US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access 

A SCAN OF THE EVOLVING FIELD OF 

BANK ON INITIATIVES

BANKING ON 

OPPORTUNITY
Prepared by the National League of Cities Institute for Youth, Education and Families under contract with 

CFED and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Assistance was additionally provided by CFED, the New 

America Foundation, and the San Francisco Office of Financial Empowerment.

Contract Number: GS-10F-0177L

Order Number: TDOX11-F-0036

 2011
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 3

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Table of Contents

Executive Summary................................................................................................................................................................. 4

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................ 6

About this Report................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Access to Banking: A Strategy for Building Financial Security.................................................................................................. 8

Why Does Access to Banking Matter?...................................................................................................................................... 8

Why are People Unbanked?..................................................................................................................................................... 8

Who are the Unbanked?.......................................................................................................................................................... 9

The Growing Field of Financial Access .................................................................................................................................. 11 

Financial Access Approaches .................................................................................................................................................. 11

Financial Access Models ........................................................................................................................................................ 12

Campaigns that Promote Savings and Financial Access............................................................................................................ 14

The Bank On Model ............................................................................................................................................................ 16

The Bank On Landscape Today ............................................................................................................................................. 17 

Program Leadership and Staffing............................................................................................................................................ 17

Partnerships .......................................................................................................................................................................... 17

Budgets and Funding............................................................................................................................................................. 19

Bank On Financial Product Features...................................................................................................................................... 20

Financial Education............................................................................................................................................................... 21 

Marketing and Outreach Strategies ........................................................................................................................................ 22

Use of Technology................................................................................................................................................................. 24 

Bank On Program Impact: Tracking Outcomes ..................................................................................................................... 25 

Program Outcomes ............................................................................................................................................................... 26

Indirect Benefits of Bank On Programs.................................................................................................................................. 27

Keys to a Successful Program................................................................................................................................................. 27

Early Involvement of Local Elected Officials and Financial Institutions ................................................................................... 27 

Early and Thorough Planning ................................................................................................................................................ 28

Robust Partnerships and Organized Planning Structures......................................................................................................... 28 

Setting Measurable Goals....................................................................................................................................................... 28

Community Needs Assessments and Preliminary Research ..................................................................................................... 28

Flexibility versus Uniform Standards...................................................................................................................................... 29

Challenges for Bank On Initiatives......................................................................................................................................... 29 

Tracking Data and Assessing Impact ....................................................................................................................................... 29

Other Financial Institution Considerations............................................................................................................................. 30 

Funding Limitations.............................................................................................................................................................. 32

Maintaining Momentum ....................................................................................................................................................... 33 

Financial Education Delivery................................................................................................................................................. 33 

Changing Regulatory Environment and its Impact on Banks.................................................................................................. 33

Leadership Transitions............................................................................................................................................................ 34

Gaps within the Financial Access Field................................................................................................................................... 35

Financial Access on the Horizon............................................................................................................................................ 35 

Integration with Other Financial Services.............................................................................................................................. 36 

Targeting Specific Populations ............................................................................................................................................... 37

Connecting Bank On with other Asset-Building Opportunities.............................................................................................. 38

Potential Roles for State, Regional Initiatives......................................................................................................................... 39

 Appendix 1: Bank On Program Information ..................................................................................................................... 40

 Appendix 2: Bank On Case Studies Overview: Savannah, GA and Seattle-King County, WA ............................................. 48

 Appendix 3: Bank On Savannah Case Study...................................................................................................................... 50

 Appendix 4: Funding and In-Kind Support...................................................................................................................... 61

 Appendix 5: Personal Stories of Bank On Customers ....................................................................................................... 62

 Appendix 6: Selected Financial Institution Descriptions.................................................................................................... 63

 Appendix 7: Bank on Seattle-King County Case Study ..................................................................................................... 64

 Appendix 8: Success! Newly Banked Customers Tell Their Stories .................................................................................... 82

 Appendix 9: Seattle-King County Case Study Sources....................................................................................................... 83

 Appendix 10: Initial Invitation to Banks........................................................................................................................... 85

 Appendix 11: Initial Invitation to Credit Unions.............................................................................................................. 86

 Appendix 12: Outreach Brochure .................................................................................................................................... 87

 Appendix 13: Financial Assessment Plan........................................................................................................................... 88

 Appendix 14: Financial Education Content Standards....................................................................................................... 89

 Appendix 15: Financial Education Brochure .................................................................................................................... 91

 Appendix 16: Template for Clear, Written Explanation of Fees.......................................................................................... 92
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

4 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Since its successful inception in 2006 in the city of San Francisco, the Bank On model has gained support from 

state and local officials across the U.S. as a way of bringing unbanked and underbanked consumers into the financial 

mainstream. In addition to connecting unbanked individuals to low-cost accounts, Bank On initiatives involve 

efforts to raise public awareness, provide targeted outreach, and expand access to financial education. The appeal of 

Bank On is straightforward: it addresses the widely-recognized challenge of financial access through interventions 

that are low-cost and responsive to the needs of both consumers and providers of basic financial services. There are 

currently dozens of communities that have implemented Bank On initiatives, and many more are planned.

Current Situation and Findings

In general, Bank On programs benefit from strong leadership provided by local or state government leaders. Local 

governments have been engaged in most Bank On programs developed to date and play a lead coordinating role in 

most programs. However, it should be noted that while local authorities play a pivotal role in bringing together the 

initiative, the effectiveness of the Bank On model is actually driven primarily by the partnerships formed among 

local governments, financial institutions, community groups and nonprofit organizations, and financial regulators. 

Each Bank On partner plays a unique role in program development and implementation. Because of the nature of 

the model, no one entity could successfully create and manage a Bank On initiative without the others. 

A key foundational component of Bank On programs is the transaction account that is offered to unbanked 

consumers. Thus, Bank On program leaders carefully negotiate the product criteria with financial institutions to 

ensure that they meet the needs of the target population. At the same time, participating financial institutions need 

to feel comfortable with a product that will meet their business needs. A compromise is usually necessary among 

the parties to ensure that everyone’s objectives are met. Some of the most common baseline products offered by 

financial institutions to the unbanked as part of the Bank On initiative include no or low monthly account fees 

and minimum monthly balance, flexibility in opening accounts for individuals who have a record in ChexSystems, 

ways to minimize overdraft fees, and acceptance of alternative forms of identification such as the Mexican consular 

card. Many financial institutions participating in Bank On initiatives have also offered other products that meet the 

specific needs of the unbanked and underbanked populations in their communities. 

Furthermore, in today’s ever evolving financial marketplace, individuals who possess limited knowledge on how 

to navigate the financial system are at a disadvantage. Accordingly, all Bank On initiatives to date have included 

some type of financial education component. Having accessible financial education available to prospective Bank 

On customers not only gives them opportunities to learn how to best use financial products and services, but 

also alleviates financial institutions’ hesitation to reach out to these traditionally high-risk individuals. Bank 

On initiatives typically offer financial education through existing providers, and often develop a set of financial 

education standards that providers should meet, covering important basic financial concepts. 

Other critical components of Bank On initiatives include their marketing and outreach strategies. 

Most communities designate a specific committee of Bank On partners to coordinate marketing and outreach; some 

turn to communications firms to help coordinate their advertising campaigns. Additionally, 28 Bank On initiatives 

have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City and County of San Francisco that allows 

them to use the City’s own marketing materials to promote their respective Bank On programs, thereby lowering 

costs. Popular media used to promote Bank Ons include radio, newspapers, billboards, bus ads, and websites. 

These aspects, among others, are critical to the successful implementation of a Bank On initiative. When combined 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 5

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

with comprehensive preliminary research on community needs, early involvement of local elected officials and 

financial institutions, organized planning structures and the setting of measurable goals, Bank On initiatives can 

become highly successful and effective in carrying out their expectations. 

Challenges Facing Bank On Initiatives

While the Bank On model is a promising new approach for expanding access to safe, affordable financial services 

for unbanked individuals, many programs have invariably faced challenges. One of the most pervasive problems 

facing Bank On initiatives has been tracking the appropriate data, and using it to assess the impact and efficacy 

of the programs. Tracking and evaluation have proved difficult because financial institutions are often limited in 

the information that they are able or willing to collect, and local governments and other partners do not have 

regulatory authority to enforce data collection. It is generally infeasible for financial institutions to track consumer 

outcomes beyond the aggregate number of accounts opened and basic account activity; they generally do not 

collect information about customers such as gender, ethnicity, and other demographic data for account opening. 

Due to this lack of individual-level data, it is difficult to fully gauge how Bank On programs affect the communities 

they serve, influence the financial behaviors of customers who open accounts with them, and determine the reasons 

behind customers who end up closing their accounts. 

Additional challenges Bank On initiatives are currently facing include maintaining momentum and further 

expanding the initiatives in order to enable them to reach out to more individuals. Newly implemented Bank 

On programs are hesitant to stray from the products that older programs are offering; this has inadvertently led 

the product criteria originally developed by Bank On San Francisco to become the “ceiling” to many Bank On 

programs. In fact, many subsequent initiatives have struggled with great efforts to convince financial institutions to 

offer additional beneficial features outside of the original Bank On San Francisco product such as the elimination 

overdraft protection charges, providing free money orders, capping monthly fees, or removing opening balance 

requirements. Furthermore, the changing regulatory environment of financial institutions may also serve as an 

impediment to Bank On programs. Recent research suggests financial institutions are becoming less willing to 

offer products to higher-risk markets or lower income consumers. These changes can impact Bank On initiatives as 

financial institutions reconsider the type of products to offer to the unbanked population. 

Future Directions

A Bank On initiative is flexible and easy to build upon in the sense that it can offer a platform for testing and 

delivering other innovative financial products for underserved populations. Limited evidence about account 

openings at this point suggest that Bank On programs appear to open new pathways for financial access for those 

individuals that were previously unbanked. Since access to mainstream financial services is only one step (albeit a 

very important one) towards financial security, future strategies to expand upon Bank On programs involve tying 

them together with other asset-building strategies. For instance, having Bank On programs work with initiatives 

like America Saves or AutoSave would continue to promote to Bank On customers the importance of savings and 

accumulating assets, ultimately making them more financial stable in the long run. 

The Bank On field is still relatively young, but there is great potential to build upon and continue the successes that 

have been observed at both a local and state level, and ultimately create a nationwide initiative that attends to the 

needs of underserved families, and works to eradicate financial instability throughout the country. 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

6 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Introduction

Since the first Bank On program was launched in San Francisco in 2006, this model of financial access has been 

refined, replicated, and identified as a leading strategy for state and local officials across the U.S. to bring unbanked 

and underbanked consumers into the financial mainstream. The Bank On concept is defined throughout this 

document as an initiative in which low-cost transaction and savings accounts are made available to unbanked 

individuals by federally insured banks and credit unions, on terms that are generally appropriate to people who have 

not had experience with such accounts, or have had previous poor experiences, and in which trusted community 

partners, such as government agencies and non-profit organizations encourage account opening and provide access 

to financial education. These programs are voluntary for all participants, and while there are many similarities across 

initiatives, key factors vary based on local needs. Bank On initiatives thrive upon collaborative partnerships among 

local government, financial institutions and community-based non-profit organizations. In addition to connecting 

unbanked individuals to low-cost bank accounts, Bank On programs involve efforts to raise public awareness, 

provide targeted outreach, and expand access to financial education. The appeal of Bank On is straightforward: it 

addresses the widely-recognized challenge of financial access through interventions that are low-cost and responsive 

to the needs of both consumers and providers of basic financial services. 

Research has thoroughly documented the size of the unbanked1 and underbanked2 population nationwide and 

the risks and costs associated with over-reliance on alternative financial services. These challenges are of particular 

interest to policymakers who view efforts to increase underserved consumers’ access to and use of basic banking 

services as an economic mobility strategy. Elected officials from different political parties and ideological 

backgrounds have championed Bank On initiatives because they offer an important service to residents without 

requiring new regulations or other legal mandates. Rather, Bank On relies on flexible, voluntary partnerships to 

achieve results. Private sector partners in a Bank On program gain access to new customers (many of whom have 

the capacity to transition into more frequently used and profitable products and services) and community goodwill. 

Consumers benefit from access to a safe place to keep their money, savings generated by using less-expensive 

services, more affordable credit products, and improved financial knowledge and capability. Additionally, the 

establishment of emergency savings to weather financial distress is beneficial to consumers. Communities benefit 

from more economically stable residents and can have additional positive outcomes from building collaboratives 

among financial institutions, non-profit organizations, government agencies and other entities. 

The flexibility inherent in the Bank On model also allows it to be tailored to meet the needs of a diverse 

range of communities. Cities, counties, regions and states have all successfully adapted Bank On to their unique 

requirements. Urban, suburban and rural areas alike have launched Bank On initiatives that are appropriate for 

different community needs and opportunities. 

1 Unbanked is defined throughout this report as those who do not have either a checking or savings account. This definition is 

based on the FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, December 2009. Available at: http://www.fdic.gov/

householdsurvey/. Hereafter cited as FDIC 2009.

2 Underbanked is defined throughout this report as those who have a checking or savings account, but rely on alternative financial 

services – specifically non-bank money orders and check-cashing services, payday loans, rent-to-own agreements, pawn shops 

or refund anticipation loans. This definition is based on the FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households, 

December 2009.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 7

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

About this Report

This report was prepared to provide background on the “Bank On” model, a new approach for expanding access to 

safe, affordable financial services for unbanked households. Although this field has grown and attracted significant 

attention in a short period of time, there has not yet been a comprehensive review of programs, or even a formal scan 

of how many programs exist and their locations. 

The purpose of this report is to describe the landscape of Bank On programs, their origins, and their context within 

a broader financial access field. The report provides basic information about Bank On programs that currently 

exist, including information about program structure, partnerships, and funding as well as an assessment of successes, 

challenges, special considerations and gaps in the field. Rather than providing a comprehensive review of all Bank 

On programs, the report is designed to present existing knowledge about the field using a snapshot of information 

gathered at a specific point in time. 

Information for this report comes from several sources:

• A Bank On program survey: The National League of Cities Institute for Youth, Education and Families (NLC) 

conducted an online survey of Bank On programs in October 2010. The survey was sent to nearly 100 known 

Bank On programs, including municipal and state initiatives that had already launched and those that were 

preparing to launch. Leaders of 49 programs responded to the survey.

• Research and information gathered for NLC’s publication, Bank On Cities: Connecting Residents to the Financial 

Mainstream.3

• Research and analysis from CFED’s forthcoming publication on the role of financial institutions in Bank On 

programs. 

• Conversations with Bank On program staff: NLC conducted short interviews with staff from nine Bank On 

programs to obtain more detailed information about certain aspects of their programs that were not included in the 

survey.

• Research from experts in the field: NLC reviewed data and analysis developed by experts in the financial access 

field, including the Center for Financial Services Innovation (CFSI), the New America Foundation, the Brookings 

Institution, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and others.

The rest of the report is organized into several sections that describe the overall financial access field, the emergence 

and growth of Bank On initiatives, details about the structure of existing programs, direct and indirect benefits 

and outcomes, key components of successful programs, challenges facing the Bank On field, and opportunities for 

expanding the reach and effectiveness of Bank On within the context of comprehensive financial access initiatives. 

3 Available at: http://www.nlc.org/find-city-solutions/iyef/family-economic-success/asset-building/bank-on-cities-toolkit.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

8 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Access to Banking: A Strategy for Building Financial Security

Research conducted by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in 2009 found that more than a quarter 

of U.S. households rely on alternative financial services to manage their money. Of these 30 million households, nine 

million are “unbanked” – they do not have a checking or a savings account. Twenty-one million are “underbanked” – 

they may have a checking or savings account but still use costly alternative financial services.4 

Why Does Access to Banking Matter?

A checking account with a bank or credit union, or a fully functional reloadable pre-paid card, provides a family 

with the means to make the basic financial transactions necessary for day-to-day life and facilitates saving. Individuals 

without a safe place to store their money are at greater risk of being victims of theft, have no way to access money 

remotely in the event of a disaster and are less likely to build assets.5 Without access to mainstream financial services, 

individuals may spend tens of thousands of dollars over a lifetime on the high fees associated with check cashing, 

money orders, and other alternative financial services. According to a study by the Brookings Institution, the average 

unbanked worker spends an estimated $40,000 throughout his or her life just to cash paychecks. Unbanked and 

underbanked individuals may also fall prey to short-term, high-interest “payday” loans offered at check cashing outlets 

and other fringe financial institutions, becoming trapped in endless cycles of debt.6 

In addition to the high individual cost associated with the use of fringe financial services, local economies suffer when 

residents are financially unstable. Communities in which a large proportion of households are struggling through 

financial crises confront greater needs and face the negative consequences of a cash economy, including eroded public 

safety due to increased theft and related crimes.7 

Why are People Unbanked?

There are many reasons why individuals do not have transactional accounts in a financial institution, or opt to use 

alternative financial services even if they do have one. The FDIC survey identified some common reasons:8 

• High costs or perceived high cost: Many individuals believe they do not have enough money to maintain an 

account and are often deterred by “hidden” fees such as high minimum balance requirements, monthly service 

charges, and overdraft fees. 

• Convenience: Banks and credit unions are often not accessible to low-income individuals due to their limited hours 

of operation and the lack of branches in some low-income neighborhoods.

• Need for immediate access to funds: For residents that do not use direct deposit, depositing a check into a checking 

account can take several days to clear.

4 FDIC 2009.

5 Barr, Michael S. 2004. “Banking the Poor: Policies to Bring Low-Income Americans into the Financial Mainstream.” Washington 

DC: The Brookings Institution. Available at: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2004/10childrenfamilies_

barr/20041001_Banking.pdf.

6 Fellowes, Matt and M. Mabanta. 2008. “Banking on Wealth: America’s New Retail Banking Infrastructure and Its Wealth-Building 

Potential.” Washington DC: The Brookings Institution, Metropolitan Policy Program. Available at: http://www.brookings.edu/

reports/2008/01_banking_fellowes.aspx.

7 Dreier, Peter, John Mollenkopf, and Todd Swanstrom. 2004. Second Edition, Revised. Place Matters: Metropolitics for the Twenty-first 

Century. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.; see also: Kubrin, Charis, Gregory D. Squires, & Steven M. Graves. “Does Fringe 

Banking Exacerbate Neighborhood and Crime Rates? Social Disorganization and the Ecology of Payday Lending.” September 2009. 

Working Paper.

8 FDIC 2009.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 9

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

• Lack of knowledge: Many individuals lack sufficient financial knowledge to navigate through the often 

complicated mainstream financial system.

• Identification requirements: Residents may believe they cannot open an account because they do not have a state 

issued driver’s license

• Previous banking problems: Individuals may be barred from opening an account due to mistakes they made in 

previous banking relationships.

