Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity 

AmeriCorps 

Submitted to: 

AmeriCorps 

250 E St., SW 

Washington, DC 20024 

Submitted by: 

ICF Incorporated, LLC 

9300 Lee Highway 

Fairfax, VA 22031 

https://www.icf.com 

September 2, 2021 

This report was commissioned by AmeriCorps’ Office of Research and Evaluation 

under Contract # GS00Q14OADU209 and Order # 95332A20R0013. Information in 

this report is in the public domain. Please, direct communications related to this 

report to Lily Zandniapour at lzandniapour@cns.gov and Sarah Yue at 

syue@cns.gov. Cite this report as follows: Naugler, A., Kulka, L., Miller, B., 

Modicamore, D., Munaretto, C., Pershing, J., & Sarwana, M. (2021). Return on 

Investment Study: Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps. ICF. 
i 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

CONTENTS 

Executive Summary...............................................................................................................ES-1 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps................................................................................... ES-1 

Return on Investment Study Methods............................................................................. ES-3 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost), and Program Costs ........... ES-7 

ROI Results..........................................................................................................................ES-9 

Introduction .................................................................................................................................1 

Program Description...................................................................................................................2 

Population Served..................................................................................................................3 

HFH Evaluation History ...........................................................................................................4 

Selection of HFH AmeriCorps for the AmeriCorps ROI Project..........................................6 

Comparable ROI Estimates...................................................................................................7 

ROI Methodology .......................................................................................................................8 

Monetizing Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost), and Program 

Costs ......................................................................................................................................11 

ROI Study Limitations............................................................................................................24 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost), Program Costs, and ROI 

Results ........................................................................................................................................25 

Program Benefits..................................................................................................................25 

Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Costs)................................................................................26 

Program Costs......................................................................................................................28 

ROI Results.............................................................................................................................28 

Recommendations for Further Research................................................................................34 

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................35 

Appendix A: Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Costs Included in 

Return on Investment Calculations.........................................................................................37 

Appendix B: Additional Information on the Methodology...................................................44 

Methodology Overview ......................................................................................................44 

Measuring Program Benefits...............................................................................................45 

Measuring Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Costs) ............................................................71 

Measuring Program Costs...................................................................................................75 

Calculating ROI....................................................................................................................76 

References ................................................................................................................................79 
ii 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1. Benefits among Stakeholder Groups Derived from HFH AmeriCorps .................10 

Figure 2. Unemployment Status Results from Friedman et al. (2016) ..................................54 

Figure 3. Compound Interest Formula Used to Calculate Investment Opportunity 

Cost ............................................................................................................................................74 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1. Selected Demographic Characteristics of HFH Homeowners and Geographic 

Region Distribution of Program Activities for Most Recent Program Year............................4 

Table 2. Distribution of Industries HFH AmeriCorps Alumni Became Employed in ...............6 

Table 3. Benefits Realized from the HFH AmeriCorps Program by Stakeholder Group ....11 

Table 4. HFH AmeriCorps Costs by Funder Type....................................................................24 

Table 5. Program Benefits by Recipient .................................................................................26 

Table 6. Forgone Benefits from Professional Opportunity Cost............................................27 

Table 7. Investment Opportunity Cost by Scenario and Funding Stream..........................27 

Table 8. Program Cost by Funding Source for HFH AmeriCorps..........................................28 

Table 9. Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Costs Included in the ROI Calculations.............29 

Table 10. Benefits and Costs by ROI Scenario.......................................................................30 

Table 11. ROI Results for HFH AmeriCorps ..............................................................................31 

Table 12. Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Costs Included in ROI 

Calculations ..............................................................................................................................37 

Table 13. Selling Price Differences Between an HFH Home and a Home on the 

U.S. Market.................................................................................................................................46 

Table 14. Average Cost of Rehabbing an HFH Home per Square Foot.............................47 

Table 15. Cost Savings to HFH Homeowners due to Additional Homes Rehabbed .........48 

Table 16. Results of Statistical Methods Used to Estimate the Percent Cost Reduction 

or Increase by Response Option.............................................................................................49 

Table 17. Medical Cost Savings Realized and Additional Medical Costs Incurred 

by Response Option Due to Change in Respiratory Health among HFH Household 

Members....................................................................................................................................50 

Table 18. Medical Cost Savings Realized and Additional Medical Costs Incurred by 

Private Insurance Companies and Other Healthcare Payers by Response Option 

Due to Change in Respiratory Health among HFH Household Members..........................52 

Table 19. HFH AmeriCorps Member Benefits from the Living Allowance, Stipend, 

and Education Award .............................................................................................................53 
iii 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 20. Earnings for HFH AmeriCorps Members Based on Distribution of Industries 

HFH AmeriCorps Alumni Became Employed in Post-Service...............................................55 

Table 21. Total Expected Per-Person Earnings for HFH AmeriCorps Members...................56 

Table 22. Additional Pre-tax Earnings for HFH AmeriCorps Members from Reduced 

Unemployment Based on HFH AmeriCorps Member Demographics and Industry 

Selection Post-Service ..............................................................................................................56 

Table 23. Cumulative Additional Post-tax Earnings Derived from Reduced 

Unemployment due to Serving with HFH AmeriCorps by Scenario ....................................57 

Table 24. Average Total Cost of Education and Portion Attributable to Education 

Award by Degree Type............................................................................................................58 

Table 25. Estimates of the Number of Post-secondary Degrees Pursued With Using 

the Education Award by Degree Type..................................................................................59 

Table 26. Additional Earnings from AmeriCorps Members’ Use of the Education 

Award ........................................................................................................................................60 

Table 27. Government Costs by Educational Attainment Level per Individual’s 

Lifetime ......................................................................................................................................66 

Table 28. Total Cost Savings in Rental Assistance Realized by the Federal 

Government..............................................................................................................................67 

Table 29. Medical Cost Savings Realized by Stakeholder Group .......................................68 

Table 30. 2020 Tax Rates and Ratio of Taxable Expenditures for HFH AmeriCorps 

Members’ Earnings, Living Allowances, Stipends, and Education Awards........................68 

Table 31. State/Local and Federal Government Benefits by Stakeholder Group and 

by Scenario ...............................................................................................................................70 

Table 32. Forgone Earnings of HFH AmeriCorps Members for a Service Term...................72 

Table 33. Forgone Taxes Associated with the Forgone Earnings of HFH AmeriCorps 

Members for a Service Term....................................................................................................73 

Table 34. Investment Opportunity Cost Calculation by Scenario and Funding Stream ..75 

Table 35. Funding Sources and Amounts for HFH AmeriCorps (2019–2020).......................76 

Table 36. ROI Calculations for Short-term Scenario ..............................................................78 

Table 37. ROI Calculations for Medium-term Scenario ........................................................78 

Table 38. ROI Calculations for Long-term Scenario ..............................................................78 
iv 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

AUTHORS 

This study was conducted by researchers from ICF and BCT Partners: 

• Alix Naugler, ICF, Senior Research Scientist 

• Lisa Kulka, BCT Partners, Research and Evaluation Analyst 

• Benjamin Miller, ICF, Senior Director 

• Dominic Modicamore, ICF, Lead Economist 

• Janet Pershing, ICF, Vice President 

• Miriam Sarwana, BCT Partners, Research and Evaluation Analyst 
ES 1-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Executive Summary 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

AmeriCorps contracted with ICF Incorporated, Key Results LLC (hereafter ICF) to explore and quantify the 

return on investment (ROI) of several programs This study estimates HFH 

that rely on AmeriCorps national service as a AmeriCorps’s ROI to be between 

major resource to sustain operations. ROI $0.62 to $2.61 per funder dollar, 

analyses have the potential to help AmeriCorps depending on how long HFH 

measure the performance of programs and AmeriCorps members 

build the base of evidence for future resource experience increased earnings 

allocation decisions. In addition, ROI study results from their national service. The 

will help AmeriCorps communicate the value of return on each dollar of federal 

support for the program is even its programming to relevant stakeholders. higher, between $0.92 and $4.14. 

This ROI study measured the benefits of Habitat These results are driven by 

for Humanity (HFH) AmeriCorps against its costs. favorable employment and 

Habitat for Humanity International, Inc. (HFHI) is education outcomes for HFH 

a non-profit homebuilding program that AmeriCorps members following 

operates on a national and international scale. their service, as well as savings in 

It provides low-income families living in homebuilding and rehabilitation 

substandard housing with volunteer-built, work by HFH homeowners. 

rehabilitated, or repaired homes and affordable 

mortgages. HFHI’s U.S. arm coordinates and organizes the efforts of more than 

1,200 local HFH organizations (i.e., affiliate sites).1 These U.S. affiliate sites work with HFHI’s 

national office to coordinate home construction, building site and partner selection, 

fundraising, and mortgage servicing. Families in need of decent and affordable 

housing apply for HFH homeownership with U.S. affiliate sites. If they qualify, 

homeowners contribute their own labor—termed “sweat equity”—and work alongside 

AmeriCorps members and non-national service member volunteers to build or improve 

their homes. HFH homeowners also pay an affordable mortgage with no interest, 

receive financial education, and participate in home maintenance classes to learn 

how to meet the demands of owning a home.2 

1 Habitat for Humanity. (n.d.). Frequently asked questions. Retrieved from 

https://www.habitat.org/about/faq. 

2 Please see these websites for more information: https://www.habitat.org/our-work/financial-education. 

and https://www.habitat.org/stories/steps-homeownership. 
ES 2-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

34

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Population Served 

For the 2019-2020 program year, HFH AmeriCorps served 2,364 individuals and built 

803 homes. HFH AmeriCorps selects U.S. families at the local level based on their 

need for safe and affordable housing, their willingness to partner with HFHI and work 

alongside volunteers, and their ability to repay the no-interest mortgage.3 These 

families predominantly have low incomes (i.e., less than 60 percent of the affiliate 

site’s service area median income), have at least one dependent under 18 years 

old, belong to racially underrepresented groups, live in overcrowded or 

sub-standard housing, or devote a large portion of their income to housing costs.4 

HFH host sites are U.S. affiliate sites that leverage AmeriCorps State and National and 

AmeriCorps VISTA members and they comprise the HFH AmeriCorps program.5 HFH 

AmeriCorps State and National members perform direct services including leading 

homebuilding and renovation efforts, planning and coordinating community projects, 

assisting in structure demolition, recruiting and educating qualified families, providing 

financial education and home maintenance classes, and training non-national service 

member volunteers. Additionally, HFH AmeriCorps VISTA members provide indirect 

services that strengthen and build the capacity of host sites including documenting 

construction operations, maintaining donor engagement, contributing to resource and 

project development, and implementing family and volunteer recruitment strategies.6 

3 Habitat for Humanity. (n.d.). Habitat homeowners. Habitat for Humanity. https://www.habitat.org/housinghelp/habitat-homeowners. 

4 This information was provided directly by HFHI through ICF’s personal communication with and data 

request to HFHI in 2021. 

5 Of note, some Habitat affiliate sites use AmeriCorps members while others do not. Affiliate sites that use 

AmeriCorps members are called host sites since they “host” AmeriCorps members for a service term. 

6 Habitat for Humanity. (n.d.). The AmeriCorps experience. Retrieved from 

https://www.habitat.org/volunteer/long-term-opportunities/americorps/americorps-experience 
ES 3-

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

HFH AmeriCorps Impacts: Selected Evaluation Results 

Below are findings from two HFH AmeriCorps evaluations on the program’s 

performance and impact. According to the findings of Viola et al. (2018), as 

compared to non-host sites (who do not leverage AmeriCorps members) over a 

three-year period, host sites on average: 

• Built 4.99 more HFH homes (20.36 vs. 15.37); this finding was nearly statistically 

significant. 

• Rehabbed 8.24 more homes (15.35 vs. 7.11); this finding was statistically 

significant. 

Relevant survey results from Mattessich et al. (2015) include the following: 

• Fifty-seven percent of HFH homeowners who reported they themselves or a 

household member had a respiratory illness prior to moving into an HFH 

home indicated their condition improved after moving into an HFH home. 

• Twenty-five percent of surveyed HFH homeowners reported that they 

received federal rental assistance prior to moving into their HFH home and 

indicated they no longer did after moving into their home. 

Return on Investment Study Methods 

This study focused on AmeriCorps’ contribution to HFHI programing. For that reason, 

only benefits and costs related to the activities and positions of HFH AmeriCorps State 

and National and HFH AmeriCorps VISTA members (i.e., the HFH AmeriCorps program) 

are included in this methodology. 

The methodology for the HFH AmeriCorps ROI study consisted of the following 

components: 

1. Measuring and monetizing program benefits. This includes using data from 

previous evaluations and other third-party sources to determine the benefits 

across the following stakeholder groups: 

• HFH homeowners. HFH homeowners benefit from cost savings in buying a 

new home and regarding home rehabilitation work. 

• HFH household members. HFH household members benefit from out-ofpocket (OOP) medical cost savings due to their improved respiratory health 

after moving into an HFH home. 

• Private insurance companies. Private insurance companies benefit from 

medical cost savings due to the improved respiratory health of HFH 

household members. 
ES 4-

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

• Other healthcare payers.7 Other healthcare payers benefit from medical cost 

savings due to the improved respiratory health of HFH household members. 

• HFH AmeriCorps members. HFH AmeriCorps members benefit from: 

a) Living allowances, stipends, and education awards 

b) Increased earnings due to reduced unemployment 

c) Increased lifetime earnings due to increased post-secondary education 

derived from the use of education awards 

• Government. Government benefits from income, Social Security, and 

Medicare tax revenue from HFH AmeriCorps members’ increased earnings, 

and sales tax revenue from the increased economic activity that results from 

those increased earnings. Government also benefits from reduced spending 

on corrections, public assistance, and social insurance and increased tax 

revenue associated with the increased educational attainment of HFH 

AmeriCorps members that is derived from their use of education awards postservice. Finally, government benefits from tax revenue from HFH AmeriCorps 

members’ living allowances, stipends, and education awards, cost savings 

due to HFH homeowners’ reduced federal rental assistance use, and 

Medicare and Medicaid cost savings due to the improved respiratory health 

of HFH household members. 

This ROI analysis monetized HFH AmeriCorps benefits in 2020 dollars. 

2. Estimating forgone benefits (opportunity costs). This ROI analysis estimated two 

types of forgone benefits. The first was the professional opportunity cost to HFH 

AmeriCorps members for their period of national service, during which they 

could have earned more pay by doing other work. This included both the 

forgone earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members and the associated tax revenue 

for government. The second was the investment opportunity cost for HFH 

AmeriCorps program funding that could have been used for other purposes. 

The analysis estimated the investment opportunity cost for both government and 

private funders based on the forgone return of investing program funds into 

U.S. Treasury bonds. The rates of return for U.S. Treasury bonds provide a 

market-based estimate of return for low-risk investments. For the ROI estimates, 

the analysis subtracted forgone benefits from program benefits to calculate net 

benefits. The net benefits were then compared to program costs. 

7 Other healthcare payers include those such as the Department of Veterans Affairs (excluding TRICARE), 

Indian Health Services, community and neighborhood clinics, worker’s compensation, homeowner’s or 

liability insurance, and others (AHRQ, 2021) 
ES 5-

 

 

 

 

 

Government Benefits 

HFH Homeowner Benefits 

Government Benefits 

HFH Household Member Benefits 

HFH AmeriCorps 

Program Activities 

HFH Homeowner 

Impacts 

HFH Household 

Member 

Impacts 

Government Benefits 

AmeriCorps Member Benefits 

AmeriCorps 

Member 

Impacts 

Other Healthcare Payer Benefits 

Private Insurance Company Benefits 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

3. Assessing program costs. HFHI provided HFH AmeriCorps program costs for the 

2019–2020 program year. Only the program costs that support the activities and 

positions of HFH AmeriCorps State and National and HFH AmeriCorps VISTA 

members (i.e., the HFH AmeriCorps program) are included in this study. These 

program costs included the AmeriCorps State and National and VISTA grants, 

the education awards received by HFH AmeriCorps members, and the fees 

received from HFH host sites paid to HFHI for hosting HFH AmeriCorps members 

(i.e., match funding). 

4. Calculating the ROI. The ROI analysis consists of three ROI calculations: 1) total 

benefits per federal dollar, 2) total benefits per funder dollar, and 3) federal 

government benefits per federal dollar. This analysis calculated the value of 

these three ROI calculations under three scenarios representing different 

assumptions about the persistence of program outcomes. As mentioned above, 

the benefits used to calculate the ROI are the net benefits associated with the 

program (the program benefits minus the forgone benefits). 

This analytical framework includes only those benefits that could be reasonably 

monetized given the available data, and that likely would not have occurred without 

the HFH AmeriCorps program. Figure ES 1 shows how HFH AmeriCorps activities can 

result in HFH homeowner, HFH household member, private insurance company, other 

healthcare payer, HFH AmeriCorps member, and government benefits. 

Figure ES 1. Benefits among Stakeholder Groups Derived from HFH AmeriCorps 
ES 6-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table ES 1 shows the benefits, forgone benefits (opportunity costs), and costs that are 

included in each of the three types of ROI calculations. 

Table ES 1. Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Costs Included in the ROI Calculations 

ROI Calculation Benefits Forgone Benefits Costs 

Total Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

• All HFH 

AmeriCorps 

member, HFH 

homeowner, HFH 

household 

member, private 

insurance 

company, other 

healthcare payer, 

and government 

benefits derived 

from the program 

• Forgone benefits 

from total 

professional 

opportunity cost 

• Forgone benefits 

from Federal 

investment 

opportunity cost 

• AmeriCorps 

federal funding 

Total Benefits per 

Funder Dollar 

• All HFH 

AmeriCorps 

member, HFH 

homeowner, HFH 

household 

member, private 

insurance 

company, other 

healthcare payer, 

and government 

benefits derived 

from the program 

• Forgone benefits 

from total 

professional 

opportunity cost 

• Forgone benefits 

from total 

investment 

opportunity cost 

• AmeriCorps 

federal funding 

• All match funding 

Federal Government 

Benefits per Federal 

Dollar 

• Additional federal 

government tax 

revenue 

generation and 

reduced 

spending 

attributable to 

the program 

• Forgone benefits 

from Federal 

professional 

opportunity cost 

• Forgone benefit 

from Federal 

investment 

opportunity cost 

• AmeriCorps 

federal funding 
ES 7-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Available data established that HFH AmeriCorps members enjoy earnings impacts as a 

result of serving with HFH AmeriCorps. However, the data do not establish the duration 

of those benefits. To address a range of possible durations for those benefits, the 

analysis includes three scenarios:8 

• Short-term. This scenario assumes short-term earnings impacts. The assumption is 

that earnings impacts are limited to a single year after program exit. This scenario 

also assumes no lifetime benefits are realized. 

• Medium-term. This scenario assumes a longer duration of earnings impacts. The 

assumption is that earnings impacts last 15 years. A 3 percent discount rate is 

applied each year to represent net present value in 2020 dollars.9 This scenario 

also assumes only half of the net present value of lifetime benefits is realized. 

• Long-term. This scenario assumes sustained earnings impacts throughout HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ working years. The assumption is that earnings impacts 

last 30 years. A 3 percent discount rate is applied each year to represent net 

present value in 2020 dollars. This scenario also assumes the entire net present 

value of lifetime benefits is realized. 

The long-term scenario (i.e., 30 years of sustained employment and earnings benefits) 

represents roughly a lifetime of working years for a given person while the short-term 

scenario assumes benefits for only the year after program participation or service is 

completed. The medium-term scenario (i.e., 15 years of sustained employment and 

earnings benefits) represents the midpoint between these two scenarios. 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost), and Program Costs 

Table ES 2 shows the estimates of monetized program benefits of HFH AmeriCorps by 

stakeholder group for each of the three scenarios, and the percentage of the total 

program benefits that each represent. The majority of monetized benefits are realized 

by HFH AmeriCorps members and HFH homeowners. In all three scenarios, both HFH 

AmeriCorps members and HFH homeowners combined realized 80 percent or more of 

program benefits. 

8 These three scenarios consider varying durations of how long increased employment and earnings 

benefits last for HFH AmeriCorps members. They also consider varying durations for lifetime benefits that 

stem from HFH AmeriCorps. For example, lifetime benefits in terms of decreased public assistance, social 

insurance, and corrections costs result from HFH AmeriCorps members’ higher education post-service. The 

analysis estimates lifetime benefits differently in the three scenarios. Specifically, the net present value of 

the entire lifetime benefit is realized for the long-term scenario, half of the net present value of the lifetime 

benefit is realized for the medium-term scenario, and no lifetime benefit amount is realized for the 

short-term scenario. 

9 The Office of Management and Budget (1992) defines a discount rate as, “The interest rate used in 

calculating the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs” (p. 18). Regarding the 3 percent 

discount rate, see Office of Management and Budget (2003). 
ES 8-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table ES 2. Program Benefits by Recipient 

Recipient 

Benefits by Scenario (2020$)* 

Short term Medium term Long term 

HFH Homeowners 

(percent of total program benefits) 

$11,629,389 

(61%) 

$11,629,389 

(37%) 

$11,629,389 

(28%) 

HFH Household Members 

(percent of total Program benefits) 

$15,137 

(0%) 

$15,137 

(0%) 

$15,137 

(0%) 

HFH AmeriCorps Members 

(percent of total program benefits) 

$5,737,878 

(30%) 

$14,740,741 

(47%) 

$21,647,163 

(52%) 

Federal Government 

(percent of total program benefits) 

$1,262,762 

(7%) 

$3,937,898 

(12%) 

$6,207,292 

(15%) 

State/Local Governments 

(percent of total program benefits) 

$399,827 

(2%) 

$1,210,776 

(4%) 

$1,876,414 

(5%) 

Total 

(Total percent) 

$19,044,993 $31,533,941 $41,375,393 

(100%) (100%) (100%) 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

Table ES 3 shows the breakdown of forgone benefits of both HFH AmeriCorps 

participants and funders. These forgone benefits are subtracted from the program 

benefits (shown above) to calculate the net benefits of the program. Those net benefits 

are then compared to program cost to calculate the ROI. These forgone benefits are 

referred to as the professional and investment opportunity costs. 

The professional opportunity cost includes the post-tax earnings HFH AmeriCorps 

members forgo—and the associated taxes forgone—due to their service with the HFH 

instead of other work. This opportunity cost is consistent across all three scenarios. 

The investment opportunity cost represents the forgone accrued interest from investing 

HFH AmeriCorps program funding into U.S. Treasury bonds instead of into the HFH 

AmeriCorps program. The forgone accrued interest calculated varies by scenario 

because the analysis matched real interest rates for different maturity levels to the 

three scenarios. The period of forgone interest accrual was set to the length of 

each scenario. 
ES 9-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table ES 3. Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost) by Scenario 

Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost) 

ROI Scenario (2020$)* 

Short term Medium term Long term 

Professional Opportunity Cost $13,479,679 $13,479,679 $13,479,679 

Forgone Earnings of HFH AmeriCorps Members $10,109,500 $10,109,500 $10,109,500 

Forgone Taxes from Forgone Earnings $3,370,180 $3,370,180 $3,370,180 

Investment Opportunity Cost $192,101 $3,564,307 $8,331,983 

Forgone Accrued Interest on Total HFH 

AmeriCorps Funding $114,712 $2,128,409 $4,975,404 

Forgone Accrued Interest on Federal HFH 

AmeriCorps Funding Only $77,389 $1,435,898 $3,356,579 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

Table ES 4 shows the cost of HFH AmeriCorps for the 2019–2020 program year by funding 

source. The table underscores what portion of HFH AmeriCorps funds were provided by 

AmeriCorps compared to other stakeholder groups (i.e., match funding from host sites). 

The table also highlights a further breakdown of these two funding streams, where 

applicable. Overall, the total cost of HFH AmeriCorps for this program year was 

$8.8 million. Sixty-seven percent of HFH AmeriCorps program costs (around $5.9 million) 

was funded by the federal government. This amount included the AmeriCorps State 

and National and AmeriCorps VISTA grants and the expected education awards. The 

remaining 33 percent (or $2.9 million) consisted of match funding from host sites. 

