IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/houspd/v18y2007i1p69-106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantity, quality, or both? Explaining investment test scores in federal community reinvestment act examinations

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Immergluck

Abstract

Banks and thrifts are major actors in the affordable housing and community development arenas. They are often relied on to invest in low‐income housing tax credits and other projects as well as provide operating support. Banks and thrifts are explicitly encouraged to invest in such activities by the Community Reinvestment Act's (CRA's) Investment Test. Regulations require examiners to consider both quantitative and qualitative criteria in determining a large bank's Investment Test rating. The qualitative criteria are particularly important for organizations seeking investments for projects that are more innovative or complex or that offer less than stellar financial returns. An analysis of CRA performance evaluations reveals that, of the two qualitative criteria, only responsiveness to needs has a significant impact on Investment Test scores. Moreover, controlling for investment activity leads to higher Investment Test scores for larger banks. Implications for CRA policy and implementation are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Immergluck, 2007. "Quantity, quality, or both? Explaining investment test scores in federal community reinvestment act examinations," Housing Policy Debate, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 69-106, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:houspd:v:18:y:2007:i:1:p:69-106
    DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2007.9521595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10511482.2007.9521595
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10511482.2007.9521595?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:houspd:v:18:y:2007:i:1:p:69-106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RHPD20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.