• Overall perceptions of banking: Many low-income residents hold a general belief that banks are not for them.

Who are the Unbanked?

The unbanked population is diverse, with different groups facing their own unique barriers to entering the financial 

mainstream. The section below describes the largest, most underserved segments of the unbanked population.

Low-Income Households 

Low-income households comprise a large proportion of the unbanked population. Approximately 71 percent of 

unbanked households have annual earnings below $30,000.9 Many low-income individuals distrust or are unfamiliar 

with mainstream financial institutions and instead use costly alternative financial services. Mainstream financial service 

providers often fail to meet the needs of low-income consumers. Low-income neighborhoods often have fewer 

mainstream banks or credit unions, and families may face transportation barriers in travelling to more distant branches. 

Financial institutions’ hours of operation also pose challenges to low-income workers who often cannot leave their 

jobs midday to conduct financial transactions.

Minority Households

Minorities are more likely to be unbanked than white Americans. Black households (an estimated 21.7 percent) are 

most likely to be unbanked, followed by Hispanics (19.3 percent), and American Indians/Alaskans (15.6 percent). 

Overall, almost 54 percent of black households, 44.5 percent of American Indian/Alaskan households, and 43.3 percent 

of Hispanic households are either unbanked or underbanked.10 There is a high correlation between low-income and 

minority groups it is therefore not surprising that minority groups face some of the same barriers to mainstream banking 

as low-income households, including intergenerational mistrust or negative experiences with banks.

Immigrants

Only 63 percent of immigrant heads of household have a checking account compared to 76 percent of nativeborn household heads. This number accounts for immigrants from all countries. Latin American immigrants are the 

most likely to be unbanked or underbanked. Just 27 percent of Mexican and 34 percent of El Salvadoran heads of 

households have a checking account compared to 48 percent of Chinese immigrant heads of households, and 72 

percent of German immigrant household heads.11 

Many immigrant groups face similar challenges in attaining accounts, including limited English proficiency and 

communication barriers, distrust of banks due to weak institutions in their country of origin, and the tendency to 

locate in immigrant enclaves, which can create unique cultural orientations toward alternative financial institutions.12

9 FDIC 2009.

10 FDIC 2009. Note that the terms, “black,””white,” “Hispanic,” and “American Indian/Alaskan” are those used in the FDIC document.

11 “Financial Access for Immigrants: Lessons From Diverse Perspectives.” 2006. Chicago Federal Reserve Board & The Brookings 

Institution. Available at: http://www.brookings.edu/metro/pubs/20060504_financialaccess.pdf 

12 FDIC 2009.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

10 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

In addition, immigrants often face real or perceived barriers to opening a bank or credit union account due to various 

identification requirements. According to the FDIC, almost all financial institutions require some form of governmentissued identification, such as a driver’s license or passport, to open a new account. Only 27 percent of banks accept the 

Mexican Matricula Consular card, which is an identity card issued by Mexican consulates to their citizens living abroad. 

The card allows the Mexican government to offer identification for its citizens while also keeping a record of their 

country of residence.13 Thirty-eight percent of financial institutions accept Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers 

(ITINs) instead of a Social Security Number.14 An ITIN is a tax processing number issued by the Internal Revenue 

Service (IRS) to individuals, both resident and nonresident aliens, who need a U.S. taxpayer identification number to 

facilitate paying taxes but are not eligible for a Social Security Number (SSN).15

Immigrants also have distinct financial needs, most notably low-cost remittance products that enable them to send 

money back to relatives in their home countries. In 2004, Latin American and Caribbean immigrants sent a total of 

$34 billion in remittances to their home countries at a cost of approximately $2.4 billion in fees, and more than 40 

percent of all immigrants remit money to their countries of origin.16 Annual remittances have only climbed in the 

years following, with Latin American and Caribbean migrants sending $58.8 billion to their home region in 2009.17

Muslim immigrant groups and native-born Muslims may also face barriers to accessing mainstream financial 

products due to cultural prohibitions on the payment or acceptance of interest for borrowing and lending money. 

Because of these standards, some residents may not take advantage of interest-bearing accounts or loans offered by 

financial institutions. 

Individuals with Negative Banking Histories

Many unbanked individuals have made financial mistakes or had negative experiences with financial institutions in 

the past. Nearly 8.3 percent of unbanked households have had problematic banking histories, such as overdrafts or 

poor credit.18 These individuals are likely to have been reported to ChexSystems, a national database for banks that 

provides information based on check verifications about a potential customer’s banking history. Financial institutions 

use ChexSystems primarily to identify people who have had past problems with accounts. 

Most financial institutions have policies against opening accounts for individuals placed on the ChexSystems list. 

While individuals on ChexSystems may have had previous difficulties in managing a checking account, such as 

multiple overdrafts, the offense may have been unwitting. In some cases, the offense occurred in the distant past and 

access to safe, appropriate financial products and financial education can provide a fresh start for individuals who would 

become good customers. According to Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS), the company that owns 

the database, a ChexSystems record lasts for five years.19 Financial institutions are under no obligation to report that 

customers have “settled up” their accounts or to request the removal of a negative report from the system. Therefore, 

customers may be affected by a report to ChexSystems for the full five years, even if they have paid any outstanding 

balances.

According to the FDIC, 87 percent of banks use a third party customer screening device such as ChexSystems when 

13 “Consular ID Cards: Mexico and Beyond.” 2003. Migration Policy Institute.

14 FDIC 2009.

15 “General ITIN Information.” 2010. Washington DC: Internal Revenue Service.

16 FDIC 2009.

17 “Ten Years of Innovation in Remittances: Lessons Learned and Models for the Future.” Access at http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/

getdocument.aspx?docnum=35163520

18 FDIC 2009.

19 Interview with FIS, Inc. staff. April 2011. More information about FIS, Inc. available at: http://www.fisglobal.com/index.htm.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 11

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

opening new accounts. Twenty-five percent of banks surveyed automatically reject a new account application that 

receives a negative screening result at the branch location. Of those institutions, only 49 percent are able to override a 

negative result on site while a customer is trying to open a new account. Just 25 percent of banks offer some type of 

second chance account designed for individuals who cannot qualify for a traditional account due to negative banking 

histories.20 

The Growing Field of Financial Access

A number of new research studies published over the last few years describe the size and characteristics of the 

unbanked market and the patterns of reliance that unbanked and underbanked consumers have on loosely regulated, 

fringe financial service providers to meet their transaction needs.21 This information – in addition to the prominence 

of the subprime mortgage and foreclosure crisis – has increased the visibility of financial access issues in the media and 

among nonprofits and policymakers at all levels of government. It has also led to an increase in efforts to educate and 

protect consumers and expand access to an array of safe and affordable financial services, particularly for low-income 

households and communities of color.

This section provides a brief overview of some of the major efforts that have served to anchor and expand financial 

access in the U.S. We also briefly describe several basic models of banking access efforts that have taken place over the 

past decade before turning our attention to the details of the Bank On model for the remainder of the paper.22 

Financial Access Approaches

There have been various approaches to expanding financial access in the U.S. over the past several decades. One strand 

has to do with reducing discrimination via financial service providers and expanding access to credit among lowincome communities and communities of color. To this end, the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 was put in 

place to ensure that banks met the credit needs of the communities where they operate. 

Other laws are also intended promote the availability of fairly priced credit in traditionally underserved communities. 

The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) passed in 1975 requires financial institutions to maintain and annually 

disclose data concerning home purchases, pre-approvals, home improvements, and refinance applications.23 This 

information is used by the public and by regulators to identify possible discriminatory lending patterns. The Equal Credit 

Opportunity Act (ECOA) prohibits discrimination in any aspect of a consumer or commercial credit transaction based on 

race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, receipt of income from any public assistance program or the 

exercise, in good faith, of any right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act. The Fair Housing Act (FHA) prohibits 

discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, or handicap, in all aspects of residential real 

estate transactions, including, but not limited to the sale, retail, appraisal, and financing of dwellings.24 

Another approach has been to expand the availability of credit and financial services through creating and growing 

financial institutions with missions of serving underserved communities. Early community development banking 

efforts such as the creation of South Shore Bank in Chicago in 1973, were also inspired by the idea that providing 

20 FDIC 2009.

21 See for example: FDIC 2009; 2008 CFSI Underbanked Consumer Study; Fellowes, Matt and M. Mabanta. 2008. “Banking on Wealth: 

America’s New Retail Banking Infrastructure and Its Wealth-Building Potential.” Washington DC: The Brookings Institution, 

Metropolitan Policy Program. 

22 A more in-depth overview of early policy initiatives to help the unbanked can be found in John P. Caskey et. al. 2004. “The 

Unbanked in Mexico and the United States.” 

23 http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-3030.html#6500hmda1975.

24 http://www.fdic.gov/consumers/community/program.html.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

12 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

access to fairly priced capital for housing and business development in low-income communities and communities of 

color could not only be profitable but could help stabilize and revitalize these communities. Many such institutions are 

now considered community development financial institutions (CDFIs). A CDFI is a specialized, mission-driven financial 

institution that works in communities underserved by traditional financial institutions. CDFIs can be regulated institutions 

(banks and credit unions) and non-regulated institutions such as loan funds and venture capital funds. CDFIs provide a range 

of financial products and services in economically distressed markets, such as mortgage financing for low-income and firsttime homebuyers and not-for-profit developers, flexible underwriting and risk capital for needed community facilities, and 

technical assistance, commercial loans and investments to small start-up or expanding businesses in low-income areas. 

Among these mission-focused institutions are community-based financial institutions that have long existed to serve 

their communities with basic transaction and savings products, and credit. These include for-profit community banks, 

and credit unions, which are member-owned not-for-profit financial institutions. For example, many community 

development credit unions (CDCUs) have operated in Black or African American communities for decades, accepting 

deposits, cashing checks, making loans, issuing credit cards and providing other financial services. 

Financial Access Models

First Accounts

In 2002, the U.S. Department of the Treasury launched the First Accounts program to increase access to financial 

services among low- and moderate-income individuals (LMI)25 without bank or credit union accounts through the 

development of appropriate and replicable financial products and services, including financial education. The Treasury 

Department funded 15 organizations, including financial institutions, community-based non-profit organizations 

and one local government agency to develop or expand projects designed to provide low-cost checking or savings 

accounts. Over the course of two years, the First Accounts initiative facilitated access to accounts for more than 37,000 

previously unbanked individuals.26 

Alliances for Economic Inclusion

In 2006, FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair created the Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion to explore ways of 

bringing the unbanked into the financial mainstream. In 2007, the initiative was further expanded through the launch 

of regional Alliances for Economic Inclusion (AEI). These broad-based coalitions of financial institutions, communitybased organizations and other partners in communities across the country were supported by the FDIC with the goal 

of expanding the availability of basic financial products and services – including savings accounts, affordable remittance 

products, small-dollar loan programs, targeted financial education programs, alternative delivery channels and other 

asset-building programs – for underserved populations. For example, the AEI in the Gulf Coast region has focused 

on financial services gaps as well as hurricane recovery initiatives. The Gulf Coast coalition has 70 members and 

three subcommittees that have been working to: 1) create a mortgage program with alternative underwriting that can 

be used for the rehabilitation of hurricane-damaged homes, the refinancing of predatory mortgages, and foreclosure 

prevention; 2) increase the awareness and usage of the free Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) service and link 

more LMI taxpayers to savings opportunities; and 3) develop strategies to help small businesses recover through the 

development of special loan pools, technical assistance services and neighborhood small business information fairs.27 

25 Defined as a family income that does not exceed—(1) for nonmetropolitan areas, 80 percent of the statewide median family 

income; or (2) for metropolitan areas, 80 percent of the greater of the statewide median family income or metropolitan area 

median family income. 

26 “Findings from the First Accounts Program.” 2009. Washington DC: U.S. Department of the Treasury.

27 “AEI Regional Initiatives - Memphis Area Office.” FDIC. Available at: http://www.fdic.gov/consumers/community/AEI/regional/memphis.html
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 13

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

As of January 2011, there are 15 AEI coalitions located in the following areas28:

• Black Belt Counties, AL29

• Boston, MA

• Worcester, MA

• Chicago, IL

• Detroit/South Michigan, MI 

• Milwaukee, WI

• South Texas, TX30

• Kansas City, KS/MO 

• New Orleans/Southeast Louisiana, LA

• Mississippi Gulf Coast, MS 

• Little Rock, AR

• Baltimore, MD

• Wilmington, DE

• Rochester, NY

• Los Angeles, CA

AEI communities in which the FDIC has provided assistance in the launch or maintenance of Bank On campaigns include: 

Houston, TX (as part of South Texas AEI); Los Angeles, CA; Detroit, MI; and Bank On Central Texas, based in Austin.

Community Financial Access Pilot

In 2008, the Treasury Department launched the Community Financial Access Pilot (CFAP) in which Treasury 

Department officials worked with eight communities to increase the availability of financial education and mainstream 

financial services for underserved populations. The approaches used by local pilot sites varied substantially in accordance 

to each community’s respective needs, priorities and resources. Three of the pilot sites – Philadelphia, PA, Fresno, CA, and 

Cowlitz County, WA – implemented Bank On initiatives to meet CFAP goals. A fourth pilot site, Jacksonville, FL, built 

on its Fresh Start Accounts project through the CFAP to eventually develop Bank On Jacksonville. The CFAP included 

in-depth professional assistance to each site provided by two community consultants, without grant funding.31

New York City Office of Financial Empowerment

New York City’s Office of Financial Empowerment (OFE) was developed in 2006 as the first local government entity 

focused on educating, empowering, and protecting low-income residents in order to enable them to become more 

financially stable. OFE has piloted several innovative financial access programs. In 2010, building on their Opportunity NYC 

Basic Account Pilot, OFE created the NYC SafeStart Account. The city partnered with five banks and five credit unions to 

offer this starter account exclusively to clients at the city’s Financial Empowerment Centers. The account, which provides 

only an ATM card, does not have overdraft or monthly fees (provided that the minimum balance requirement of $25 is met).

Further, New York City’s OFE has also partnered with San Francisco as co-chairs of Cities for Financial 

Empowerment (CFE), a coalition of local governments in cities across the U.S. dedicated to advancing innovative 

28 http://www.fdic.gov/consumers/community/AEI/index.html.

29 The FDIC defines the Black Belt to include the counties of Barbour, Bullock, Butler, Choctaw, Clarke, Conecuh, Dallas, Escambia, 

Greene, Hale, Lowndes, Macon, Marengo, Monroe, Perry, Pickens, Sumter, Washington and Wilcox. The two adjoining Gulf Coast 

hurricane-impacted counties of Mobile and Baldwin, AL are also included in AEI efforts.

30 Primarily the cities of Austin, Houston, and San Antonio.

31 More information about the CFAP project is available at www.treasury.gov/cfap.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

14 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

financial empowerment initiatives as a means to improve the financial health of their residents. By expanding the 

vision of how municipal government can serve its citizens and create pathways for financial stability, CFE leverages 

politics in the service of at-risk communities, and provides a platform for cities to work and learn collectively, forging 

partnerships with public, private, and non-profit sectors. Besides the co-chairs, CFE member cities, as of early 2011, 

include Chicago, County of Hawai’i, Los Angeles, Miami, Newark, Providence, San Antonio, Savannah, and Seattle.32 

Campaigns that Promote Savings and Financial Access 

The formation of AEIs and Bank On was happening at the same time when many state coalitions that had 

traditionally focused their advocacy efforts on expanding access to the federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) or 

helping low-income families build assets began to get engaged in financial access issues. The large number of state 

and local tax coalitions around the country provided a natural infrastructure for stakeholders to begin raising residents’ 

awareness about the importance of protecting assets through a banking relationship or other type of financial service 

or product. Many states and cities started focusing on the issue in their existing asset-building coalitions. In Baltimore, 

MD, for example, the local asset-building organization, Baltimore CASH Campaign, was and continues to be a key 

player in the city’s financial access efforts, including tax time opportunities to open bank accounts and build assets. 

In addition, the issue of financial access became more prominent through national campaigns that began highlighting 

the need to connect unbanked and underbanked residents with safe, affordable financial products in order to ensure 

these residents’ short- and long-term financial stability. America Saves is a nationwide campaign managed by the 

Consumer Federation of America that works to build broad coalitions across the country of nonprofit, corporate, 

and government groups to help individuals and families save and build wealth. In a growing number of states and 

communities, these coalitions have organized and maintain local America Saves campaigns with various partners, 

structures and activities. In general, the campaigns offer residents access to a variety of web-based tools and other 

resources, such as workshops and financial planners, to equip them in learning how to save and build assets The 

campaigns also facilitate access, through financial institution partnerships, to affordable savings accounts and 

other financial products. There are approximately 60 state and local America Saves campaigns at various stages of 

development throughout the country.33

Bank On San Francisco

In 2005, the City and County of San Francisco began work on Bank On San Francisco, in partnership with the New 

America Foundation, Earned Assets Resource Network (EARN), the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and 15 

banks and credit unions. Bank On San Francisco was the first municipal program in the nation to address the needs 

of unbanked residents by actively moving the marketplace to offer financial products and services that are suitable 

for lower-income consumers. By developing an innovative partnership that draws on the strengths of government 

agencies, banks and credit unions, and a wide range of community partners, Bank On San Francisco partners united 

around the ambitious goal to bank 10,000 unbanked San Franciscans in two years. The pilot program was launched 

in September 2006. In its first five years, Bank On San Francisco opened more than 70,000 checking accounts for 

formerly unbanked individuals. 

Emergence and Growth of the Bank On Field

Municipal leaders in San Francisco first began developing the Bank On model in 2005. At that time, city leaders 

were noticing that the many of the families receiving the city’s new local Earned Income Tax Credit, the Working 

Families Credit, did not have an account with a bank or credit union in which to directly deposit their refund. The 

32 More information about CFE is available at its website www.cfecoalition.org.

33 “America Saves: About Us.” Available at: http://www.americasaves.org/about/.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 15

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Brookings Institution conducted research to further examine this issue and found that an estimated one in five San 

Franciscans, and half of the city’s Blacks/African-Americans and Hispanics/Latinos, did not have accounts and were 

paying 2 to 5 percent of their incomes to cash their paychecks.

In response, Mayor Gavin Newsom and City Treasurer José Cisneros invited financial institutions to join the city, the 

Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, and community-based nonprofit partners to create and launch Bank On San 

Francisco. The program would offer low- income residents alternatives to check-cashing outlets by increasing the 

supply of starter accounts that provided easy, affordable ways to deposit paychecks, pay bills, and save. 

The city launched Bank On San Francisco in September 2006 after over a year of development by a coalition of city officials, 

15 banks and credit unions, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, and a large number of community organizations. The 

program had a goal to bank 10,000 unbanked San Franciscans in two years. By the following year, the program surpassed its 

own expectations, with 11,110 previously unbanked San Franciscans acquiring accounts through the program. 