Table ES 4. Program Cost by Funding Source for HFH AmeriCorps 

Funder 

Funding Provided 

for the Program Year ($) 

Percent 

of Total (%)* 

AmeriCorps $5,933,696 67.5% 

Education Awards $1,620,396 18.4% 

Grants $4,313,300 49.0% 

Host Sites (i.e., Match Funding) $2,861,727 32.5% 

Total $8,795,423 100.0% 

ROI Results 

This analysis developed ROI estimates using the three scenarios (short-term, mediumterm, and long-term). As noted above, the ROI calculations compared the net benefits 

of the HFH AmeriCorps program with program costs to calculate the ROI. Table ES 5 

shows the gross program benefits, forgone benefits, net benefits, and program costs of 

the program, along with the results of the three ROI calculations. 
ES 10-

 

 

ROI Scenario (2020$) 

Benefits and Costs Short - termMedium -term Long - term

Total Gross Program Benefits $19,044,993 $31,533,941 $41,375,393 

HFH Homeowners $11,629,389 $11,629,389 $11,629,389 

HFH Household Members $15,137 $15,137 $15,137 

HFH AmeriCorps Member Benefits $5,737,878 $14,740,741 $21,647,163 

Federal Government Benefits $1,262,762 $3,937,898 $6,207,292 

State/Local Government/other funder Benefits $399,827 $1,210,776 $1,876,414 

Total Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Costs) $13,594,392 $15,608,089 $18,455,084 

Forgone Benefits to Members (Forgone 

Earnings Post-Taxes) $10,109,500 $10,109,500 $10,109,500 

Forgone Tax Revenue from Member Earn ings $3,370,180 $3,370,180 $3,370,180 

Forgone Tax Revenue to Federal Government $2,646,338 $2,646,338 $2,646,338 

Forgone Tax Revenue to State/Local 

Government $723,842 $723,842 $723,842 

Forgone Benefits from Funding Provided (All 

Funders) $114,712 $2,128,409 $4,975,404 

Forgone Investment Benefits to Federal 

Government from Funding Provided $77,389 $1,435,898 $3,356,579 

Forgone Investment Benefits to State/Local 

Government and Other Funder s from Funding 

Provided 

$37,323 $692,511 $1,618,825 

Total Program Net Benefits ( Total Program 

Gross Benefits – Total Forgone Benefits) $5,450,601 $15,925,852 $22,920,309 

Net Benefits to HFH Homeowners (HFH 

homeowners benefits) $11,629,389 $11,629,389 $11,629,389 

Net Benefits HFH Househol d Members HFH 

household members benefi ts) $15,137 $15,137 $15,137 

Net Benefits to Members (Member Benefits –

Forgone Benefits to Members) -$4,371,622 $4,631,241 $11,537,663 

Net Benefits toFederal Government (Federal 

Government Benefits – Forgone Tax Revenue 

to Federal Government – Forgone Investment 

Benefits to Federal Government from Funding 

Provided) 

-$1,460,965 -$144,338 $204,375 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table ES 5. Benefits and Costs by ROI Scenario 
ES 11-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -

- - -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Benefits and Costs 

ROI Scenario (2020$) 

Short term Medium term Long term 

Net Benefits State/Local Government and 

other funders (State/Local Government 

Benefits – Forgone Tax Revenue to State/Local 

Government – Forgone Investment Benefits to 

State/Local Government and Other Funders 

from Funding Provided) 

-$361,338 -$205,577 -$466,253 

Total Program Costs $8,795,423 $8,795,423 $8,795,423 

Federal Government Cost $5,933,696 $5,933,696 $5,933,696 

Non-Federal Government Costs $2,861,727 $2,861,727 $2,861,727 

ROI for Total Benefits per Federal Dollar (Total 

Program Net Benefits / Federal Government 

Costs) 

$0.92 $2.80 $4.14 

ROI for Total Benefits per Funder Dollar (Total 

Program Net Benefits / Total Program Costs) $0.62 $1.81 $2.61 

Federal Government Benefits per Federal 

Dollar (Net Benefits Federal Government / 

Federal Government Costs) 

-$0.25 -$0.02 $0.03 

Table ES 6 shows the ROI results for the HFH AmeriCorps program. The results are 

expressed as cost–benefit ratios, while maintaining the ROI terminology. Specifically, 

these ratios take the form of the sum of monetized benefits over the sum of applicable 

program costs. The ROIs expressed as cost–benefit ratios in this study can be interpreted 

as the amount of dollars returned for every $1 of investment (or program cost).10 

Table ES 6. ROI Results for HFH AmeriCorps 

ROI Calculation Short term 

ROI Scenario 

Medium term Long term 

Total Benefits per Federal Dollar $0.92 $2.80 $4.14 

Total Benefits per Funder Dollar $0.62 $1.81 $2.61 

Federal Government Benefits per Federal Dollar -$0.25 -$0.02 $0.03 

HFH AmeriCorps produced strong returns for the medium- and long-term scenarios 

when benefits to HFH AmeriCorps members, HFH homeowners and household 

members, state/local governments, and other non-federal government stakeholder 

groups are included. This is indicated by the results of the total benefits per federal 

dollar and the total benefits per funder dollar ROI calculations for these two scenarios. 

10 ROIs can be expressed in percentages or as ratios, such as in this study. Although not shown as a ratio in 

the results, the ROIs in this study show the amount of return for every $1 invested. 
ES 12-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

In the short-term scenario—where benefits for only one year post-program are 

included—the ROI results indicate that costs outweigh the benefits in the first year after 

the program. A negative ROI or one that is below $1 in the first year post-program is 

common in programs where there is an initial one-time investment made and benefits 

accrue in the following years. This is because it often requires several years of benefits to 

recoup the initial investment and generate positive returns, as indicated in the results for 

the first two ROI calculations for the medium- and long-term scenarios. During the 

program, AmeriCorps members gain the experience, skills, and knowledge that result in 

future benefits, such as improved employment and wages, which can be sustained 

throughout their working years. The results for the short-term scenario indicate that every 

$1 invested by the federal government results in a return of $0.92 to all stakeholders 

combined. When considering the program costs of all funders, for every $1 invested 

there is a return of $0.62 to all stakeholders combined. Moreover, for every $1 the 

federal government invests, the federal government loses its initial $1 investment plus an 

additional $0.25. 

In the medium-term scenario, all stakeholder groups realized a combined return of 

$2.80 for every $1 invested by the federal government in the HFH AmeriCorps program. 

Moreover, for every $1 invested in the HFH AmeriCorps program from all funders, $1.81 is 

returned to both society and government combined. When considering only benefits to 

the federal government, the federal government loses its initial $1 investment plus an 

additional $0.02. 

In the long-term scenario, the ROI for total benefits per federal dollar and total benefits 

per funder dollar are $4.14 and $2.61, respectively. When considering only the federal 

government return for every $1 of federal investment, the federal government realizes a 

return of $0.03 for the long-term scenario. Namely, for every $1 invested, the federal 

government loses $0.97 in potential tax revenue gains and cost savings. 

The magnitude and direction of the ROI calculations are driven by several factors: 

• High educational attainment of HFH AmeriCorps members prior to service. HFHI 

provided data indicating HFH AmeriCorps members’ pre-service educational 

attainment levels for the 2019–2020 program year. Of the 345 HFH AmeriCorps 

members who served during this program year, 76 percent had a college 

degree prior to national service with 64 percent having a graduate degree. 

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020), gains in educational 

attainment—especially obtaining advanced degrees—translate to decreased 

unemployment and higher earnings. The high levels of educational attainment 

of this cohort of HFH AmeriCorps members significantly increased the professional 

opportunity cost to HFH AmeriCorps members. Specifically, this analysis 

calculated HFH AmeriCorps members’ pre-service unemployment rate to be 

2.6 percent using demographics data provided by HFHI and data from the 

Current Population Survey’s Annual Social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement. 

The analysis also used the same data sources to estimate HFH AmeriCorps 

members’ pre-service pre-tax annual earnings at $54,782 per person. In other 

words, if these HFH AmeriCorps members did not serve with HFH AmeriCorps, this 

analysis estimated that 97.4 percent would have been employed, each making 
ES 13-

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

an average salary of almost $55,000 annually. With this low unemployment rate 

and high earnings amount, the professional opportunity cost to HFH AmeriCorps 

members—for the one year service term—is significantly more than the total HFH 

AmeriCorps program cost for one year ($13,479,679 vs. $8,795,423). Since some 

variation of the professional opportunity cost is considered in each ROI 

calculation—across the three scenarios—this reduced the benefits attributed to 

the HFH AmeriCorps program. 

• Medium- and long-term accumulation of benefits. In the short-term, the three 

ROI calculations resulted in losses because only one year of post-program 

employment and earnings gains as well as other program benefits are factored 

in while the entire program cost is considered. Additionally, the short-term 

scenario does not include any lifetime benefits in terms of reduced spending on 

corrections, public assistance, and social insurance or increased tax revenue. As 

these benefits accumulate over time, the analysis shows positive returns. This is 

indicated by the ROI results in the medium- and long-term scenarios (15 and 

30 years post-program, respectively) when total benefits are considered. 

• The employment outcomes of HFH AmeriCorps members. According to Friedman 

et al. (2016), the percentage of AmeriCorps members unemployed was 

5 percentage points lower six months after serving in AmeriCorps versus six 

months before. This gain in employment results in increased earnings and tax 

revenue. 

• The educational attainment outcomes of HFH AmeriCorps members. AmeriCorps 

State and National members and some AmeriCorps VISTA members receive an 

education award after serving in an AmeriCorps program; the award is used by 

a portion of members to help pay for post-secondary degrees post-service. The 

additional educational attainment resulting from the use of the education 

award generates additional lifetime earnings for HFH AmeriCorps members and 

additional tax revenue and savings for government. 

Government funding serves as a catalyst for private funding of evidence-based social 

services programs. For the ROI calculations of 1) total benefits per federal dollar and 

2) total benefits per funder dollar, AmeriCorps’s requirement of match funding also 

contributed to the magnitude of outcomes. Federal government funding of HFH 

AmeriCorps serves as a catalyst for other funding, specifically that received by HFH host 

sites. This additional funding—amounting to $2.9 million for HFH AmeriCorps for the most 

recent program year—allowed the HFH AmeriCorps program to serve more families and 

communities than otherwise would have been served under the federal funding alone. 

Though it may not impact the ROI, because it is a per unit metric, match funding leads 

to greater investment in HFH AmeriCorps and thus to a greater impact as more 

individuals and families are served. 
1 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Introduction 

AmeriCorps contracted with ICF Incorporated, LLC (hereafter ICF) to explore and 

quantify the return on investment (ROI) of several programs that rely on national 

service—specifically AmeriCorps—as a major resource to sustain operations. ROI 

analyses measure the performance of programs and build the base of evidence for 

future resource allocation decisions. ROI study results demonstrate the value of 

AmeriCorps programming to relevant stakeholders. 

This project began with a comprehensive literature review and preliminary assessments 

of whether ROI analyses were feasible for five national service programs. These 

feasibility studies included thorough reviews of these programs’ recent evaluations, 

detailed logic models, proposed ROI analysis methodologies for each program, and a 

scorecard mechanism that determined the viability of conducting an ROI analysis for 

each selected program. 

Upon completion of five feasibility studies, AmeriCorps selected four programs to be the 

subject of ROI studies in Fiscal Year 2021: Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps, Washington 

Conservation Corps, YouthBuild AmeriCorps, and Birth & Beyond’s Home Visitation 

Program. This ROI study measures the benefits of Habitat for Humanity (HFH) AmeriCorps 

against its costs based on the analytical approach and data sources specified in its 

respective feasibility study. 

This study is organized into five sections: 

• Program Description describes the program’s design, activities, and objectives, 

along with the role that national service (specifically AmeriCorps) plays in its 

operation. It also provides a brief history of past evaluations, outlines the factors 

that made this program a strong selection for an ROI study, underscores the 

population this program serves, and identifies a potential set of comparable ROI 

estimates for Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps. 

• ROI Methodology outlines how this analysis used various data sources to 

monetize benefits derived from Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps, describes its 

associated program costs, and explains how opportunity costs were calculated. 

• Benefits, Forgone Benefits (opportunity costs), Program Costs, and ROI Results 

provides a detailed description of the program benefits, forgone benefits 

(opportunity cost), and program costs that are inputs into the ROI analyses and 

presents the results of the three ROI calculations across different assumptions. 

• Recommendations for Further Research explores ways AmeriCorps and others 

could further build the evidence base for this program and similar programs, 

including how to address limitations of this study. 

• Conclusion summarizes key points from the ROI study overall. 
2 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Program Description 

Habitat for Humanity International, Inc. (HFHI) is a non-profit homebuilding program that 

operates on a national and international scale. Specifically, it serves communities in all 

50 United States and in more than 70 countries worldwide. It provides low-income 

families living in substandard housing with volunteer-built, rehabilitated, or repaired 

homes and affordable mortgages. HFHI’s U.S. arm coordinates and organizes the efforts 

of more than 1,200 local Habitat for Humanity (HFH) organizations (i.e., affiliate sites).11 

These U.S. affiliate sites work with HFHI’s national office to coordinate home 

construction, building site and partner selection, fundraising, and mortgage servicing. 

Some affiliate sites leverage the human capital and people power of AmeriCorps 

members in both rural and urban areas nationwide. 

Families in need of decent and affordable housing apply for HFH homeownership with 

U.S. affiliate sites. If they qualify, homeowners contribute their own labor—termed 

“sweat equity”—and work alongside AmeriCorps members and non-national service 

member volunteers to build or improve their homes. HFH homeowners also pay an 

affordable mortgage with no interest, receive financial education, and participate in 

home maintenance classes.12 Through this program, HFH homeowners become more 

self-reliant, learn to meet the demands of owning a home, and build better lives for 

themselves and their families. 

HFH homes are modestly sized to keep construction costs low, while meeting 

homeowners’ needs. Beyond home construction, HFH offers program services that 

facilitate aging in place among the senior population. HFH also spearheads 

neighborhood revitalization efforts, helps communities rebuild after natural disasters, 

and advocates on housing policies.13 It should be noted that HFH’s policy advocacy is 

not funded by AmeriCorps. 

HFH host sites are U.S. affiliate sites that leverage AmeriCorps State and National and 

AmeriCorps VISTA members and they comprise the HFH AmeriCorps program.14 HFH 

AmeriCorps State and National members perform direct services. These include leading 

homebuilding and renovation efforts, planning and coordinating community projects, 

assisting in structure demolition, recruiting and educating qualified families, providing 

financial education and home maintenance classes, and training non-national service 

member volunteers. HFH AmeriCorps VISTA members provide indirect services that 

11 Habitat for Humanity International, Inc. (n.d.). Frequently asked questions. Retrieved from 

https://www.habitat.org/about/faq 

12 Please see these websites for more information: https://www.habitat.org/our-work/financial-education 

and https://www.habitat.org/stories/steps-homeownership. 

13 Habitat for Humanity International, Inc. (n.d.). Our work. Retrieved from 

https://www.habitat.org/impact/our-work 

14 Of note, some Habitat affiliate sites use AmeriCorps members while others do not. Affiliate sites that use 

AmeriCorps members are called host sites since they “host” AmeriCorps members for a service term. 

Affiliate sites that do not host AmeriCorps members care called non-host sites. 
3 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

strengthen and build the capacity of host sites. Such activities include documenting 

construction operations, maintaining donor engagement, contributing to resource and 

project development, and implementing family and volunteer recruitment strategies.15 

Population Served 

The families who partner with HFH affiliate sites to build their homes or improve their 

housing structures are selected at the local level and reside in both rural and urban 

communities nationally and internationally. The basis for a family’s selection is their need 

for safe and affordable housing, their willingness to partner with HFHI and work 

alongside volunteers (e.g., HFH AmeriCorps members, non-national service member 

volunteers, etc.), and their ability to repay the no-interest mortgage.16 Additionally, 

these families predominantly have low incomes, live in sub-standard or overcrowded 

housing, or devote a large portion of their disposable income to housing costs. Since 

1976, HFHI has helped more than 35 million households build or improve their homes 

worldwide. In FY2020 alone, more than 5.9 million people received HFHI homebuilding 

and repair services.17 

In the U.S., families served are predominantly low-income (i.e., at or below the federal 

poverty line), belong to racially underrepresented groups (e.g., African American, 

Hispanic, etc.), and have at least one dependent under 18 years old in the home. With 

regard to targeting those with economic need, affiliate sites make reasonable efforts to 

serve those whose income does not exceed 60 percent of the area median income 

(AMI), as defined for the affiliate site’s service area by the U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development. Affiliate sites are also in no case permitted to select 

households with incomes above 80 percent of the AMI and are encouraged to serve 

those whose income falls within the lowest AMI range possible.18 

For the 2019–2020 program, HFHI provided data that indicated HFH AmeriCorps built 

803 HFH homes and served 2,364 individuals as shown in Table 1. This represents 

7.6 percent and 8.5 percent of all the HFH homes and individuals served through HFHI in 

the U.S. during the most recent program year, respectively. Table 1 also delineates 

selected demographics of HFH homeowners served by HFH AmeriCorps for this program 

year and the geographic distribution of HFH AmeriCorps homebuilding activities across 

the U.S. Specifically, HFH AmeriCorps predominantly served families and individuals in 

the Southern and Western regions of the nation. Additionally, most of the individuals 

and HFH homeowners served by the HFH AmeriCorps program either had dependents 

15 Habitat for Humanity. (n.d.). The AmeriCorps experience. Retrieved from 

https://www.habitat.org/volunteer/long-term-opportunities/americorps/americorps-experience 

16 Habitat for Humanity. (n.d.). Habitat homeowners. Habitat for Humanity. 

https://www.habitat.org/housing-help/habitat-homeowners 

17 Habitat for Humanity International, Inc. (n.d.). Annual Report FY2020. 

https://www.habitat.org/sites/default/files/documents/HFHI_AR_20_FINAL_6NOV.pdf. 

18 This information was provided directly by HFHI through ICF’s personal communication with and data 

request to HFHI in 2021. 
4 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

under 18 years old living in the home or were 65 years old or older. HFH AmeriCorps also 

builds homes and provides services to those with disabilities, veterans, and other 

disadvantaged groups. 

Table 1. Selected Demographic Characteristics of HFH Homeowners and Geographic 

Region Distribution of Program Activities for Most Recent Program Year 

All HFH Percent 

Homes HFH Homes of Total 

Built in Built by HFH Homes 

Characteristic the U.S. AmeriCorps Built (%) 

Selected Demographics of HFH Homeowners 

All 

Individuals 

Served in 

the U.S. 

Individuals 

Served 

by HFH 

AmeriCorps 

Percent 

of Total 

Individuals 

Served 

(%) 

Dependents 

under age 18 

living in home 

3,851 376 9.8% 12,820 1,334 10.4% 

Disabled 3,044 161 5.3% 6,904 384 5.6% 

Military or 

Veteran 960 55 5.7% 2,184 130 6.0% 

Over 65 Years 

Old 4,142 264 6.4% 8,886 602 6.8% 

Disasteraffected 1,022 43 4.2% 2,270 140 6.2% 

Geographic Region 

Midwest 4,397 137 3.1% 11,050 404 3.7% 

Northeast 624 58 9.3% 1,688 186 11.0% 

South 3,602 253 7.0% 10,212 694 6.8% 

West 1,935 330 18.3% 

Total 10,558 803 7.6% 

4,864 

27,814 

1,080 

2,364 

22.2% 

8.5% 

Source: HFHI 

HFH Evaluation History 

The two evaluations discussed below provide insight into the impacts of HFH 

AmeriCorps on AmeriCorps members, HFH homeowners, and HFH household members. 

Viola et al. (2018): Evaluation of Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps Program 

2016–2019 

HFH contracted third-party evaluators to conduct an external evaluation of its 

AmeriCorps program from 2016–2019. This evaluation updated HFH’s 2013–2016 external 

evaluation (Olson et al., 2016) with new data from the 2016–2018 program years. This 

updated evaluation used survey data collected from three stakeholder groups: 
5 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

• HFH host sites (that leveraged AmeriCorps members) as well as a matched 

comparison group of HFH non-host sites (that did not leverage AmeriCorps 

members) 

• AmeriCorps State and National and VISTA members who served at HFH host sites 

during the study period 

• AmeriCorps member alumni from the HFH AmeriCorps program 

Similar to the previous version of this study, the updated version used a quasiexperimental design to match host and non-host sites based on their annual budget 

expense. This research design statistically tested the differences in organizational 

outcomes between the two groups during the three-year period. Additionally, the 

evaluation analyzed survey results from host sites concerning the perceived value-add 

of members. It also included survey results from HFH AmeriCorps members on their skill 

and social capital gains and survey results from HFH AmeriCorps member alumni 

regarding the impact of service on their career trajectory and knowledge gains. The 

surveys for host and non-host sites were collected in the fall of 2018. The surveys of 

AmeriCorps members that served during the study period were collected in August 

2017 and again in August 2018. Results for the one-time HFH AmeriCorps member 

alumni survey were collected in September 2018. 

According to the findings, compared to non-host sites over a three-year period, host 

sites on average: 

• Built 4.99 more HFH homes (20.36 vs. 15.37); this finding was nearly statistically 

significant. 

• Rehabbed 8.24 more homes (15.35 vs. 7.11); this finding was statistically 

significant. 

• Engaged 63 more non-national service member volunteers (1,499 vs. 1,436); 

this finding was statistically significant. 

Additionally, Table 2 shows the breakdown of the industries HFH AmeriCorps member 

alumni reported to be employed in following their service term. Results indicated that 

more than 75 percent of member alumni reported working in housing, construction, or 

other non-profit work after serving in the HFH AmeriCorps program. 
6 

 

 

Industry Percent (%)*

Local habitat organization/HFHI 27% 

Construction/Home remodeling 19% 

Non-profit 18% 

Affordable housing/homeless nonprofit 14% 

Education 8% 

Private Sector 6% 

Government/Public Sector 5% 

Healthcare 4% 

Total 100% 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 2. Distribution of Industries HFH AmeriCorps Alumni Became Employed in 

*Sample size was 181 HFH AmeriCorps member alumni. Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

Mattessich et al. (2015): Impacts of Habitat for Humanity Homeownership: 

Connections to Quality of Life 

HFH Minnesota contracted with Wilder Research to carry out a 2015 statewide study. 

The study analyzed the connection between HFH homeownership and the 

homeowner’s and other household members’ quality of life. Leveraging survey data, 

this report highlights the short- and long-term benefits that HFH homeowners and 

household members received due to moving into an HFH home. These benefits were 

related to personal safety, health, children’s and adults’ education, employment, social 

connectedness, and decreased use of government assistance. A sample of 402 HFH 

homeowners—who moved into their homes between 1989 and 2014—were surveyed. 

Results were analyzed overall, by geographical region, and by owners’ longevity in their 

homes (i.e., lived in their HFH home for more than five years or for five years or less). The 

study also reported demographic information about the sample. This included items 

such as homeowners’ race/ethnicity, family characteristics, gender, and marital status. 

Relevant survey results from the study include the following: 

• Of HFH homeowners who reported they themselves or a household member had 

a respiratory illness prior to moving into an HFH home, 57 percent indicated their 

condition improved after moving into an HFH home. 

• Twenty-five percent of surveyed HFH homeowners reported that they received 

federal rental assistance prior to moving into their HFH home and indicated that 

they no longer did after moving. 

Selection of HFH AmeriCorps for the AmeriCorps ROI Project 

ICF recommended making the HFH AmeriCorps program the subject of an ROI study 

based on the findings from Viola et al. (2018) that documented strong program 

productivity and capacity outcomes. These were related to home construction, home 

rehabilitation, and volunteer recruitment for HFH affiliate sites that utilized AmeriCorps 
7 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

members. HFH is also a nationwide program that has received support from 

AmeriCorps—in terms of funding and deployed members—for several years. It targets 

and serves low-income families to ultimately help bring them out of poverty which 

aligns with AmeriCorps’s mission of improving lives and strengthening communities. An 

ROI study for this program would also pioneer strategies for monetizing outcomes 

associated with homebuilding and home rehabilitation activities. These activities would 

be relevant to assessing an ROI for disaster recovery and relief services, another 

AmeriCorps focus area. 

Comparable ROI Estimates 

ROI studies of other programs that offer similar services provide context for a potential 

set of ROI estimates for HFH AmeriCorps. 

Drabo et al. (2021) completed an ROI analysis of Bon Secours Hospital’s House for 

Health program. This is a hospital-sponsored affordable housing program in Baltimore, 

Maryland that purchases, re-purposes, and develops units of affordable housing in 

communities with high concentrations of poverty and rising rates of vacant homes. 

At the time of the study, Bon Secours owned 801affordable housing units and through 

the program, provided reduced-rent housing along with wrap-around support services 

to occupants who were predominantly low-income families, individuals with disabilities, 

and seniors. The analysis considered the social, environmental, and economic benefits 

of the program and reported that the hospital’s annual program expenses for 

maintenance, staffing, utilities, and other services totaled $5.7 million. The authors also 

noted that the initial $107 million investment to buy and renovate the affordable 

housing units was largely paid for by mechanisms such as low-income housing tax 

credits. Results indicated the program generates between $1.30 and $1.92 of social 

return in the community for every dollar in yearly operating costs. 

As part of its findings, Mattessich et al. (2015) included a government assistance 

cost-benefit analysis. To quantify the reduction in government assistance program use 

due to HFH homeownership, the authors attached a monetary value to the percent 

reduction in individual government assistance program use reported by surveyed HFH 

homeowners who moved into their HFH home between 2009 and 2014. This analysis only 

calculated government assistance program savings for two regions in Minnesota: 

greater Minnesota and the Twin Cities. These findings were then scaled to the HFH 

homeowner population in the entire state. Savings as a result of HFH homeownership 

were calculated for the following government assistance programs: medical assistance 

and/or MinnesotaCare (i.e., healthcare), energy assistance, Section 8 housing rental 

assistance, Minnesota Family Investment Program (i.e., welfare), and food support 

(e.g., SNAP, WIC, etc.). Results indicated that 2,200 HFH homeowners in Minnesota were 

estimated to use between $6.4 and $9.3 million less in government assistance every 

year due to moving into an HFH home. 
8 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

ROI Methodology 

This study focuses on AmeriCorps’ contribution to HFHI programing. For that reason, only 

benefits and costs related to the activities and positions of HFH AmeriCorps State and 

National and HFH AmeriCorps VISTA members (i.e., the HFH AmeriCorps program) are 

included in this methodology. 

The methodology for the HFH AmeriCorps ROI study consisted of the following 

components: 

1. Measuring and monetizing program benefits. This included using data from 

previous evaluations and other third-party sources to determine the benefits to 

HFH homeowners, HFH household members, HFH AmeriCorps members, 

government, and other relevant stakeholders. The benefits realized across 

stakeholder groups include: 

• HFH homeowners. HFH homeowners benefit from cost savings realized from 

buying a new home and for home improvements. 

• HFH household members. HFH household members benefit from out-ofpocket (OOP) medical cost savings due to their improved respiratory health 

after moving into an HFH home. 

• Private insurance companies. Private insurance companies benefit from 

medical cost savings due to the improved respiratory health of HFH 

household members. 

• Other healthcare payers.19 Other healthcare payers benefit from medical 

cost savings due to the improved respiratory health of HFH household 

members. 

