Mission Effectiveness Research Study: Habitat for Humanity of East King County

Issue Studied and Relevance to Habitat for Humanity

The East King County Habitat for Humanity affiliate in Redmond, Wash., conducted an initial survey of their current and future homeowners to determine how well the affiliate is accomplishing their mission. The survey looked at partners’ current residence, homeownership, their assessment of Habitat for Humanity East King County and demographics. The affiliate used the information gathered to assess how well they are meeting the affiliate’s stated mission and to determine where they need to improve to better serve the families in their service area. The survey will be conducted on an annual basis to track long-term measures of progress for the families.

Methods

A seven-page questionnaire with approximately 40 questions was mailed to all current and future homeowners. Families were notified one to two weeks prior to the mailing that the survey would be coming. They had a two-week window to return the surveys via a self-addressed, postage-paid return envelope. The questionnaire covered four main topics: perceptions of life in current residence, perceptions of homeownership, demographics of the homeowners, and their assessment of HFH East King County.

At the time of the survey in late summer 2004, the affiliate had 51 current homeowners and 17 future homeowners. Seventeen, or 33 percent, of the current homeowners returned their survey and seven, or 44 percent, of the future homeowners returned the survey.

The report is a PowerPoint presentation of the responses to the questions in the survey.

The responses for current homeowners are presented in the main report while those of the future homeowners are presented in the appendix. The appendix also includes comparisons of responses from future homeowners with those of current homeowners.

Key Findings

Moving into a Habitat home had a positive effect for the majority of families on the twenty or so lifestyle measures covered in the survey. Forty-four percent rated their quality of life as “above average” or “excellent” with 82 percent of adults stating that their quality of life is better since moving to their Habitat home. Families’ financial situations and involvement in community or group activities remained unchanged by the move to a Habitat home.

Families felt homeownership is a good thing. Families identified being able to decorate or improve their homes as desired, financial equity, and stability as the top advantages to homeownership. The main disadvantage was maintenance, repair and home-related costs. Almost all families agreed that owning their Habitat home was affordable. Seventy-one percent were satisfied with their home while only 53 percent were satisfied with how well it was built.

Families rated East King County Habitat as effectively meeting its core mission goals. All of the families agreed that they would not have been able to afford a home in East King County without Habitat. Eighty-seven percent of the families agreed that homeownership helped them build hope for the future, while close to three-quarters felt empowered and more stable in their Habitat homes.

Overall, families were satisfied with East King County Habitat’s services. However, there are several areas where it could do better. The biggest areas for improvement were in the building process where 41 percent were dissatisfied and in the training classes where 31 percent were dissatisfied.

The report concludes with recommendations for improving relations with homeowners through better communication to manage expectations, and improving homeowner and volunteer training.

Implications for HFH

• The survey tool enables an affiliate to assess how well it is meeting its core mission and to identify areas of strength or weakness for further action.
• HFH has a positive impact on families, providing affordable housing and improving their quality of life
• Key concerns of partner families identified in surveys should be addressed. Affiliates should view this as an opportunity to improve their program.
• Comparison of responses from the different phases or neighborhood developments may help identify strengths or weaknesses in affiliate programs.

Questions for Reflection

• Are we fulfilling the mission statement of our affiliate? Would our program benefit from conducting a survey similar to the one in this report? Should we conduct the survey ourselves or partner with a local university or other group?
• In what areas are we doing well by the majority of our families? In what areas can we do better? Are there areas that we are failing our partner families?
• Would homeowner responses from our various neighborhoods/developments be different in levels of satisfaction? If they are disparate, can we discern why and use the information to improve our program?
• East King County HFH plans to conduct the survey annually. What are the benefits of having long term measures? What are the drawbacks to conducting a yearly survey? Are there ways to encourage families to return the surveys?

Sources Used in Study

Homeowner survey

Full Paper

The entire study is available at the following address: http://elearning.hfhu.org/hfhu/documents/research/eastKingCounty.ppt

Additionally, the appendix to this study may be found here: http://elearning.hfhu.org/hfhu/documents/research/eastKingCountyAppendix.ppt