Following San Francisco’s lead, cities, counties, and states adopted the Bank On concept as a model for promoting 

access to mainstream financial services, supporting working families, and strengthening local economies. The program 

appeals to local leaders due to its replicable nature and its relatively low costs. Many of the communities that launched 

Bank On programs already had established key partnerships with financial institutions and community organizations 

resulting from other asset-building efforts, including EITC outreach campaigns, savings campaigns like America Saves 

or MoneySmart Week, asset-building coalitions and the FDIC’s Alliance for Economic Inclusion (AEI) coalitions. 

Many government agencies and nongovernmental organizations have worked directly with community leaders to 

help them develop Bank On initiatives. In response to the growing interest among municipal leaders in helping 

residents connect to the financial mainstream, NLC’s Institute for Youth, Education and Families launched the Bank 

On Cities Campaign in early 2008. The campaign was designed to help local elected officials and their senior staff in 

18 cities replicate the Bank On San Francisco model over a two-year period. Cities were encouraged to collaborate 

with financial institutions and community-based organizations to provide LMI residents with access to basic, low-cost 

financial services. The campaign also helped municipal officials develop and advance more comprehensive, local assetbuilding and asset-protection agendas to help families achieve financial stability. 

Between 2007 and 2010, NLC partnered with the City and County of San Francisco to provide technical assistance to nearly 

75 cities seeking to replicate the Bank On model. NLC also partnered with San Francisco officials to launch the www.

joinbankon.org web portal to streamline access to information and resources for emerging Bank On programs. In 2008, under 

Governor Schwarzenegger’s leadership, California became the first state to launch a Bank On initiative. A number of the state’s 

largest cities and financial institutions, along with United Way chapters and other partners, agreed to support the opening of 

accounts meeting minimum standards, provide financial education, and form coalitions to market the accounts. 

Geographic Variation of Bank On Programs

Although Bank On initiatives are most commonly led by local governments, a few states, counties, and regions have 

also sought to develop initiatives that cover a broader geographic area. Various state and regional entities such as 

governor’s offices, state treasurers, and regional nonprofit organizations have led these efforts. 

Regional efforts may focus on a county or several cities and towns within a state. For example, Bank On Central 

Texas, led by the United Way of Central Texas, encompasses Austin and the regional/metro area served by that United 

Way. Also in Texas, the Bank On Bryan program developed by the City of Bryan evolved into a regional Bank On 

Brazos Valley initiative. During the program development phase, it became clear that Bryan’s sister city, College 

Station, should be included since financial institution and other community partners served both cities equally. 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

16 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Statewide Bank On programs began to emerge beginning with the launch of Bank On California in 2008. A state 

government official such as a governor or state treasurer usually leads these statewide efforts. The goal of statewide 

programs so far has been to act as an umbrella effort to coordinate and help strengthen local initiatives within the state. 

There are currently statewide Bank On initiatives in California, Indiana, Illinois, and Florida. With the exception of 

Illinois, these programs were developed following the launch of one or two city-based programs. 

Statewide initiatives typically coordinate some of the primary tasks associated with developing a Bank On initiative, such 

as financial institution involvement and financial product negotiation. In some cases, financial institutions prefer to offer a 

common Bank On account across all local programs within a state rather than negotiating with each individual community. 

A state program can bolster local efforts in other ways. State legislators can advocate for policies that protect 

consumers and expand access to mainstream financial services. Officials in state departments, such as a treasurer’s 

office or banking department, can provide guidance and information to local programs. Statewide initiatives also have 

the potential to be especially useful in rural areas. Small, rural cities and towns often do not have the infrastructure 

necessary to build a program on their own. There may not be a diverse set of financial institutions within the local 

area, or there may be few community organizations with the capacity to conduct outreach or offer financial education 

to participants. A state program can offer resources to help programs in rural areas get off the ground. 

The Bank On Model

The Bank On model is driven by partnerships. Municipal leaders, community organizations, financial institutions, and 

other community stakeholders work together to create pathways to safe, affordable financial services for unbanked and 

underbanked individuals. Bank On programs increase the supply of “starter account products” by developing baseline 

criteria for Bank On products that participating financial institutions agree to offer, inform unbanked consumers about 

the benefits of account ownership and encourage them to open accounts, and raise community-wide awareness of the 

risks associated with being unbanked. Important Bank On goals include decreasing reliance on check cashers, payday 

lenders, and other predatory financial services and making high-quality money management education more easily 

available to underserved populations.

A typical Bank On financial product may include the following features:

• A low- or no-cost checking account;

• A low or no minimum monthly balance;

• Forgiveness of certain charges related to non-sufficient funds or overdrafts; 

• Flexibility in opening accounts for individuals in ChexSystems; and

• Acceptance of alternative forms of identification as primary identification, such as the Mexican Matricula Consular card.

Bank On programs also typically include a financial education component in order to help participants better manage 

their accounts and achieve and maintain financial stability. 

While none of the Bank On program leaders responding to the NLC survey require remittance products to be 

offered as part of their overall product suite, some programs have encouraged participating financial institutions to 

offer remittance opportunities to Bank On customers.34 For example, Bank On Houston requires that participating 

financial institutions offer at least one “additional” product feature beyond the standard criteria, with the provision of 

remittance products as a suggested way to satisfy this requirement. Similarly, most financial institutions participating in 

Bank On Florida offer a remittance product. 

34 “National Survey of Bank On Programs.” 2010. Washington DC: National League of Cities.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 17

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Through marketing and outreach campaigns, program leaders inform residents about the new financial products and 

services that are available. Marketing messages not only encourage use of the product, but also incorporate general 

public service messages about the importance of saving and keeping money safe. Community-based organization 

partners play a key role in conducting outreach to targeted, underserved populations that many financial institutions 

do not often reach through their own advertising.

The Bank On Landscape Today 

Since Bank On San Francisco was launched in 2006, efforts to replicate the model have spread across the country. Based on 

data collected by NLC as of April 2011, 32 cities, four states, and two regions have fully implemented Bank On initiatives. 

In 2007, Seattle became the first community to replicate the San Francisco model by launching Bank On Seattle-King 

County, and in 2008, two more community programs (Evansville, IN, and Los Angeles) and the first state program 

(Bank On California) were launched. As news of early program successes spread, more localities and states developed 

Bank On initiatives, with 10 new programs launched in 2009 and 13 more in 2010. In the first quarter of 2011, four 

more programs were launched. The four existing statewide programs were developed over a similar time frame as the 

city initiatives. After the launch of Bank On California in December 2008, Indiana and Illinois followed in 2009 and 

Bank On Florida in 2010. See the appendix for more information.

It generally takes local partners between six and 18 months to develop a Bank On initiative from an initial idea 

to a fully implemented program. By the summer of 2012, an estimated 20 additional programs that are now in 

development are likely to be launched. More efforts that are underway are in earlier stages of development, as local 

leaders that have expressed interest in the idea and are just beginning to plan. 

Program Leadership and Staffing

Bank On programs benefit from strong leadership provided by local or state government leaders. Local governments have 

been engaged in most Bank On program developed to date and play a lead coordinating role in most programs. Some 

efforts are jointly led by the city and a community partner. Many Bank On initiatives are created when a local elected 

official – most often a mayor, city councilmember, or a city treasurer – champions the program and establishes a steering 

committee for developing the program. City staff and coalition partners often carry out the day-to-day tasks. 

In some cases, a mayor and treasurer or a mayor and councilmember pair up to support the program, and each plays a different 

role in building public support for the program. For example, in Houston, then-City Controller Annise Parker, who is now 

mayor, played a lead role in bringing the Bank On concept to her city and coordinating efforts, while then-Mayor Bill White 

supported the initiative and used his “bully pulpit” to build public support. According to NLC’s survey, a community entity, 

such as a United Way or an asset-building coalition, acts as the primary coordinator for about 15 percent of programs. For 87 

percent of Bank On initiatives, one or more staff from a city agency or community organization dedicates a portion of their 

hours to managing the program. Others rely on volunteers or hire consultants to manage program development. 

Partnerships

Each Bank On partner plays a unique role in program development and implementation. Because of the nature of the 

model, no one entity could create and manage a Bank On program on its own. Typical partners in a Bank On initiative 

include municipal staff, federal regulatory agencies, nonprofit or community-based organization staff, and bank or credit 

union representatives. Some programs have also engaged different partners depending on specific community circumstances 

and needs. A varied set of partner organizations can help Bank On programs reach diverse segments of the population. 

The following four key partners have been part of every Bank On program launched thus far, according to 

information gathered for NLC’s survey.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

18 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Local Government

Local elected officials play an influential role in convening partners, uniting stakeholders around a common agenda, 

negotiating with financial institutions, enlisting community organizations, and generating publicity for a Bank On 

program. Local officials can designate staff from different city agencies to oversee development of the program. For 

example, in Indianapolis, City Neighborhood Liaisons provide information about Bank On Indy to underserved 

residents in low-income neighborhoods, subsidized housing developments and correctional facilities. The City of 

Bryan, TX utilized its media department to help Bank On Brazos Valley develop public service announcements to 

reach target audiences through popular local radio stations. Moreover, city leaders can gain the support of financial 

institutions and negotiate product development by leveraging the business relationship cities have as customers with 

large amounts of assets in local banks.

Financial Institutions 

Banks and credit unions are vital partners as the main point of delivery for a Bank On account. Financial institutions 

also have the expertise necessary in financial products and services to help other partners formulate a product strategy. 

Financial institution representatives who participate in the development of a Bank On initiative work in various 

departments which may include regional leadership teams, community development staff, or branch managers. 

Financial institution partners usually include a combination of large national banks, community and regional banks, 

credit unions and CDFIs. Bank On initiatives usually have a total of between eight and 12 financial institution 

partners, engaging between one and five of each type of institutions. Large banks are the most common partner for 

Bank On programs, perhaps because of their significant presence within communities and their ability to provide 

larger financial contributions to programs. 

Fewer Bank On programs reported involvement of CDFI partners. About 60 percent of programs engage one or more 

CDFIs while almost 40 percent of programs reported that they were not working with a CDFI. This relatively lower 

participation could be explained by the absence of CDFIs from some of the Bank On communities or that many 

CDFIs are loan funds which do not have the ability to offer retail financial products or transactional accounts. 

To date, only one Bank On initiative is known to include a non-bank pre-paid debit card provider. Bank on Central 

Texas collaborates with Mango Financial, to give participants the option of a prepaid Mastercard-branded debit card, which 

provides users account access through mobile phone or internet, rather than a physical financial institution location.

Community Groups/Non-Profit Organizations

Nonprofit community organizations such as local United Ways, faith-based organizations, neighborhood groups, and 

financial education providers are often most connected to unbanked and underbanked communities and provide 

important insights that help programs meet the needs of the target population. These partners are often seen as trusted 

messengers, facilitating outreach to unbanked residents. Community groups frequently serve as the program’s fiscal 

agent, receiving and managing any funding associated with the program. Although community groups usually work 

closely with city program leaders, NLC found that community organizations played a lead role in coordinating about 

15 percent of Bank On initiatives. 

In addition, other partners in the community that have supported Bank On programs include local universities, 

advocates for people with disabilities, utility companies, media partners (such as Univision and other ethnic media 

outlets), local businesses, police officers, former local elected officials, marketing firms, and state officials. For example, 

in Dallas, the police department has played a strong role in Bank On outreach because the department views financial 

access as an important public safety issue. In another example of creative partnerships, Bank On Fresno leaders worked 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 19

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

with the Spanish-language television and media company, Univision, to create several public service announcements 

and vignettes that promoted the program and the importance of financial education to Spanish-speaking residents. 

Universities have been an asset to several Bank On initiatives, providing expertise in research, financial education and 

other key aspects of the program. For example, before designing Bank On Savannah, program planners worked with 

Savannah State University to assess the local financial landscape and learn how residents were using banks and alternative 

financial service outlets. In Indianapolis, the Bank On Indy tracking committee partnered with Indiana University and 

Purdue University on a performance measurement project to improve the program’s data tracking and evaluation process. 

Financial Regulators

Federal financial regulators have proven to be essential partners in Bank On initiatives. The Federal Reserve Bank of 

San Francisco played a key role in the creation of the first Bank On initiative. Community affairs officers in various 

Federal Reserve Banks, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Office of the Comptroller of 

the Currency (OCC) have supported other local Bank On initiatives by providing guidance on financial product 

development and banking practices and by helping engage and convene financial institution representatives. 

Regulatory partners have also helped conduct preliminary research on community needs, and offered their general 

expertise, experience, and credibility in working with financial institutions to assist underserved markets. Finally, 

regulatory partners act as data repositories by collecting program data from financial institutions and sharing it 

with other program partners. According to NLC’s survey, federal regulators are involved in 90 percent of Bank On 

programs. About three-quarters of programs partner with regional Federal Reserve Banks and almost 70 percent 

partner with regional FDIC community affairs offices. 

Some programs, such as Bank On Manhattan and Bank On Seattle-King County, also partner with state financial 

regulators. The Washington Department of Financial Institutions (DFI) is a co-sponsor of Bank On Seattle-King 

County and has been involved with the development and implementation of the program. Washington DFI also 

tracks and collects program data from participating financial institutions. The New York State Banking Department 

(NYSBD) co-hosted Bank On Manhattan’s initial meetings and participates in its steering committee. NYSBD also 

helped the program negotiate Bank On Manhattan’s baseline product features.

Budgets and Funding

Bank On initiatives have not had large budgets for their activities. Budgets vary widely in scope depending on the 

region and details of the program. Initiatives have pieced together limited funds, donated resources, and in-kind staff 

from government departments and community organizations, for example. Funds are predominantly spent on marketing 

materials, including design, billboard ads, bus cards, flyers, brochures, buckslips,35 window clings for financial institution 

branches, and a variety of other products. Other costs include contracts for services from commercial firms (e.g., for 

marketing or research) and/or nonprofit organizations (e.g., for fiscal agent services, financial education, etc.). Most 

programs spend less than 25 percent of their budgets on staffing. About 40 percent of respondents to NLC’s survey 

reported budgets of $25,000 or less, while 20 percent have budgets of more than $100,000. Bank On initiatives are 

funded through a combination of donated and in-kind services and resources, financial contributions from participating 

financial institutions, contributions at fundraising events and occasionally grant funding or cities’ general funds.36

Contributions from financial institutions are generally based on a formula that incorporates bank or credit union size 

35 Buckslips are slips of paper the size of a dollar bill, often inserted into direct mail campaigns. 

36 The city general fund covers activities not accounted for in other line items or grants. Most tax-funded functions – such as police 

and fire protection – are funded from a city’s general fund. The revenues contributing to a general city fund typically are from taxes, 

utility fees, licenses, permits and inspection fees and fines. From: Bland, Robert L. and Irene S. Rubin. “Budgeting: A Guide for 

Local Governments.” International City/County Management Association, Washington, D.C. 1997.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

20 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

and the number of branches located in the designated community or a tiered sponsorship structure with institutions 

contributing at different sponsorship levels. Bank On initiatives also seek funding from local foundations, community 

organizations, government agencies, businesses and other partners to support the work. 

Most initiatives budget for the first one to two years of operation and then conduct additional fundraising for longerterm marketing and outreach. After the first couple of years, programs typically do not require the same level of funding 

because many of the initial upfront costs, such as the development of the website or logo, are already in place. Program 

leaders also have a better sense of what marketing materials were most successful, which allows subsequent marketing 

campaigns to be more targeted. Bank On Indy, for example, was able to reduce program costs by finding more efficient 

ways of printing marketing materials and targeting specific populations instead of using mass marketing techniques. 

Because program leaders also secured donated billboards and bus cards, only production costs were incurred. 

The cost of a Bank On program is often reduced by the donation of in-kind services and resources by local and national 

partners. For example, the City of San Francisco received pro bono marketing materials from a marketing firm and 

allowed those materials to be used by other Bank On initiatives free of charge. By sharing these materials, San Francisco 

leaders helped communities that took advantage of this offer significantly decrease the initial costs of their initiatives. 

Bank On Financial Product Features

A key foundational component of Bank On programs is the transaction account that is offered to unbanked 

consumers. Therefore, Bank On program leaders carefully negotiate the product criteria with financial institutions to 

ensure that they meet the needs of the target population. At the same time, participating financial institutions need to 

feel comfortable with a product that will meet their business needs.

Therefore, many Bank On programs have conducted initial research on the financial services needs of the community 

and identified existing products in participating financial institutions that are targeted toward underserved consumers. 

Financial institution and regulatory partners have also provided important feedback on product development.

Cities that have launched Bank On programs have developed similar baseline products, which typically adopt the 

following standard components based on the original Bank On San Francisco model:

37

38

39

37 “Low” monthly fees are not always defined by each individual Bank On program. However, typically they refer to fees that are less 

than $10.

38 These include forgiveness of a series of overdraft charges within the first year; the option to opt-in to overdraft protection (versus 

automatic enrollment); encouraging financial education to learn how to avoid overdraft charges and how much they can cost over 

time.

39 Financial institutions consider alternative identifications “strong” if it includes of layers of protections to ensure that the person 

using the card is in fact, the person he/she claims to be. This includes identifying items such as a photo, the address, date of birth, 

holograms, and other security mechanisms.

Product Feature Percentage of programs 

responding to NLC’s survey

No or low monthly fees (under $10)37 100%

Low or no minimum monthly balance 80%

Flexibility in opening accounts for individuals who have been in ChexSystems. 80%

Ways to minimize overdraft fees38 72%

Acceptance of alternative forms of identification, such as consular identification 39 69%

A savings account or other savings option 47%
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 21

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Some programs built on the standard Bank On product by adding other components that meet the specific needs of 

the unbanked and underbanked populations in their communities. For example, Bank On Newark offers customers 

one free money order per month as a feature of their baseline product because many local residents rely on money 

orders to pay their rent. Customers signing up for Bank On D.C. accounts would have to “opt in” for overdraft 

protection, rather than automatically being placed in the program. Other additional product components that some 

programs added to their basic accounts include:

• A free ATM or debit card; 

• Clear and thorough disclosure of bank product features and policies;

• Free online banking; and

• Encouragement of direct deposit.

Access to safe, appropriate financial products and financial education can provide a fresh start for individuals who 

are in ChexSystems for reasons other than fraud, helping them become low-risk, sustainable accountholders. Bank 

On programs and other financial access initiatives have made it a priority to provide pathways to the financial 

mainstream for those in ChexSystems. Strategies have included mandating financial education before an individual 

on ChexSystems can open an account, flexible restitution policies, or provisions for opening accounts when 

individuals have a ChexSystems history that is more than six months old. According to NLC’s Bank On survey, 80 

percent of programs require that participating institutions provide options for individuals in ChexSystems as part of 

their baseline product.