• HFH AmeriCorps members. HFH AmeriCorps members benefit from: 

a) living allowances, stipends, and education awards 

b) increased earnings due to reduced unemployment 

c) increased lifetime earnings due to increased post-secondary education 

derived from the use of education awards 

• Government. Government benefits from income, Social Security, and 

Medicare tax revenue from HFH AmeriCorps members’ increased earnings, 

and sales tax revenue from the increased economic activity that results from 

those increased earnings. Government also benefits from reduced spending 

on corrections, public assistance, and social insurance and increased tax 

revenue associated with the increased educational attainment of HFH 

AmeriCorps members that is derived from their use of education awards 

19 Other healthcare payers include those such as the Department of Veterans Affairs (excluding TRICARE), 

Indian Health Services, community and neighborhood clinics, worker’s compensation, homeowner’s or 

liability insurance, and others (AHRQ, 2021). 
9 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

post-service. Finally, government benefits from tax revenue from HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ living allowances, stipends, and education awards, 

cost savings due to HFH homeowners’ reduced federal rental assistance use, 

and Medicare and Medicaid cost savings due to the improved respiratory 

health of HFH household members. 

This ROI analysis monetized HFH AmeriCorps benefits in 2020 dollars. 

2. Estimating forgone benefits (opportunity costs). This ROI analysis estimated two 

types of forgone benefits. The first was the professional opportunity cost to HFH 

AmeriCorps members for their period of national service, during which they 

could have earned more pay by doing other work. This included both the 

forgone earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members and the associated tax revenue 

for government. The second was the investment opportunity cost for HFH 

AmeriCorps program funding that could have been used for other purposes. 

The analysis estimated the investment opportunity cost for both government and 

private funders based on the forgone return of investing program funds into 

U.S. Treasury bonds. The rates of return for U.S. Treasury bonds provide a marketbased estimate of return for low-risk investments. For the ROI estimates, the 

analysis subtracted forgone benefits from program benefits to calculate net 

benefits. The net benefits were then compared to program costs. 

3. Assessing program costs. HFHI provided HFH AmeriCorps program costs for the 

2019–2020 program year. Only the program costs that support the activities and 

positions of HFH AmeriCorps State and National and HFH AmeriCorps VISTA 

members (i.e., the HFH AmeriCorps program) are included in this study. The 

program costs included in this ROI are comprised of: 

• the expected education award amount HFH AmeriCorps members will 

collectively use post-service 

• the AmeriCorps State and National and AmeriCorps VISTA grants supplied 

by AmeriCorps 

• match funding (host site fees) received from HFH host sites paid to HFHI for 

hosting HFH AmeriCorps members 

4. Calculating the ROI. The ROI analysis included three ROI calculations, each 

assessed under three scenarios representing different assumptions about the 

persistence of program outcomes: 

• Total benefits per federal dollar 

• Total benefits per funder dollar20 

• Federal government benefits per federal dollar 

20 The different funder groups whose investment is in this calculation include the federal government 

(i.e., AmeriCorps) and HFH host sites. 
10 

 

 

 

 

Government Benefits 

HFH Homeowner Benefits 

Government Benefits 

HFH Household Member Benefits 

HFH AmeriCorps 

Program Activities 

HFH 

Homeowner 

Impacts 

HFH Household 

Member 

Impacts 

Government Benefits 

AmeriCorps Member Benefits 

AmeriCorps 

Member 

Impacts 

Other Healthcare Payer Benefits 

Private Insurance Company Benefits 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

This analytical framework includes only those benefits that could be reasonably 

monetized given the available data, and that likely would not have occurred without 

the HFH AmeriCorps program. Figure 1 shows how HFH AmeriCorps activities can result 

in HFH homeowner, HFH household member, private insurance company, other 

healthcare payer, HFH AmeriCorps member, and government benefits. 

Figure 1. Benefits among Stakeholder Groups Derived from HFH AmeriCorps 

Available data established that HFH AmeriCorps members enjoy earnings impacts as a 

result of serving with HFH AmeriCorps. However, the data do not establish the duration 

of those benefits. To address a range of possible durations for those benefits, the 

analysis includes three scenarios:21 

• Short-term. This scenario assumes short-term earnings impacts. The assumption is 

that earnings impacts are limited to a single year after program exit. This scenario 

also assumes no lifetime benefits are realized. 

21 These three scenarios consider varying durations of how long increased employment and earnings 

benefits last for HFH AmeriCorps members. They also consider varying durations for lifetime benefits that 

stem from HFH AmeriCorps. For example, lifetime benefits in terms of decreased public assistance, social 

insurance, and corrections costs result from HFH AmeriCorps members’ higher educational attainment postservice. The analysis estimates lifetime benefits differently in the three scenarios. Specifically, the net present 

value of the entire lifetime benefit is realized for the long-term scenario, half of the net present value of the 

lifetime benefit is realized for the medium-term scenario, and no lifetime benefit amount is realized for the 

short-term scenario. 
11 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

• Medium-term. This scenario assumes a longer duration of earnings impacts. The 

assumption is that earnings impacts last 15 years. A 3 percent discount rate is 

applied each year to represent net present value in 2020 dollars.22 This scenario 

also assumes only half of the net present value of lifetime benefits is realized. 

• Long-term. This scenario assumes sustained earnings impacts throughout HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ working years. The assumption is that earnings impacts 

last 30 years. A 3 percent discount rate is applied each year to represent net 

present value in 2020 dollars. This scenario also assumes the entire net present 

value of lifetime benefits is realized. 

The long-term scenario (i.e., 30 years of sustained employment and earnings benefits) 

represents roughly a lifetime of working years for a given person while the short-term 

scenario assumes benefits for only the year after program participation or service is 

completed. The medium-term scenario (i.e., 15 years of sustained employment and 

earnings benefits) represents the midpoint between these two scenarios. 

Monetizing Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost), 

and Program Costs 

This analysis monetized an array of benefits and included HFH AmeriCorps program 

costs and expected opportunity costs—all in 2020 dollars—to assess the ROI of HFH 

AmeriCorps. Additional details on the methodology employed and the calculations 

used for this analysis are in Appendix B. 

Program Benefits 

Outcomes of the HFH AmeriCorps program resulted in monetizable benefits to 

several stakeholders. Table 3 summarizes these benefits and data sources by 

stakeholder group. 

Table 3. Benefits Realized from the HFH AmeriCorps Program by Stakeholder Group 

Stakeholder Group Benefits Data Sources* 

HFH Homeowners • Cost savings in buying a new 

home 

• Cost savings in home 

rehabilitation work 

• HFHI23 

• National Association of 

REALTORS (2020) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• Esajian (2021) 

• Characteristics of 

New Housing (U.S. Census 

Bureau, n.d.) 

22 The Office of Management and Budget (1992) defines a discount rate as, “The interest rate used in 

calculating the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs” (p. 18). Regarding the 3 percent 

discount rate, see Office of Management and Budget (2003). 

23 Unless otherwise cited, all information provided directly by HFHI for this report was received through ICF’s 

personal communication with HFHI in 2021. 
12 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Stakeholder Group Benefits Data Sources* 

HFH Household • OOP medical cost savings due • HFHI 

Members to improved respiratory health • Viola et al. (2018) 

• Mattessich et al. (2015) 

• Consumer Price Index (CPI; 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

n.d.) 

• Medical Expenditure Panel 

Survey (MEPS; AHRQ, 2021) 

Private Insurance • Medical cost savings due to • HFHI 

Companies & improved respiratory health of • Viola et al. (2018) 

Other Healthcare HFH household members • Mattessich et al. (2015) Payers • CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• MEPS (AHRQ, 2021) 

HFH AmeriCorps • Additional earnings from • HFHI 

Members reduced unemployment 

• Additional lifetime earnings 

from increased educational 

attainment as a result of 

education awards 

• Friedman et al. (2016) 

• Trostel (2015) 

• Current Population Survey 

Annual Social and Economic 

Supplement (ASEC; U.S. • Post-tax living allowances, 

stipends, and education 

awards 

Census Bureau, n.d.) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES) (2019) 

• NCES (2020) 

• AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2019) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 
13 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Stakeholder Group Benefits Data Sources* 

Government • Tax revenue from increased 

earnings by HFH AmeriCorps 

members post-program and 

sales tax revenue from the 

induced increased economic 

activity 

• Tax revenue from living 

allowances, stipends, and 

education awards 

• Reduced lifetime spending on 

corrections, public assistance, 

and social insurance from 

increased educational 

attainment by HFH AmeriCorps 

members as a result of 

education awards 

• Lifetime tax revenue from 

increased educational 

attainment by HFH AmeriCorps 

members as a result of 

education awards 

• HFHI 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• Mattessich et al. (2015) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• MEPS (AHRQ, 2021) 

• Consumer Expenditure Survey 

(U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

2021) 

• Federal and state income tax 

rates (El-Sibaie, 2019; 

Loughead, 2020) 

• Social Security tax rate (Social 

Security Administration (SSA), 

2020) 

• Medicare tax rate (SSA, 2020) 

• Combined state and average 

local sales tax rates 

(Cammenga, 2020) 

• Reduced federal rental 

assistance use by HFH 

homeowners due to HFH 

homeownership 

• Medicare and Medicaid 

medical cost savings due to 

improved respiratory health of 

HFH household members 

• Trostel (2015) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

• American Community Survey 

(2019) (ACS; U.S. Census 

Bureau, n.d.) 

• Center on Budget and Policy 

Priorities (CBPP) (2019) 

• Friedman et al. (2016) 

*Usage of these data sources is discussed in more detail in the subsequent sections. Tax rates used on HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ increased earnings, forgone earnings, education awards, stipends, and living 

allowances are national averages. See Appendix B for a detailed discussion. 

Cost Savings in Home Buying and Home Rehabilitation Work (Benefits to HFH 

Homeowners) 

As a result of HFH AmeriCorps, HFH homeowners experienced cost savings related to 

buying a home and having rehabilitation work completed on their existing home. 

Specifically, Viola et al. (2018) found that HFH AmeriCorps members increased the 

capacity and productivity of host sites (that leveraged HFH AmeriCorps members) 

compared to affiliate sites that did not utilize HFH AmeriCorps members (i.e., non-host 

sites). Results indicated that host sites built on average 4.99 more HFH homes and 

rehabbed 8.24 more homes than non-host sites during the three-year study period after 

controlling for sites’ annual budget expense. Given these results, on an annual basis, 

host sites built on average 1.66 more HFH homes and rehabbed 2.75 more homes 
14 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

compared to non-host sites. To estimate the number of additional homes built and 

rehabbed nationwide by HFH host sites for the most recent program year, this analysis 

multiplied the number of HFH host sites in the U.S. by 1.66 and 2.75, respectively. 

This analysis conservatively assumed that each 

HFH AmeriCorps members play a home built and rehabbed had one homeowner. 

vital role in recruiting, training, Thus, the number of additional homes built and 

and managing non-national rehabbed nationwide represents the number of 

service member volunteers at HFH homeowners who purchased a new HFH their respective HFH host sites. home or had rehab work completed on their Viola et al. (2018) reported that existing home, respectively. Additionally, this 

methodology HFH host sites engaged 63 more attributed a portion of HFH host 

non-AmeriCorps volunteers on sites’ output to national service. It captured the 

average over a three-year value of only the “additional” homes that host period than non-host sites. This sites built and rehabbed based on the 

underscored the impact of comparison of these productivity outcomes 

national service on host sites’ between host sites and non-host sites in Viola et 

capacity-building efforts. The al. (2018). impact of this additional 

Cost Savings Due to Additional HFH Homes Built volunteer base was assumed to 

have contributed to the 

To monetize the cost savings HFH homeowners additional new homes built and 

realized when purchasing a home, this analysis rehabbed. To avoid double- subtracted the average cost of building a HFH counting benefits, the monetary home (which was the average selling price to contribution of this additional 

HFH homeowners) from the median selling price capacity to host sites was not 

of a similar home in the U.S. HFHI provided the quantified separately. 

average square footage and the average cost 

(i.e., selling price) per square foot of an HFH home in the U.S.24 The product represents 

the average selling price of a HFH home for the 2019–2020 program year. The analysis 

then multiplied the average square footage of a HFH home by the median selling price 

per square foot of a home in the U.S. according to the National Association of 

REALTORS (2020). The product represents the median sales price a HFH homeowner 

would have paid for a similarly-sized home if they did not purchase a HFH home. The 

analysis then applied the difference in selling prices to the number of additional HFH 

homes built per HFH host site—as reported by Viola et al. (2018)—and to the number of 

HFH host sites in the U.S. to calculate the total savings realized by HFH homeowners. 

24 The median selling price per square foot for U.S. homes may differ slightly from that for HFH AmeriCorps 

homes, given the geographic distribution that HFH AmeriCorps operates in. For example, as shown in Table 

1, the greatest proportion of HFH AmeriCorps homes (i.e., 44 percent) were built in the West region (among 

the four U.S. census regions) during the most recent program year. The West region has higher median 

housing costs than the U.S. in general. Thus, as done in this ROI analysis, using the U.S. median may have led 

to a lower estimated benefit to HFH homeowners—in the form of cost savings—for additional HFH homes 

built. Namely, using the U.S. median would result in an ROI estimate slightly lower than the actual. 
15 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Cost Savings Due to Additional Homes Rehabbed 

To monetize HFH homeowners’ cost savings in home rehabilitation work, this analysis 

subtracted the average cost of rehabilitation work for an HFH home from that of a 

similarly-sized home in the U.S. To calculate the latter, the analysis divided the average 

cost of home rehabilitation work in the U.S. according to Esajian (2021) by the median 

square footage of a U.S. house in 2019 (U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.). This represents the 

U.S. market rate for home rehabilitation work per square foot. To calculate the average 

rehabilitation cost for HFH homes, the analysis used the aforementioned selling price 

data to impute the average cost of rehab work for an HFH home per square foot. The 

difference between the market and HFH average rehabilitation costs per square foot 

represents the money saved by HFH homeowners by utilizing the resources and 

manpower of HFH AmeriCorps members. The analysis then multiplied the per square 

foot costs savings by the average square footage of an HFH home, the number of HFH 

host sites, and the number of additional homes rehabbed annually as stated in Viola 

et al. (2018). This represents nationwide cost savings to HFH homeowners with regard to 

home rehabilitation activities for the most recent program year. 

Medical Cost Savings Due to Improved Respiratory Health of HFH Household 

Members (Benefits to Multiple Stakeholders) 

Mattessich et al. (2015) found that 36 percent of HFH homeowners reported that they or 

someone in their household had a respiratory or lung illness (such as asthma or 

respiratory allergies) prior to moving into their HFH home. Of that subset, 35 percent 

reported that their or their household member’s condition was “much better,” 

22 percent reported it was “somewhat better,” 29 percent reported “there was no 

change,” 10 percent reported it was “somewhat worse,” and 4 percent reported it was 

“much worse” since moving into their HFH home. Qualitative data from Mattessich et al. 

(2015) underscored how HFH homes had less mold, less dusty conditions, and provided 

an overall healthier living environment. The net improved respiratory health reported by 

HFH homeowners leads to medical cost savings realized by the following stakeholders: 

HFH household members themselves, private insurance companies, the federal 

government, and other healthcare payers.25 

To monetize the net improved respiratory health of HFH household members, this 

analysis used the average number of additional new homes built by HFH host sites 

provided by Viola et al. (2018) (e.g., 1.66). This outcome was multiplied by the number 

of U.S. host sites nationwide. The analysis then multiplied this product by 36 percent to 

determine the national population of HFH household members who had a respiratory 

illness before moving into their HFH home. The analysis then multiplied this product by 

35 percent, 22 percent, 10 percent, and 4 percent, separately. These calculations 

estimated the national HFH population that reported their pre-moving respiratory 

condition had gotten “much better,” “somewhat better,” “somewhat worse,” and 

25 Other healthcare payers include those such as the Department of Veterans Affairs (excluding TRICARE), 

Indian Health Services, community and neighborhood clinics, worker’s compensation, homeowner’s or 

liability insurance, and others (AHRQ, 2021). 
16 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

“much worse” since moving, respectively. This resulted in four distinct populations of HFH 

household members who experienced some degree of improvement or deterioration in 

their respiratory health since moving into their HFH home. 

These health outcomes were monetized in terms of medical cost savings or losses using 

data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MESP). Specifically, the analysis used 

the average annual cost for someone that has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 

(COPD), asthma, or other respiratory conditions in the U.S. in 2018 (AHRQ, 2021). For HFH 

household members that reported an improvement in respiratory health, the analysis 

assumed that those HFH household members would see a cost reduction. Namely, they 

would still have to pay some amount of the annual cost from AHRQ (2021) given their 

condition was not eradicated. For HFH household members that reported their 

respiratory health worsened, the analysis assumed that those HFH household members 

would experience an increase in costs. This analysis defined the percentage reduction 

or increase in this cost for each of the four HFH household member populations using 

statistical methods. These methods leveraged the response distribution for this survey 

question which was provided by Mattessich et al. (2015). The analysis multiplied the 

resulting cost reduction and increase percentages by the annual cost from AHRQ 

(2021) and then by the HFH household member population whose condition got “much 

better,” “somewhat better,” “somewhat worse,” and “much worse,” separately. When 

summed, this determined the total cost savings related to HFH household members’ net 

improved respiratory health since moving into an HFH home.26 

The portion of medical cost savings paid out-of-pocket (OOP) represented a benefit to 

HFH household members themselves. Private insurance companies and other 

healthcare payers also realized cost savings due to HFH household members’ net 

improved respiratory health. The portion of these costs paid by Medicare or Medicaid 

also represented savings to the federal government. This payment source segmentation 

was determined by using 2018 MEPS data (AHRQ,2021).27 

26 This analysis accounted for any random instances of HFH household members reporting improved or 

deteriorating respiratory health that were not attributable to moving into an HFH home by capturing both 

medical cost savings and additional medical costs incurred due to improved and worsening respiratory 

health, respectively. 

27 For all stakeholder groups that experience medical cost savings due to HFH household members’ 

improved respiratory health after moving into an HFH home, the impact on healthcare providers is not 

captured in this ROI analysis. This analysis assumes that these healthcare providers are operating at 100 

percent capacity. Thus, when they lose patients due to the favorable impacts of HFH, it is assumed they will 

serve another individual needing care and that they are not losing revenue. 
17 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Post-Tax Living Allowances, Stipends, and Education Awards (Benefits to HFH 

AmeriCorps Members) 

Some member-specific benefits realized due to AmeriCorps members serving with HFH 

AmeriCorps include the post-tax living allowances AmeriCorps State and National and 

AmeriCorps VISTA members are allotted during their national service and the post-tax 

education awards or the post-tax stipends they receive after service completion. All are 

considered taxable income and thus result in increased government revenue.28 Of 

note, only AmeriCorps VISTA members are given the option to receive an end-ofservice cash stipend or an education award.29 AmeriCorps State and National 

members are not offered the former as a benefit for their service. The post-tax award 

amounts (i.e., living allowance, stipend, and education awards used to repay 

student loans) were included in the ROI analysis as direct one-time benefits to HFH 

AmeriCorps members. 

Additional Earnings from Reduced Unemployment (Benefit to HFH AmeriCorps 

Members) 

Evaluations have shown that serving in AmeriCorps fosters higher skill acquisition, 

increased educational attainment, and higher income from increased employment 

post-national service (Friedman et al., 2016; Markovitz et al., 2008; Spera et al., 2013; 

Zeidenberg et al., 2016). Freidman et al. (2016) found that unemployment among 

AmeriCorps members six months after their period of national service was 5 percentage 

points lower compared to six months before.30 To monetize this decrease in 

unemployment, the analysis first determined the demographic distribution of HFH 

AmeriCorps State and National and VISTA members who served during the most recent 

program year in terms of race/ethnicity, gender, age, and education level pre-service 

using data provided by HFHI. The analysis then proceeded to: 

1. Estimate HFH AmeriCorps members’ per-person average annual earnings 

(weighted by the above demographics) using data from the Current Population 

Survey’s Annual Social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement for March 2019, 

2. Use findings from Viola et al. (2018)—regarding the distribution of industries HFH 

AmeriCorps members reported to work in post-service—and Occupational 

Employment and Wage Statistics data (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019) to 

calculate HFH AmeriCorps members’ weighted 25th percentile annual earnings, 

3. Weigh the demographic- and industry-weighted annual earnings metrics equally 

to estimate the per-person earnings that were representative of HFH AmeriCorps 

members’ demographic composition and labor profile, 

28 The tax implications of the AmeriCorps member education award are stated here: AmeriCorps. (n.d.). 

Segal AmeriCorps Education Award. Retrieved from https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/segalamericorps-education-award 

29 Please see this site for additional information: https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/vista/benefits. 

30 See page 56 of Friedman et al. (2016). 
18 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

4. Multiply the 5-percentage point reduction in unemployment from Freidman et al. 

(2016) to the number of HFH AmeriCorps members that served during the most 

recent program year to estimate the number of additional HFH AmeriCorps 

members employed post-service, 

5. Multiply the per-person average annual earnings by the number of additional 

HFH AmeriCorps members employed to estimate the total increased earnings 

attributable to national service. 

The earnings metrics for HFH AmeriCorps members were applied and discounted based 

on the short-term, medium-term, and long-term scenarios to represent net present 

2020 dollars. The post-tax HFH AmeriCorps members’ projected earnings represents the 

additional income earned by AmeriCorps members attributable to serving with the HFH 

AmeriCorps program. 

Additional Lifetime Earnings from Increased Educational Attainment as a Result 

of Education Awards (Benefit to HFH AmeriCorps Members) 

Another benefit derived from national service is the higher educational attainment of 

AmeriCorps members. AmeriCorps members in general—as documented in Friedman 

et al. (2016)—can use their education awards to 

a) Pay for additional post-secondary educational attainment or 

b) Repay student loans. 

Friedman et al. (2016) reported that 46 percent of AmeriCorps State and National 

members and 31 percent of AmeriCorps VISTA members used their education award to 

pursue additional post-secondary education while 33 percent and 37 percent of them, 

respectively, used it to repay student loans.31 

This analysis estimated the expected increase in lifetime earnings of HFH AmeriCorps 

members attributable to the use of education awards to pay for additional postsecondary schooling. Based on the findings from Friedman et al. (2016), this ROI analysis 

estimated the amount in post-tax education awards that HFH AmeriCorps members 

used to pay for additional educational attainment. The analysis then estimated the 

value of the additional educational attainment attributable to the education awards in 

terms of lifetime earnings using data from Trostel (2015). These estimated additional 

post-tax lifetime earnings were included as a benefit to HFH AmeriCorps members. 

Tax Revenue Generation and Reduced Spending (Benefits to Government) 

The benefits of HFH AmeriCorps members, HFH homeowners, and HFH household 

members resulted in benefits to the various levels of government. 

31 Friedman et al. (2016). op. cit. Exhibit VIII-6. 
19 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Benefits to Government from Increased Earnings by HFH AmeriCorps Members 

Government benefits from increased earnings by HFH AmeriCorps members. Those 

benefits included: 

• Income tax revenue from increased HFH AmeriCorps member earnings postservice. Federal income taxes, state income taxes, Medicare taxes, and Social 

Security taxes were estimated for the additional pre-tax earnings of HFH 

AmeriCorps members based on 2020 rates. For both federal and state income 

taxes, the analysis estimated proportional tax rates representing the share of 

earnings paid in taxes. 

To estimate proportional tax rates that reflect federal- and state-level progressive 

tax brackets and standard deductions, the amount of total taxes paid was 

divided by the pre-tax earnings per HFH AmeriCorps member. For the state 

income tax rate, the analysis weighted individual state-level rates by their 

respective state populations to estimate a weighted national tax rate to apply 

program-wide. A weighted national tax rate was used because HFH AmeriCorps 

operates nationwide. Also, HFH AmeriCorps members may disperse to various 

locations following their service terms and continue to migrate over the course of 

their working years. 

• Sales tax revenue from the increased economic activity that resulted from 

increased HFH AmeriCorps member earnings post-service. To estimate the 

additional sales tax revenue generated due to the additional post-tax earnings 

of HFH AmeriCorps members, the combined state and average local sales tax 

rate for the U.S.—weighted by states’ populations—was calculated. This analysis 

applied that rate to the estimated taxable expenditures of HFH AmeriCorps 

members based on their post-service pre-tax earnings using Consumer 

Expenditure Survey data (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021).32 The resulting 

product was then applied to the share of post-tax earnings attributable to 

serving with HFH AmeriCorps to estimate state and local government sales 

tax revenue. 

32 To calculate the estimated taxable expenditures, Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES) Table 1203 was 

used from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021). This table lists the annual expenditure means by pre-tax 

income tax brackets. Thus, the pre-tax earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members were used instead of their 

post-tax earnings to calculate this metric. Please visit this site for more details: 

https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-share-average-standard-error.htm#cu-income. 
20 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Benefits to Government from Increased Educational Attainment by HFH AmeriCorps 

Members 

Government benefits from increased post-secondary educational attainment by HFH 

AmeriCorps members. Those benefits included: 

• Tax revenue from education awards. Education awards provided to HFH 

AmeriCorps members upon service completion are subject to taxes, resulting in 

additional government revenue. 33 This ROI analysis applied federal income, 

state income, Social Security, and Medicare tax rates to the expected total 

amount of education awards to be given to HFH AmeriCorps members to 

estimate these additional taxes. Both estimated proportional federal and state 

income tax rates were used. Sales taxes were not estimated for education 

awards because they cannot be used for consumer purchases. 

• Reduced lifetime spending on corrections, public assistance, and social 

insurance from increased educational attainment as a result of education 

awards. Higher educational attainment is associated with less dependence on 

government assistance programs and lower incarceration rates (Blagg & Blom, 

2018; Harlow, 2003). Because HFH AmeriCorps members increased postsecondary educational attainment due to the use of the education award, 

government spends less. For the monetization of these benefits, the analysis 

paired the expected increase in post-secondary educational attainment of HFH 

AmeriCorps members with the expected difference in per-person lifetime 

government cost savings from Medicaid, SNAP, unemployment insurance, 

worker’s compensation, and corrections for individuals with different levels of 

educational attainment. The latter values were provided by Trostel (2015). 

