should stir both celebration and sober reflection. A quarter millennium is no small achievement in the long arc of human governance. Republics have faltered far sooner. Yet anniversaries, especially ones of this magnitude, are not merely commemorations of survival. These observances are invitations to take inventory. Thus, demanding that we ask not only what we have built, but what we have become.

The American story is told in two intertwined registers. One is triumphant: a daring rebellion reshaping political thought, expanding liberty. The other is quieter and often suppressed: a republic professing universal rights while sanctioning human bondage, preaching equality but benefiting only a select few. In our 250th year, we are invited to see these two narratives as inseparable, each shaping and challenging the other.

Keep ReadingShow less