Financial Education 

In today’s constantly changing financial marketplace, people can choose from countless financial services options, 

many of which can be detrimental to individuals who lack the knowledge to navigate the financial system or have 

struggled with banking in the past. Bank On initiatives have addressed this issue by providing accessible financial 

education, which may also alleviate financial institutions’ hesitation to reach out to unbanked individuals. Findings 

from the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s CFAP report reinforce the importance of financial education in 

promoting the successful use of financial products and services.40

All respondents to NLC’s survey have some type of financial education component within their Bank On programs. 

Most programs make financial education available to all Bank On customers but generally do not require financial 

education in order to obtain an account. However, some initiatives, such as the one in Cowlitz County, WA, require 

financial education for participants in the ChexSystems database who seek second chance or “fresh start” accounts. 

This requirement helps financial institutions feel more comfortable in offering accounts to this traditionally highrisk population. Some initiatives, such as Bank On San Francisco, only require financial education for those with a 

ChexSystems history that is less than a year old. 

Classes and Curricula

Typically, Bank On initiatives coordinate with existing financial education classes in the community and provide 

that information to participants. Bank On initiatives often develop a set of financial education standards that 

providers should meet, which cover important, basic banking and financial management concepts. 

While most Bank On initiatives do not develop an independent financial education curriculum, a handful of 

communities have designed their own curricula to meet program goals. Bank On Evansville, IN leaders developed 

40 “Community Financial Access Pilot Report.” 2010. Washington DC: United States Department of the Treasury. Available at:

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/financial-education/Documents/Community%20Financial%20Access%20Pilot%20Report.pdf.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

22 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

a financial education curriculum and complementary training guide for instructors that is targeted specifically 

toward Bank On customers. In Jacksonville, FL, program partners developed a special financial education 

curriculum for participants with a ChexSystems history. Bank On Jacksonville’s financial education committee, 

working with the University of Florida and Duval County Cooperative Extension combined the Get Checking 

curriculum with relevant Money Smart modules to create “Fresh $tart Training.” After successfully completing the 

one-day workshop, participants receive certificates that will allow them to open accounts at participating banks and 

credit unions.41 

Many programs use a combination of existing financial education classes offered in the community and the FDIC’s 

Money Smart curriculum. Money Smart is a comprehensive financial education curriculum designed to help LMI 

and financially underserved individuals enhance their financial skills and develop informed, positive relationships 

with banks and credit unions.42 

Money Smart is widely used for a number of reasons, including its comprehensiveness, ease of use, and availability 

in multiple languages. 

Financial Education Delivery

In most Bank On initiatives, financial education is delivered in a classroom setting on a regular basis (typically 

weekly or monthly). Program partners strive to make educational opportunities available at times and locations that 

are convenient to participants. Bank On customers learn about financial education opportunities from financial 

institutions when they open accounts, or through relationships with community organizations, which either directly 

provide or refer to the financial education. Classes are also advertised on partner websites or in other community 

resource materials.

Encouraging attendance at financial education classes can be challenging because the lives of working families are 

often hectic. For some families, lack of transportation or child care pose barriers to participation. As a result, a few 

programs provide incentives for participating in financial education. For example, some financial institutions in 

Seattle-King County offer a $50 or $100 incentive for customers who attend classes. In one Bank On program in 

Illinois, financial education participants receive food vouchers from grocery stores and food pantries.

In a small number of programs, including Bank On San Francisco, one-on-one financial counseling or coaching 

is available to Bank On participants. This more intensive coaching method can more directly address participants’ 

specific financial concerns and increase their financial capability in a more targeted way.

Web-based financial education has also gained attention. In Washington, DC, Bank On customers are encouraged 

to create profiles and participate in online, goal-based financial education. Bank on D.C partnered with Financial 

Education Literacy Advisors (FELA) to create an online portal that helps clients identify goals, interests and needs, 

measures learning outcomes, and connects clients with resources that help them achieve their personal financial goals. 

Marketing and Outreach Strategies

Thoughtful marketing and outreach strategies are necessary to inform the public about Bank On initiatives. In 

some communities, marketing campaigns also contain public service messages about the importance of using 

mainstream banking instead of high-cost alternative services and the benefits of saving and storing money in a 

41 To learn more about Bank on Jacksonville and its Fresh $tart program, visit: http://www.bankonjacksonville.com/wp-content/

uploads/2011/02/Fresh-Start-Brochure-121010.pdf.

42 More information about Money Smart is available on the FDIC’s website: http://www.fdic.gov/consumers/consumer/moneysmart/.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 23

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

safe place. Most communities designate a specific committee of Bank On partners to coordinate marketing and 

outreach. Some Bank On initiatives turn to communications firms to help coordinate their advertising campaigns. 

San Francisco laid the groundwork for many other Bank On initiatives’ marketing efforts. The city received 

pro bono services from McCann Worldgroup, a large marketing firm that created all of the program’s marketing 

materials. The city then made these materials available to other Bank On initiatives. To date, 28 Bank On programs 

have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City and County of San Francisco to use these 

materials in their marketing campaigns. The MOU requires programs to use the materials solely to promote a Banx 

On program that is consistent with the original model launched in San Francisco. 

Bank On programs use a variety of materials and media to promote their products and services, including earned 

media (such as interviews on local radio programs), with marketing efforts often determined by the available 

budget. Local media outreach may involve public service announcements, op-eds in local newspapers, insertion 

in voter information guides, and sound bites on television and radio. Distribution of printed materials is often a 

large component of most Bank On marketing campaigns. Some Bank On campaigns have used outdoor marketing 

options such as billboards, bus ads, and posters placed in bus shelters and other public locations. The messages in 

these outreach materials reflect local needs. For example, San Francisco’s marketing materials highlight the high 

costs of alternative financial services with advertisements that read, “Check Cashing Shrinks Your Paycheck. Now 

You Can Open a Bank Account.”43 

Fliers and buckslips are often made available at banks and community-based organizations and distributed to 

employers, affordable housing providers, city agencies, and other settings frequented by unbanked residents. Several 

communities, including St. Petersburg, FL, and Houston, TX have conducted direct mail campaigns with key 

partners such as the local utility company and school districts. 

The majority of Bank On programs have websites that provide information about which financial institutions offer 

accounts, in addition to other information, such as sites offering financial education and counseling, and event calendars. 

Social marketing also seems o be an effective outreach strategy. For example, Bank On Fresno has combined traditional 

marketing and outreach strategies with use of social media – including Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and Mindhub – and 

43 For more information, visit http://media.bankonsf.org/en/PDF/BankonSFCaseStudy.pdf.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

24 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

marketing through college campuses, Univision vignettes, and public service announcements in ten languages.

Many communities use a local service referral phone line to provide callers with information about Bank On opportunities. 

These services include 211 lines run by the local United Way and 311 lines run by cities, which are designed to provide 

residents with general information about local public services. In Seattle-King County, Bank On program information is 

incorporated into the city’s online public benefit screening tool, PeoplePoint. PeoplePoint offers service providers in multiple 

agencies a way to assess clients’ eligibility for public benefits, including food stamps, health insurance, and utility assistance. 

Service referral lines help cities assess the impact of their marketing campaigns. In San Francisco, referral line callers 

are asked how they heard about Bank On. The most frequent responses from residents that call the referral line are 

that they learned about the program through bus and billboard ads. In many cities, financial institutions also track 

referral mechanisms. The most common method of referrals reported by financial institutions is “word of mouth,” 

including recommendations from people involved in community groups, churches and schools. 

Use of Technology 

Bank On Websites

Leaders of Bank On initiatives have used technology to enhance their programs in several ways. As mentioned 

above, almost all Bank On programs have a website to disseminate information to the public, potential customers, 

and partners. Some websites offer tools that customers can use to navigate the financial system. For example, 

several programs, including Bank On Denver and Bank On San Francisco, have a mapping tool, which can be used 

to search for financial institutions and products that meet certain criteria, such as location, monthly fees, and types 

of identification participating financial institutions will accept. 

Bank On Denver Mapping Tool

Bank On Denver leaders secured the assistance of a mapping design company, Maptive, to develop a mapping tool for 

the program’s website. The tool helps customers identify the financial institution that matches search criteria for branch 

location, product offerings, and bank identification requirements. Below is a screen shot from the mapping tool.44

44 To view Denver’s program locator tool, visit: http://www.bankondenver.org/map.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 25

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Bank On Philadelphia is among the programs that share marketing materials with local partners through a program 

website. Partners can access materials directly from the site, including posters for store windows, referral slips, and 

brochures. Many program websites also provide information about upcoming financial education classes and other events. 

Training

Training frontline staff in financial institutions and community organizations is an important component of Bank 

On initiatives. These staff must be well-versed in the program’s components since they are usually the first point of 

contact for potential customers. Some programs use online training tools, presentations and videos to reach a large 

number of frontline staff at one time. This method is particularly useful for statewide Bank On programs and other 

initiatives that are spread out over large geographic areas. For instance, Bank On program planners in Louisville, 

KY and Indiana, as well as in Manhattan regularly host webinar trainings for financial institution and community 

organization staff about their Bank On programs. Bank On Seattle-King County leaders created a training DVD, 

which outlined program details and was provided to all participating financial institutions to be shown to their staff. 

The video was also useful for sharing program information with the public.

Data Tracking

Some programs have used technology in creative ways to improve their data tracking efforts. For example, the Los 

Angeles Community Development Department partnered with community-based organizations to collect a rich set 

of data from potential and current Bank On customers. With the help of funders and other experts, program staff 

developed a computer-based intake questionnaire that gathers information about residents’ current financial services 

usage, level of debt, income and perceived future financial services needs. The questionnaire is delivered to clients 

of partnering community organizations and helps the city track the impact of the program on clients’ financial 

security. In Seattle-King County, Bank On partners developed a simplified online reporting tool to help financial 

institution staff enter information directly using a shared form that can be submitted on line. 

Bank On Program Impact: Tracking Outcomes

Because the Bank On field is still relatively new, there has been little research or evidence to date that tracks the 

impact of the model on individuals’ financial stability. However, all Bank On programs attempt to track some 

basic information about whether they are meeting their goals. Most Bank On programs have straightforward goals 

for opening a certain number of new accounts, typically 10 to 20 percent of the estimated number of unbanked 

residents in the area served (which has ranged so far from 500 to 200,000 new accounts) over one to two years. 

Other goals have included decreasing the number of check cashers in the community, increasing access to financial 

education, increasing the number of people using direct deposit, and concentrating resources and attention toward 

specific demographic groups such as homeless residents, youth, and seniors.

In general, Bank On initiatives track the following information:

• Basic account information, such as the number of Bank On accounts opened and closed;

• Account performance details, such as the average monthly balance, use of debit cards or other account features, 

and non-sufficient fund (NSF) occurrences;

• Marketing information that indicates how the customer learned about the program; and

• Indicators demonstrating what knowledge customers retain from financial education and how that education 

affects their success as accountholders.

These data are tracked by participating financial institutions and reported to program leaders or federal regulators. 

There have been many challenges associated with the data tracking process. Many initiatives have not collected 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

26 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

additional data on program impact beyond what is listed above because financial institutions do not track individual 

outcomes and conducting additional research can be cost prohibitive, an issue explored in greater detail below.

Program Outcomes

To date, all initiatives that have collected account data for at least one year have met their initial goals for opening 

accounts. The table below presents basic account data tracked for a sample of programs (these data include a selection 

of programs launched between 2006 and 2010): As discussed further under the section, Challenges for Bank On 

Initiatives - Tracking Data and Assessing Impact, below, aggregating data on accounts opened by individual financial 

institutions and from individual Bank On initiatives has posed to be a challenge, thus it is not possible to aggregate the 

numbers from all Bank On sites to date. 

Account Results from Selected Bank On Programs

45

45 Bank On California results include all of the cities under the Bank On California umbrella, including those which are listed in this table.

Program Name Number of New Accounts Opened Additional 

Information

Bank On Cowlitz County 1,311 (first 8 quarters) 821 savings accounts 

490 checking accounts

Bank On Denver 1,318 (7 of 10 banks reporting, first quarter)

Bank On Evansville 1,930

(approx. 8 quarters, data since February 2009)

Bank On Indy 12,980 (5 quarters)

Bank on Fresno 51,458 (7 quarters, through October 2010)

Bank On Los Angeles 56,550 (8 quarters)

Bank On Louisville 1,712 (2 quarters) average balance of $970

Bank On Manhattan 7,200 (first 2 quarters)

Bank On Sacramento 36,444 (8 quarters)

Bank On San Francisco 78,000 (approx. 16 quarters) average balance of $900

Bank On Seattle-King County 43,000 (approx. 9 quarters)

Bank On St. Pete 1,785 (5 quarters) average balance of 

$246.74

Bank On D.C. 2,600 (3 quarters)

Bank On California45 214,236 (8 quarters)
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 27

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Indirect Benefits of Bank On Programs

Bank On programs have had far-reaching outcomes on communities beyond the opening of accounts for 

underserved families. For some communities, particularly small or rural communities, a Bank On initiative 

provides a unique opportunity that did not previously exist to bring together important stakeholders around 

issues concerning financial access. Cities and states are well-positioned to use the coalitions and “infrastructure” 

developed through Bank On initiatives to initiate other programs that help families build and protect assets. 

For example, local officials in Gaithersburg, MD were able to use their Bank On program as a launchpad for 

the development of an outreach campaign connecting residents to free tax preparation services and the federal 

Earned Income Tax Credit. Since then, Gaithersburg leaders have been encouraging local employers to provide 

opportunities for their employees to participate in financial education, open accounts, and directly deposit 

paychecks into their accounts. A Bank On initiative can offer an initial “hook” that draws the attention of local 

officials to the financial challenges facing low- and moderate-income families.

Another unanticipated benefit of Bank On initiatives is the way in which they enhance community focus on financial 

education. In many communities, new partnerships with financial education providers are developed through 

the Bank On initiative, which offer opportunities to coordinate services more effectively for local residents. In 

Indianapolis, First Lady Winnie Ballard’s primary interest is improving financial literacy within her community. The 

Bank On Indy initiative helped her draw partner organizations’ attention to an issue about which she felt strongly. 

In Seattle-King County, the Bank On initiative provided the infrastructure to develop a broader financial stability 

event called “Financial Fitness Day,” which was co-sponsored by Bank On Seattle-King County. The event 

included activities such as free tax preparation, credit report review, screening for public benefits, college financial 

aid assistance, job search assistance, loan information, financial planning, home buying and mortgage application 

assistance, starting or growing a small business, avoiding identity theft, and legal assistance on financial issues, as well 

as opening accounts. The event drew a large audience and enabled recently elected Mayor Mike McGinn to tout 

the importance of financial access and act as a champion for the event. 

Keys to a Successful Program

Early Involvement of Local Elected Officials and Financial Institutions 

Local elected leaders often provide the initial spark for a Bank On campaign. Because local elected officials are 

usually highly visible, have strong name recognition, and are trusted voices in the community, they are a natural fit 

as the public face of the initiative. In addition, local officials have the leverage needed to engage a diverse set of 

stakeholders, especially financial institutions, and create a common, community-wide agenda around which partners 

can coalesce. Programs that have had little or no elected official involvement have had a more difficult time securing 

the involvement of financial institution partners and have experienced greater delays in project development.

Bank On initiatives have found that the earlier financial institutions are engaged, the more likely they are to become 

significantly involved in the initiative. For example, many program leaders have met individually with bank and credit 

union representatives to secure participation commitments prior to formally announcing the program and creating 

committee planning structures. Individuals leading a Bank On programs have found it important to engage either 

high-level financial institution staff who are authorized to make decisions, or representatives who have direct access to 

those staff. In Evansville, IN, an Old National Bank representative was integral in getting the Bank On initiative off 

the ground and has since assisted in the development of programs throughout the region served by the bank.46 

46 Old National Bank’s footprint includes Indiana, Kentucky, and Illinois.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

28 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Early and Thorough Planning

San Francisco’s in-depth planning process as well as the experiences of other cities demonstrate that the early stages 

of a Bank On initiative can have a tremendous impact on the program’s long-term success. More than half of Bank 

On initiatives surveyed by NLC required six to 12 months to plan their initiative prior to launch, which gives an 

indication of how much time is required to engage stakeholders and conduct thorough planning. Of the different 

“components” that comprise a Bank On program, many city officials have noted that developing a budget and 

creating a data tracking plan are perhaps the most important components for early planning. 

In launching a Bank On initiative, local entities are faced with the challenge of developing the program without 

substantial or centralized funding. Developing a budget at an early stage gives stakeholders a figure from which 

to “work backwards” and identify how to meet specific resource needs. For example, by estimating the cost of 

marketing and outreach, Bank On Newark leaders were able to tailor their requests for contributions from financial 

institutions to ensure that they would have enough funds. 

Early identification of and agreement on data tracking and analysis can also help mitigate some of the challenges 

described later in this report. Communities that have given early thought to this component have more success 

obtaining sufficient data from financial institutions. 

Robust Partnerships and Organized Planning Structures 

A variety of partners adds depth and provides the resources needed to develop and sustain a Bank On program. 

Community organizations have direct connections to the target population and provide invaluable assistance in 

outreach and financial education. Financial institutions develop and deliver the low-cost products. City staff serve 

as coordinators and conveners. Federal regulators have the capacity to help convene stakeholders and to impartially 

collect and analyze data from banks and credit unions to determine program impact. Each partner’s role has proven 

to be complementary for creating a successful program, though the structure and composition of the partnerships 

tend to vary from community to community. 

Every Bank On initiative has created some type of steering committee or work group structure to guide planning 

and implementation. Based on San Francisco’s model, most have chosen to create similar planning structures 

that include an overall steering committee to guide the work, as well as subcommittees that focus on the key 

components of a successful Bank On campaign. In general, these are: financial products and services; marketing 

and outreach; financial education/money management; and tracking and evaluation.47 

Setting Measurable Goals

Setting measurable goals has been an important strategy for ensuring that stakeholders remain engaged around a 

common agenda and measuring the success of the initiative. Bank On programs typically set goals for number of 

accounts opened but have also sought to achieve goals such as decreasing the use of alternative financial services 

or increasing access to financial education. Many of the more mature Bank On initiatives, including those in San 

Francisco, Fresno, and Savannah, have created annual reports that highlight goals and accomplishments. These 

documents are particularly effective in showcasing impact and garnering support for Bank On initiatives.

Community Needs Assessments and Preliminary Research

Assessments of the financial services landscape in a community have been valuable for highlighting local needs. 

These assessments often have a geographic component and identify how many residents lack bank or credit union 

accounts, barriers to access, and availability of mainstream and alternative financial services by neighborhood. 