• Lifetime tax revenue from increased educational attainment as a result of 

education awards. Another benefit related to HFH AmeriCorps members 

captured in this ROI study was the lifetime tax revenue generated from 

members’ higher post-secondary educational attainment due to the use of the 

education award. Here, the estimated increase in HFH AmeriCorps members’ 

post-secondary educational attainment was paired with the expected 

difference in per-person lifetime taxes for individuals with different levels of 

education as provided by Trostel (2015). This lifetime tax revenue includes federal 

income, state income, property, Social Security, Medicare, and sales taxes 

derived from use of the education award. 

33 The tax implications of the AmeriCorps member education award are stated here: AmeriCorps. (n.d.). 

Segal AmeriCorps Education Award. Retrieved from https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/segalamericorps-education-award 
21 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Benefits to Government from Living Allowances and Stipends Received by HFH 

AmeriCorps Members 

The living allowance provided to HFH AmeriCorps members during their service term 

and the end-of-year stipend earned by HFH AmeriCorps VISTA members upon service 

completion are considered taxable income. This analysis applied a proportional federal 

income tax rate as well as Medicare and Social Security tax rates to the pre-tax living 

allowance and stipend amounts received by HFH AmeriCorps members for the most 

recent program year. The analysis also applied a sales tax rate to the estimated taxable 

expenditures of HFH AmeriCorps members based on their post-tax living allowance and 

stipend amounts to estimate additional state and local government revenue. Of note, 

for the end-of-year stipend amount, federal income and Social Security taxes are 

withheld from the amount provided to HFH AmeriCorps members. These taxes are 

included in the analysis.34 

Benefits to Government from Reduced Federal Rental Assistance Use by HFH 

Homeowners 

According to Mattessich et al. (2015), 25 percent of surveyed HFH homeowners in 

Minnesota reported that they received federal rental assistance prior to moving into 

their HFH home and indicated they no longer did. To monetize this benefit to the 

federal government—which funds rental assistance programs through the U.S. 

Department of Housing and Urban Development (e.g., Section 8 project-based 

housing, public housing, housing choice vouchers, etc.)—this analysis first multiplied the 

number of additional HFH homes built nationwide due to HFH AmeriCorps (calculated 

earlier) by the 25 percent. This estimated the number of HFH households who were no 

longer using rental assistance since moving into their HFH home. Then using data from 

the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (2019), the analysis calculated the average 

amount of federal rental assistance used per U.S. household receiving housing or rental 

assistance for 2019. The analysis applied this monetary amount to the number of HFH 

households no longer using rental assistance to estimate rental assistance cost savings 

to the federal government for the most recent program year. 

Benefits to Government from Improved Respiratory Health of HFH Household Members 

As mentioned in the previous section, findings from Mattessich et al. (2015) indicated 

net-improved self-reported respiratory health among HFH household members who had 

a respiratory condition prior to moving into their HFH home. This resulted in medical cost 

savings to several stakeholder groups, one being the federal government in terms of 

savings in Medicare and Medicaid costs. The portion of medical cost savings realized 

by the federal government was determined by using 2018 MEPS data (AHRQ, 2021). 

Further discussion of how this benefit was calculated can be found in Appendix B. 

34 The tax implications of the AmeriCorps VISTA member stipend (i.e., end-of-year benefit) are stated here: 

https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/vista/benefits. 
22 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Costs) 

The analysis estimated forgone benefits of both members and funders because of their 

participation and investment in the HFH AmeriCorps program. These forgone benefits 

were subtracted from the program benefits (shown above) to calculate the net 

benefits of the program. Those net benefits were then compared to program cost to 

calculate the ROI. These forgone benefits are referred to as the professional and 

investment opportunity costs, described below. 

Professional Opportunity Cost to HFH AmeriCorps Participants 

The first opportunity cost was the professional opportunity cost to HFH AmeriCorps 

participants for their period of national service, during which they could otherwise be 

working and earning higher pay. To calculate this, this analysis estimated what HFH 

AmeriCorps participants would have earned if they did not participate in the HFH 

AmeriCorps program. Specifically, this analysis estimated the weighted average annual 

earnings of this group as well as their weighted unemployment rate using the 

demographic distribution of HFH AmeriCorps participants for the most recent program 

year and data from the Current Population Survey’s Annual Social and Economic 

(ASEC) Supplement for March 2019. The HFH demographics included were gender, 

age, race/ethnicity, economically disadvantaged status, and pre-service highest level 

of education. The weighted average annual earnings represent the expected earnings 

of HFH AmeriCorps participants if they were employed, not participating in the HFH 

AmeriCorps program. The weighted unemployment rate represents how many of the 

HFH AmeriCorps participants would have been unemployed if they did not participate 

or serve in the HFH AmeriCorps program. These weighted metrics were first used to 

estimate the portion of HFH AmeriCorps program completers who would have been 

employed and then to calculate the aggregate earnings those employed individuals 

would have earned. 

Some of the forgone earnings would have been paid in the form of taxes. To 

appropriately allocate opportunity costs between HFH AmeriCorps participants and 

government, the analysis estimated the reduced tax revenue for federal income, state 

income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes. The analysis also estimated the reduction 

in sales tax from reduced consumption. These taxes combined represent what the 

various levels of government are forgoing in tax revenue when these individuals decide 

to serve and participate in the HFH AmeriCorps program instead of work. 

The sum of all forgone taxes and the forgone post-tax earnings of HFH AmeriCorps 

participants is called the total professional opportunity cost. 

It is important to note that in the federal government benefits per federal dollar ROI 

calculation, only federal government (not total) benefits are included. Given this, only 

federal components of the professional opportunity cost (forgone federal income, 

Social Security, and Medicare taxes) are subtracted from all federal government 

benefits for that ROI calculation. 
23 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Investment Opportunity Cost to Funders 

The second opportunity cost used in this ROI analysis was an investment opportunity 

cost. It estimates forgone return if all funds used to support HFH AmeriCorps during the 

most recent program year were invested in U.S. Treasury bonds instead. To calculate 

this, the analysis matched 2019 real interest rates provided by Office of Management 

and Budget (2020) to each of the scenarios in the ROI analysis: short-term, mediumterm, and long-term.35 The rates of return for U.S. Treasury bonds provide a marketbased estimate of return for low-risk investments. 

The real interest rate for the 3-year maturity was used for the short-term scenario, the 

average between the 10-year and 20-year maturity rates was used as the rate for the 

medium-term scenario, and the 30-year maturity rate was used for the long-term 

scenario. These real interest rates were 1.3, 1.45, and 1.5 percent, respectively. Also, the 

number of time periods elapsed on these bonds equaled the length of the short-term, 

medium-term, and long-term scenarios (1 year, 15 years, and 30 years, respectively). 

These bonds compound bi-annually according to Department of Treasury (n.d.). 

Note that for 1) the federal government benefits per federal dollar and 2) the total 

benefits per federal dollar ROI calculations, the investment opportunity cost subtracted 

from the benefits in these calculations is the forgone accrued interest from investing 

only the federal funds into these U.S. Treasury bonds. This is called the federal investment 

opportunity cost. This is done because these ROI calculations only include federal 

government (not total) program costs. For the other ROI calculation estimated in this 

analysis, the investment opportunity cost subtracted from the benefits realized is the 

forgone accrued interest from investing all HFH AmeriCorps funds (both federal and 

non-federal) into these U.S. Treasury bonds. This is called the total investment 

opportunity cost. See Appendix B for details. 

Program Costs 

The costs for the HFH AmeriCorps program, used for this ROI analysis, include federal 

and required match funding and any other funding used to support program 

operations. The program costs are specific to funding the activities and positions of HFH 

AmeriCorps State and National and HFH AmeriCorps VISTA members whose outcomes 

are measured in this analysis. 

Table 4 shows the segmentation of HFH AmeriCorps program costs by funder.36 The 

federal funds included the AmeriCorps State and National grant and the AmeriCorps 

VISTA grant distributed to HFH host sites nationwide. Federal dollars also helped pay for 

the expected education award amounts granted to HFH AmeriCorps members once 

they completed their service term. All other funding was provided by HFH host sites. 

They pay HFHI a fee per HFH AmeriCorps member to host national service members at 

35 The analysis used 2019 real interest rates for U.S. Treasury bonds because the program year analyzed 

began in 2019. 

36 Program cost data were provided by the director of long term volunteer programs at HFHI. 
24 

 

 

 

 

 

Funder 

Funding Provided 

for the Program Year ($) 

Percent 

of Total (%) 

AmeriCorps $5,933,696 67.5% 

Host Sites (i.e., Match 

Funding) $2,861,727 32.5% 

Total $8,795,423 100.0% 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

their affiliate site. No other state/local government nor private funding supported HFH 

AmeriCorps during the 2019–2020 program year. 

AmeriCorps (providing both the grants and the expected education award amounts) is 

the leading funder for the HFH AmeriCorps program, sponsoring more than two-thirds of 

program costs.37 Moreover, HFH AmeriCorps’s match funding—provided by host sites— 

was an amount equal to about 48 percent of AmeriCorps federal funds. This match 

provides HFH AmeriCorps with the resources to offer more services and support to lowincome families than would be otherwise available only under the AmeriCorps federal 

funds. That translates into increased aggregate benefits realized across stakeholder 

groups. 

Table 4. HFH AmeriCorps Costs by Funder Type 

ROI Study Limitations 

Study limitations included the use of self-reported outcomes data to determine 

stakeholder benefits and the ability to capture all benefits that stem from the HFH 

AmeriCorps program. 

Limitation to Using Self-Reported Outcomes Data 

Both the Viola et al. (2018) and Mattessich et al. (2015) evaluations used in this ROI 

analysis included outcomes data—related to HFH AmeriCorps members, HFH household 

members, and HFH homeowners—that were self-reported and collected through 

surveys. No third-party data were leveraged to corroborate what survey respondents 

reported. This introduced concerns related to accuracy and response bias. For 

instance, in Mattessich et al. (2015), HFH homeowners reported they themselves or a 

household member having a respiratory condition prior to moving into their HFH home 

and whether that respiratory condition improved, stayed the same, or worsened after 

moving into their HFH home. Prior to moving into their HFH home, they may or may not 

have been professionally diagnosed for such a medical condition. After moving into 

their HFH home, the status of their condition may or may not have been confirmed by 

37 The education award comes from the National Service Trust. This is a line-item in AmeriCorps’s annual 

budget approved by Congress every year. Thus, the expected education award amounts to be realized 

by HFH AmeriCorps members post-service is grouped with the AmeriCorps State and National and VISTA 

grants as being supplied by AmeriCorps. For more information, see: 

https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/documents/CNCS%20FY%202021%20Congressional%20Budget%20 

Justification%20w%20IG%20Message%20%28Final%29_508.pdf. 
25 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

a medical professional. Additionally, outcomes from Viola et al. (2018) related to the 

additional HFH homes built and rehabbed due to the efforts of HFH AmeriCorps 

members were based on responses submitted by personnel at host sites and non-host 

sites. Affiliate site personnel may have referenced programmatic data using a reliable 

internal reporting system to answer survey questions. However, this was not confirmed. 

Limitations to the Array of Benefits Captured 

While Mattessich et al. (2015) captures self-reported HFH homeowner and household 

member outcomes, the study excludes any employment or educational attainment 

outcomes from these stakeholder groups that could be reasonably monetized. The 

inclusion of such outcomes in this ROI analysis—even if self-reported—would reap 

substantial benefits such as increased earnings and increased tax revenue as a result of 

those increased earnings. Specifically, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2020), gains in educational attainment translate to decreased unemployment and 

higher earnings. Moreover, obtaining gainful employment provides a steady stream of 

income for families which in turn has significant ripple effects with regards to family 

stability. Specifically, research suggests that increased financial stability has positive 

impacts on food security, children’s academic performance, children’s future earnings, 

parents’ mental health and cognitive functioning, parent-child relationships, and 

children’s physical, emotional, and cognitive development (Duncan & Magnuson, 

2013; Mani et al., 2013; Akee et al., 2018). Additional research demonstrates that 

affordable housing plays a critical role in providing stability to poor families and 

providing a pathway out of poverty, especially in the form of improving educational 

attainment and employment stability among household members (Cunningham & 

MacDonald, 2012; Brennan et al., 2014; Desmond & Gershenson, 2016). Given this, it 

can be inferred that owning an affordable HFH home can positively impact families’ 

and individuals’ economic well-being. Though the literature supports such benefits 

could be realized as a result of increased housing stability, of which HFH AmeriCorps 

provides, the two evaluations used in this ROI analysis do not speak to such impacts 

that are specific to the HFH AmeriCorps program. 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Cost), Program 

Costs, and ROI Results 

The ROI for HFH AmeriCorps measures the benefits of the program compared to its costs 

to determine the return to different stakeholders. This section provides ICF’s estimates of 

benefits, program costs, opportunity costs, and resulting ROI. 

Program Benefits 

Table 5 shows the estimates of monetized benefits of HFH AmeriCorps by stakeholder 

group for each of the three scenarios. The majority of monetized benefits are realized 

by HFH AmeriCorps members and HFH homeowners. In all three scenarios, both HFH 

AmeriCorps members and HFH homeowners combined realized eighty percent or more 

of program benefits. 
26 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 5. Program Benefits by Recipient 

Recipient 

Benefits by Scenario (2020$)* 

Short term Medium term Long term 

HFH Homeowners 

(percent of total) 

$11,629,389 

(61%) 

$11,629,389 

(37%) 

$11,629,389 

(28%) 

HFH Household Members 

(percent of total) 

$15,137 

(0%) 

$15,137 

(0%) 

$15,137 

(0%) 

HFH AmeriCorps Members 

(percent of total) 

$5,737,878 

(30%) 

$14,740,741 

(47%) 

$21,647,163 

(52%) 

Federal Government 

(percent of total) 

$1,262,762 

(7%) 

$3,937,898 

(12%) 

$6,207,292 

(15%) 

State/Local Governments 

(percent of total) 

$399,827 

(2%) 

$1,210,776 

(4%) 

$1,876,414 

(5%) 

Total 

(Total percent) 

$19,044,993 $31,533,941 $41,375,393 

(100%) (100%) (100%) 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Costs) 

Table 6 shows the breakdown of forgone benefit from the professional opportunity cost 

to HFH AmeriCorps members and government in net present 2020 dollars. It lists the 

amount of post-tax earnings members forgo and the associated taxes forgone—to 

serving with the HFH AmeriCorps program. This is called the total professional 

opportunity cost. For the federal government benefits per federal dollar ROI 

calculation, only the forgone federal income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes were 

subtracted from the total federal benefits that are realized due to HFH AmeriCorps. The 

sum of these forgone federal taxes is called the federal professional opportunity cost. 
27 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Forgone Category 

Professional Opportunity Cost Amount 

Across All Scenarios (2020$) 

Post-Tax Earnings $10,109,50038 

Federal Income Taxes $1,631,701 

State Income Taxes $507,395 

Social Security and Medicare Taxes $1,014,637 

Sales Taxes $216,446 

Total $13,479,679 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

- -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 6. Forgone Benefits from Professional Opportunity Cost 

Table 7 lists the forgone benefits from the investment opportunity costs incurred by 

scenario and for when: 

a) Total HFH AmeriCorps funds for the program year are invested in U.S. Treasury 

bonds and 

b) Only federal HFH AmeriCorps funds (both program and education award 

funding) are invested in these bonds. 

Table 7 also lists the 2019 real interest rates and the number of years elapsed (with two 

payments a year) that were used as inputs to calculate the forgone accrued interest 

value for each scenario. The analysis used 2019 real interest rates for U.S. Treasury bonds 

because the HFH AmeriCorps program year analyzed began in 2019. 

Table 7. Investment Opportunity Cost by Scenario and Funding Stream 

Funding Stream 

Forgone Accrued Interest by Scenario (2020$) 

Medium term Long term 

Short term (1.45% interest (1.50% interest rate 

(1.30% interest rate rate and 15 years and 30 years 

and 1 year elapsed) elapsed) elapsed) 

Total HFH AmeriCorps Funding $114,712 $2,128,409 $4,975,404 

Federal HFH AmeriCorps 

Funding Only $77,389 $1,435,898 $3,356,579 

38 The forgone earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members are high given that 64 percent of HFH AmeriCorps 

members for the most recent program year had a graduate degree prior to serving. Such advanced levels 

of educational attainment resulted in an extremely low unemployment rate being calculated for this group 

(i.e., 2.6 percent) and greatly augmented their forgone earnings. This is because according to U.S. Bureau 

of Labor Statistics (2020), increased educational attainment results in reduced unemployment and higher 

earnings. Please see a more detailed discussion of this calculation in Appendix B. 
28 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Program Costs 

Table 8 shows the cost of HFH AmeriCorps for the 2019–2020 program year by funding 

source. The table underscores what portion of HFH AmeriCorps funds were provided by 

AmeriCorps compared to other stakeholder groups (i.e., match funding from host sites). 

The table also highlights a further breakdown of these two funding streams, where 

applicable. Overall, the total cost of HFH AmeriCorps for this program year was $8.8 

million. Sixty-seven percent of HFH AmeriCorps program costs (around $5.9 million) was 

funded by the federal government. This amount includes the AmeriCorps State and 

National and AmeriCorps VISTA grants and the expected education awards. The 

remaining 33 percent (or $2.9 million) consisted of match funding (i.e., host site fees) 

from host sites. 

Table 8. Program Cost by Funding Source for HFH AmeriCorps 

Funder 

Funding Provided 

for the Program Year ($) 

Percent 

of Total (%)* 

AmeriCorps $5,933,696 67.5% 

Education Awards $1,620,396 49.0% 

Grants $4,313,300 18.4% 

Host Sites (i.e., Match 

Funding) $2,861,727 32.5% 

Total $8,795,423 100.0% 

ROI Results 

Table 9 shows the benefits, forgone benefits (opportunity costs), and costs that are 

included in each of the three types of ROI calculations. 
29 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 9. Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Costs Included in the ROI Calculations 

ROI Calculation Benefits Forgone Benefits Costs 

Total Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

• All HFH 

AmeriCorps 

member, HFH 

homeowner, HFH 

household 

member, private 

insurance 

company, other 

healthcare payer, 

and government 

benefits derived 

from the program 

• Forgone benefits 

from total 

professional 

opportunity cost 

• Forgone benefits 

from Federal 

investment 

opportunity cost 

• AmeriCorps 

federal funding 

Total Benefits per 

Funder Dollar 

• All HFH 

AmeriCorps 

member, HFH 

homeowner, HFH 

household 

member, private 

insurance 

company, other 

healthcare payer, 

and government 

benefits derived 

from the program 

• Forgone benefits 

from total 

professional 

opportunity cost 

• Forgone benefits 

from total 

investment 

opportunity cost 

• AmeriCorps 

federal funding 

• All match funding 

Federal Government 

Benefits per Federal 

Dollar 

• Additional federal 

government tax 

revenue 

generation and 

reduced 

spending 

attributable to 

the program 

• Forgone benefits 

from Federal 

professional 

opportunity cost 

• Forgone benefit 

from Federal 

investment 

opportunity cost 

• AmeriCorps 

federal funding 

This analysis developed ROI estimates using the three scenarios (short-term, mediumterm, and long-term). As noted above, the ROI calculations compared the net benefits 

of the HFH AmeriCorps program with program costs to calculate the ROI. Table 10 

shows the gross program benefits, forgone benefits, net benefits, and program costs of 

the HFH AmeriCorps program, along with the results of the three ROI calculations. 
30 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 10. Benefits and Costs by ROI Scenario 

Benefits and Costs 

ROI Scenario (2020$) 

Short term Medium term Long term 

Total Gross Program Benefits $19,044,993 $31,533,941 $41,375,393 

HFH Homeowners $11,629,389 $11,629,389 $11,629,389 

HFH Household Members $15,137 $15,137 $15,137 

HFH AmeriCorps Member Benefits $5,737,878 $14,740,741 $21,647,163 

Federal Government Benefits $1,262,762 $3,937,898 $6,207,292 

State/Local Government/other funder Benefits $399,827 $1,210,776 $1,876,414 

Total Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Costs) $13,594,392 $15,608,089 $18,455,084 

Forgone Benefits to Members (Forgone 

Earnings Post-Taxes) $10,109,500 $10,109,500 $10,109,500 

Forgone Tax Revenue from Member Earnings $3,370,180 $3,370,180 $3,370,180 

Forgone Tax Revenue to Federal Government $2,646,338 $2,646,338 $2,646,338 

Forgone Tax Revenue to State/Local 

Government $723,842 $723,842 $723,842 

Forgone Benefits from Funding Provided (All 

Funders) $114,712 $2,128,409 $4,975,404 

Forgone Investment Benefits to Federal 

Government from Funding Provided $77,389 $1,435,898 $3,356,579 

Forgone Investment Benefits to State/Local 

Government and Other Funders from Funding 

Provided 

$37,323 $692,511 $1,618,825 

Total Program Net Benefits (Total Program 

Gross Benefits – Total Forgone Benefits) $5,450,601 $15,925,852 $22,920,309 

Net Benefits to HFH Homeowners (HFH 

homeowners benefits) $11,629,389 $11,629,389 $11,629,389 

Net Benefits HFH Household Members HFH 

household members benefits) $15,137 $15,137 $15,137 

Net Benefits to Members (Member Benefits – 

Forgone Benefits to Members) -$4,371,622 $4,631,241 $11,537,663 

Net Benefits to Federal Government (Federal 

Government Benefits – Forgone Tax Revenue 

to Federal Government – Forgone Investment 

Benefits to Federal Government from Funding 

Provided) 

-$1,460,965 -$144,338 $204,375 
31 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -

- - -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Benefits and Costs 

ROI Scenario (2020$) 

Short term Medium term Long term 

Net Benefits State/Local Government and 

other funders (State/Local Government 

Benefits – Forgone Tax Revenue to State/Local 

Government – Forgone Investment Benefits to 

State/Local Government and Other Funders 

from Funding Provided) 

-$361,338 -$205,577 -$466,253 

Total Program Costs $8,795,423 $8,795,423 $8,795,423 

Federal Government Cost $5,933,696 $5,933,696 $5,933,696 

Non-Federal Government Costs $2,861,727 $2,861,727 $2,861,727 

ROI for Total Benefits per Federal Dollar (Total 

Program Net Benefits / Federal Government 

Costs) 

$0.92 $2.80 $4.14 

ROI for Total Benefits per Funder Dollar (Total 

Program Net Benefits / Total Program Costs) $0.62 $1.81 $2.61 

Federal Government Benefits per Federal 

Dollar (Net Benefits Federal Government / 

Federal Government Costs) 

-$0.25 -$0.02 $0.03 

Table 11 summarizes the ROI results for HFH AmeriCorps across the short-term, mediumterm, and long-term scenarios. Three different ROI results are calculated for each 

scenario. Since two of the calculations include benefits to society (e.g., HFH AmeriCorps 

members, HFH homeowners, HFH household members, etc.), the results are expressed 

as cost–benefit ratios, while maintaining the ROI terminology. Specifically, these ratios 

take the form of the sum of monetized benefits over the sum of applicable program 

costs. The ROIs expressed as cost–benefit ratios in this study can be interpreted as the 

amount of dollars returned for every $1.00 of investment (or program cost).39 See 

Appendix B for the formulas used to calculate each ROI calculation. 

Table 11. ROI Results for HFH AmeriCorps 

ROI Calculation Short term 

ROI Scenario 

Medium term Long term 

Total Benefits per Federal Dollar $0.92 $2.80 $4.14 

Total Benefits per Funder Dollar $0.62 $1.81 $2.61 

Federal Government Benefits per Federal Dollar -$0.25 -$0.02 $0.03 

39 ROIs can be expressed in percentages or as ratios, such as in this study. Although not shown as a ratio in 

the results, the ROIs in this study show the amount of return for every $1 invested. 
32 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

HFH AmeriCorps produces strong returns for the medium- and long-term scenarios when 

benefits to HFH AmeriCorps members, HFH homeowners and household members, 

state/local governments, and other non-federal government stakeholder groups are 

included. This is indicated by the results of the total benefits per federal dollar and the 

total benefits per funder dollar ROI calculations for these two scenarios. 

In the short-term scenario—where benefits for only one year post-program are 

included—the ROI results indicate that costs outweigh the benefits in the first year after 

the program. A negative ROI or one that is below $1 in the first year post-program is 

common in programs where there is an initial one-time investment made and benefits 

accrue in the following years. This is because it often requires several years of benefits to 

recoup the initial investment and generate positive returns. Part of the reason why the 

ROI calculations show losses in the short-term is because the professional opportunity 

cost to HFH AmeriCorps members is high given that over 60 percent of members for the 

most recent program year had a graduate degree pre-service. This augments the 

earnings they forgo due to serving with HFH AmeriCorps for one year. Additionally, as 

noted in the ROI methodology, lifetime benefits that stem from HFH AmeriCorps are not 

realized in the short-term scenario. Lastly, as stated in the ROI Study Limitations section, 

both employment and educational attainment outcomes for HFH homeowners or HFH 

household members were not included in this ROI analysis due to a lack of data; 

including such benefits would potentially increase the ROI results. Given this, and 

considering the forgone benefits in the first year (i.e., professional and investment 

opportunity costs), the ROI calculations for the short-term scenario all result in losses. 

Specifically, every $1 invested by the federal government results in a return of $0.92 

to all stakeholders combined. When considering the program costs of all funders, for 

every $1 invested there is a return of $0.62 to all stakeholders combined. Moreover, 

for every $1 the federal government invests, the federal government loses its original 

$1 investment plus an additional $0.25. 

In the medium-term scenario, all stakeholder groups realized a combined return of 

$2.80 for every $1 invested by the federal government in the HFH AmeriCorps program. 

Moreover, for every $1 invested in the HFH AmeriCorps program from all funders, $1.81 is 

returned to both society and government combined. When considering only benefits to 

the federal government, the federal government loses its original $1 investment plus an 

additional $0.02. 