47 National League of Cities, “Bank on Cities: Connecting Residents to the Financial Mainstream.”
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 29

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Many local Bank On program planners have conducted preliminary research. San Francisco leaders received planning 

assistance from the Brookings Institution. Some communities received assistance from national organizations such 

as NLC or through the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s CFAP. The CFAP community consultants identified 

potential partners in each of the program’s eight sites, as well as challenges and strengths specific to the communities 

in order to help them convene the most appropriate partners and implement the best approaches. NLC facilitated 

connections between city programs and organizations providing research assistance. These organizations included the 

Pew Charitable Trusts, which developed financial access profiles containing a snapshot of a city’s unbanked residents 

and a map of mainstream and alternative financial services, and the William J. Clinton Foundation, which helped cities 

conduct research on the financial landscape of specific neighborhoods.

Information about the unbanked and the communities’ financial landscape helped local stakeholders clearly 

define needs, leverage support and gain attention to the issue of financial access, create a baseline from which to 

develop measurable goals, guide program development, engage funders and partners, promote the development of 

appropriate financial products, and better evaluate the success of the program.

Flexibility versus Uniform Standards

Bank On initiatives are locally planned and driven. The flexibility inherent in this type of model is an important 

strength because it allows cities to meet the unique needs of their unbanked residents. For example, Bank On 

Newark included a low-cost remittance in their standard Bank On product after learning from surveys that many 

residents needed that option. In Savannah, Bank On leaders engaged the faith-based community because of its 

high level of trust and influence among residents in the community. Bank On Savannah hosts outreach events at 

houses of worship and works with religious leaders to distribute outreach materials and information about financial 

education opportunities to congregations throughout the city. 

However, the variation in programs that comes with flexibility can also create tension between local initiatives and 

national financial institutions that may prefer to offer a basic product across the regions they serve. This tension is 

further explored in the next section.

Challenges for Bank On Initiatives 

Tracking Data and Assessing Impact

Tracking and evaluation has been a constant challenge for Bank On programs because financial institutions are 

often limited in the information they are able and willing to track, and local governments and other partners have 

no authority to enforce data collection. It is often not feasible to track consumer outcomes beyond the aggregate 

number of accounts opened and basic account activity, and many financial institutions do not collect additional 

demographic data. In addition, confidentiality requirements restrict what kind of data financial institutions 

are able to share with outside partners. For example, financial institutions would be prohibited from releasing 

individual account details that Bank On program staff may want to compare with other data collected from 

residents. Because of this lack of individual-level data, it is difficult to understand how Bank On initiatives affect 

the communities they aim to serve, influence the financial behaviors and choices of those who open an account, 

and determine why a customer closes an account. 

Also, because financial institutions are the point of entry for the Bank On initiative, other partners may have little or 

no opportunity to interact directly with Bank On clients. This lack of access makes it difficult to connect customers 

with other beneficial services, such as financial education or credit counseling. Bank On coordinators also cannot 

follow up to verify whether customers were counted and tracked.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

30 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

There is not a strong enforcement mechanism to ensure that financial institutions track and report data consistently. 

Even if a Bank On program requires participating financial institutions to track and report data, program staff 

find it difficult to obtain accurate and timely information. From the financial institution’s perspective, it may not 

be easy to track these data. Tracking account information is an added responsibility for bank and credit union 

staff. Financial institutions that are unable to incorporate Bank On accounts into their existing electronic tracking 

systems effectively may have difficulty presenting accurate information. It may also be difficult to define and flag 

“Bank On” accounts consistently across financial institutions, and different institutions may be tracking different 

populations of Bank On customers. 

When data are tracked, they are self-reported and not verifiable. There may not be consistent definitions or 

measures of account activity tracked across all programs. For example, the term “average monthly balance” can 

mean a different thing to different institutions. Even the definition of “unbanked” can vary across and sometimes 

within programs. Despite efforts to clarify the process, there is no independent oversight to determine if accounts 

are accurately tracked. This lack of consistency may lead to both overcounting and undercounting. 

Also, because data are tracked on a per account basis, not by individual accountholders, financial institutions track 

only the number of accounts opened and not the number of individuals banked. For example, one person may open 

more than one account, or may close one account and open another at a different financial institution and therefore 

be counted twice. Banks and credit unions have no way of comparing accountholders to see if duplicate accounts 

are being tracked.

Finally, the rate of staff turnover in financial institution branches can be high and new staff may not have sufficient 

information about the program or understand their role in directing potential customers to the Bank On product 

and capturing important data at the point of opening an account 

Other Financial Institution Considerations

Local governments and community organizations have had to navigate sometimes uncharted waters when 

partnering with financial institutions through the Bank On process. This section identifies some of the challenges 

beyond data tracking that arise from their participation.48 

First, the support and engagement may vary by financial institutions’ size, mission, and the level of commitment 

of individual financial institution representatives. Financial institutions are concerned with the amount of staff 

time dedicated to what is often a six to 12-month negotiation process just to launch the program. They may also 

balk at having staff participate in numerous meetings, especially as they begin to engage in multiple local Bank On 

programs that may need to be staffed by the same financial institution representative. Some Bank On programs 

have found it easier to work with credit unions (both CDFI and non-CDFI) because by mission and design, these 

institutions are more focused on the needs of low or moderate income consumers and members. 

Many financial institutions face challenges in training staff about the various elements of the Bank On initiatives, 

including products, coding of accounts for data collection purposes, and referrals to and from financial education 

providers. For a financial institution with multiple branches, hundreds of staff members need to be trained regularly, 

as staff turnover is common in front line positions, such as tellers.

48 This section draws on research by CFED exploring financial institutions’ experiences with participation in Bank On programs, as well 

as field research conducted by the National League of Cities over the last three years with Bank On programs and their relationships 

with financial institution partners.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 31

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

In addition, financial institutions’ flexibility in meeting certain product criteria varies by type of institution. For example, 

credit unions, community banks and CDFIs may already be offering low-cost products and services to the unbanked market, 

which may facilitate their participation in a Bank On initiative because they do not have to modify their existing products 

and policies, and may also be able to respond more easily to program requirements due to having smaller footprints. Larger 

banks, on the other hand, are more likely to standardize products and services across markets and may therefore be less willing 

to modify or create a new type of account. The local branch managers of larger banks are also less likely to have the ability to 

make concessions or change existing policies. For example, the Bank On Newark product includes one free money order 

per month. At least one larger bank was not able to comply with this requirement and as a result could not be part of the 

program. Some large bank partners are eager to innovate and to participate meaningfully in the Bank On model, but prefer to 

do so in a standardized way, which can be frustrating for local initiatives trying to negotiate local features.

Although credit unions and local or regional banks may have more flexibility to modify or create new products 

for a local market or open accounts for unbanked customers, there is a tradeoff between having more consumerfriendly product standards and engaging a larger number of participating financial institutions, which often serve a 

larger market share. Larger banks have been important players in Bank On initiatives due to their larger resources, 

geographic reach and multiple locations. Many larger banks also have appropriate products aimed at the unbanked 

market segment, but these products are often not well advertised. Moreover, some consumers may be more likely 

to open an account at a large bank because they recognize the bank’s brand. 

Smaller financial institutions face their own unique challenges. Because credit unions and community banks 

generally already offer products that more closely match the needs of the unbanked, Bank On products, which 

are developed in negotiations that include banks, can sometimes end up being “weaker” or “watered down” by 

comparison since large banks do not share the same mission as many of the smaller institutions. Moreover, credit 

unions can feel excluded because of the “Bank On” language. 

Nevertheless, credit unions and community banks benefit by being a part of a community-wide initiative that provides 

opportunities for exposure and for better serving the community. For example, Express Credit Union, a CDFI credit union 

based in Seattle, benefited from its involvement in Bank On Seattle-King County’s financial education network and Financial 

Fitness days by gaining increased opportunities to build relationships with potential new members. The credit union also 

appreciates the relationships the initiative fosters among participating financial institutions and the increased customer base 

gained. For example, other participating credit unions will refer their customers to Express if they cannot serve them.49

The negotiation process between coalition partners and financial institutions, regardless of size and type, can be 

particularly time-consuming, complicated and challenging because of the conflicting interests of these entities. 

While the Bank On model aims to increase the supply of products that are appropriate for unbanked consumers, 

financial institutions are also concerned about their profit, risk, and security. Some financial institutions fear that a 

defined financial product that looks similar across institutions will impact their competitiveness within the market, 

and want the flexibility to change their products when needed or to express what they feel is their unique brand 

value proposition. For example, Bank On San Francisco leaders negotiated with financial institutions during a 

robust economy and created a Bank On product that was financially acceptable at that time. Since that time there 

has been a significant recession and major upheaval in the financial markets. It is unclear if financial institutions will 

be willing to offer such products in the future. Research conducted by the Center for Financial Services Innovation 

(CFSI), seems to support the uncertainty going forward, financial institutions are becoming more conservative, 

which may result in moving away from unbanked customers, rather than expanding their share of this market.50 

49 Interview with Dave Sieminski, Managing Director of Express Advantage, the non-profit affiliate of Express Credit Union. April 2011.

50 “The Future of Financial Services.” 2011. Webinar. Chicago, IL: Center for Financial Services Innovation. 

Available at: http://cfsinnovation.com/content/future-financial-services-1. Hereafter, CFSI 2011 Webinar.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

32 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Some additional product challenges include:

• While some initiatives have sought to develop more innovative products, they have found that financial 

institutions are hesitant to stray from what their peers have already undertaken in other Bank On programs. 

The product criteria developed by Bank On San Francisco inadvertently became a ceiling, and most subsequent 

initiatives have struggled to convince financial institutions, especially some of the larger banks, to offer additional 

features, such as eliminating overdraft protection charges, providing free money orders, capping monthly fees at 

$5, or removing opening balance requirements.51 

• Similarly, as more Bank On campaigns emerge, large national banks struggle to respond to multiple requests from 

different initiatives around the country or a region. 

• Financial institutions are concerned with the amount of time dedicated to the product negotiation process. It 

can also be time consuming to engage financial partners. Communities in which a high-level elected official is 

not engaged can struggle to reach agreement on product criteria.

• Some financial institutions have concerns about federal regulations pertaining to safety and soundness and 

customer identification mandates under the Bank Secrecy Act and USA PATRIOT Act. Since lack of acceptable 

identification is a major barrier to banking, these concerns can impact the reach of a Bank On initiative.

It may be that new types of financial products and services will be effective at meeting the needs of LMI customers 

in a manner that is sustainable for financial institutions. Such innovations may take the form of prepaid cards, or 

other services that employ greater use of technology. Innovations may also be built on partnerships among financial 

institutions, non-profit organizations, employers and others in order to determine and fill the regular financial 

service needs of consumers in a cost-effective manner.

Funding Limitations

Although Bank On programs cost relatively little, some funding is necessary for conducting an effective marketing 

campaign, coordinating large numbers of partners and using creative new strategies to improve financial access 

outcomes. The economic downturn has made it difficult for communities to allocate funding for innovative 

and comprehensive programs. Bank On initiatives typically rely most heavily on contributions from financial 

institutions and in-kind resources provided by coalition partners. All of these resources have diminished in the 

current economic climate. 

For some of the larger banks participating in multiple programs, there may be inconsistencies in contribution 

policies and practices. For example, a bank may contribute a certain amount to one program, but only offer a 

fraction of that amount to another program. Additionally, some banks may not be comfortable with funding 

multiple programs across the state or region they cover, or providing significant support over time. 

At the same time, community organizations, cities and states have been forced to reduce staff hours, increase other 

responsibilities, or lay off workers who often provide staff time to coordinate programs because of overall budget 

cuts. Enhancing the ability to dedicate sufficient staff to program implementation would be a major boost for 

programs that rely on staff or volunteers from multiple partners.

51 “Building Better Bank Ons: Top 10 Lessons From Bank On San Francisco”. Phillips, L. and Stuhldreher, A.. February 2011. 

Available at: http://newamerica.net/publications/policy/building_better_bank_ons 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 33

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Maintaining Momentum 

Many initiatives have struggled to keep coalition partners engaged and enthusiastic over time, particularly during long 

negotiation periods, times when the program development process becomes temporarily stalled, in the face of leadership 

transitions, or after launch. Planning meetings often require many hours of negotiation that can cause some level of 

“burnout.” Some initiatives have found that partners remain fully engaged until after the launch, at which point their 

enthusiasm and participation begin to wane. The period following the launch can be a key point at which efforts to 

maintain enthusiasm of local partners can ensure proper implementation and support any needed mid-course corrections. 

Financial Education Delivery 

As described earlier, financial education is a common component of Bank On initiatives. Yet many initiatives 

struggle with how to successfully deliver financial education so that it is convenient and appropriate for participants 

and improves their ability to maintain accounts and achieve financial stability. Research shows that the success of 

financial education programs has been mixed.52 There has been little quantitative evidence to suggest what specific 

curricula, formats, or delivery methods have the most impact on LMI individuals in helping gain greater financial 

stability, and innovation may be needed to enhance the cost-efficiency of financial education efforts. However, 

many Bank On leaders have reported that some type of financial education or counseling is important to ensure 

that Bank On participants successfully manage their accounts, and many report that financial education is well 

received and appreciated by participants.

Financial education is especially a topic of concern for communities that lack existing financial education 

opportunities. In these communities, locating appropriate, affordable curricula and instructors, as well as training 

opportunities for those instructors, can be a significant challenge. In some instances, Bank On leaders have chosen 

to develop their own new financial education component.

Communities with sufficient existing financial education programs face a different challenge related to coordination 

of services. Bank On program staff may identify a set of criteria or core competencies that can be used to 

ensure local financial education classes are appropriate for Bank On customers, and cover the content deemed 

appropriate by the financial institution partners. A second challenge is to coordinate the various classes to ensure 

that they offered at times and places convenient to the target audience. Child care, transportation and language 

barriers remain difficult obstacles for families seeking financial education. Bank On programs must consider these 

challenges when making referrals to financial education providers. 

Changing Regulatory Environment and its Impact on Financial Institutions

The financial services sector has undergone major changes in recent years, causing financial institutions to change 

their own products and programs. Recent financial regulatory changes may reduce financial institutions’ revenue 

from overdraft charges and interchange fees. According to research conducted by the CFSI, the financial crisis and 

resulting new regulations are causing financial institutions to be more conservative about their willingness to offer 

products to higher-risk markets or lower income consumers.53 These changes can impact Bank On initiatives ass 

and credit unions reconsider how to offer appropriate products to the unbanked. 

52 See: Collins, Michael J. 2010. “A Review of Financial Advice Models and the Take-up of Financial Advice.” Madison, WI: The Center 

for Financial Security. Available at: http://cfs.wisc.edu/Publications-Briefs/A_Review_of_Financial_Advice_Models_and_the_Takeup_of_Financial_Advice.pdf; see also: Lyons, A.C., Palmer, L., Jayaratne, K.S.U, and Scherpf. E. 2006. “Are We Making the Grade? A 

National Overview of Financial Education and Program Evaluation.” Journal of Consumer Affairs, 40: 208–235..

53 CFSI 2011 Webinar.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

34 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

• Overdraft fees have traditionally brought in millions of dollars in revenue for financial institutions but have also 

been highly controversial.54 A customer who overdraws his or her account on a purchase by just a few dollars 

could be charged up to $40 in fees. As a result, the Federal Reserve implemented changes to Regulation E, 

which stated that as of July 1, 2010, financial institutions could not charge overdraft fees for everyday debit card 

and ATM transactions unless the customer had “opted in” for the service. Financial institutions can no longer 

automatically include overdraft protection when someone opens an account.55

• Interchange fees are the fees that financial institutions receive every time a purchase is made with a debit card. 

The current fee that financial institutions receive is 1.14 percent of the purchase. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 included an amendment, known as the Durbin Amendment, 

which directs the Federal Reserve Board to consider limiting the interchange fees that banks can charge, 

particularly for debit cards. The Federal Reserve Board has established a cap in these fees of approximately 24 

cents per transaction.56 Smaller banks, with assets of less than $10 billion, would be exempt, although they may 

still be impacted if they use the same card providers.57 This would reduce fees earned by debit cards by 60-80 

percent and is estimated to cost the banking industry between $4 billion and $14 billion per year.58

As a result of these two changes, it may become increasingly difficult for Bank On initiatives to negotiate free or 

low-cost checking accounts. Several banks have already announced increases in their monthly fees for basic checking 

products, the elimination of certain rewards programs, and additional requirements that clients needs to meet in order 

to avoid fees. In some cases, the new, higher fees are above the guidelines agreed upon in local Bank On initiatives. 

These changes also create confusion for Bank On clients who have opened accounts with the assurance of transparent, 

low costs that would not change. Changing and hidden fees and costs are often the reason that many Bank On 

customers have either had negative experiences with banks or have avoided opening accounts in the past. There is 

tension when financial institutions find it necessary to change a product in a way that is contrary to their Bank On 

product agreement. Bank On initiatives are left with the choice of either renegotiating their product criteria to 

accommodate the new fee structure or asking those financial institutions to leave the collaborative. 

Leadership Transitions

Because Bank On initiatives are often driven by local elected champions, a change in administration can potentially 

disrupt an initiative. When an elected official leaves office, there is a risk that his or her successor will not continue 

to support the initiative, particularly if it is an initiative that is closely tied to the preceding administration. Bank 

On programs that have navigated this transition successfully, including San Francisco, Seattle-King County, and St. 

Petersburg, have done so because the program has been embedded in the infrastructure of the city and the community 

and because local leaders have supported maintaining the program. Elected official and staff transitions can be 

particularly challenging to a program that is still in the planning and has not yet launched the development stages. 

54 Paletta, Damian. “Fed Slaps Curbs on Overdraft Fees.” November 2009. The Wall Street Journal. Available at: http://online.wsj.

com/article/SB10001424052748703811604574532063720902686.html; see also: “Quick Facts on Overdraft Loans.” 2009. 

Washington DC: Center for Responsible Lending. Available at: http://www.responsiblelending.org/overdraft-loans/research-analysis/

quick-facts-on-overdraft-loans.html. 

55 “Highlights of Final Rules Regarding Overdraft Services.” November 2009. Washington DC: Federal Reserve Board. Available at: 

http://federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/bcreg20091112a2.pdf.

56 Federal Reserve Board Press Release, June 29, 2011 . 

Available at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/bcreg/20110629a.htm.

57 Summary of the Durbin Amendment on Interchange Fee Reform (Section 1075 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act).

58 Interchange Fee Study conducted by Cardhub.com based on data from based on data from The Nilson Report, annual reports 

from both VISA and MasterCard, and information from VISA and MasterCard’s interchange assessments. Updated March 2011. 

Available at http://education.cardhub.com/interchange-fee-study-2010/.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 35

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

The Evolving Field of Financial Access

The Center for Financial Services Innovation (CFSI) has identified a number of factors affecting the financial access 

field in the coming years, presenting both challenges and opportunities for Bank On programs.59 First, demographic 

changes may increase the importance of connecting residents to mainstream financial services. One challenge involves 

addressing the needs of an aging population, including many older adults who have experienced increasing debt over 

time or have few assets as they approach retirement. In addition, a substantial portion of recent population growth has 

been driven by the immigration of new residents, who are more likely to be unbanked. Finally, the youth and young 

adult population – more adept at using technology products – may be alienated from the traditional financial system 

and could benefit from some of the newer, innovative technological changes in the financial market.

The economic environment has changed dramatically since the start of the first Bank On initiatives. As a 

result, anecdotal evidence indicates that advocates and practitioners are likely to deemphasize the promotion of 

homeownership as an asset-building strategy and instead shift their focus to workforce development and savings 

(e.g., for emergencies, education, and retirement). Additionally, as lending standards have tightened, it appears 

that many underserved individuals will need credit building and repair services as well as access to alternative 

underwriting of affordable, sustainable mortgages made on reasonable terms.

According to CFSI research, regulatory reforms and technological advances are changing the types of financial 

products offered by financial institutions as well as the costs of products and services. As noted above, new 

regulatory rules could potentially lead financial institutions to become more risk averse.60 

Demographic and technological changes are also creating incentives for new financial service providers to enter the 

market. Over the past several years, large retailers such as Wal-Mart and Kmart have begun offering a range of lowcost financial products. In addition, a range of non-bank financial service companies such as Mango Financial and 

Progreso Financiero have created new products, such as prepaid debit cards and web- and mobile-based applications 

with advertising strategies that market specifically to low-income populations and communities of color, and which 

may provide terms and pricing that are better than “fringe” providers in the marketplace. Thus, there may be a 

new set of reasonable alternatives to both financial instutions and alternative financial service providers. While the 

goal of the Bank On model is to connect consumers to financial institution accounts, these new products may offer 

appropriate choices either as “transition” products to mainstream banking, or in some cases, as alternatives.

Gaps within the Financial Access Field

Although a basic transactional bank account can be considered the primary point of entry into the financial 

mainstream, unbanked and underbanked individuals must have access to a variety of safe, affordable products in 

order to fully protect and build their assets. While Bank On and other financial access initiatives have been effective 

at connecting unbanked residents with basic bank accounts, additional financial products such as small-dollar loans, 

microenterprise credit, savings options, and niche products like prepaid debit cards can also be valuable components 

of a broader asset-building strategy. 

Financial Access on the Horizon 

In communities around the country, new opportunities to expand financial access beyond transactional accounts 

have emerged, with cities building broader financial stability initiatives atop their Bank On efforts. Although 

collaborations change over time, maintaining a shared objective of helping families become financially stable will 

59 CFSI 2011 Webinar.

60 CFSI 2011 Webinar.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

36 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

enable Bank On programs to withstand changes in leadership, maintain focus, and take new steps to improve 

outcomes for residents. Broad-based financial access initiatives, whether they predate or grow out of Bank On 

efforts, can help cities make progress toward this goal. 

As Bank On leaders assess whether the initiative meets the specific needs of unbanked consumers in their 

communities, they may consider expanding the program to reach a larger number of residents after the pilot phase 

or first year, adding new features or services to supplement the baseline product, reaching out more intentionally to 

certain segments of the population, and connecting the Bank On initiative with other asset-building opportunities.

Integration with Other Financial Services 

A Bank On program or other financial access initiative can offer a platform for testing and delivering innovative 

financial products for underserved populations. Several Bank On programs incorporate other types of financial 

services into their product suite such as short-term, small-dollar loans, credit-building and repair services, 

acceptance of alternative data for evaluating credit and making alternative loans, and innovative savings options.

For example, Bank On programs in San Francisco, Savannah, and Seattle-King County have developed a smalldollar loan product or payday lending alternative. In Seattle-King County, three Bank On partners (one bank and 

two credit unions) are offering loans of up to $1,000 at an 18 percent annual percentage rate. Since San Francisco’s 

Payday Plus program was launched in 2010, six financial institution partners have made 300 Payday Plus loans to 

customers, with loans capped at $500. 

Some communities are encouraging customers to directly deposit their paychecks into bank accounts. City leaders 

in San Francisco, Savannah, and Gaithersburg work with local employers to encourage, and in some cases mandate, 

the use of direct deposit. Employers are often willing partners since direct deposit not only helps their unbanked 

employees save but also lowers their administrative costs.61 

Some emerging Bank On programs are in the planning stages of considering other ways to promote saving. For 

example, Bank On Save Up KC!, which encompasses Kansas City and some surrounding towns, is combining its 

Bank On program with an America Saves campaign. This program will have a greater emphasis on savings than 

other Bank On initiatives. 

Bank On D.C. and Bank On Denver are both considering the development of a business component to their 

initiatives to ensure that local entrepreneurs and small businesses have access to safe, affordable products that meet 

their specific business banking needs. Business accounts in traditional banks often charge high fees or are designed 

for larger companies. Programs are also offering products that in some ways model the convenience of highercost fringe services but are more affordable and still meet the needs of unbanked residents. For example, Bank 

On Central Texas partnered with Mango to offer a prepaid debit card that met the same “low cost” standard as the 

program’s transactional bank account ($10 or less per month). 

According to the limited evidence gathered to this point about account openings, Bank On and similar initiatives 

appear to open new pathways to the financial mainstream for a large segment of the unbanked population. 

However, several segments of this population face unique barriers to the financial mainstream and often remain 

underserved. Their diverse financial services needs are not always met by the products available through Bank On 

and other financial access initiatives.

61 Many Bank On programs have formal and informal agreements with their financial institution partners regarding what is expected 

of them, the baseline product features they are agreeing to, and what type of reporting they expect of them.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 37

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Targeting Specific Populations

As Bank On initiatives become established in their communities, they can increasingly target tailored products toward specific 

segments of the unbanked and underbanked population. For example, a community with a college or university may have a 

disproportionately large number of young adults who are unbanked or underbanked. A prepaid debit card offered as part of a 

Bank On initiative’s product suite may be appealing to this population and help introduce them to the financial mainstream. 

Many programs are interested in targeting vulnerable or underserved neighborhoods. Bank On Indy conducts 

targeted outreach to residents living in the largest low-income housing complexes in the city’s two lowest-income 

neighborhoods. Some Bank On programs located in areas with large Muslim populations are trying to find ways 

to make their products comply with Islamic banking rules. Other key constituencies may include people with 

disabilities, rural residents, or the youth population.

Financial Access for People with Disabilities

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, as of 2004, there were approximately 32 million adults (ages 18 or over) 

with disabilities living in the U.S. Although most research on the unbanked has not specifically focused on people 

with disabilities, the National Disability Institute estimates that thirty percent of adults with disabilities do not have 

either a basic checking or savings account, and are much more likely to be asset poor than the general population.62 

Additionally, research on taxpayers with disabilities suggests that they may need to be given special consideration 

when designing a financial access strategy. Like the unbanked population overall, these individuals are less likely 

to have attained a college education and more likely to have lower incomes.63 While it is not clear if low-income 

people with disabilities are more likely to be unbanked than other low-income Americans, they do report the need 

for special accommodations in banking activities. Constraints that they face include teller windows that are too 

high, a lack of accessible online banking for individuals with visual disabilities, and a lack of understanding among 

bank personnel of how to respond to the needs of customers with disabilities.64

Individuals with disabilities may be particularly concerned that keeping money in bank or credit union accounts could 

cause them to exceed asset tests for government benefits, and thus run the risk of losing their benefits. Bank On St. 

Petersburg leaders partnered with the National Disabilities Institute to train program partners on meeting the unique 

needs of people with disabilities, and are also reaching out to that segment of the community. Based on St. Petersburg’s 

model, all programs within Bank On Florida are incorporating these disability-specific components into their work.

Financial Access in Rural Communities

The expansion of the Bank On model has not been as widespread in rural communities as it has been in urban areas. 

Financial access initiatives are concentrated in urban areas, perhaps due to greater demand as well as stronger capacity 

and civic infrastructure on which to build such initiatives. However, access to the financial mainstream tends to be 

more limited for residents living in rural areas. Families in rural areas frequently lack access to affordable financial 

products, financial education and other asset-building supports such as volunteer income tax preparation sites.65

62 “The Business Case: Why Target People With Disabilities.” Washington DC: National Disability Institute. Available at: 

http://www.realeconomicimpact.org/Asset-Development-Community/The-Business-Case.aspx.

63 “Taxpayers with Disabilities: 2010 Report.” September 2010. Washington DC: Internal Revenue Service. Available at: 

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p4640.pdf.

64 “Educating Democracy: Tax and Financial Service Needs of Working Americans with Disabilities.” 2006. Washington DC: National 

Disability Institute.

65 See, for example, “Community Financial Access Pilot Report.” 2010. Washington DC: United States Department of the Treasury 

available at: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/financial-education/Pages/CFAP.aspx. and “Asset Building Taking Root in 

Rural Communities” in Banking and Community Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Issue 1, 2011 available at http://

www.dallasfed.org/ca/bcp/2011/bcp1101.cfm,
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

38 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Because rural communities generally cover large geographic areas, families may face transportation and other 

barriers to access when trying to get to brick-and-mortar financial institutions during the business day. The 

number of bank and credit union branches in rural, low-income communities is limited. In addition, with many 

rural communities covering multiple municipalities or counties, overlapping jurisdictional boundaries can create 

challenges to engaging key stakeholders. Some community organizations and financial institutions may only be 

interested in serving specific areas or simply may not have the capacity to cover larger geographical areas. 

Financial Access for Youth

While most Bank On programs focus on unbanked and underbanked adults, there are benefits to reaching youth 

early with messages about the importance of mainstream banking and savings and providing them with bank 

accounts and opportunities for financial education. Youth often learn about financial practices from their parents 

and can develop poor financial habits at a young age. Some Bank On programs target young people. For instance, 

Bank On D.C. offers an account to young people participating in the city’s summer youth employment program. 

In developing this account, the city first determined which financial institution partners already had products that 

would be appropriate for the youth. Program leaders encourage participating youth to directly deposit their pay 

into accounts instead of receiving paper checks. Participants also must attend a financial education class and create a 

profile on the Bank On D.C. online financial education portal. 

Similarly, Bank On Jacksonville has reached out to youth through one of its credit union partners, Vystar, which 

has developed a special account for students. The account allows for smaller deposits and pays a higher interest rate 

on certificates of deposit (CDs) and other savings products. Vystar also has bank branches in three high schools 

in the Jacksonville area. Finally, in an effort to provide appropriate financial education to youth, Bank On Fresno 

conducted a student survey to assess college students’ banking practices and knowledge.66

Connecting Bank On with other Asset-Building Opportunities

Access to mainstream financial services is one important step towards financial security but is far from being the 

only challenge facing underserved families. In addition to the strategies outlined above to expand financial access, a 

few cities are connecting their Bank On programs with other asset-building strategies by:

• Coordinating a Bank On campaign with local outreach on the federal Earned Income Tax Credit 

(EITC) and volunteer income tax assistance (VITA) sites. These strategies can help Bank On 

initiatives reach potential new customers, provide unbanked tax filers with quick access to their refunds, 

and offer alternatives to a costly refund anticipation loans.

• Promoting savings by working with initiatives like America Saves or AutoSave. These programs 

offer a way to target new customers while encouraging the use of an important asset-building tool.67 

AutoSave is an employer-based savings plan in which a small amount of an employee’s wages are 

automatically diverted from each paycheck into a savings account. San Francisco is participating in the 

AutoSave pilot project, which was launched last year with one credit union partner. The San Francisco 

Treasurer’s Office enrolled 40 employees in the first six months of the program, and the credit union 

provides participants with a small, $50 incentive after six months of savings, which has made the program 

more successful in San Francisco than in some of its peer pilot sites. 

66 Pierce, Tamyra. California State University Student Survey Data. 2010. Fresno California: United Way of Fresno County and Bank On 

Fresno.

67 AutoSave is program developed and piloted by the New America Foundation which encourages employee savings by working with 

employers to divert small payroll deductions into a savings account. More information about AutoSave is available here: 

www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/autosave_0.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 39

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

• Using Bank On to share information with the public about homeownership counseling, 

foreclosure prevention scams, or identity theft. For example, the City of Providence, RI, in 

conjunction with its Bank On initiative, held a Financial Fitness Fair in early 2011. The fair provided 

residents with an opportunity to open accounts, receive foreclosure and debt counseling, and apply for 

microloans. As part of its broader financial empowerment efforts, the city and its Bank On partners also 

hosted a special event to teach residents how to avoid foreclosure rescue scams.

• Connecting Bank On customers to public benefits and social services or working with social 

service providers to connect clients to the Bank On program. The Seattle-King County Asset 

Building Collaborative, which was instrumental in developing Bank On Seattle-King County, created a 

training for social service providers on financial empowerment principles. This training is intended to 

prepare case managers with financial knowledge that will help them better serve their clients, who are 

referred to the Bank On initiative if they do not have an account. 

Potential Roles for State and Regional Initiatives

While regional Bank On efforts that are either countywide or involve two or more cities are likely to be similar 

to a city-led program, statewide initiatives have an opportunity to serve two important roles. First, they can help 

cultivate new local programs by providing technical assistance, leveraging connections with statewide partners, and 

assisting local programs in understanding financial regulations. Additionally, they can help leaders of statewide Bank 

On programs share best practices and resources. It is important that statewide programs clearly define their role and 

their relationship with existing local Bank On programs. 

State-based programs may also be able to overcome financial access challenges facing rural areas and smaller towns, 

which often lack the resources and infrastructure necessary to get a Bank On effort off the ground. Even if a rural 

area does not have sufficient resources or lacks the political will to start an initiative, a statewide program can support 

the development of a Bank On program in a nearby, “anchor” town or city that serves (e.g., through grocery stores or 

post offices) the wider rural area. Bank On Indiana leverages resources from the statewide partnership of Community 

Action Agencies, the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority (IHCDA), and Indiana Bankers 

Association, the Indiana Credit Union League and other entities to assist smaller communities. 

While the Bank On field is still relatively young, there is great potential to build on the successes observed so far 

at the local level and create a nationwide program that addresses the needs of underserved families and helps them 

achieve financial stability. With further analysis and careful consideration of the changing financial environment, 

Bank On programs can be continuously improved to ensure that more families have access to safe, appropriate 

financial products. 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

40 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 1: Bank On Program Information

Program Name Launch Date Contact Information: 

Program Lead and Website

 City Based Programs

Central Texas (Austin) June 2010

Emily De Maria 

Vice President, Community Development

United Way Capital Area 

Austin, TX

512-225-0366

emily.demaria@unitedwaycapitalarea.org

www.bankoncentraltexas.org

Brazos Valley (Cities of Bryan 

and College Station, TX) March 2011

Ronnie L. Jackson

Neighborhood/Youth Services Manager

City of Bryan

979-209-5115

rjackson@bryantx.gov

www.bryantx.gov/bankonbrazosvalley

Carbondale, IL April 2010

City Hall

618-457-3226 

bankoncarbondale@ci.carbondale.il.us

ci.carbondale.il.us/index.php?q=bankoncarbondale

Dallas, TX June 2010

Jerry Allen

Councilmember

City of Dallas

216-670-4068

Jerry.allen@dallascityhall.com

www.dallascityhall.com/BankOnDallas

Denver October 2010

Katherine O'Conner 

Analyst & Bank on Denver Project Manager

Office of Economic Development

Denver, CO

720-913-1528

katherine.oconnor@denvergov.org

www.bankondenver.org

Detroit, MI March 2011

Derrick Headd

Fiscal Analysis Division

Detroit City Council

Detroit, MI 

313-224-4524

headdd@detroitmi.gov

www.bankondetroit.org (note, this website will not 

be live until late April)
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 41

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Evansville February 2009

Patty Avery 

Assistant Vice President & Community Outreach 

Officer

Old National Bank

812-465-8802

patty.avery@oldnational.com

bankonevansville.org

Fresno, CA December 2008

Sevag Tateosian 

Manager, Financial Stability Services 

United Way of Fresno 

Fresno, CA 

559-243-3664

stateosian@unitedwayfresno.org

www.bankonfresno.ca.gov

Gaithersburg, MD September 2009

Cindy Hines 

Olde Towne Revitalization Coordinator

Department of Economic Development, City 

Manager's Office

Gaithersburg, MD

301-258-6310 x2107

chines@gaithersburgmd.gov

www.gaithersburgmd.gov/poi/default.asp?POI_

ID=1764&TOC=107;81;87;1764 

Greenfield, IN 2010

Larry McGuire

lmcguire@greenfieldin.org

Their website is listed as: www.greenfield.org, but it 

is currently down

Houston, TX May 2008

Shannon Dionne Nobles 

Deputy Director

City of Houston Controller's Office 

832-393-3403

shannan.nobles@houstontx.gov

houstontx.gov/bankonhouston/index.html

The Heartland (Omaha) March 2011

Julie Kalkowski

Financial Hope Collaborative

Creighton University

402-280-3792

juliekalkowski@creighton.edu

Website still under development
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

42 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Indianapolis, IN October 2009

Natalie R. Clayton 

Deputy Director

Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee

Indianapolis, IN

(317) 327-3625

nclayton@indy.gov

bankonindy.org

Jacksonville, FL October 2010

Karen Landry 

Executive Director

War on Poverty - Florida, Inc. 