For the long-term scenario, the ROI for total benefits per federal dollar and total benefits 

per funder dollar are $4.14 and $2.61, respectively. When considering only the federal 

government return for every $1 of federal investment, the federal government realizes 

$0.03 for the long-term scenario. Namely, for every $1 invested, the federal government 

loses $0.97 in potential tax revenue gains and cost savings. 
33 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

The magnitude and direction of the ROI calculations are driven by several factors: 

• High educational attainment of HFH AmeriCorps members prior to service. 

HFHI provided data indicating HFH AmeriCorps members’ pre-service 

educational attainment levels for the 2019–2020 program year. Of the 345 HFH 

AmeriCorps members who served during this program year, 76 percent had a 

college degree prior to national service with 64 percent having a graduate 

degree. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020), gains in 

educational attainment—especially obtaining advanced degrees—translated 

to decreased unemployment and higher earnings. The high levels of 

educational attainment of this cohort of HFH AmeriCorps members significantly 

increased the professional opportunity cost to HFH AmeriCorps members. 

Specifically, this analysis calculated HFH AmeriCorps members’ pre-service 

unemployment rate to be 2.6 percent using demographics data provided by 

HFHI and ASEC data. The analysis also used the same data sources to estimate 

HFH AmeriCorps members’ pre-service pre-tax annual earnings at $54,782 per 

person. In other words, if these HFH AmeriCorps members did not serve with HFH 

AmeriCorps, this analysis estimated that 97.4 percent would have been 

employed, each making an average salary of almost $55,000 annually. With this 

low unemployment rate and high earnings amount, the professional opportunity 

cost to HFH AmeriCorps members—for the one-year service term—is significantly 

more than the total HFH AmeriCorps program cost for one year ($13,479,679 

vs. $8,795,423). Since some variation of the professional opportunity cost is 

considered in each ROI calculation—across the three scenarios—this reduced 

the benefits attributed to the HFH AmeriCorps program. 

• Medium- and long-term accumulation of benefits. In the short-term, the three 

ROI calculations result in losses because only one year of post-program 

employment and earnings gains as well as other program benefits are factored 

in while the entire program cost is considered. Additionally, the short-term 

scenario does not include any lifetime benefits in terms of reduced spending on 

corrections, public assistance, and social insurance or increased tax revenue. As 

these benefits accumulate over time, the analysis shows positive returns. This is 

indicated by the ROI results in the medium- and long-term scenarios (15 and 

30 years post-program, respectively) when total benefits are considered. 

• The employment outcomes of HFH AmeriCorps members. According to Friedman 

et al. (2016), the percentage of AmeriCorps members unemployed was 

5 percentage points lower six months after serving in AmeriCorps versus 

six months before. This gain in employment results in increased earnings and 

tax revenue. 

• The educational attainment outcomes of HFH AmeriCorps members. AmeriCorps 

State and National members and some AmeriCorps VISTA members receive an 

education award after serving in an AmeriCorps program; the award is used by 

a portion of members to help pay for post-secondary degrees post-service. The 

additional educational attainment resulting from the use of the education 

award generated additional lifetime earnings for HFH AmeriCorps members and 

additional lifetime tax revenue and savings for government. 
34 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Government funding serves as a catalyst for private funding of evidence-based social 

services programs. For the ROI calculations of 1) total benefits per federal dollar and 

2) total benefits per funder dollar, AmeriCorps’s requirement of match funding also 

contributed to the magnitude of outcomes. Federal government funding of HFH 

AmeriCorps serves as a catalyst for other funding, specifically that received by HFH host 

sites. This additional funding—amounting to $2.9 million for HFH AmeriCorps for the most 

recent program year—allowed the HFH AmeriCorps program to serve more families and 

communities than otherwise would have been served under the federal funding alone. 

Though it may not impact the ROI, because it is a per unit metric, match funding leads 

to greater investment in HFH AmeriCorps and thus to a greater impact as more 

individuals and families are served. 

Recommendations for Further Research 

Future ROI studies for national and community service programs, such as HFH 

AmeriCorps, can be strengthened in several ways. 

Recommendation 1: Determine the persistence of short- and long-term impacts for 

program participants and AmeriCorps members. The persistence of impacts, such as 

earnings or employment, is often not measured in evaluations because they require 

long-term tracking. Although a scenario-based approach that accounts for variations 

in the persistence of impacts can be used, as was completed in this ROI analysis, 

rigorous research on the long-term impact of programming will enable AmeriCorps to 

determine a single value for ROI calculations and avoid relying on the scenario-based 

approach. For example, Friedman et al. (2016) reported the employment status of 

AmeriCorps member alumni six months before, six months after, and during the summer 

of 2016. The authors indicated that data for the latter time-point was collected 

anywhere from three to 11 years after service completion depending on the 

AmeriCorps member alumni cohort (i.e., 2005, 2010, or 2013). Thus, instead of collecting 

outcome measures at a time that varied by AmeriCorps member or program 

participant, studies should track outcomes of interest at the same intervals, multiple 

times after program or service completion, to provide greater insight into the duration 

and consistency of benefits. 

Recommendation 2: Document outcomes using third-party data Sources. Using thirdparty data, along with or in place of self-reported data, can also improve the accuracy 

of program outcome measurements. While self-reported data are easier to obtain— 

especially via the use of survey instruments—it has several disadvantages. Some 

answers may be exaggerated, respondents may not answer honestly, and response 

biases could affect results. AmeriCorps programs should—where possible—leverage 

data from third-party sources either to provide data for their program evaluation or to 

corroborate findings from self-reported data. For example, if employment and earnings 

outcomes are of interest, unemployment insurance (UI) data—which are submitted by 

employers—could be used to verify members’ wages or employment status postservice. Additionally, if degree completion data are of interest, such as in the case of 

this ROI analysis, data from the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) could be used to 
35 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

verify what portion HFH AmeriCorps members pursued higher education and which 

degrees were completed post-program, with the help of the education award. Where 

degree or employment outcomes data from third-party data sources (like NSC) is 

available, those data may make more precise ROI estimates possible. 

Recommendation 3: Quantify ripple effects. Earnings impacts on program participants 

and AmeriCorps members likely have positive benefits for those individuals’ families and 

surrounding communities. Rigorous research on those potential ripple effects would 

enable AmeriCorps to capture a broader array of benefits of this and other programs, 

which would be expected to result in an increased ROI. Specifically, the longitudinal 

impacts on program participants could be collected alongside the ripple effects their 

outcomes have on their families and communities to determine how long these indirect 

impacts are sustained after program participation or completion. For instance, studying 

how HFH AmeriCorps members’ service work in home construction and rehabilitation 

impacts the educational attainment, employment, and overall resilience of those HFH 

homeowners and their family members would result in a more comprehensive ROI. 

Conclusion 

Based upon these findings, investment in the HFH AmeriCorps program results in 

favorable impacts under the long- and medium-term scenarios, particularly when 

society and government benefits are both included. Specifically, impacts are realized 

by the following stakeholder groups in this ROI analysis: HFH AmeriCorps members, HFH 

homeowners, HFH household members, private insurance companies, other healthcare 

payers, and the various levels of government. 

The ROI results indicate that the benefits realized across all stakeholder groups outweigh 

the investment made by all funders (e.g., AmeriCorps and HFH host sites) for the 

medium- and long-term scenarios. Specifically, the combined return to society and 

government per federal dollar is $2.80 under the medium-term scenario and $4.14 

under the long-term scenario. 

When all funding (from the federal government and other funders) is considered, every 

$1 in funding results in a return of $1.81 under the medium-term scenario and $2.61 

under the long-term scenario. 

Lastly, when considering the ROI to the federal government alone, the medium- and 

long-term scenario results are -$0.02 and $0.03, respectively. This indicates that in the 

medium-term scenario, the federal government loses its original $1 investment plus an 

additional $0.02. In the long-term scenario, the federal government loses $0.92 for every 

dollar invested. 

In the short-term scenario—where benefits for only one year post-program are 

included—the ROI results indicate that costs outweigh the benefits in the first year after 

the program. A negative ROI or one that is below $1 in the first year post-program is 

common in programs where there is an initial one-time investment made and benefits 

accrue in the following years. This is because it often requires several years of benefits to 
36 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

recoup the initial investment and generate positive returns, as indicated in the results for 

the first two ROI calculations for the medium- and long-term scenarios. During the 

program, AmeriCorps members gain the experience, skills, and knowledge that result in 

future benefits, such as improved employment and wages, which can be sustained 

throughout their working years. 
37 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Appendix A: Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Costs Included in Return 

on Investment Calculations 

In Table 12, the three columns on the right indicate by an “X” if the Program benefits, forgone benefits (opportunity cost), 

or program cost is included in the numerator or denominator of a return on investment (ROI) calculation. 

Table 12. Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Costs Included in ROI Calculations 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Cost 

Federal 

Government 

Total Benefits Total Benefits Benefits per 

per Federal per Funder Federal 

Dollar Dollar Dollar 

Program Benefits Stakeholder Group Data Sources X indicates inclusion in the ROI numerator 

Cost savings in buying 

a new home HFH homeowner 

• HFHI 

• National Association of 

REALTORS (2020) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

X X — 

Cost savings in home 

rehabilitation work HFH homeowner 

• HFHI 

• National Association of 

REALTORS (2020) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• Esajian (2021) 

• Characteristics of New Housing 

(U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.) 

X X — 

Out-of-pocket (OOP) 

medical cost savings 

due to improved 

respiratory health 

HFH household 

member 

• HFHI 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• Mattessich et al. (2015) 

• Consumer Price Index (CPI; 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

n.d.) 

• Medical Expenditure Panel 

Survey (MEPS; AHRQ, 2021) 

X X — 
38 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Federal 

Government 

Total Benefits Total Benefits Benefits per 

per Federal per Funder Federal 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Cost Dollar Dollar Dollar 

Private insurance cost Private insurance • HFHI 

savings due to companies • Viola et al. (2018) 

improved respiratory 

health of HFH 

• Mattessich et al. (2015) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor X X — 

household members Statistics, n.d.) 

• MEPS (AHRQ, 2021) 

Medicare and Federal • HFHI 

Medicaid cost savings government • Viola et al. (2018) 

due to improved • Mattessich et al. (2015) 

respiratory health of • CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor X X X 

HFH household Statistics, n.d.) 

members • MEPS (AHRQ, 2021) 

Cost savings to other Other healthcare • HFHI 

healthcare payers due payers • Viola et al. (2018) 

to improved respiratory • Mattessich et al. (2015) 

health of HFH • CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor X X — 

household members Statistics, n.d.) 

• MEPS (AHRQ, 2021) 

Additional earnings of HFH AmeriCorps • HFHI 

HFH AmeriCorps member • Friedman et al. (2016) 

members from • Current Population Survey 

reduced Annual Social and Economic 

unemployment Supplement (ASEC; U.S. Census 

Bureau, n.d.) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2019) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

X X — 
39 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Cost 

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar 

Total Benefits 

per Funder 

Dollar 

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal 

Dollar 

Increased income tax 

revenue due to 

additional earnings of 

HFH AmeriCorps 

members 

Federal and state 

governments 

• HFHI 

• Friedman et al. (2016) 

• ASEC (U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2019) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• Tax rate data on 

Taxfoundation.org (2019 & 

2020) 

X X X 

Increased Social 

Security and Medicare 

tax revenue due to 

additional earnings of 

HFH AmeriCorps 

members 

Federal 

government 

• HFHI 

• Friedman et al. (2016) 

• ASEC (U.S. Census Bureau, 

n.d.) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2019) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• Social Security Administration 

(SSA) (2020) 

X X X 
40 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Cost 

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar 

Total Benefits 

per Funder 

Dollar 

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal 

Dollar 

Increased sales tax State and local • HFHI 

revenue due to governments • Friedman et al. (2016) 

additional earnings of • ASEC (U.S. Census Bureau, 

HFH AmeriCorps n.d.) 

members • CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2019) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• Tax rate data on 

Taxfoundation.org (2020) 

• Consumer Expenditure Survey 

(CEX) (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, 2021) 

X X — 

Increased lifetime 

earnings due to 

increased educational 

attainment of HFH 

AmeriCorps members 

as a result of education 

awards 

HFH AmeriCorps 

member 

• HFHI 

• AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

• NCES (2019) 

• NCES (2020) 

• Trostel (2015) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

X X — 

Increased lifetime tax 

revenue due to 

increased educational 

attainment of HFH 

AmeriCorps members 

as a result of education 

awards 

Federal, state, and 

local governments 

• HFHI 

• AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

• NCES (2019) 

• NCES (2020) 

• Trostel (2015) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

X X X 
41 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Federal 

Government 

Total Benefits Total Benefits Benefits per 

per Federal per Funder Federal 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Cost Dollar Dollar Dollar 

Reduced spending on 

lifetime public 

assistance, corrections, 

and social insurance 

due to increased 

educational 

attainment of HFH 

AmeriCorps members 

as a result of education 

awards 

Federal, state, and 

local governments 

• HFHI 

• AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

• NCES (2019) 

• NCES (2020) 

• Trostel (2015) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

X X X 

Increased tax revenue Federal, state, and • HFHI 

from living allowances, local governments • Friedman et al. (2016) 

stipends, and • AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

education awards • Tax rate data on 

Taxfoundation.org (2019 & 

2020) 

• SSA (2020) 

X X X 

Post-tax living HFH AmeriCorps • HFHI 

allowances, stipends, member • Friedman et al. (2016) 

and education awards • AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

• Tax rate data on 

Taxfoundation.org (2019 & 

2020) 

• SSA (2020) 

X X — 

Reduced federal rental Federal • HFHI 

assistance use by HFH government • Viola et al. (2018) 

homeowners due to • Mattessich et al. (2015) 

HFH homeownership • Center on Budget and Policy 

Priorities (CBPP) (2019) 

• CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, n.d.) 

X X X 
42 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Federal 

Government 

Total Benefits Total Benefits Benefits per 

per Federal per Funder Federal 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Cost Dollar Dollar Dollar 

Forgone Benefits 

(Opportunity Costs)* Stakeholder Group Data Sources X indicates inclusion in the ROI denominator 

Professional HFH AmeriCorps • HFHI 

opportunity cost of member • ASEC (U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.) 

forgone market wages • CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

for HFH AmeriCorps Statistics, n.d.) X X — 

members • U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2019) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

Professional Federal • HFHI 

opportunity cost of government • ASEC (U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.) 

federal income, Social • CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Security, and Medicare Statistics, n.d.) 

taxes on forgone • U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

market wages for HFH (2019) X X X 

AmeriCorps members • Viola et al. (2018) 

• Tax rate data on 

Taxfoundation.org (2019) 

• Social Security Administration 

(2020) 

Professional State and local • HFHI 

opportunity cost of governments • ASEC (U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.) 

state income and sales • CPI (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

taxes on forgone Statistics, n.d.) 

market wages for HFH • U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

AmeriCorps members (2019) 

• Viola et al. (2018) 

• CEX (U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, 2021) 

• Tax rate data on 

Taxfoundation.org (2020) 

X X — 
43 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Program Benefits, Forgone Benefits, and Program Cost 

Federal 

Government 

Total Benefits Total Benefits Benefits per 

per Federal per Funder Federal 

Dollar Dollar Dollar 

Investment opportunity 

cost of investing total 

HFHI AmeriCorps 

funding in U.S. Treasury 

bonds 

All funders • HFHI 

• Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) (2020) 

• U.S. Department of Treasury 

X X — 

Investment opportunity 

cost of investing only 

federal HFH 

AmeriCorps funding in 

U.S. Treasury bonds 

Federal 

government 

• HFHI 

• OMB (2020) 

• U.S. Department of Treasury — — X 

Program Cost Payer Data Sources X indicates inclusion in the ROI denominator 

AmeriCorps grant costs 

(excluding education 

awards provided to 

HFH AmeriCorps 

members) 

Federal 

government 

(AmeriCorps) 

• HFHI 

X X X 

HFH AmeriCorps 

member expected 

education awards 

Federal 

government 

(AmeriCorps) 

• AmeriCorps (n.d.) 

• HFHI 

• Friedman et al. (2016) 

X X X 

Fees from HFH host sites HFH host sites • HFHI — X — 

*Opportunity costs are amounts that are reduced from total benefits realized across ROI calculations. Thus, they represent a negative value in the 

numerator. Please see the Calculating ROI section of Appendix B for further details. 
44 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Appendix B: Additional Information on the Methodology 

This appendix provides additional details on the methodology used for this study, as a 

supplement to the methodology section in the main report. It describes the steps used 

to calculate the return on investment (ROI), the results of interim calculations that 

contribute to the ROI calculations, and assumptions that underlie the analysis. 

Methodology Overview 

Calculating the ROI for HFH AmeriCorps included the following steps: 

• Measuring and monetizing program benefits to various stakeholder groups 

• Estimating forgone benefits (opportunity costs) 

• Assessing program costs 

• Calculating the ROI 

This ROI analysis included only those benefits that could be reasonably monetized given 

the available data, and that likely would not have occurred without HFH AmeriCorps. 

Although HFH AmeriCorps members experience positive benefits from the HFH 

AmeriCorps program in terms of increased employment and earnings (described 

below), available data do not establish how long these specific impacts are sustained 

over time. To address a range of possible durations for those benefits, three scenarios 

were developed for this ROI study: 

• Short-term. This scenario assumes short-term earnings impacts. The assumption is 

that earnings impacts are limited to a single year after program exit. This scenario 

also assumes no lifetime benefits are realized. 

• Medium-term. This scenario assumes a longer duration of earnings impacts. The 

assumption is that earnings impacts last 15 years. A 3 percent discount rate is 

applied each year to represent net present value in 2020 dollars.40 This scenario 

also assumes only half of the net present value of lifetime benefits is realized. 

• Long-term. This scenario assumes sustained earnings impacts throughout HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ working years. The assumption is that earnings impacts 

last 30 years. A 3 percent discount rate is applied each year to represent net 

present value in 2020 dollars. This scenario also assumes the entire net present 

value of lifetime benefits is realized. 

40 The Office of Management and Budget (1992) defines a discount rate as, “The interest rate used in 

calculating the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs” (p. 18). Regarding the 3 percent 

discount rate, see Office of Management and Budget (2003). 
45 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

There are some differences between the three scenarios. One is the length of time that 

increased employment—and earnings associated with that employment—are 

sustained. The other is what portion of lifetime benefits, when applicable, are realized.41 

For each ROI calculation, three estimates using the three scenarios were developed, 

which is shown in greater detail in the Calculating ROI section. 

Measuring Program Benefits 

The first step in calculating the ROI for the HFH AmeriCorps program is to measure and 

monetize the program benefits. As a result of the HFH AmeriCorps program, HFH 

homeowners, HFH household members, HFH AmeriCorps members, private insurance 

companies, other healthcare payers, and various levels of government benefit. These 

benefits were identified through an extensive literature review and data collection 

process. The methods used to measure benefits for each of these stakeholder groups 

are described below. 

Benefits to HFH Homeowners 

Findings from Viola et al. (2018) indicate that over a three-year period, compared to 

HFH affiliate sites that do not host HFH AmeriCorps members, HFH host sites on average: 

• Built 4.99 more HFH homes (i.e., 1.66 more HFH homes annually) 

• Rehabbed 8.24 more homes (i.e., 2.75 more homes annually) 

To monetize these productivity and capacity gains by HFH host sites and calculate the 

resulting benefits realized by HFH homeowners, the analysis first multiplied the number of 

HFH hosts sites in the U.S. during the most recent program year (i.e., 127) by both annual 

findings from Viola et al. (2018). Multiplying the 1.66 additional HFH homes built per HFH 

host site and the 2.75 additional rehabbed homes per HFH host site by the total number 

of HFH host sites represents the number of additional homes built and rehabbed, 

respectively, nationwide during the most recent year. These numbers were 211 and 349, 

respectively. The analysis assumed that each home built and rehabbed had one 

homeowner. Thus, these numbers also represent the number of HFH homeowners who 

purchased a new HFH home or had home rehabilitation work completed, respectively. 

41 These three scenarios consider varying durations of how long increased employment and earnings 

benefits last for HFH AmeriCorps members. They also consider varying durations for lifetime benefits that 

stem from the HFH AmeriCorps program. For example, lifetime benefits in terms of decreased public 

assistance, social insurance, and corrections costs result from HFH AmeriCorps members’ higher 

educational attainment post-service. The analysis estimates lifetime benefits differently in the three 

scenarios. Specifically, the net present value of the entire lifetime benefit is realized for the long-term 

scenario, half of the net present value of the lifetime benefit is realized for the medium-term scenario, and 

no lifetime benefit amount is realized for the short-term scenario. 
46 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Average Square 

Footage of an HFH 

Home (ft2) 

Selling Price per 

Square Foot (2020$) 

Estimated Total 

Selling Price per 

Home (2020$) 

Similarly-sized Home 

on U.S. Market 1,375 $143.42 $197,204 

HFH Home 1,375 $110.00 $151,250 

Difference $33.42 $45,954 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Cost Savings Due to Additional Homes Built 

HFH homes are purchased at below market-rate costs, resulting in substantial savings to 

HFH homeowners. To monetize this benefit, the analysis subtracted the average cost of 

building an HFH home—which represents the average selling price of an HFH home— 

from the average selling price of a similar-sized home in the U.S. Based on data 

provided by HFHI, the average size of an HFH home for the 2019–2020 program year 

was 1,375 square feet and the average cost per square foot of an HFH home was $110. 

According to the National Association of REALTORS (2020), the median selling price per 

square foot of a home in the U.S. was about $143. As shown in Table 13, Using these 

costs per square foot, a HFH home of average size cost roughly $151,250 while a home 

of the same size in the U.S. costs roughly $197,204.42 The difference between these two 

estimates represents the savings to HFH homeowners per HFH home purchased. These 

savings are then multiplied by the number of additional HFH homes built nationally due 

to the efforts of HFH AmeriCorps members. Specifically, the $46,000 selling price 

differential was applied to the 211 additional HFH homes built nationwide for the most 

recent program year. Given this, the total savings to HFH homeowners in terms of 

purchasing a home equaled approximately $9.7 million. 

Table 13. Selling Price Differences Between an HFH Home and a Home on the 

U.S. Market 

Sources: HFHI and National Association of REALTORS (2020) 

Cost Savings Due to Additional Homes Rehabbed 

HFH homeowners also realize cost savings when HFH AmeriCorps members complete 

rehabilitation work on their existing homes. To calculate these benefits, this analysis first 

subtracted the average cost of rehabilitation work for an HFH home from that of a 

similarly-sized home in the U.S. Findings from Esajian (2021) indicate that the average 

cost of rehabilitation work for a home in the U.S. was $39,567. Using the median square 

footage of a U.S. home in 2019 from U.S. Census Bureau (n.d.) (i.e., 2,301 ft2), the analysis 

42 The median selling price per square foot for U.S. homes may differ slightly from that for HFH AmeriCorps 

homes, given the geographic distribution that HFH AmeriCorps operates in. For example, as shown in Table 

1, the greatest proportion of HFH AmeriCorps homes (i.e., 44 percent) were built in the West region (among 

the four U.S. census regions) during the most recent program year. The West region has higher median 

housing costs than the U.S. in general. Thus, as done in this ROI analysis, using the U.S. median may have led 

to a lower estimated benefit to HFH homeowners—in the form of cost savings—for additional HFH homes 

built. Namely, using the U.S. median would result in an ROI estimate slightly lower than the actual. 
47 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Row Component Value* Source 

A 

Percent Difference Between the Selling Price 

per Square Foot of an HFH Home and a U.S. 

Home (%) 

23.3% HFHI & National 

Association of REALTORS 

(2020) 

B Rehabbing Price per Square Foot for a U.S. 

Home (2020$) 

$17.20 Esajan (2021) & U.S. 

Census Bureau. (n.d.) 

C 

Estimated Difference Between the 

Rehabbing Price per Square Foot of an HFH 

Home and a U.S. Home (2020$) 

$4.01 (A x B) 

D Rehabbing Price per Square Foot for an HFH 

Home (2020$) 

$13.19 (B - C) 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

estimated the average cost of rehabilitation work per square foot of a home in the U.S. 

was $17.20. The analysis then calculated the average cost of rehabilitation work for an 

HFH home per square foot since such data was not provided by HFHI. This analysis 

assumed that the percent savings realized in home selling prices per square foot would 

also be realized for home rehabilitation prices per square foot. This is because both 

types of home construction work are carried out by HFH AmeriCorps members, are 

valued at their cost, and utilize HFH homeowners’ sweat equity. Specifically, the 

percent difference between the selling price per square foot of an HFH home (i.e., 

$110) and that of a home on the U.S. market (i.e., 143) was -23.3 percent. This indicated 

that the selling price per square foot of an HFH home was 23.3 percent less than that for 

a U.S. home. Thus, this analysis assumed that the rehabilitation price per square foot of 

an HFH home was also 23.3 percent less than that for a U.S. home. As stated previously, 

the average market price for rehabilitation work per square foot was $17.20. Applying 

the 23.3 percent difference to this metric estimated the HFH home rehabilitation cost 

per square foot at $13.19. This result and calculation are shown in Table 14. 

Table 14. Average Cost of Rehabbing an HFH Home per Square Foot 

The difference between these per square foot rehab work estimates (i.e., $4.01) 

represents savings to HFH homeowners. The analysis then multiplied this home 

rehabilitation work cost differential by the average square footage of an HFH home 

and then by the number of additional homes rehabbed annually in the U.S. calculated 

previously (i.e., 349). This estimated the total savings realized by HFH homeowners 

related to home rehabilitation work performed by HFH AmeriCorps members. These 

total savings equaled $1,921,924, which is shown in Table 15. 
48 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 15. Cost Savings to HFH Homeowners due to Additional Homes Rehabbed 

Rehabilitation Work 

Cost Differential 

Between an HFH 

Home and a Home in 

the U.S. per Square 

Foot (2020$) 

Average Square 

Footage of an HFH 

Home (ft2) 

Additional Homes 

Rehabbed 

Nationwide due to 

HFH AmeriCorps 

Total Savings from 

Rehabilitation Work* 

(2020$) 

$4.01 1,375 349 $1,921,924 

Sources: HFHI, National Association of REALTORS (2020), Esajian (2021), Viola et al. (2018), U.S. Census 

Bureau (n.d.), 

*Numbers may not total due to rounding. 