904-766-7275

klandry@waronpoverty.org

www.bankonjacksonville.com/about/

Kalamazoo, MI April 2010

Jeffrey H Brown 

Executive Director

Poverty Reduction Initiative

Kalamazoo, MI 

269-387-2678 

director@haltpoverty.org

www.haltpoverty.org/bank_on_initiative

Kansas City, MO June 2011

Kevin W. Shields

Community Affairs Specialist

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

(816) 234-8158

Kshields@fdic.gov

www.bankonsaveupkc.org

Los Angeles, CA March 2009

Abigail R. Marquez 

Senior Program Manager

Community Development Department

Los Angeles, CA

213-744-9307

abigail.marquez@lacity.org

www.bankonla.org/index.htm

Louisville, KY July 2010

Tina Lentz 

Executive Administrator

Louisville Metro Human Services 

502-574-6827

tina.lentz@louisvilleky.gov

www.louisvilleky.gov/economicdevelopment/

BankOnLouisville
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 43

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Madisonville, KY February 2011

Leslie Curneal 

Executive Assistant to Mayor 

Madisonville, KY 

270-824-2100 

lcurneal@madisonvillegov.com 

Kent Mills 

Old National Bank

Kent.Mills@oldnational.com

www.bankonmadisonville.com/partners.html

Manhattan July 2010

Shira J. Gans 

Policy Analyst

Office of the Manhattan Borough President Scott 

Stringer

New York, NY

212-669-2206

sgans@manhattanbp.org

bankonmanhattan.com

Memphis, TN March 2011

Kerry J. Hayes

City of Memphis

kerry.hayes@memphistn.gov 

901-576-6017

Charles “Corky” Neale

Director of Research

Rise Memphis

corky@risememphis.org

bankonmemphis.org

Muncie, IN February 2011

Gary Chenault 

President 

United Way of Delaware County

Muncie, IN 

gchenault@uwdcin.org

765-288-5586 ext. 230

www.invitedtoliveunited.org/index/bankonmuncie.asp
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

44 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Newark, NJ November 2009

Frank Martinez 

Policy Advisor

Economic and Housing Development Department 

Newark, NJ

373-733-8413

martinezf@ci.newark.nj.us

Anthony Santiago 

Chief Operating Officer

Newark Now 

973-733-3460

anthony@newarknow.org

bankonnewark.org

Oakland, CA April 2009

Tyrone Cosey 

Operation HOPE

510-535-6700 

Tyrone.cosey@operationhope.org

bankonoakland.ca.gov 

Owensboro, KY April 2010

Keith Sanders

The Lawrence & Augusta Hager Educational 

Foundation

270-685-1603

ksanders@lahef.org

www.owensboro.org/node/402

Philadelphia, PA October 2008

Brian Dries

Office of the Controller

City of Philadelphia 

215-686-8869 

brian.dries@phila.gov

philadelphiacontroller.org/bop

Providence, RI April 2010

Garry Bliss 

Bank on Providence Coordinator

Department of Planning & Development

Providence, RI

401-339-4681

gbliss@providenceri.com

bankonprovidence.org

Sacramento, CA January 2010

Kimberlie Gladden 

City of Sacramento 

Kgladden@cityofsacramento.org

Russell Fehr 

City of Sacramento 

Rfehr@cityofsacramento.org

www.bankonsacramento.ca.gov
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 45

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

San Francisco, CA September 2006

Leigh Phillips 

Program Manager

Office of the Treasurer and Tax Collector, Office of 

Financial Empowerment

City and County of San Francisco

415-554-4479

leigh.phillips@sfgov.org

bankonsf.org 

San Jose, CA December 2008

Jim Dale 

United Way Silicon Valley

408-345-4347 

Jim.dale@uwsv.org

bankonsj.org 

Santa Ana, CA September 2009

Natalie Bishop 

Orange County United Way

949-660-7600 

NatalieB@UnitedWayOC.org

www.bankonsantaana.ca.gov

Savannah, GA March 2009

Robyn Wainner 

Asset Building & Financial Services Manager

Step Up Savannah 

912-232-6747

rwainner@stepupsavannah.org

stepupsavannah.org/bankonsavannah

Seattle-King County, WA September 2008

Jerry DeGrieck 

Public Health Manager and Policy Advisor

Seattle Human Services Department

Seattle, WA

206-684-0684

jerry.degrieck@seattle.gov

everyoneiswelcome.org

St. Petersburg, FL August 2009

Gary Jones

Planning & Economic Development Department

City of St. Petersburg, FL 

727.893.7877 

gary.jones@stpete.org

bankonstpete.org 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

46 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Tippecanoe (Lafayette, IN) March 2011

Robert D. Smith

Market President

Old National Bank

Lafayette, Indiana 

765-420-8664

Marie Morse

Executive Director

Homestead Consulting Services

Lafayette, In 

765-423-1284

Marie@homesteadconsulting.net

www.bankontippecanoe.org

Washington, DC May 2010

Sybongile Cook, Project Manager 

Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning & 

Economic Development 

202-285-4845 

sybongile.cook@dc.gov

www.bankondc.org

State Based Programs

Bank On California December 2008

Bev Augustine

Department of Consumer Affairs

916-574-8203

Bev.augustine@dca.ca.gov

www.BankonCalifornia.ca.gov

Bank On Florida December 2010

Bill Mills

407-797-6549

Director of Strategic Initiatives

Florida Prosperity Partnership

bill.mills@bankonfl.org

www.floridaprosperitypartnership.org/bank_on_

program0.aspx

Bank On Indiana October 2009

Christopher Conner

Treasurer of State's Office 

317-232-6387

cconner@tos.in.gov

Patty Avery

Old National Bank

812-465-7278

Patty.Avery@oldnational.com

www.bankonindiana.com/
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 47

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Bank On Illinois October 2009 Primary contact in transition

www.bankonillinois.org

County Based Programs

Bank On Cowlitz County, WA February 2008

Liz M. Myntti

Financial Independence Center Program Manager 

Certified Educator in Personal Finance Lower 

Columbia CAP

360-425-3430 x 215

LizM@LowerColumbiaCAP.ORG

www.cowlitzsaves.com

Bank On Marion County, FL 2010

Maureen Quinlan 

President

United Way of Marion County, Inc.

352-732-9696

mquinlan@uwmc.org

www.uwmc.org/our-work/financial-stability/bank-on-marion

Knox County, IN June 2010

United Way of Knox County and City of Vincennes

Amanda Quirk

812-882-3624 

knox@unitedwayofknoxcounty.org

www.bankonknoxcounty.com
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

48 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 2: Bank On Case Studies Overview: Savannah, GA and Seattle-King County, WA

This report provides an in-depth picture of two sites – Seattle-King County, WA. and Savannah, GA– that have 

developed initiatives designed to promote access to mainstream financial banking and financial education as a way 

to enhance the overall financial stability of their residents. Both cities have implemented a “Bank On” initiative, 

modeled after the Bank On San Francisco program. 

The Bank On Model

The Bank On model, first developed in 2006 by the City and County of San Francisco, is driven by partnerships. 

Local leaders, community organizations, financial institutions, and other community stakeholders work together 

to create financial access pathways for un- and under-banked individuals to connect to safe, affordable financial 

services. Bank On programs aim to increase the supply of “starter account products” by developing baseline 

product criteria that participating financial institutions agree to offer, informing unbanked consumers about the 

benefits of account ownership and encouraging them to open accounts, and raising community wide awareness 

of the issue and risks associated with being unbanked. Related goals of decreasing the reliance on check cashers, 

payday lenders, and other predatory financial services and making quality money management education more 

easily available to underserved populations have also been very important. Shortly after Bank On San Francisco’s 

launch, efforts to replicate the model have grown across the country. 

Seattle and Savannah: Early Pioneers

Seattle-King County and Savannah were among the small handful of communities that began efforts to replicate 

the Bank On model almost immediately after San Francisco’s launch. Both cities took part in a site visit conducted 

by the National League of Cities to San Francisco to learn about the model in August of 2006, just before San 

Francisco’s program launched. Following this visit, city leaders from both cities began the challenging work of 

bringing together key stakeholders with the purpose of launching similar programs. After over a year of strategic 

planning, Seattle was the second city in the nation to implement a Bank On program. The City of Seattle and the 

Seattle-King County Asset Building Collaborative brought together a wide range of financial institution partners, 

community partners, and public agencies to develop the initiative and ensure its success through extensive outreach 

across King County.

Savannah followed Seattle-King County in April 2009 with the launch of Bank On Savannah as a means to address 

the large number of unbanked households throughout the city and to serve as a tool for reducing poverty and 

promoting economic development. Step Up Savannah, the city’s anti-poverty collaborative organization, has 

served as the overall coordinator for the Bank On Savannah program. Step Up actively links Bank On with other 

asset-building efforts throughout the community, such as financial education.

As of June 2011, both Seattle-King County and Savannah maintain successful Bank On initiatives that have met 

their initial program goals, and continue to expand and innovate. During its first two years, Bank on Seattle-King 

County has documented the opening of over 54,000 new accounts for previously unbanked customers with an 

average balance of $652 in checking accounts and $932 in savings accounts. In Savannah, a much smaller city, 1,011 

Bank On accounts were opened, the majority (86 percent) of which remained open after one year. 

Both communities have faced similar challenges in program implementation related to data collection and 

reporting, training of financial institution staff, and financial sustainability. However, both programs have also 

experienced similar successes as a result of having committed city leadership and strong partnerships with financial 

institutions and community organizations.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 49

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

About the Case Studies

These two case studies were developed by the National League of Cities through a contract with the U.S. 

Department of Treasury to provide an in-depth view of the development and implementation of Bank On 

programs, including an analysis of the challenges and successes they face. Seattle-King county and Savannah were 

selected from a small group of cities that have had Bank On programs in operation for at least a year. Cities were 

selected by representatives from the National League of Cities, CFED, the New America Foundation, and the City 

of San Francisco. Savannah and Seattle were chosen from this group based on the following criteria: city size, 

demographic diversity, time length of program operation , and unique program features.

The case studies were authored by consultants working for the National League of Cities based in Seattle and 

Savannah, and then further reviewed and edited by the National League of Cities. The Seattle case study was 

authored by Diana Stone, Director of Initiatives, Seattle-King County Asset-Building Collaborative and the 

Savannah case study was authored by Andrea Silverman, Independent Consultant. Information was collected from 

interviews with key program leaders in each city including city government representatives, financial institution 

partners, community organizations, and Bank On customers.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

50 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 3: Bank On Savannah Case Study

Executive Summary 

In spite of a growing economy in the City of Savannah, GA, 22.8 percent of the city’s residents live in poverty, 

and an estimated one in eight of the city’s 52,000 households is unbanked. In April 2009, Bank On Savannah 

was launched to address the number of unbanked households throughout the city and to serve as a tool for 

reducing poverty and promoting economic development. Step Up Savannah, the city’s anti-poverty collaborative 

organization, serves as the overall coordinator for the Bank On Savannah initiative and grant-financed financial 

education programs. Step Up actively links Bank On with other asset-building efforts throughout the community. 

City leaders first became interested in the idea of connecting residents to the financial mainstream in 2006 after 

they learned it through the National League of Cities’ (NLC) Helping Families Build Assets technical assistance 

project, where they were exposed to the Bank On model. Convinced that this model of reaching financially 

underserved residents with mainstream banking products could play a significant role in helping Savannah residents 

move out of poverty, city leaders began the process of developing their own Bank On initiative. With strong support 

from Mayor Otis Johnson and a robust infrastructure of asset-building and poverty reduction work, Savannah was 

well-positioned to implement a successful Bank On initiative. In December 2006, Step Up Savannah (Step Up) 

helped to convene a Banking Task Force that spent the next two years developing Bank On Savannah. 

The Banking Task Force consisted of representatives from seven banks, the City of Savannah’s Economic 

Development Department, the Chatham Savannah Asset Development Coalition, and Step Up. Working in smaller 

committees focused on product development, marketing and data tracking and evaluation, the Banking Task Force 

developed a Bank On initiative based on local and national research on the needs of the unbanked, as well as the 

resources available in the community; this includes strong community-based organization involvement, robust 

financial education offerings, and leadership from financial institutions. 

In 2009, Mayor Otis Johnson formally launched Bank On Savannah. The first year was a success with 1,011 Bank 

On accounts opened, the majority (86 percent) of which remained open after one year. Other positive impacts that 

were seen included over 3,000 financial education clients served and five major employers increased their direct 

deposit take-up. The program has also faced some challenges in its implementation phase, including reaching and 

engaging the targeted population and ensuring consistent, accurate data collection from financial institutions. 

Bank On Savannah Product

The financial product criteria developed is designed to meet the specific needs of unbanked residents in Savannah. 

After a strategic negotiation process, the members of the Banking Task Force developed the following product criteria:

• Waiver of first NSF (insufficient funds)/overdraft fee

• Opening deposit requirement under $100

• No monthly minimum balance 

• No (or low) monthly fee

• ATM and debit card access

• Promotion of linked savings account

• Direct deposit

• Free online banking

• Refer customers to financial education

• Accept Mexican Matricula Consular card as primary identification and accept an individual Taxpayer 

Identification Number (ITIN) in lieu of social security number
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 51

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

• Open accounts for people on ChexSystems if the activity is more than six months old, except in cases of fraud, 

or where bank requirements for restitution not met

• Open accounts for people with low or negative credit scores (bank discretion).

• Review Bank On Savannah checklist at account opening with customer to inform them of parameters and 

responsibilities

Bank On Savannah: Looking Ahead

In its relatively short existence, Bank On Savannah has met its initial goals and succeeded in bringing mainstream 

banking services and financial education to many unbanked residents of the city. The program development 

process also had an added benefit of developing strong between the city and financial institutions. There were 

several factors that contributed to the success of the program. Some of these include building a foundation for 

the program through preliminary research on the community’s needs, strong support from the mayor and other 

city leaders, an engaged banking community, and access to the lessons learned from other cities that had already 

developed similar initiatives.

Mayor Johnson continues to be a strong champion of the Bank On program. Moving forward, Bank On Savannah 

plans to expand outreach efforts-- focusing on the city’s Hispanic population-- and increase training for financial 

institution staff, including efforts focused on improving data collection. The initiative also hopes to introduce more 

products, such as small dollar credit builder loans, and to bring back an alternative refund anticipation loan program 

(ARAL) that had ended in 2010. 

Background and History

Savannah is a historic, coastal Georgia city with population of 136,000. The downtown area, which includes 

22 squares and centuries old architecture, has been declared a National Historic Landmark district. In addition 

to having a very strong tourism industry, Savannah has the fourth largest container port facility in the U.S., is a 

regional center for medicine and higher education, and has aerospace and other manufacturing industries. Savannah 

is located within Chatham County which includes seven other municipalities: Bloomingdale, Garden City, Pooler, 

Port Wentworth, Thunderbolt, Tybee Island and Vernonburg. The country is served by eighteen commercial banks 

with a total of 97 offices and total deposits of $4.6 billion.68 

In spite of its growing economy, 22.8 percent of Savannah’s residents live in poverty, and an estimated one in eight of 

Savannah’s 52,000 households is unbanked.69 The Bank On Savannah, formally launched by Mayor Otis Johnson in 

April 2009, was to address this deficit and serve as a tool for reducing poverty and promoting economic development. 

The roots of the Bank On Savannah program go back to the 1990s, when the city’s traditional efforts to improve 

neighborhoods through investment in “bricks and mortar” were expanded to include a broader program of 

actions to achieve poverty reduction. Bank On Savannah eventually grew out of this large scale effort to reduce 

poverty within the city. Following the election of Mayor Johnson in 2004, the City joined with Chatham 

County, representatives of several private sector and community organizations, and the University of Georgia 

to conduct research on poverty and develop a Poverty Reduction Action Plan. That plan, published in 2005, 

describes a large number of barriers to poverty reduction, including the limited access of low-income residents to 

mainstream financial institutions. The plan identifies five broad, strategic areas of action: asset-building, workforce 

development, housing, dependent care, and health. To facilitate and coordinate the implementation of the Action 

68 Information about banks from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) website: www.fdic.gov.

69 “FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Under-banked Households. 2009. Washington DC: Federal Deposit Insurance Commission. 

Available at: http://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/. 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

52 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Plan, an executive director was hired using city resources, and the organization, called Step Up Savannah, was born. 

Step Up Savannah, which was the organization that was the driver behind the City’s Bank On efforts, is a 

collaborative of organizations with a unique leadership structure. The quasi-governmental organization is supported 

by the city government but relies on a collaboration of organizations and volunteers to accomplish its goals. The 

collaboration includes businesses, community organizations and government agencies, all with a mission of reducing 

poverty in Savannah and Chatham County by helping families move toward economic self-sufficiency. Step Up 

accomplishes this goal through three primary focuses: workforce development and jobs; wealth building and 

financial understanding; and work supports.

Step Up’s board of directors is comprised of community and organizational leaders from city and county 

government, local business, educational institutions, nonprofit organizations, and low-income neighborhoods. Step 

Up’s executive director, Daniel Dodd, explains that Step Up has purposely remained small as an organization. 

Rather than implementing programs, Step Up acts primarily as a convener and collaborator, bringing groups 

together and working with them to find innovative solutions. 

The City’s Poverty Reduction Action Plan called for action teams to be formed to address each strategic area 

outlined in the plan. Each team is chaired by volunteers who are members of Savannah’s private, local government 

and nonprofit sectors. The City’s financial access efforts grew out of the work of one of these teams – the Banking 

Task Force. In 2011, six years after the inauguration of Step Up, the following teams have been established: 

• Banking Task Force

• Workforce Action Team

• Employer Supports Action Team

• Chatham County Safety Net Planning Council

• Financial Education Network

• Residents Team of Neighborhood Leaders

• Chatham Savannah Asset Development Coalition (which existed prior to the formation of Step-Up but became 

linked with Step Up as one of the action teams) 

Each of these action teams is led by volunteers from partnering organizations and supported by Step Up staff.

Evolution of the Savannah Banking Task Force

The Banking Task Force emerged in 2006 after growing interest from city leaders in the idea of promoting financial 

access for Savannah residents. A year earlier, in 2005, Savannah was one of eight cities selected to join the National 

League of Cities’ (NLC) Helping Families Build Assets Technical Assistance project. The objective of the two year 

project was to build municipal leaders’ capacity to take action toward helping families increase their economic stability. 

In June 2006, the final project meeting was held in San Francisco with a focus on showcasing the newly developed 

Bank On San Francisco program. Savannah City Manager Michael Brown, Step Up Director Daniel Dodd, and the 

Asset Development Coalition Chair Edward Chisolm returned from San Francisco convinced that Savannah needed to 

expand its asset building activities and initiate a program to give Savannah’s unbanked population access to mainstream 

financial services. They realized that for it to succeed, the participation and leadership of the banking community 

itself was essential. Shortly after returning to Savannah, City Manager Brown called the City Executive of Savannah’s 

BB&T Bank, Toby Moreau, and asked him to take leadership of a Banking Task Force which could serve to identify 

the needs of underserved residents and deliver safe products and services to meet those needs. 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 53

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

The first meeting of the Banking Task Force took place at the BB&T Bank in December 2006, and was attended 

by representatives from seven banks, the City of Savannah’s Economic Development Department, the Asset 

Development Coalition, and Step Up. At first, Banking Task Force members struggled with how best to achieve the 

goal of banking the unbanked, and progress seemed, at times, very slow. Much of the discussion focused on how 

to bring back old customers who 

were listed on ChexSystems, which 

involved requiring those customers 

to make at least partial restitution 

for earlier debts to the banks and to 

attend financial education training.70 

Under Moreau’s leadership, the 

number of Banking Task Force 

participants grew to 10 banks – four 

community banks and six regional or 

national banks.