Benefits to HFH Household Members 

Results from Mattessich et al. (2015) indicated that 36 percent of surveyed HFH 

homeowners in Minnesota reported that they or someone in their household had a 

respiratory or lung illness prior to moving into their HFH home. Of that subset, 35 percent 

reported that their or their household member’s condition was “much better,” 

22 percent reported it was “somewhat better,” 29 percent reported “there was no 

change,” 10 percent reported it was “somewhat worse,” and 4 percent reported it was 

“much worse” since moving into their HFH home. To monetize this net improved 

respiratory health by HFH household members, the analysis first multiplied the number of 

additional HFH homes built nationwide due to HFH AmeriCorps (i.e., 211)43 by 

36 percent. This represents the national population of HFH household members who 

had a respiratory illness before moving into their HFH home. The analysis then multiplied 

this product by 35, 22, 10, and 4 percent, separately. This represents the national 

population of HFH household members who reported their respiratory condition got 

“much better” (i.e., 27), “somewhat better” (i.e., 17), “somewhat worse” (i.e., 8), and 

“much worse” (i.e., 3) since moving into their HFH home, respectively. 

To monetize the medical costs savings derived from this net improvement in respiratory 

health, the analysis used data provided by the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 

(MESP) (AHRQ, 2021). These data indicated that the average annual cost for someone 

that has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, or other respiratory 

conditions in the U.S. in 2018 was $2,136 ($2,179 in 2020 dollars). To determine the 

amount of annual savings for those that reported improvements or deteriorations in 

their respiratory condition since moving, the analysis used statistical methods to 

43 Reference the Benefits to HFH Homeowners section for details regarding the methodology to calculating 

this metric. Additionally, Mattessich et al. (2015) only included survey responses from HFH homeowners, not 

individuals who received rehabilitation work on their existing home due to HFH AmeriCorps. Thus, benefits 

with regards to improved respiratory health were only scaled up to the number of additional HFH homes 

built due to national service for the most recent program year. However, the HFH homeowners surveyed in 

Mattessich et al. (2015) reported that either they or someone in their household had a respiratory illness 

prior to moving into their HFH home. Because there could have been multiple people per HFH home with a 

respiratory condition prior to moving, counting by HFH home could potentially understate the associated 

medical cost savings realized across the different stakeholder groups. 
49 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

estimate the percent cost reduction or increase for each population. This analysis was 

based on the referenced survey question from Mattessich et al. (2015), which had five 

response options: “much better,” “somewhat better,” “there was no change,” 

“somewhat worse,” and “much worse.” These five response options were not 

accompanied by an interpretational rubric; thus, each response option was relative to 

a particular respondent’s initial standing regarding their or their household member’s 

respiratory health. To estimate the percent cost reduction or increase associated with 

each of these response options, the analysis first used the response distribution and 

sample size for this survey question from Mattessich et al. (2015) to populate a data file 

of individual records. Using a standard deviation of 1, the analysis calculated Cohen’s 

d for each of the five survey response options based on the data populated in the data 

file. Interpreting the Cohen’s d value as a z-score and assuming a normal distribution, 

the analysis estimated the cumulative percentile for each survey response option. Then 

to provide a percentile difference above and below the “there was no change” survey 

response option (as this response option indicates there was no improvement or 

deterioration in HFH household members’ respiratory health after moving into an HFH 

home), the analysis reduced the cumulative percentages by 50 percentage points. The 

result is shown in the fourth column of Table 16. These findings across all response 

options—as well as their interpretation—for this question are summarized in Table 16.44 

Table 16. Results of Statistical Methods Used to Estimate the Percent Cost Reduction or 

Increase by Response Option 

Response Option (Distribution 

Among Survey Respondents) Cohen’s d 

Cumulative 

Percent (%) 

Change 

in Cost (%) 

Interpretation 

of Change 

in Cost 

“Much Better” (35%) 2 98% 48% 48% cost 

reduction 

“Somewhat Better” (22%) 1 84% 34% 34% cost 

reduction 

“There Was No Change” (29%) 0 50% 0% No change 

“Somewhat Worse” (10%) -1 16% -34% 34% cost 

increase 

“Much Worse” (4%) -2 2% -48% 48% cost 

increase 

Sources: Mattessich et al. (2015) and ICF 

44 This statistical method used was informed by procedures leveraged by the What Works Clearinghouse’s 

“improvement index.” Please reference page 18 of this document for additional information: 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/WWC-Procedures-Handbook-v4-1-508.pdf. 
50 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

— — — — —

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Results from this statistical analysis translated into a 48 percent cost reduction for those 

that reported their respiratory health had gotten “much better” and a 34 percent cost 

reduction for those that reported their respiratory condition had gotten “somewhat 

better” after moving into their HFH home. Moreover, the results translated into a 

34 percent cost increase for those that reported their respiratory health had gotten 

“somewhat worse” and a 48 percent cost increase for those that reported their 

respiratory condition had gotten “much worse” since moving into an HFH home. The 

analysis multiplied these percentages by the $2,179 annual cost and then by the HFH 

household member population whose respiratory condition got “much better,” 

“somewhat better,” “somewhat worse,” and “much worse,” separately. When 

summed, this estimated the aggregate medical cost savings related to the net 

improved respiratory health of these HFH household members since moving into an HFH 

home. These values and results are presented in Table 17. It is important to note that this 

analysis accounted for any random instances of HFH household members reporting 

improved or deteriorating respiratory health that were not attributable to moving into 

an HFH home by capturing both medical cost savings and additional medical costs 

incurred due to improved and worsening respiratory health, respectively. 

Table 17. Medical Cost Savings Realized and Additional Medical Costs Incurred by 

Response Option Due to Change in Respiratory Health among HFH Household Members 

Response 

Option 

Additional 

Homes Built 

Nationwide 

due to HFH 

AmeriCorps 

Percent 

of HFH 

Household 

Members 

Who Had a 

Respiratory 

Illness Pre 

Moving 

into an 

HFH Home 

(%) 

Change in 

Respiratory 

Health 

Reported 

by HFH 

Household 

Members 

(%) 

Change in 

Cost 

Associated 

with 

Change in 

Respiratory 

Health 

(%) 

Average 

Annual 

Cost Paid 

per Person 

with a 

Respiratory 

Illness 

(2020$) 

Medical 

Cost 

Savings 

Realized 

or 

Medical 

Costs 

Incurred 

(2020$)* 

“Much 

Better” 211 36% 35% 48% $2,179 $27,676 

“Somewhat 

Better” 211 36% 22% 34% $2,179 $12,442 

“Somewhat 

Worse” 211 36% 10% -34% $2,179 -$5,656 

“Much 

Worse” 211 36% 4% -48% $2,179 -$3,163 

Total $31,300 

Sources: HFHI, Viola et al. (2018), Mattessich et al. (2015), ICF, CPI, and AHRQ (2021) 

*Numbers may not total due to rounding. 
51 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Of note, HFH household members only realize the medical cost savings that are paid 

out-of-pocket (OOP). Along with providing the average annual cost for someone that 

has COPD, asthma, or other respiratory conditions in the U.S., MESP data (AHRQ, 2021) 

also provided this expenditure amount by payment source. Using this data, the analysis 

estimated that 8 percent of the total medical cost savings as a result of HFH household 

members’ net improved respiratory health was realized by HFH household members 

themselves. This resulted in total savings of $2,506. These savings are considered a 

one-time benefit.45 

Benefits to Private Insurance Companies and Other Healthcare Payers 

Private insurance companies and other healthcare payers46 also realize savings in 

medical costs due to the net improved respiratory health reported by HFH household 

members after moving into an HFH home. Considering the methodology described in 

the previous section, this analysis estimated the portion of the total medical cost savings 

realized by private insurance companies and other healthcare payers, separately. 

Using the MESP data from AHRQ (2021), the analysis calculated the medical cost 

savings realized by each of these stakeholders. These values are provided in Table 18. 

45 All medical cost savings benefits realized across stakeholder groups are only realized for one year. 

Namely, net improved respiratory health outcomes in this analysis are not spread out or discounted for 

several years after receipt of program services (e.g., moving into an HFH home). This is because HFH 

homeowners surveyed in Mattessich et al. (2015) reported to being living in their HFH home anywhere from 

less than a year to more than 16 years at the time of the survey. Specifically, 55 and 45 percent reported 

living in their HFH home for more than five years and for less than five years, respectively. Thus, health 

outcomes data was collected at a time that varied by survey respondent. Given this and a lack of more 

detailed data, this ROI analysis made a conservative assumption that medical cost savings would only be 

one-time benefits. 

Additionally, for all stakeholder groups that experience medical cost savings due to HFH household 

members’ net improved respiratory health after moving into an HFH home, the impact on healthcare 

providers is not captured in this ROI analysis. This analysis assumes that these healthcare providers are 

operating at 100 percent capacity. Thus, when they lose patients due to the favorable impacts of HFH 

AmeriCorps, it is assumed they will serve another individual needing care and they are not losing revenue. 

46 Other healthcare payers include those such as the Department of Veterans Affairs (excluding TRICARE), 

Indian Health Services, community and neighborhood clinics, worker’s compensation, homeowner’s or 

liability insurance, and others (AHRQ, 2021) 
52 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 18. Medical Cost Savings Realized and Additional Medical Costs Incurred by 

Private Insurance Companies and Other Healthcare Payers by Response Option Due to 

Change in Respiratory Health among HFH Household Members 

Stakeholder Group 

Total Medical 

Cost Savings 

Realized Across 

Stakeholder 

Groups (2020$) 

Portion of 

Savings Realized 

by Stakeholder 

Group Based on 

MESP Data (%) 

Medical Cost 

Savings Realized 

or Medical Costs 

Incurred 2020$)* 

Private Insurance Companies $31,300 34% $10,682 

“Much Better” — 30% $9,446 

“Somewhat Better” — 14% $4,246 

“Somewhat Worse” — -6% -$1,930 

“Much Worse” — -3% -$1,079 

Other Healthcare Payers $31,300 6% $1,949 

“Much Better” — 6% $1,723 

“Somewhat Better” — 2% $775 

“Somewhat Worse” — -1% -$352 

“Much Worse” — -1% -$197 

Sources: HFHI, Viola et al. (2018), Mattessich et al. (2015), ICF, CPI, and AHRQ (2021) 

*Numbers may not total due to rounding. 

It is important to note that the federal government also realizes benefits from the net 

improved respiratory health reported by HFH household members. These benefits are 

described in the Benefits to Government section later in this appendix. 

Benefits to HFH AmeriCorps Members 

The HFH AmeriCorps members who provide services as part of HFH AmeriCorps 

experience benefits due to their national service. This analysis estimated the following 

benefits: 

• Living allowance, stipend, and education award 

• Increased earnings due to reduced unemployment 

• Increased lifetime earnings due to increased post-secondary education derived 

from the use of education awards 

Living Allowance, Stipend, and Education Award 

Living allowances are given to AmeriCorps members during their one-year service term 

to pay for various living expenses, such as housing and groceries, and it sometimes 

includes members’ worker’s compensation and health insurance when applicable. 

With regard to stipends, only AmeriCorps VISTA members can choose between this 

option or an education award as an end-of-service benefit. However, AmeriCorps State 

and National members are not offered the stipend as a benefit for their service and 

only receive an education award. The cash stipend can be used to purchase any 
53 

 

 

 

 

 

Benefit Post -Tax Value (2020$)* Notes 

Living Allowance $4,559,135 Post-tax living allowances members 

receive during service 

Stipend $12,364 Post-tax cash stipend AmeriCorps VISTA 

members elect to receive post-service 

Education Award Used 

to Pay Off Student Loans $564,557 Post-tax education award amount used to pay off outstanding student loans 

Total $5,136,055 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

goods or services post-service while the education award is a voucher that can only be 

used to pay for future educational training and related expenses or to repay existing 

eligible federal student loans.47 

Regarding education awards, according to Friedman et al. (2016), a significant portion 

(i.e., 46 percent) of AmeriCorps State and National member alumni who receive an 

education award use them to pay for additional post-secondary education at 

colleges, graduate schools, and technical/vocational schools, while others (i.e., 

33 percent) use them to pay off outstanding student loans. The remaining 21 percent 

do not use their education awards. For AmeriCorps VISTA member alumni who opt to 

receive an education award, Friedman et al. (2016) indicated these percentages were 

31, 37, and 32 percent, respectively. Based on data provided by HFHI directly, 7 out of 

41 HFH AmeriCorps VISTA members selected to receive a stipend versus an education 

award for the most recent program year. This is slightly higher than the findings from 

Friedman et al. (2016) in which 14 percent of AmeriCorps VISTA member alumni 

reported choosing a stipend instead of an education award post-service. 

Living allowances, stipends, and education awards (considered one-time benefits that 

are not discounted or spread over time) are taxable and represent member benefits. 

However, only the portion of education awards used by members to pay off existing 

student loans is considered a direct member benefit. The portion that is utilized to 

pursue further post-secondary education is only used in calculating members’ 

additional lifetime earnings due to the increased educational attainment they 

experience post-service from using the education award. This is done to avoid double 

counting. This analysis included the post-tax values of the living allowance, stipend, and 

the portion of the education award used to repay student loans as HFH AmeriCorps 

member benefits, which are listed in Table 19. The portion of the education award used 

to fund additional post-secondary education is discussed in the following section. 

Table 19. HFH AmeriCorps Member Benefits from the Living Allowance, Stipend, 

and Education Award 

Sources: HFHI and Friedman et al. (2016) 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

47 Please see this site for additional information: https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/vista/benefits. 
54 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Increased Earnings due to Reduced Unemployment 

According to Friedman et al. (2016), the percentage of AmeriCorps members 

unemployed was 5 percentage points lower six months after serving in AmeriCorps 

compared to six months before. The study did not provide actual employment rates for 

AmeriCorps members pre- and post-service, but instead provided the unemployment 

rates shown in Figure 2 (17 percent vs. 12 percent) in which the change between 

represents a 5-percentage point decrease. 

Figure 2. Unemployment Status Results from Friedman et al. (2016)48 

0 20 40 60 80 100 

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni 

Currently 

Six Months After AmeriCorps 

Six Months Before AmeriCorps 

Seeking work, providing caregiving, 

or occupied outside of the workforce 

17 

12 

12 

Source: Friedman et al. (2016) 

A direct member benefit from being employed post-service is additional income 

earned. To monetize this 5-percentage point decrease in unemployment, ICF 

requested that HFHI provide the gender, age, pre-service educational attainment, and 

race/ethnicity distribution of AmeriCorps members who served with HFH AmeriCorps for 

the most recent program year. Based on those demographics, the analysis first used 

annual average earnings data from the Current Population Survey’s Annual Social and 

Economic (ASEC) Supplement for March 2019 to estimate HFH AmeriCorps members’ 

earnings. Specifically, the analysis used ASEC data to calculate the per-person pre-tax 

average annual earnings for 18 to 34-year-olds weighted by the demographic 

distribution of HFH AmeriCorps members that served during the 2019–2020 program 

year. This value expressed in 2020 dollars was $54,782 as shown in Table 21. 

Additionally, survey data representative of HFH AmeriCorps member alumni from Viola 

et al. (2018) indicated which industries respondents were employed in after serving with 

HFH AmeriCorps. This distribution is shown in Table 20. To incorporate these findings into 

HFH AmeriCorps members’ additional earnings from reduced unemployment, each 

industry listed in Table 20 was first matched to an existing North American Industry 

Classification System (NACIS) code.49 The analysis then used Occupational Employment 

48 “Currently” refers to the summer 2016 survey. Respondents were from the 2005, 2010, and 2013 

AmeriCorps cohorts, so respondents varied in how much time had elapsed since their AmeriCorps service. 

49 For more information about NAICS codes, please reference see: https://www.census.gov/naics/. 
55 

 

 

 

-

— — —

Industry Percent (%) 

NAICS Code 

Equivalent50 

25th 

Percentile 

Earnings 

(2019$) 

25th 

Percentile 

Earnings 

(2020$) 

Weighted 

Per Person 

Earnings 

Based on 

Industry 

Distribution 

(2020$) 

Local habitat 

organization/HFHI 27% 624200 $28,140 $28,421 $7,674 

Construction/Home 

remodeling 

19% 236100 $34,240 $34,582 $6,571 

Nonprofit 18% 813000 $26,600 $26,866 $4,836 

Affordable 

housing/homeless 

nonprofit 

14% 624000 $23,630 $23,866 $3,341 

Education 8% 611000 $33,160 $33,492 $2,679 

Private Sector 6% 541000 $44,310 $44,753 $2,685 

Government/Public 

Sector 

5% 999000 $38,230 $38,612 $1,931 

Healthcare 4% 622000 & 

621000 $34,215** $34,557 $1,382 

Total 100% $31,099 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

and Wage Statistics data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019) to identify the 

25th percentile annual earnings for each of these industries. The 25th percentile was 

used because it more closely represented income earned in entry-level employment. 

To estimate HFH AmeriCorps members’ annual earnings using these industry-specific 

findings, the 25th percentile annual earnings amounts were expressed in 2020 dollars 

and then weighted based on the survey findings from Viola et. al (2018). These results 

are shown in the sixth column of Table 20. The values in this sixth column were then 

summed to represent HFH AmeriCorps members’ per-person earnings based on HFH 

AmeriCorps member alumni’s post-service employment selection. 

Table 20. Earnings for HFH AmeriCorps Members Based on Distribution of Industries HFH 

AmeriCorps Alumni Became Employed in Post-Service* 

Sources: Viola et al. (2018), U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019), and CPI 

*Sample size was 181 HFH AmeriCorps member alumni. Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

**The 25th percentile earnings for this industry is the average of those or the following industry sectors: 

622000 and 621000. 

50 The following lists which industry sector each NAICS code used represents: 624200 (Community Food and 

Housing, and Emergency and Other Relief Services), 236100 (Residential Building Construction), 813000 

(Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar Organizations), 624000 (Community Housing 

Services), 611000 (Educational Services), 541000 (Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services), 999000 

(Federal, State, and Local Government, excluding state and local schools and hospitals and the U.S. Postal 

Service), 622000 (Hospitals), and 621000 (Ambulatory Healthcare Services). 
56 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average Per-Person Pre-tax Annual Earnings of Employed 18 to 34-year-olds 

weighted by HFH AmeriCorps Member Demographics (e.g., gender, 

race/ethnicity, and pre-service education level) and Industry Selection Post-Service 

$42,941 

Reduction in AmeriCorps Members’ Unemployment 5% 

HFH AmeriCorps Members 345 

Cumulative Additional Pre-Tax Earnings $740,727 

Cumulative Additional Post-Tax Earnings $601,822 

Metric 

Value 

(2020$)* 

 

- -

—

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

The analysis used the demographically- and industry-weighted earnings amounts listed 

in Table 21 to determine HFH AmeriCorps members’ total expected per-person 

earnings. Namely, each of these values were weighted equally as shown in Table 21 to 

estimate the per-person earnings that were representative of HFH AmeriCorps 

members’ demographic composition and labor profile. 

Table 21. Total Expected Per-Person Earnings for HFH AmeriCorps Members 

Category 

Per Person 

Annual Earnings 

(2020$) Weight (%) 

Weighted Per 

Person Annual 

Earnings (2020$) 

Based on Member Demographics $54,782 50% $27,391 

Based on Member Industry Selection $31,099 50% $15,550 

Total 100% $42,941 

Sources: HFHI, Viola et al. (2018), ASEC (2019), CPI, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019) 

The analysis then multiplied the 5 percentage point decrease in unemployment from 

Friedman et al. (2016) by the number of HFH AmeriCorps members that served during 

the most recent program year (i.e., 345). This estimated the number of additional HFH 

AmeriCorps members employed due to national service (i.e., 17). To estimate the 

additional pre-tax earnings that stemmed from the reduced unemployment, the 

$42,941 annual earnings amount was multiplied by the additional number of HFH 

AmeriCorps members employed post-service. This represents the additional income 

earned by HFH AmeriCorps members due to serving with HFH AmeriCorps. These values 

and calculations are shown in Table 22. 

Table 22. Additional Pre-tax Earnings for HFH AmeriCorps Members from Reduced 

Unemployment Based on HFH AmeriCorps Member Demographics and Industry 

Selection Post-Service 

Sources: HFHI, Viola et al. (2018), Friedman et al. (2016), ASEC (2019), CPI, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(2019) 

*Numbers may not total due to rounding. 
57 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

To avoid double counting, the additional post-tax earnings is used to calculate the 

direct benefit to HFH AmeriCorps members, rather than the additional pre-tax earnings. 

The post-tax earnings for the additional 17 HFH AmeriCorps members employed in Table 

22 excludes payroll taxes (e.g., federal and state income, Social Security, and 

Medicare). The payroll tax rates used are described in more detail in the Benefits to 

Government section. 

Based on these calculations, the cumulative additional post-tax earnings for HFH 

AmeriCorps members for the three different scenarios—discounted in 2020 dollars using 

data from Office of Management and Budget (2003)—are shown in Table 23. These 

monetary amounts represent the additional post-tax earnings realized due to the 

employment gain that is not only solely attributed to the HFH AmeriCorps program but is 

also based on HFH AmeriCorps members’ demographics and post-service job industries. 

Table 23. Cumulative Additional Post-tax Earnings Derived from Reduced 

Unemployment due to Serving with HFH AmeriCorps by Scenario 

Scenario 

Cumulative Additional Post xax Earnings 

due to Serving with HFH AmeriCorps (2020$) 

Short-term $601,822 

Medium-term $7,357,254 

Long-term $12,016,244 

Sources: HFHI, Viola et al. (2018), Friedman et al. (2016), ASEC (2019), U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019), 

and OMB (2003) 

Increased Lifetime Earnings due to Increased Pos t-secondary Education 

Derived from the Use of Education Awards 

The AmeriCorps education award pays for some portion of members’ increased postsecondary educational attainment, and the future earnings derived from that 

educational attainment is treated as a direct benefit to HFH AmeriCorps members. To 

calculate the portion of members’ increased educational attainment that is 

attributable to HFH AmeriCorps, the analysis used cost data from the National Center 

for Education Statistics (NCES). Table 24 details the average total cost fo r each degree 

type, and the portion of the cost that the post-tax education award amount (i.e., 

$5,461) represents ($6,15551 before taxes). The analysis then used these percentages to 

51 This analysis used the 2020 to 2021 AmeriCorps education award amount ($6,345) but discounts it to net 

present 2020 dollars using the Consumer Price Index. For more information about this education award, 

please see https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/segal-americorps-education-award/find-out-more. 
58 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

estimate the lifetime benefits of 

post-secondary educational 

attainment that can be 

attributed to the education 

award. For instance, according 

to NCES (2020), the average 

annual cost of a public, in-state, 

four-year academic institution 

during the 2019–2020 academic 

year was $20,532. This amounts to 

almost $83,000 for four years if 

expressed in 2020 dollars. The 

$5,461 post-tax education award 

only represents 6.6 percent of the 

cost of that degree, so HFH 

AmeriCorps could only be 

credited with 6.6 percent of the 

completion of HFH AmeriCorps 

members’ bachelor’s degree 

post-service. 

Table 24. Average Total Cost of Education and Portion Attributable to Education Award 

by Degree Type 

Additional earnings derived from HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ reduced unemployment 

were calculated annually and then discounted 

based on the short-term, medium-term, and 

long-term scenarios in net present 2020 dollars. 

Regarding additional earnings derived from HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ increased postsecondary educational attainment—due to 

using education awards—Trostel (2015) did not 

provide data on how earnings accrue over 

time. Therefore, this analysis treated the 

increases in earnings as lifetime values 

expressed in 2020 dollars. The analysis assumed 

100 percent of those lifetime earnings 

accrued by year 30 (i.e., in the long-term 

scenario), 50 percent accrued by year 15 (i.e., in 

the medium-term scenario), and nothing 

accrued one year post-program (i.e., in the 

short-term scenario). 

Degree Type52 Average Cost (2020$)* 

Percent of Degree Total Cost 

Covered by Post tax 

Education Award (%) 

Associate Degree $11,979 45.6% 

Bachelor’s Degree $82,949 6.6% 

Graduate Degree $39,401 13.9% 

Sources: AmeriCorps (n.d.), CPI,2 NCES (2019), and NCES (2020) 

*Costs were provided for the 2019 to 2020 academic year by NCES (2020) for associate degree and 

bachelor degree types. Graduate degree type data for the 2018 to 2019 academic year was provided by 

NCES (2019). These costs are expressed in 2020 dollars since the post-tax education award amounts are in 

2020 dollars. 

To determine the future lifetime earnings (and later, the associated lifetime taxes, which 

are described in the Benefits to Government section) realized due to the use of the 

education award post-service, the analysis first determined the number of additional 

post-secondary degrees estimated to be completed by degree type. The 345 HFH 

AmeriCorps members who served during the 2019–2020 program year were distributed 

52 Costs for an associate degree include tuition, required fees, books, and supplies for a public, in-state, 

2-year program; costs for a bachelor’s degree include tuition, required fees, books, supplies, and oncampus housing for a public, in-state, 4-year program; costs for a graduate degree includes tuition and 

required fees for a public, in-state, 2-year graduate program. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

— —

Degree Type 

Total HFH 

AmeriCorps 

Member 

Count 

Percent Estimated to 

Pursue Post secondary 

Education According to 

Friedman et al. (2016) (%) 

Number of 

Degrees 

Pursued Using 

the Education 

Award* 

Associate Degree 345 — 6.5 

AmeriCorps State and National 304 2% 6.1 

AmeriCorps VISTA 41 1% 0.4 

Bachelor’s Degree 345 — 68.8 

AmeriCorps State and National 304 21% 63.8 

AmeriCorps VISTA 41 12% 4.9 

Graduate Degree 345 — 77.3 

AmeriCorps State and National 304 23% 69.9 

AmeriCorps VISTA 41 18% 7.4 

Total 152.6 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

by the education award use findings listed in Friedman et al. (2016) across the degree 

types. Specifically, Friedman et al. (2016) reported 46 percent of AmeriCorps State and 

National member alumni and 31 percent of AmeriCorps VISTA member alumni used 

their education award to pursue post-secondary degrees after program completion. 

This makes the number of HFH AmeriCorps members expected to use the education 

award to pursue additional post-secondary education roughly equal to 153. 

Specifically, Friedman et al. (2016) indicated that the 46 percent is comprised of 

2 percent using it to attend a technical or vocational training program, 21 percent 

using the education award to obtain a bachelor’s degree, and 23 percent using it for 

graduate school.53 For AmeriCorps VISTA member alumni, these percentages were 

reported as 1, 12, and 18 percent, respectively. This results in the number of HFH 

AmeriCorps members estimated to pursue an associate degree, a bachelor’s degree, 

and a graduate degree post-service using the education award to be roughly 7, 69, 

and 77, respectively. These values are shown in Table 25. 

Table 25. Estimates of the Number of Post-secondary Degrees Pursued With Using the 

Education Award by Degree Type 

Sources: AmeriCorps (n.d.), CPI, HFHI, Friedman et al. (2016), NCES (2020), and NCES (2019) 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

53 This analysis considers the use of the education award to attend a technical or vocational training 

program from Friedman et al. (2016) to be synonymous with using it to pursue an associate degree. 

59 
60 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

- - -

— — — —

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Next, the difference in the additional lifetime pre-tax earnings from one degree type to 

the subsequent degree type was estimated using data provided by Trostel (2015), 

which is shown in the fifth column of Table 26 and expressed in 2020 dollars.54 For 

instance, using Trostel (2015) data, the lifetime earnings in 2020 dollars of someone with 

an associate degree is about $875,000, while that of someone with a bachelor’s degree 

is almost $1.3 million. The difference between these two metrics (roughly $417,000 as 

show in Table 26) represents the additional lifetime earnings realized as a result of 

gaining a bachelor’s degree if an associate degree was already completed. This 

process was completed for all post-secondary degree types to conservatively estimate 

the additional lifetime earnings realized by HFH AmeriCorps members due to an 

increase in post-secondary educational attainment. Trostel (2015) also included data 

on lifetime taxes paid which was converted to 2020 dollars and then used to estimate 

the post-tax lifetime earnings that would be realized per additional post-secondary 

degree received. Specifically, the lifetime taxes paid amounts were subtracted from 

the pre-tax additional lifetime earnings amounts to estimate the additional post-tax 

lifetime earnings, a direct benefit to HFH AmeriCorps members. 

Table 26. Additional Earnings from AmeriCorps Members’ Use of the Education Award* 

Degree 

Type 

Number 

of 

Degrees 

Pursued 

with Using 

the 

Education 

Award 

Percent 

of Degree 

Total Cost 

Covered 

by Post 

tax 

Education 

Award 

(%) 

Number 

of 

Degrees 

Obtained 

with Using 

the 

Education 

Award 

Additional 

Pre tax 

Lifetime 

Earnings 

Per 

Degree 

Type 

(2020$) 

Additional 

Lifetime 

Taxes 

Paid Per 

Degree 

Type 

(2020$) 

Additional 

Post tax 

Lifetime 

Earnings 

Per 

Degree 

Type 

(2020$) 

Total 

Post tax 

Lifetime 

Earnings 

with Using 

the 

Education 

Award 

Associate 

Degree 6.5 45.6% 3.0 $271,036 $120,490 $150,546 $445,430 

Bachelor’s 

Degree 68.8 6.6% 4.5 $416,996 $201,594 $215,402 $975,090 

Graduate 

Degree 77.3 13.9% 10.7 $461,413 $174,460 $286,953 $3,074,343 

Total 152.6 18.2 $4,494,863 

Sources: AmeriCorps (n.d.), CPI, HFHI, Friedman et al. (2016), NCES (2020), NCES (2019), and Trostel (2015) 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

54 For an associate degree, comparisons were made between metrics for a high school diploma and those 

for an associate degree. For a bachelor’s degree, comparisons made were between metrics for an 

associate degree and those of a bachelor’s degree. For a graduate degree, comparisons made were 

between metrics for a bachelor’s degree and those of a master’s degree. 
61 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

To isolate the increase in additional lifetime earnings specific to members using the 

education award, the number of HFH AmeriCorps members who used the education 

award for this purpose by degree type was reduced by the percent of the degree cost 

that can be covered by the $5,461 post-tax education award received post-service, 

displayed in the third column of Table 26. As a result, the analysis estimated that the use 

of the education award among HFH AmeriCorps members produced roughly three 

additional associate degrees, five additional bachelor’s degrees, and 11 additional 

graduate degrees post-service. Then, the number of additional degrees obtained was 

applied to the 2020 additional post-tax lifetime earnings by degree type. This calculates 

the additional lifetime post-tax earnings realized by HFH AmeriCorps members from their 

increase in post-secondary educational attainment that is credited to the use of the 

education award post-service. The total additional lifetime post-tax earnings amount 

was roughly $4.5 million across HFH AmeriCorps members. Of note, these lifetime 

earnings are in addition to the earnings derived from HFH AmeriCorps members’ gains 

in employment as delineated in the previous section. To reiterate, the earnings from HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ reduced unemployment differs depending on the scenario 

(i.e., short-term, medium-term, and long-term) since it is uncertain how long these 

earnings will persist. For the post-tax lifetime earnings—and all lifetime benefits in this ROI 

analysis—the entire amount is realized in the long-term, half of it is realized in the 

medium-term, and no amount is realized in the short-term. 

Benefits to Government 

State and Local Government 

State and local government benefits from: 

• Additional state income tax revenue from HFH AmeriCorps members’ increased 

earnings due to reduced unemployment 

• Additional lifetime state and local taxes due to HFH AmeriCorps members’ 

increased post-secondary educational attainment55 

• Additional state and local taxes from the living allowance, stipend, and 

education award received by these members, where applicable 

• Additional state and local sales tax revenue from HFH AmeriCorps members’ 

increased consumption due to reduced unemployment 

• Reduced lifetime spending on social insurance and corrections56 due to HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ increased post-secondary educational attainment 

55 This benefit was calculated using lifetime tax revenue data from Trostel (2015). These values summed 

lifetime state income taxes, lifetime property taxes, and lifetime sales taxes by education level. 

56 Reduced spending on public assistance due to HFH AmeriCorps members’ increased post-secondary 

educational attainment is included as a federal government benefit, not a state and local government 

benefit. This is because public assistance includes programs funded at the federal-level (e.g., TANF, etc.). 
62 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

State income tax revenue: To measure 

income tax revenue generation that stems For additional tax revenue derived 

from reduced unemployment for state from HFH AmeriCorps members’ 

gove reduced unemployment, living rnments (any local income taxes are allowances, stipends, and education not included), the additional pre-tax 

awards, they were calculated using earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members that 

tax rates specific to each per-person are solely attributed to the HFH AmeriCorps monetary amount. program are taxed by a weighted, 

estimated proportional state income tax For additional tax revenue derived 

rate. This tax rate considers state-specific from HFH AmeriCorps members’ 

progressive tax brackets and standard increased post-secondary 

deduction amounts. Based on the taxable educational attainment—due to 

using education awards—Trostel income, the analysis estimated the (2015) did not provide specific tax proportional state income tax for each 

rates. Therefore, this analysis treated state as the amount of state income taxes 

the increases in tax revenue as paid per HFH AmeriCorps member divided lifetime values expressed in 2020 by their pre-tax earnings. This analysis then dollars. The analysis assumed 100 calculated the weighted average of these percent of those lifetime tax state-specific tax rates—using these states’ revenues accrued by year 30 (i.e., in population from the 5-year estimates of the the long-term scenario), 50 percent 

2019 American Community Survey—to accrued by year 15 (i.e., in the estimate a weighted national tax rate (i.e., medium-term scenario), and nothing 3.0 percent). A weighted national tax rate accrued one year post-program 

was used because HFH AmeriCorps (i.e., in the short-term scenario). 

operates nationwide. Also, HFH AmeriCorps 

members may disperse to various locations 

following their service terms and continue to migrate over the course of their 

working years. 

Lifetime state income tax revenue values are also provided by Trostel (2015) by 

education level. Based on the number of post-secondary degrees estimated to be 

obtained due to the use of the education award received after serving with HFH 

AmeriCorps, additional lifetime state income taxes are realized. Thus, the additional 

lifetime state income taxes paid values—informed by data from Trostel (2015)—were 

converted to 2020 dollars and then multiplied by the inferred number of degrees 

obtained with using the education award, which are listed in the fourth column of 

Table 26. 

State governments also receive state income taxes from the education awards HFH 

AmeriCorps members receive post-service. The analysis estimated the pre-tax 

education award amount in 2020 dollars (i.e., $6,155).57 Then the analysis multiplied it by 

the number of HFH AmeriCorps State and National members and HFH AmeriCorps VISTA 

57 This analysis used the 2020 to 2021 AmeriCorps education award amount ($6,345) but discounts it to net 

present 2020 dollars using the Consumer Price Index. For more information about this education award, 

please see https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/segal-americorps-education-award/find-out-more 
63 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

members expected to redeem the award and use it to pursue post-secondary 

education or to repay outstanding student loans based on findings from Friedman et al. 

(2016). The result represents the pre-tax cumulative education award amount expected 

to be received by HFH AmeriCorps members. The portion of this value taxed by state 

income taxes was estimated using a weighted state income tax rate specific to the 

per-person education award amount. Additionally, state income taxes were estimated 

for the living allowance and stipend amounts received by HFH AmeriCorps members 

during and after their service term, respectively, using tax rates specific to each of their 

per-person values. Of note, only AmeriCorps VISTA members are given the option to 

choose between a cash stipend and an education award as an end-of-year benefit.58 

The different rates used for these member benefits are enumerated in Table 30. 

State and local sales tax revenue: To measure sales tax revenue generation for state 

and local governments that stems from reduced unemployment, a weighted state and 

local sales tax rate was applied to the amount of HFH AmeriCorps members’ 

cumulative additional post-tax earnings that are available to be spent on taxable 

goods. To establish a weighted state and local sales tax, this analysis first summed the 

state sales tax rate and the average local sales tax rate for each state using data from 

Cammenga (2020). Then using 2019 data from the American Community Survey (U.S. 

Census Bureau, n.d.), these state-level combined state and local sales tax rates were 

weighted based on the population of each state. The resulting weighted average sales 

tax rate used in this analysis was 7.43 percent. 

To estimate the additional post-tax earnings as a result of reduced unemployment that 

was spent on taxable goods, data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey (U.S. Bureau 

of Labor Statistics, 2021) were used. These data showed the amount of spending on a 

number of different goods and services by national consumers across several different 

pre-tax income brackets.59 The proportion of earnings that is spent on taxable goods 

(such as alcoholic beverages, housekeeping supplies, apparel, etc.) was then 

calculated for consumers with incomes that matched the per-person average pre-tax 

earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members. This value was 43.1 percent. This proportion was 

then applied to HFH AmeriCorps members’ cumulative additional post-tax earnings to 

calculate the post-tax monetary amount they spend on taxable goods. Then the sales 

tax rate (i.e., 7.43 percent) was applied to estimate the resulting sales tax revenues that 

go to state and local governments due to HFH AmeriCorps members’ reduced 

unemployment post-service. 

Trostel (2015) also provides additional lifetime state and local sales tax values by 

education level. Using these values, the analysis calculated the additional sales tax 

revenue realized by state and local governments as a result of HFH AmeriCorps 

58 Please see this site for additional information: https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/vista/benefits. 

59 To calculate the estimated taxable expenditures, Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX) Table 1203 was 

used from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021). This table lists the annual expenditure means by pre-tax 

income tax brackets. Thus, the pre-tax earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members were used instead of their 

post-tax earnings to calculate this metric. Please visit this site for more details: 

https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-share-average-standard-error.htm#cu-income. 
64 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

members using their education award to achieve higher post-secondary educational 

attainment post-service. These values represent a direct benefit to state and local 

governments in the form of increased tax revenue. 

State and local government cost savings: State and local governments also benefit 

from HFH AmeriCorps through lifetime savings in social insurance and corrections—as 

reported in Trostel (2015)—due to the increase in HFH AmeriCorps members’ postsecondary educational attainment after program exit. Of note, social insurance 

includes unemployment insurance and workers’ compensation. To calculate these 

lifetime non-federal government savings, the analysis first calculated the decrease in 

social insurance and corrections costs (and thus savings) from one education level to 

the subsequent education level using data from Trostel (2015) and then multiplied these 

monetary amounts by the number of additional post-secondary degrees estimated to 

be obtained due to the use of the education awards. 

To determine what portion of this differential represents lifetime cost savings to state or 

local governments versus the federal government, a different method was employed 

for each of these cost savings areas. For social insurance, 50 percent of lifetime 

unemployment insurance cost savings and all the lifetime cost savings for workers’ 

compensation are apportioned to state and local governments (Oswald, 2018). 

Regarding reductions in lifetime corrections spending, the portion between the federal 

and state or local governments was determined based on data from Hyland (2015). 

Specifically, this report found that 8.4 percent of U.S. correction costs is paid by the 

federal government and the remaining 91.6 percent is paid by state and local 

governments. Therefore, almost 92 percent of the lifetime cost savings in corrections 

due to HFH AmeriCorps members experiencing an increase in post-secondary 

educational attainment post-service are allocated to state and local governments. 

Federal Government 

The federal government benefits from: 

• Additional federal income, Social Security, and Medicare tax revenue from HFH 

AmeriCorps members’ increased earnings due to reduced unemployment 

• Additional federal income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes from the living 

allowance, stipend, and education award received by these members, where 

applicable60 

• Additional lifetime federal taxes due to HFH AmeriCorps members’ increased 

post-secondary educational attainment 

60 Of note, for the end-of-year stipend amount, federal income and Social Security taxes are withheld from 

the amount distributed to HFH AmeriCorps members. This nuance is considered in the method used to 

calculate federal tax revenue associated with the stipend. Namely, these federal taxes are still calculated 

and included in the ROI analysis. Additional details can be found at https://americorps.gov/membersvolunteers/vista/benefits. 
65 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

• Reduced lifetime spending on public assistance, social insurance, and 

corrections due to HFH AmeriCorps members’ increased post-secondary 

educational attainment 

• Reduced federal rental assistance use by HFH homeowners due to HFH 

homeownership 

• Medicare and Medicaid medical cost savings due to improved respiratory 

health of HFH household members 

Federal income tax revenue: To measure federal income tax revenue that stems from 

reduced unemployment, the additional pre-tax earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members 

that are solely attributed to the HFH AmeriCorps program—as well as the pre-tax living 

allowance, stipend, and education award amounts received by HFH AmeriCorps 

members—are taxed by a federal income tax rate. The rates used are estimated 

proportional tax rates that consider the standard deductions and progressive tax 

brackets specific to federal income taxes as provided by El-Sibaie (2019). To reiterate, 

an estimated proportional tax rate equals the total amount of taxes estimated to be 

paid divided by the pre-tax amount of the value to be taxed (e.g., per-person average 

pre-tax earnings). The specific federal income tax rates used for these different benefits 

are enumerated in Table 30. Of note, different tax rates were used because they were 

specific to the per-person pre-tax earnings, living allowance, stipend, and education 

award amounts. 

For the additional lifetime earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members that is based on their 

increase in post-secondary educational attainment—fueled by the use of the 

education award—Trostel (2015) provides additional lifetime federal income tax values. 

These values are used to calculate the additional income tax revenue realized by the 

federal government due to members’ post-secondary education gains. 

Social Security and Medicare tax revenue: Social Security and Medicare tax revenue 

are measured as fiscal gains as a result of the additional pre-tax earnings of HFH 

AmeriCorps members from their reduced unemployment and as a result of the pre-tax 

living allowances, stipends, and education awards amounts received by members. 

However, tax rates specific to each revenue source are used. Social Security and 

Medicare use flat tax rates, 6.2 percent and 1.45 percent, respectively; thus, these rates 

are applied to the additional pre-tax earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members to calculate 

the additional amount of revenue the federal government receives. These same rates 

are also applied to the living allowance, stipend, and education award amounts 

received by HFH AmeriCorps members to calculate additional tax revenue. 

Moreover, lifetime Social Security tax values are provided by Trostel (2015) by education 

level. The analysis used these values to estimate the additional lifetime Social Security 

tax revenue realized by the federal government as a result of HFH AmeriCorps members 

using their education award to complete different post-secondary education degree 

types post-service. 

Federal government cost savings: The federal government realizes cost savings in public 

assistance, social insurance, and corrections due to the increased post-secondary 

educational attainment of HFH AmeriCorps members after program exit. Specifically, 
66 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

the number of additional post-secondary degrees estimated to be earned by HFH 

AmeriCorps members post-service as well as data from Trostel (2015) were used to 

estimate the federal government portion of lifetime cost savings on social insurance 

(which is comprised of worker’s compensation and unemployment insurance, as noted 

earlier), public assistance (e.g., SNAP, Medicaid, TANF, etc.), and corrections. 

Table 27 shows the lifetime costs to the federal versus the state and local governments 

for each of these areas—where applicable—by education level in 2012 dollars as 

presented in Trostel (2015). The differences in these lifetime costs from one education 

level to the next represent cost savings per degree obtained. 

Table 27. Government Costs by Educational Attainment Level per Individual’s Lifetime* 

Source of 

Government 

Saving 

High School 

Diploma (2012$) 

Associate 

Degree (2012$) 

Bachelor’s 

Degree (2012$) 

Graduate 

Degree (2012$) 

Public Assistance $54,155 $31,803 $14,480 $9,394 

Social Insurance $9,584 $8,209 $5,863 $4,732 

Federal $3,964 $3,570 $2,660 $2,090 

State/Local $5,620 $4,639 $3,204 $2,643 

Corrections $8,488 $4,055 $1,190 $725 

Federal $713 $341 $100 $61 

State/Local $7,775 $3,714 $1,090 $664 

Sources: Trostel (2015) 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

As mentioned earlier in this appendix, as a result of the HFH AmeriCorps program, the 

analysis estimated an additional 153 HFH AmeriCorps members would redeem the 

education award to pursue additional post-secondary education. Based on the portion 

of degree costs covered by the post-tax education award, this analysis calculated that 

an additional three associate degrees, five bachelor’s degrees, and 11 graduate 

degrees would be obtained due to HFH AmeriCorps. To conservatively calculate the 

federal government’s lifetime savings associated with these education gains, the 

differences between the public assistance, federal social insurance, and federal 

corrections lifetime costs for these education levels and those that precede them are 

calculated and then expressed in 2020 dollars. These values are then multiplied by the 

number of additional post-secondary degrees estimated to be obtained—where 

appropriate—to represent the total cost savings realized by the federal government 

due to the HFH AmeriCorps program. As previously mentioned where discussing the 

state and local governments’ allocation of the reduction in lifetime social insurance 

and corrections expenditures, the federal government receives 50% of the lifetime cost 

savings in unemployment insurance (part of social insurance; Oswald, 2018), and more 

than eight percent of the lifetime cost savings in corrections (Hyland, 2015). These 

federal government savings are shown in Table 31. 
67 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

-

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

The federal government also realizes cost savings from reduced rental assistance use 

among HFH homeowners as a result of the HFH AmeriCorps program. Findings from 

Mattessich et al. (2015) indicated 25 percent of HFH homeowners that previously 

received federal rental assistance no longer did after moving into their HFH home. 

To monetize this federal government benefit, the analysis first multiplied the 25 percent 

by the number of additional HFH homes built nationwide calculated previously (i.e., 

211). This estimated the number of national HFH homeowners who no longer needed to 

use rental assistance programs given they now pay no-interest mortgages for their HFH 

homes (i.e., 53). The analysis then used data from the Center on Budget and Policy 

Priorities (2019) to determine the average amount of federal rental assistance used per 

U.S. household receiving such assistance. Specifically, the Center on Budget and Policy 

Priorities (2019) reported federal funding for rental assistance for 2019 totaled 

$43,834,000,000 while the number of households on rental assistance totaled 5,199,000 

for 2019. Thus, the average amount of rental assistance used in 2020 dollars per 

household on rental assistance was $8,600. Multiplying this metric by the number of 

households no longer using federal rental assistance due to HFH AmeriCorps estimates 

the total cost savings to the federal government. The result of this calculation is shown in 

Table 28. 

Table 28. Total Cost Savings in Rental Assistance Realized by the Federal Government 

Portion of HFH 

Homeowners Who 

Used Federal Rental 

Assistance 

Pre Moving But Not 

Post Moving (%) 

Additional Homes 

Built Nationwide 

due to HFH 

AmeriCorps 

Average Amount 

of Federal Rental 

Assistance per 

Household that Uses 

Rental Assistance (2020$) 

Total Cost Savings 

in Federal Rental 

Assistance* (2020$) 

25% 211 $8,600 $454,166 

Sources: Mattessich et al. (2015), Viola et al. (2018), HFHI, CPI, and Center on Budget and Policy Priorities 

(2019) 

*Numbers may not total due to rounding. 

Lastly, the federal government realizes medical cost savings due to the self-reported 

net improved respiratory health of HFH household members after moving into an HFH 

home. As stated earlier, according to Mattessich et al. (2015), HFH homeowners who 

reported they or someone in their household had a respiratory or lung illness prior to 

moving into their HFH home also indicated if they experienced improved or 

deteriorating respiratory health after moving into their HFH home. This results in medical 

cost savings to several stakeholder groups which totals $31,300 for the most recent 

program year. One of these stakeholder groups is the federal government which 

realizes Medicare and Medicaid cost savings. Using 2018 MEPS data from AHRQ (2021), 

the analysis determined that 36 and 16 percent of total medical costs savings are 

realized by the federal government in terms of Medicare and Medicaid, respectively. 

These cost savings—as well as those for the other stakeholder groups mentioned 

previously—are summarized in Table 29. 
68 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 29. Medical Cost Savings Realized by Stakeholder Group 

Stakeholder Group 

Portion of $31,300 Total 

Savings Realized by 

Stakeholder Group Based 

on MESP Data (%) 

Medical Cost Savings 

Realized (2020$) 

HFH Household Members (i.e., OOP) 8% $2,506 

Private Insurance Companies 34% $10,682 

Other Healthcare Payers 6% $1,949 

Federal Government 52% $16,163 

Medicare 36% $11,283 

Medicaid 16% $4,880 

Total 100% $31,300 

Sources: HFHI, Viola et al. (2018), Mattessich et al. (2015), ICF, CPI, and AHRQ (2021) 

Table 30 shows the tax rates applied to HFH AmeriCorps members’ additional pre-tax 

and post-tax earnings (derived from reduced unemployment), depending on the type 

of revenue being calculated. It also enumerates the tax rates used for the pre-tax living 

allowance, stipend, and education award amounts received by HFH AmeriCorps 

members either during their service term or upon service completion. 

Table 30. 2020 Tax Rates and Ratio of Taxable Expenditures for HFH AmeriCorps 

Members’ Earnings, Living Allowances, Stipends, and Education Awards 

Metric 

Rate for 

Additional 

Earnings & 

Education 

Award* (%) 

Rate for Living 

Allowance, 

Stipend, & 

Education 

Award** (%) Notes 

Estimated 

Proportional 

Federal 

Income Tax 

8.07% 1.67% 

• Tax rates are used which consider the 

progressive tax brackets and standard 

deductions specific to federal income 

taxes. 

• These rates are dependent on and 

applied to the pre-tax value of each 

metric being taxed. 

Estimated 

Proportional 

State Income 

Tax 

3.03% 1.95% 

• Tax rates are used which consider the 

progressive tax brackets and standard 

deductions specific to each state’s 

income taxes. Each state’s tax rate is 

weighted based on the state’s 

population and summed to estimate 

a weighted national average. 

• These rates are dependent on and 

applied to the pre-tax value of each 

metric being taxed. 
69 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Metric 

Rate for 

Additional 

Earnings & 

Education 

Award* (%) 

Rate for Living 

Allowance, 

Stipend, & 

Education 

Award** (%) Notes 

Social Security 

Tax 6.20% 6.20% 

• Social Security tax rate for employees 

and employers. 

• These rates are applied to the pre-tax 

value of each metric being taxed. 

Medicare Tax 1.45% 1.45% 

• Medicare tax rate for employees and 

employers. 

• These rates are applied to the pre-tax 

value of each metric being taxed. 

Sales Tax 

7.43%; N/A to 

the Education 

Award 

7.43% on the 

Living 

Allowance 

and Stipend; 

N/A to the 

Education 

Award 

• The combined state and average 

local tax rate for each state was 

summed and weighted based on 

states’ population to calculate a 

national weighted average sales tax 

rate. 

• The rate is applied to the additional 

post-tax earnings of members as well 

as their post-tax living allowance and 

stipend amounts. 

Ratio of 

Taxable 

Expenditures 

per National 

Consumer 

43.1%; N/A to 

the Education 

Award 

64.4% on the 

Living 

Allowance 

and Stipend; 

N/A to the 

Education 

Award 

• Percent of post-tax earnings spent on 

taxable goods and services that is 

used to calculate sales tax from posttax earnings. 

• Ratio is dependent on the pre-tax 

value of members’ additional 

earnings, the pre-tax living allowance 

amount, or the pre-tax stipend 

amount. 

*These rates are only used for the portion of the education award used to repay outstanding student loans. 

**These rates are only used for the portion of the education award used for additional schooling. 

Sources: Cammenga (2020), Social Security Administration (2020), Consumer Expenditures Survey (U.S. 

Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021), and El-Sibaie (2019) 

Summary of Benefits to Government 

Table 31 shows the amount of tax revenue generated and savings in expenditures for 

state and local versus federal government that are solely credited to the HFH 

AmeriCorps program and calculated using the methods described above. These 

government revenue and savings amounts are benefits that are included in the three 

ROI calculations and they are derived from HFH AmeriCorps program impacts. 
70 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

-

-

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 31. State/Local and Federal Government Benefits by Stakeholder Group and by 

Scenario 

Benefit Type Short term 

Benefit (2020$)* 

Medium 

term Long term 

State/Local Government Benefits $399,827 $1,210,776 $1,876,414 

State Income Tax Revenue from Education Awards, 

Living Allowances, and Stipends** $139,302 $139,302 $139,302 

State and Local Sales Tax Revenue from Living 

Allowances and Stipends $218,811 $218,811 $218,811 

State Income Tax Revenue from Employment $22,428 $274,187 $447,816 

State and Local Sales Tax Revenue from Employment $19,286 $235,769 $385,070 

State Income, Sales, and Property Taxes from Postsecondary Educational Attainment (Lifetime) $- $318,579 $637,159 

Savings in Reduced Social Insurance and Corrections 

Spending from Post-secondary Educational 

Attainment (Lifetime) 

$- $24,128 $48,256 

Federal Government Benefits $1,262,762 $3,937,898 $6,207,292 

Savings in Federal Rental Assistance from HFH Home 

Ownership $454,166 $454,166 $454,166 

Savings in Medical Costs due to Improved Health of 

HFH Household Members $16,163 $16,163 $16,163 

Federal Income Tax Revenue Education Awards, 

Living Allowances, and Stipends** $157,858 $157,858 $157,858 

Social Security and Medicare Tax Revenue from 

Education Awards, Living Allowances, and Stipends** $518,099 $518,099 $518,099 

Federal Income Tax Revenue from Employment $59,810 $731,178 $1,194,197 

Social Security and Medicare Tax Revenue from 

Employment $56,666 $692,735 $1,131,410 

Federal Income Tax Revenue from Post-secondary 

Educational Attainment (Lifetime) $- $783,335 $1,566,671 

Social Security Tax Revenue from Post-secondary 

Educational Attainment (Lifetime) $- $467,188 $934,376 

Savings in Reduced Social Insurance, Corrections, 

and Public Assistance Spending from Post-secondary 

Educational Attainment (Lifetime) 

Total 

$-

$1,662,589 

$117,176 

$5,148,674 

$234,352 

$8,083,705 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

**Living allowances, stipends, and education awards are one-time taxable payments. The resulting tax 

revenue does not vary by scenario. 
71 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Measuring Forgone Benefits (Opportunity Costs) 

The analysis included two types of forgone benefits, referred to as opportunity costs, in 

the three ROI calculations to conservatively estimate the return of the HFH AmeriCorps 

program: a professional opportunity cost to HFH AmeriCorps participants and an 

investment opportunity cost to funders. Each of these forgone benefits is subtracted 

from the total program benefits (shown above) in each of the ROI calculations. The 

methodologies used to calculate these two forgone benefits (opportunity costs) are 

described below. 

Forgone Benefits from Professional Opportunity Cost to HFH AmeriCorps Members 

There is a forgone benefit (professional opportunity cost) to HFH AmeriCorps members 

for their period of national service, during which they could have otherwise been 

working and earning higher pay. This includes both the forgone earnings of HFH 

AmeriCorps members for their service term and the forgone taxes associated with those 

lost earnings. To calculate this forgone benefit, the analysis first used the demographic 

distribution of HFH AmeriCorps members for the 2019–2020 program year—in terms of 

gender, age, race/ethnicity, and pre-service education level—and ASEC data to 

estimate the weighted unemployment rate for this population (i.e., 

2.6 percent). This represents how many of these HFH AmeriCorps members would have 

been unemployed if they did not serve with HFH AmeriCorps. Using the weighted 

unemployment rate and the number of HFH AmeriCorps members that served during 

the 2019–2020 program year (i.e., 345), the analysis estimated the number of members 

that would have been employed without serving with HFH AmeriCorps based on their 

demographic characteristics (i.e., 336). Then the analysis multiplied this value by the 

weighted post-tax annual earnings. This is derived from the pre-tax annual earnings 

listed in Table 22. The methodology used to calculate this latter monetary amount is 

described in the previous Increased Earnings due to Reduced Unemployment section. 

The post-tax amount subtracts out all applicable payroll taxes (e.g., federal income, 

state income, Medicare, and Social Security). The product of multiplying 336 by the 

weighted post-tax annual earnings represents what HFH AmeriCorps members would 

have earned in total if they did not serve with HFH AmeriCorps. Separately, the analysis 

then multiplied the number of HFH AmeriCorps members that served by the amount 

they earned during their national service in the form of a post-tax living allowance 

(i.e., $13,215 per person). This represents the aggregate amount HFH AmeriCorps 

members earned during their service term. The difference between what they would 

have earned if they did not serve and what they did earn because they served equals 

the total post-tax earnings forgone due to serving with HFH AmeriCorps, shown in 

Table 32. Forgone Earnings of HFH AmeriCorps Members for a Service Term. 
72 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Row Component Value* Source 

A HFH AmeriCorps Members 345 HFHI 

B Weighted Unemployment Rate (%) 2.6% ASEC (2019) & HFHI 

C Weighted Post-Tax Annual Earnings 

Per Person (2020$) $43,669 ASEC (2019), CPI, & HFHI 

D Post-Tax Living Allowance Per Person $13,215 HFHI 

E Total Post-tax Earnings Forgone (2020$) $10,109,500 [A x (1- B) x C] – (A x D) 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 32. Forgone Earnings of HFH AmeriCorps Members for a Service Term 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

The second portion of this professional opportunity cost was the forgone taxes 

associated with the earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members lost for this year of service. 

Federal income, state income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes specific to the perperson weighted pre-tax earnings amount were calculated. Specifically, the estimated 

proportional federal and state income tax rates used were 9.3 and 3.3 percent, 

respectively. The analysis also estimated the sales taxes lost based on the per-person 

post-tax earnings forgone by the HFH AmeriCorps members. Using data from the 

Consumer Expenditure Survey (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021), the analysis 

estimated that based on the per-person weighted pre-tax earnings of HFH AmeriCorps 

members (i.e., $54,782), 39.9 percent of their income would have been spent on 

taxable goods, as opposed to 64.4 percent of the living allowance. Then the weighted 

combined state and local sales tax rate (i.e., 7.43 percent)—used earlier in this analysis 

to calculate government benefits—was applied to the difference in expected 

spending on taxable goods to represent the resulting sales tax revenue lost due to 

individuals serving with HFH AmeriCorps instead of working for higher pay. The totals for 

these taxes are listed in Table 33. 
73 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 33. Forgone Taxes Associated with the Forgone Earnings of HFH AmeriCorps 

Members for a Service Term* 

Forgone Taxes 

Taxes without 

Service Term 

(2020$) 

Taxes Realized 

from Living 

Allowance 

(2020$) 

Net Taxes 

Forgone 

(2020$) 

Federal Forgone Taxes (i.e., Federal 

Professional Opportunity Cost) $3,125,437 $479,099 $2,646,338 

Federal Income Taxes $1,717,725 $86,024 $1,631,701 

Social Security and Medicare Taxes $1,407,712 $393,075 $1,014,637 

Non-Federal Forgone Taxes $1,042,064 $318,223 $723,842 

State Income Taxes $607,399 $100,003 $507,395 

Sales Taxes $434,666 $218,220 $216,446 

Total Taxes $4,167,501 $797,322 $3,370,180 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

For the federal government benefits per federal dollar ROI calculation, only federal 

government (not total) benefits are included. Because of this, only federal components 

of the professional opportunity cost are subtracted from all federal government 

benefits—realized due to the HFH AmeriCorps program—in this ROI calculation. The 

parts of the professional opportunity cost subtracted from these total federal 

government benefits include the forgone net federal income taxes (i.e., $1,631,701) 

and the net forgone Social Security and Medicare taxes (i.e., $1,014,637). The sum of 

these two values is called the federal professional opportunity cost. The sum of all the 

values listed in Table 33 and the forgone post-tax earnings of HFH AmeriCorps members 

is called the total professional opportunity cost. These naming conventions are 

referenced in the Calculating ROI section. 

Forgone Benefits from Investment Opportunity Cost to Funders 

The investment opportunity cost estimates the expected forgone return if funds used to 

support the activities and positions of HFH AmeriCorps members during the most recent 

program year were invested in U.S. Treasury bonds instead. An investment opportunity 

cost is calculated for two different funding streams: 1) all HFH AmeriCorps funding for 

the 2019–2020 program year and 2) only federal funding for the same program year. 

This is done because two of the three ROI calculations only have federal (not total) 

program costs included. Thus, for 1) the federal government benefits per federal dollar 

and 2) the total benefits per federal dollar ROI calculations, the investment opportunity 

cost subtracted from the benefits in these calculations is the forgone accrued interest 

from investing only the federal funds into these U.S. Treasury bonds. For the other ROI 

calculation, the investment opportunity cost subtracted from the benefits realized is the 

forgone accrued interest from investing all HFH AmeriCorps funds (both federal and 
74 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

non-federal) into these U.S. Treasury bonds. Therefore, the analysis estimated forgone 

accrued interests across all three scenarios when 1) all HFH AmeriCorps funds and 2) 

only federal HFH AmeriCorps funds are invested in U.S. Treasury bonds. 

To calculate these forgone accrued interest values, the analysis first matched 2019 real 

interest rates provided by the Office of Management and Budget (2020) to each of the 

scenarios included in this ROI analysis. The analysis used 2019 real interest rates for 

U.S. Treasury bonds because the HFH AmeriCorps program year analyzed began in 

2019. The real interest rate for the 3-year maturity was used for the short-term scenario, 

the average between the 10-year and 20-year maturity rates was used as the rate for 

the medium-term scenario, and the 30-year maturity rate was used for the long-term 

scenario. These real interest rates were 1.3, 1.45, and 1.5 percent, respectively. Also, the 

number of years elapsed on these U.S. Treasury bonds was equal to the number of 

years the different scenarios assumed HFH AmeriCorps members’ employment and 

earnings gains were sustained. These values are 1 year, 15 years, and 30 years for the 

short-, medium-, and long-term scenarios, respectively. Given that U.S. Treasury bonds 

compound bi-annually according to the U.S. Department of Treasury, the formula used 

to calculate the forgone accrued interest for each of the three scenarios for the two 

funding streams is listed in Figure 3, where A equals the forgone accrued interest 

(e.g., the investment opportunity cost), P equals the amount of one of the funding 

streams, r equals the 2019 real interest rate, and t equals the number of years elapsed. 

Figure 3. Compound Interest Formula Used to Calculate Investment Opportunity Cost 

tt∗2

AA = PP �1 + 2

rr

� − PP

Based on this formula, the investment opportunity cost calculated by scenario and 

funding stream are listed in Table 34, along with their associated inputs. The forgone 

accrued interest amounts for all funding are called the total investment opportunity 

costs while that for federal funding only are called the federal investment opportunity 

costs. These naming conventions are referenced in the Calculating ROI section. 
75 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- - -

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 34. Investment Opportunity Cost Calculation by Scenario and Funding Stream 

Metric 

Short term 

Federal 

Funding 

All Funding Only 

Medium term 

Federal 

Funding 

All Funding Only 

Long term 

Federal 

Funding 

All Funding Only 

Real 

Interest 

Rate 

1.30% 1.45% 1.50% 

Years 

Elapsed 1 15 30 

Funding 

Amount $8,795,423 $5,933,696 $8,795,423 $5,933,696 $8,795,423 $5,933,696 

Forgone 

Accrued 

Interest 

$114,712 $77,389 $2,128,409 $1,435,898 $4,975,404 $3,356,579 

Measuring Program Costs 

Table 35 shows the program costs of the HFH AmeriCorps program by funding source. 

AmeriCorps is the leading funder for the HFH AmeriCorps program, covering more than 

two-thirds of the program’s annual operating costs given that it supplies the AmeriCorps 

State and National and AmeriCorps VISTA grants as well as the expected education 

awards received by HFH AmeriCorps members. Other non-AmeriCorps funders (i.e., HFH 

host sites) matched 48 percent of AmeriCorps’s contribution for the most recently 

completed program year. That matched amount represented 33 percent of total HFH 

AmeriCorps program funding for the year. 
76 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Table 35. Funding Sources and Amounts for HFH AmeriCorps (2019–2020)* 

Funding Source 

AmeriCorps State AmeriCorps 

and National VISTA 

AmeriCorps Grants $3,516,572 $796,728 

Living Allowance $3,516,572 $470,068 

Health Insurance $- $-

Worker’s Compensation $- $-

Stipend $- $12,609 

Other (e.g., staff salaries, benefits, travel, operation) $- $314,051 

Host Sites (i.e., Match Funding) $2,638,420 $223,307 

Living Allowance $21,626 $109,191 

Health Insurance $454,286 $-

Worker’s Compensation $566,494 $-

Stipend $- $-

Other (e.g., staff salaries, benefits, travel, operation) $1,596,014 $114,116 

Expected Education Awards $1,478,101 $142,296 

Sub-Total $7,633,093 $1,162,331 

Grand Total $8,795,423 

Source: HFHI 

*Numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

Calculating ROI 

To complete the three ROI calculations for the HFH AmeriCorps program, the sum of 

applicable program benefits is reduced by the forgone benefits from the professional 

and investment opportunity costs (where appropriate) and then compared to the cost 

of the program. As described previously, these three ROI calculations are calculated for 

each of the three scenarios: short-term, medium-term, and long-term. 
77 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Since two of the calculations include benefits to society (e.g., HFH homeowners, HFH 

household members, HFH AmeriCorps members, etc.), the results are expressed as cost– 

benefit ratios, while maintaining the ROI terminology. Specifically, these ratios take the 

form of the sum of monetized benefits over the sum of applicable program costs. The 

ROIs expressed as cost–benefit ratios in this study can be interpreted as the amount of 

dollars returned for every $1.00 of investment (or program cost).61 

The formulas used to calculate each of the three ROIs are shown below:62 

(Benefits to Non-government Stakeholders + Benefits to Government) – (Forgone 

Benefits from Total Professional Opportunity Cost + Forgone Benefits from Federal 

Investment Opportunity Cost) 

= 

(AmeriCorps Federal Funding) 

(Benefits to Non-government Stakeholders + Benefits to Government) – (Forgone 

Benefits from Total Professional Opportunity Cost + Forgone Benefits from Total 

Investment Opportunity Cost) 

= 

(AmeriCorps Federal Funding + Non-federal Match Funding) 

(Benefits to the Federal Government) – (Forgone Benefits from Federal 

Professional Opportunity Cost + Forgone Benefits from Federal Investment 

Opportunity Cost) 

= 

Total 

Benefits per 

Federal 

Dollar 

Total 

Benefits per 

Funder 

Dollar 

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

(AmeriCorps Federal Funding) 

61 ROIs can be expressed in percentages or as ratios, such as in this study. Although not shown as a ratio in 

the results, the ROIs in this study show the amount of return for every $1 invested. 

62 Non-government stakeholders for this ROI analysis include HFH homeowners, HFH household members, 

HFH AmeriCorps members, private insurance companies, and other healthcare payers. 
78 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

-

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Tables 36, 37, and 38 show the total program benefits, forgone benefits (opportunity 

costs), program costs, and ROI results for each scenario. 

Table 36. ROI Calculations for Short-term Scenario 

Components 

Total Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

(2020$) 

Total Benefits per 

Funder Dollar 

(2020$) 

Federal Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

(2020$) 

Total Program 

Benefits $19,044,993 $19,044,993 $1,262,762 

Total Forgone 

Benefits (Opportunity 

Costs) 

$13,557,068 $13,594,391 $2,723,727 

Total Program Costs $5,933,696 $8,795,423 $5,933,696 

Result $0.92 $0.62 $0.25 

Table 37. ROI Calculations for Medium-term Scenario 

Components 

Total Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

(2020$) 

Total Benefits per 

Funder Dollar 

(2020$) 

Federal Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

(2020$) 

Total Program 

Benefits $31,533,941 $31,533,941 $3,937,898 

Total Forgone 

Benefits (Opportunity 

Costs) 

$14,915,578 $15,608,088 $4,082,236 

Total Program Costs $5,933,696 $8,795,423 $5,933,696 

Result $2.80 $1.81 $0.02 

Table 38. ROI Calculations for Long-term Scenario 

Components 

Total Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

(2020$) 

Total Benefits per 

Funder Dollar 

(2020$) 

Federal Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar 

(2020$) 

Total Program 

Benefits $41,375,393 $41,375,393 $6,207,292 

Total Forgone 

Benefits (Opportunity 

Costs) 

$16,836,259 $18,455,083 $6,002,918 

Total Program Costs $5,933,696 $8,795,423 $5,933,696 

Result $4.14 $2.61 $0.03 
79 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

References 

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2021). MEPS summary tables: Use, 

expenditures, and population. https://meps.ahrq.gov/mepstrends/hc_use 

Akee, R., Copeland, W., Costello, E. J., & Simeonova, E. (2018). How Does Household 

Income Affect Child Personality Traits and Behaviors? American Economic Review, 

108(3), 775–827. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160133 

AmeriCorps. (n.d.). Education Award find out more. AmeriCorps. 

https://americorps.gov/members-volunteers/segal-americorps-educationaward/find-out-more 

Blagg, K., & Blom, E. (2018, September). Evaluating the return on investment in higher 

education: An assessment of individual- and state-level returns. Urban Institute. 

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/99078/evaluating_the_return_ 

on_investment_in_higher_education.pdf 

Brennan, M., Reed, P., & Sturtevant, L. A. (2014, November). The Impacts of Affordable 

Housing on Education: A Research Summary. https://nhc.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/03/The-Impacts-of-Affordable-Housing-on-Education-1.pdf 

Cammenga, J. (2020, January 15). State and Local Sales Tax Rates, 2020. Tax 

Foundation. https://taxfoundation.org/2020-sales-taxes/ 

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2019). National and State Housing Fact Sheets & 

Data. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 

https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/national-and-state-housing-fact-sheetsdata 

Cunningham, M., & MacDonald, G. (2012, May). What Works Collaborative: Housing as 

a Platform for Improving Education Outcomes among Low-Income Children. 

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/25331/412554-Housing-as-aPlatform-for-Improving-Education-Outcomes-among-Low-Income-Children.PDF 

Desmond, M., & Gershenson, C. (2016). Housing and Employment Insecurity among the 

Working Poor. Social Problems, 63(1), 46–67. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spv025 

Drabo, E. F., Eckel, G., Ross, S. L., Brozic, M., Carlton, C. G., Warren, T. Y., Kleb, G., Laird, 

A., Pollack Porter, K. M., & Pollack, C. E. (2021). A Social-Return-On-Investment 

Analysis Of Bon Secours Hospital’s ‘Housing For Health’ Affordable Housing Program. 

Health Affairs, 40(3), 513–520. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00998 

Duncan G.J., & Magnuson K. (2013) The Long Reach of Early Childhood Poverty. In: 

Yeung WJ., Yap M. (eds) Economic Stress, Human Capital, and Families in Asia. 

Quality of Life in Asia, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-

7386-8_4 

El-Sibaie, A. (2019, November 14). 2020 Tax Brackets. Tax Foundation. 

https://taxfoundation.org/2020-tax-brackets/ 

Esajian, P. (2021, June 4). How To Rehab A House On A Budget. FortuneBuilders. 

https://www.fortunebuilders.com/how-to-rehab-a-house-on-a-budget/ 
80 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Friedman, E., Freeman, B., Phillips, B., Rosenthal, L., Robinson, D., Miller, H., & Porowski, A. 

(2016). AmeriCorps alumni outcomes: Final survey technical report. Corporation for 

National and Community Service (now AmeriCorps). 

https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_AmeriCorpsAlumni 

OutcomesFinalTechReport_1.pdf 

Giel, B. K., & Issa, R. R. (2013). Return on Investment Analysis of Using Building Information 

Modeling in Construction. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 27(5), 511-521. 

doi:10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000164 

Harlow, C. (2003, April 15). Bureau of Justice Statistics special report: Education and 

correctional populations. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. 

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ecp.pdf 

Hovee, E. & Whitney, D. (2003). North Macadam Urban Renewal Area Return on 

Investment (ROI) Analysis Update (Rep.). Vancouver, Washington: E.D. Hovee & 

Company. Retrieved from 

https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/9731/Portland_Nort 

h_Macadam_ROI_Analysis_2003.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y 

Hyland, S. S. (2015). Justice Expenditure And Employment Extracts, 2015 - Final. 

https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/justice-expenditure-and-employmentextracts-2015-final 

Kousky, C., Ritchie, L., Tierney, K., & Lingle, B. (2019). Return on investment analysis and 

its applicability to community disaster preparedness activities: Calculating costs and 

returns. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 41, 101296. 

doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101296 

Lee, G., Park, H. K., & Won, J. (2012). D3 City project — Economic impact of BIM-assisted 

design validation. Automation in Construction, 22, 577-586. 

doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2011.12.003 

Loughead, K. (2020, February 4). State Individual Income Tax Rates and Brackets for 

2020. Tax Foundation. https://taxfoundation.org/state-individual-income-tax-ratesand-brackets-for-2020/ 

Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E., & Zhao, J. (2013). Poverty Impedes Cognitive 

Function. Science, 341(6149), 976–980. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1238041 

Markovitz, C., Schneider, G., Jastrzab, J. A., & Frumkin, P. (2008, April). Improving lives 

and communities: Perspectives on 40 years of VISTA service. Corporation for 

National and Community Service (now AmeriCorps). 

https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_Imprv_LivesComm 

_40YrsVISTASvc_2008_1.pdf 

Mattessich, P., & Hansen, I. (2015). Impacts of Habitat for Humanity Homeownership: 

Connections to Quality of Life. 

https://www.wilder.org/sites/default/files/imports/HFHMN_HomeownerImpactStudy_ 

2-15.pdf 
81 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

National Association of REALTORS. (2020). 2020 Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers. 

https://www.gaar.com/images/uploads/2020_NAR_Consumer_Profile.pdf 

National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Digest of education statistics. Table 

330.50. Average and percentiles of graduate tuition and required fees in degreegranting postsecondary institutions, by control of institution: 1989-90 through 2018-19. 

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_330.50.asp 

National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). IPEDS Data Explorer. Average costs (in 

constant 2019 dollars) associated with attendance for full-time, first-time 

degree/certificate-seeking undergraduates at Title IV institutions operating on an 

academic year calendar system, and percentage change, by level of institution, 

type of cost, control of institution, residency, and student housing: United States, 

academic years 2017–18 and 2019–20. 

https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/Search?query=&query2=&resultType=all&page=1&sortBy 

=date_desc&overlayTableId=27425 

Office of Management and Budget. (1992, October 29). Circular A-94: Guidelines and 

discount rates for benefit–cost analysis of federal programs, Transmittal Memo No. 

64. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/circulars/A94/a094.pdf 

Office of Management and Budget. (2003, September 17). Circular A-4. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/circulars/A4/a-4.pdf 

Olson, B., Cooper, D., & Viola, J. (2016). 2013-16 External Evaluation for HFH National 

Service Program. 

https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_HabitatforHumanit 

y_Internatl_..EvalReport_1.pdf 

Oswald, J. (2018, March 29). What does an unemployment claim cost an employer? 

Unemployment Insurance Services. https://www.unemploymentservices.com/unemployment-claim-cost-employer/ 

Sen, S. (2012). The Impact of BIM/VDC on ROI: Developing a Financial Model for Savings 

and ROI Calculation of Construction Projects (Rep.). Retrieved from 

https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:546660/FULLTEXT01.pdf 

Social Security Administration. (2020). Fact Sheet: 2020 Social Security Changes. 

https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/factsheets/colafacts2020.pdf 

Spera, C., Ghertner, R., Nerino, A., & DiTommaso, A. (2013). Volunteering as a Pathway 

to Employment: Does Volunteering Increase Odds of Finding a Job for the Out of 

Work? 

https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_2013_Volunteering 

asaPathwaytoEmployment_1.pdf 

Trostel, P. (2015). It’s not just the money: The benefits of college education to individuals 

and to society. Lumina Foundation. 

https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/its-not-just-the-money.pdf 
82 

 

 

 

 

 

Return on Investment Study: 

Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics 

(OEWS) for May 2019. https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020, May). Learn more, earn more: Education leads to 

higher wages, lower unemployment: Career Outlook. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2020/data-on-display/education-pays.htm 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2021, May 27). Consumer Expenditures Surveys Tables 

(CEX). https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-share-averagestandard-error.htm#cu-income 

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (n.d.). CPI inflation calculator. https://data.bls.gov/cgibin/cpicalc.pl 

U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). Characteristics of New Housing. Highlights. 

https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/highlights.html 

U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). Explore census data. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ 

U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). Select a Dataset & Vintage. Explore Data. 

https://data.census.gov/mdat/#/ 

Viola, J., Cooper, D., & Olson, B. (2018). Evaluation of Habitat for Humanity AmeriCorps 

Program 2016-2019. 

https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/HabitatforHumanityInt 

l_19ED211822_Report1_Revised_508_1.pdf 

Zeidenberg, M., Freeman, B., Friedman, E., & Porowski, A. (2016). Results from the 

National Student Clearinghouse Data Match: New Methods for Assessing 

AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes. 

https://americorps.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_NatlStudent_Cleari 

nghouseMatch_AlumniOutcomes_2016_1.pdfh