During the task force’s formative 

years, the banks worked to define 

the common characteristics of the 

accounts to be offered at each bank 

(see Box 2). Later, with the assistance 

of the FDIC, a generic checklist was 

created to assist bank personnel in 

reviewing the Bank On Savannah 

account with new customers. One of 

the banks, Carver State Bank, already 

had such an account available, a 

“Second Chance” checking account. 

The other three community banks 

adopted their own versions of 

what later became labeled a “Bank 

On Savannah” account. The six 

regional and national banks used 

products created by their corporate 

headquarters, but agreed to follow Bank On guidelines, including the addition of the following criteria that had not 

been a part of their original second chance products: 

1. waiver of first NSF (non-sufficient fund)/overdraft fee; 

2. referral of customers to financial education; and 

3. consideration to opening accounts for people on ChexSystems or with low or negative credit scores. 

In practice, the differing standards among the 10 banks led to occasional referrals between banks so that a customer 

rejected at one bank might be given an account at a second bank.

70 ChexSystems is a national database for banks that provides information based on check verifications and consumer credit about 

a potential customer’s banking history and is primarily used to identify people who have had past problems with accounts. Most 

financial institutions havepolicies against opening accounts for individuals placed on this list. 

Bank On Savannah Participating 

Financial Institutions

• BB&T Bank

• Capitol City Bank & Trust 

Company

• Carver State Bank

• First Chatham Bank

• Sea Island Bank

• SunTrust Bank

• The Coastal Bank

• The Savannah Bank

• United Community Bank

• Wells Fargo Bank

Box 1
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

54 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Bank on Savannah Program Development

In 2008, significant progress was made in the development of a Bank On initiative. Five positive developments 

helped Step Up and the Banking Task Force to work through the negotiation process eventually leading to the the 

formal launch of the Bank On Savannah program in April 2009: 

• linking of banks with the target underserved population through the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) sites;

• successful design and then piloting (in early 2009) of an alternative financial product, the Alternative Refund 

Anticipation Loan (ARAL);

• completion of the Neighborhood Financial Services Study financed by the William J. Clinton Foundation; 

• expansion of Savannah’s financial education programs through a grant from the AIG Financial Literacy Fund; and 

• the involvement of representatives of the FDIC and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in Savannah’s initiative.

Linking of banks to the VITA sites

In January 2008, the Asset Development Coalition chair invited the members of the Banking Task Force to send 

bank staff to its VITA sites to assist clients in establishing bank accounts to receive income tax refunds, including 

earned income tax credits (EITC), by direct deposit. As explained by Teinique Gadson, coordinator of the VITA 

sites, “we wanted the VITA clients not only to open accounts to get their direct deposits, but also to establish a 

relationship with mainstream banking.” Their experience was that “by having the banks at the VITA sites they 

are able to touch on other banking issues in a setting in which people felt comfortable asking questions.” Gadson 

discovered numerous instances of “cross-selling,” where in addition to opening bank accounts, individuals learned 

about and accessed lower cost auto loans and credit cards through their discussion with bank and credit union 

representatives at the VITA sites. This was an unexpected benefit of the effort.

Piloting of Alternative Refund Anticipation Loans (ARALs)

For years, commercial income tax preparation businesses in Savannah had been offering Refund Anticipation Loans 

(RALs) to their clients, charging them an average of $450 in interest and fees plus the income tax preparation fee 

to allow them to immediately access their expected refunds. City leaders in Savannah saw many residents spending 

 • Waiver of first NSF (insufficient funds)/overdraft fee

 • Opening deposit requirement under $100

 • No monthly minimum balance 

 • No (or low) monthly fee

 • ATM and debit card access

 • Promotion of linked savings account

 • Direct deposit

 • Free online banking

 • Refer customers to financial education

 • Accept Mexican Matricula Consular card as primary ID and accept an ITIN in lieu of social 

security number

 • Open accounts for people on ChexSystems if the activity is more than 6 months old, except in 

cases of fraud, or where bank requirements for restitution not met

 • Open accounts for people with low or negative credit scores (bank discretion).

 • Review Bank On Savannah checklist at account opening with customer to inform them of 

parameters and responsibilities

Box 2

Characteristics of a Bank On Savannah Account
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 55

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

large sums of money at these establishments and wanted to offer an alternative that could help residents obtain 

their refund through a safe, quick, and affordable loan product. Using a similar program in San Antonio as a model, 

Banking Task Force members developed the ARAL or Alternative Refund Anticipation Loan at an inexpensive 

rate. In January 2009, it was offered at two VITA sites through Georgia’s Own Credit Union. The ARAL was a 

successful product and was expanded in 2010. Unfortunately, the program could not be offered in 2011 as a result 

of an Internal Revenue Service policy change that limited information available to tax preparers.71

Neighborhood Financial Services Study 

To support the work of the Banking Task Force and the development of a Bank On Savannah program, Step 

Up sought the assistance of the William J. Clinton Foundation to conduct a Financial Services Study focused on 

Savannah’s poorest neighborhoods. The survey was administered by Professor Deden Rukmana of Savannah State 

University, with the assistance of students and community leaders. It surveyed a randomly selected sample of 201 

of the 2,813 households living in Savannah’s six poorest census tracts, all located near downtown Savannah.72 Of 

those households, 38 percent had neither savings nor checking accounts.73 Nearly half of the heads of households 

had never had a bank account at any point in their lives. A majority of both the banked and the unbanked 

households in those low income neighborhoods routinely used check cashers and money orders, and 11 percent of the sample 

made regular (weekly or monthly) use of high cost title pawn or title loans.74 Through the survey, it became clear that (i) 

there was indeed a very significant number of unbanked residents in Savannah; (ii) both banked and unbanked low-income 

families depended on high-cost, fringe financial institutions; and (iii) the reasons people did not seek bank accounts were 

varied and included a distrust of banks, fear of “hidden” fees, and a lack of experience and comfort with banks in general. 

71 Starting in the 2011 tax season, the Internal Revenue Service began to remove the debt indicator from its communication process 

to tax preparers. Before then, both volunteer and paid preparers would receive communication from the IRS after e-filing a person’s 

tax return that would indicate whether or not the taxpayer had a debt that would garnish their federal tax refund. This indicator 

allowed financial institutions that partnered with preparers to offer RAL and ARAL products to be assured that the loans they were 

distributing would be quickly repaid through deposited refunds. 

72 Census tracts 1, 12, 13, 18, 19, and 101.01, each of which had a poverty rate of > 50% in 2000. Each of these tracts were in 

Chatham County, GA, Census locator code 130051.

73 Rukmana, Deden, principal investigator, Savannah Neighborhood Financial Services Survey, Final Report, 2008.

74 Savannah has 13 title pawn or title loan businesses, with 29 locations in Chatham County in total.

As reported in the 2008 study, unbanked respondents indicated that they did not use banking services 

because:

 • fees are too high;

 • needing instant access to money and banks take too long to process;

 • the government or creditor could take money out of their account; 

 • they lacked of proper identification required by the banks;

 • bank hours were inconvenient;

 • they do not have enough money to open an account; 

 • it is too diffic ult to withdraw money when needed; and

 • unwillingness to provide personal information to the bank.

_______________________

Savannah Neighborhood Financial Services Survey, Final Report, 2008.

Box 3

Views of the Unbanked Individuals in Savannah

Regarding Mainstream Financial Services (Banks)
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

56 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

At the end of 2008 and in early 2009, the study’s results were presented and discussed in a series of workshops with the 

participation of the Banking Task Force members, other community, government and business leaders, as well as representatives 

of the FDIC, the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, the Clinton Foundation and the Pew Charitable Trust. 

Financial Education Programs

In early 2008, the Cities for Financial Empowerment (CFE) coalition was created, including Savannah and five other, 

larger cities. Savannah was able to benefit from the coalition’s efforts to secure funding to enhance financial empowerment 

efforts in participating cities. CFE launched an initiative to expand delivery and increase quality of financial education and 

counseling services with funding from the AIG Financial Literacy Fund. Funding from the AIG grant helped to finance 

a full-time Outreach and Financial Education Coordinator, who would be located at the Consumer Credit Counseling 

Service (CCCS) of Savannah. 

The Outreach and Financial Education Coordinator went on to organize the Financial Education Network, a network 

of financial education providers located within the city. The Coordinator also worked closely with Step Up and the 

Banking Task Force to ensure that financial education services were offered through the Bank On program . AIG funds 

were also combined with other existing funds to create another new position at Step Up Savannah which could focus on 

asset building and financial empowerment activities. 

CCCS expanded its financial education program, providing financial education at Savannah’s Centers for Working 

Families and at Savannah’s Live Oak Public Library. A financial education directory was developed, as were brochures and 

a video for marketing the Bank On Savannah and financial education programs. Financial education workshops were 

also provided at business sites, targeting the employees of Chatham County, the City of Savannah, the Chatham-Savannah 

Metropolitan Police, the Westin Hotel, and other public and private employers. This effort was aided by the Supporting 

Work project, financed by the Ford Foundation and implemented by Step Up Savannah.

Involvement of FDIC and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

Two key financial institution regulators, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, became active in the Savannah 

Bank On effort toward the end of 2008 when representatives from their Atlanta offices attended a presentation of the results 

of the Financial Services study. In spite of the 250 mile distance between Atlanta and Savannah, the FDIC representative 

became a regular participant in the Banking Task Force meetings, and encouraged Bank On Savannah efforts by offering 

support and guidance. The FDIC and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta have also contributed to Bank On Savannah 

by printing materials, producing an informational video about Bank On for Savannah residents, and hosting Bank On 

committee and other meetings.

Bank On Savannah Launch 

After a couple of years of planning, negotiation, and developing partnerships, Bank On Savannah was ready to formally 

launch. The workshops to discuss the findings of the Financial Services Survey provided both the impetus and the 

opportunity to take the next step and formally launch Bank On Savannah. The findings from the survey confirmed the 

challenges that underserved Savannah residents faced when seeking financial services. The presence of external supporters 

including the FDIC, the Federal Reserve and the Clinton Foundation at those meetings emphasized the importance 

of the effort. The official launch took place in one of Savannah’s historic squares, presided over by Mayor Otis Johnson 

and the Chair of the Banking Task Force. The ten participating bank representatives each signed a Bank On Savannah 

“Commitment to Participate,” an expression of intent of the financial institution to participate in five key ways: 

 (i) to contribute financial resources to support the effort (expected contribution $750 to $5,000)75; 

 (ii) to offer the financial products and services that meet or exceed the agreed upon criteria; 

75 This financial support was in addition to the in-kind staff support offered by banks to help develop the program.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 57

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

 (iii) to share data and participate in the tracking of program outcomes; 

 (iv) to assist with Bank On Savannah marketing and education initiatives; and 

 (v) to attend meetings to assess and improve the effectiveness of the overall campaign. 

Beginning with the formal launch, the Banking Task Force set annual targets for Bank On Savannah and has 

reported annually on its progress. The achievements of Bank On Savannah in its first year, 2009-2010, are presented 

in Table 1, as are the targets that were set for 2010-2011. 

 

Ongoing Implementation of Bank On Savannah

Following the program launch, the Banking Task Force – now led by Jenny Gentry, market president for Well Fargo 

in Savannah – has continued to meet every two months. Other active members include representatives of the City 

of Savannah’s Economic Development Department, CCCS, and the Asset Development Coalition. The Banking 

Task Force has three committees that meet on an intermittent schedule that focus on marketing, data and products. 

The marketing committee developed and maintains the Bank On Savannah marketing campaign, which is paid for 

by annual financial institution contributions. 

The marketing committee has thus far conducted outreach using radio spots, newspaper ads, city bus ads, and the 

distribution of informational materials and leaflets through community organizations. The use of formal advertising 

methods has brought the campaign to the attention of news media and the general public. However, committee 

members indicate they believe that the distribution of Bank On Savannah information through organizations with 

direct contact with the target population has been the most successful in bringing about greater participation. As a 

new initiative, the committee is working on approaches to reach the Hispanic population.

The product committee’s initial work focused on establishing an agreed set of criteria for all Bank On Savannah 

accounts among the participating banks. It is now examining the impact of financial sector reforms on the program 

and is also exploring opportunities to expand the Bank On Savannah offerings to include alternative financial products 

that most meet the needs of financially undeserved residents. The committee is currently concerned with how to reinitiate the ARAL program, and how to provide Bank On customers with access to to credit-building small loans.

The data committee has been meeting regularly to address challenges encountered in collecting data on new 

and existing Bank On Savannah accounts from the 10 member banks. They have worked to streamline the data 

reporting sheet, gain agreement among the banks on data to be reported, and also regularly follow-up with 

participating banks to ensure that information is being reportedly quarterly. 

Bank On Savannah

2009 – 2010 Achievements

Bank On Savannah

2010-2011 Goals

• Bank accounts opened –1,011

• Accounts still open after one year – 86% 

• Alternative Refund Advance Loan – 155 

• Financial Education Clients 3,024 

• Participating Financial Institutions – 10 banks; 1 

credit union

• Participating Branch/office locations – 28

• 2010 contribution by Financial Institutions to Bank 

On Savannah -- $15,000 

• Use of direct deposit increased in 5 large employers

• Bank accounts to be opened –1,500

• Accounts still open after one year – 70% 

• If possible, bring back the Alternative Refund 

Anticipation Loan – (not offered in 2010-2011)

• Financial Education Clients – 3,000 

• Participating Financial Institutions – 10 banks; 1 

credit union 

• Participating Branch/office locations – 31

• Outreach program to Hispanic population developed

• Employers’ direct deposit programs expanded
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

58 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Links with other programs

The Bank On Savannah program is linked to several other efforts in Savannah, primarily through the three 

community-based nonprofit organizations that are active members in the Banking Task Force. 

Step Up Savannah: In addition to being the overall coordinator for the Bank On Savannah program and grantfunded financial education programs, Step Up actively links Bank On with its other efforts. Step Up works with 

CCCS to bring financial education and counseling services to Savannah’s five Centers for Working Families, to 

the large organizations involved in its employer program (originally financed by the Ford Foundation), and to the 

participants of its job training and apprenticeship program for Chatham County. Influenced by the early work 

of the Banking Task Force, Step Up’s employer program actively promotes the use of direct deposit and access to 

VITA services for low income workers. With the completion of the AIG funded financial education program in 

2010, Step Up applied for and received a grant for $150,000 from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority 

(FINRA) Investor Financial Foundation. This grant provides financing to Step Up and CCCS to continue to 

provide financial education and counseling at employer sites, at the Centers for Working Families, and at the Live 

Oak Public Library. 

Consumer Credit Counseling Service of Savannah: CCCS is the largest, nonprofit provider of financial education 

and counseling services in coastal Georgia. As described above, through Bank On, CCCS has expanded its public 

outreach and education work, and actively promotes the Bank On Savannah program with a wide range of clients. 

Asset Development Coalition: The chair of the Coalition, who is also the director of Savannah’s Neighborhood 

Improvement Association, a community development corporation that acts as the lead agency for the Asset 

Development Coalition, continues to invite bank staff to the VITA sites each tax season to help provide access 

to mainstream financial services for the approximately 5,000 clients of the 12 Chatham County VITA sites. The 

Coalition is hopeful that the VITA sites will be able to resume offering ARALs in the near future.

Challenges 

Savannah had the benefit of strong support for the Bank On program from its Mayor and City Manager, the 

opportunity to learn from and work with other cities through the NLC and CFE efforts, and financial support from 

foundations for its financial education programs and research. Nevertheless there were four substantial challenges 

stakeholders faced in the development and implementation of the program: 

 1. Reaching the target population. The Banking Task Force realized that for the program to be successful, 

outreach to the target population was essential. Practical approaches to reaching the target populations 

through existing community programs and organizations developed slowly, and required new linkages be 

established between the banks and credit union and community organizations. After some time, these 

outreach efforts have become successful but require sustained effort maintain its achievements

 2. Orientation and training of bank staff. While the initial commitment of 10 of Savannah’s banks came 

relatively rapidly, the necessary orientation and training of the branch managers and frontline bank staff in the 

participating branches has been a challenge. Given the high turn-over and movement of bank staff, it has been 

difficult for Bank On leaders to arrange enough frequent trainings and orientations to ensure staff are wellequipped to promote the program and connect customers up Bank On accounts. .

 3. Data tracking and reporting. In each participating Bank On Savannah bank, data are collected and reported 

quarterly regarding the number of new accounts and the status of existing Bank On accounts. However, this 

has been a significant challenge. For some of the smaller banks, tracking systems can be altered to collect 

and report new data as required by the Bank On program. However in some of the larger banks, data must 

be collected manually, as there is no way of tagging the Bank On accounts in most of the banks. As a result, 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 59

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

data are not regularly reported across participating banks. Step Up staff have worked to solicit feedback from 

banks as to how to improve data collection and have been told that the manual data entry is a challenge. One 

financial institution representative reported that they would regularly collect and report the data if there were 

a federal regulation requiring them to do so.

 In addition, the definition of what constitutes a Bank On account can sometimes vary between banks. In 

some cases a Bank On account is only tagged if a customer specifically requests it by name. In other banks, 

anyone who does not have a bank account is considered a Bank On customer. 

 4. Financial Sustainability. Obtaining financial support from banks has been a continuing challenge for Bank 

On Savannah. In the first year the banks contributed funds for marketing without a great deal of resistance. 

However, following the financial crisis and gulatory reforms, the initiative is concerned that financial 

support may be more difficult to obtain in the coming years. In addition, being a smaller city, there are fewer 

resources from which to draw to build a financially sustainable initiative over time.

Lessons and Innovations from Savannah

The factors contributing to the success of the Bank On Savannah program include the following:

 • Financial services research. Local data on the numbers of unbanked and the use of fringe financial institutions 

in Savannah has been invaluable. The dissemination of this research has sparked the interest of many and 

created support for the Bank On Savannah program. 

 • Support from city leadership. In Savannah’s case, both the Mayor and City Manager are strong advocates for 

the initiative. They have used their influence to help the initiative develop, and the Mayor has served as an 

active spokesperson for the effort. The city has provided funding for key components, including operating 

resources for Step Up Savannah and funding for the work of the Chatham Savannah Asset Development 

Coalition. 

 • Leadership and teamwork by the banking community. From the beginning, the Bank On Savannah effort 

has been led by the Banking Task Force, chaired first by the city executive of BB&T and later by the market 

president in Savannah for Wells Fargo. In addition, involved bankers noted that the success of the program has 

been aided by their working as a team, an experience that has been personally and professionally rewarding. 

 • Role of community-based nonprofit organizations. Step Up Savannah played a central role in supporting the 

work of the Banking Task Force and in ensuring that community organizations working with low income 

residents and workers were linked to the efforts of mainstream financial institutions. As stated by Penny King 

of the Atlanta FDIC, the Bank On Savannah program has benefited tremendously by having “a communitybased organization to get marketing to the low and middle income population.” 

 • Support from key, external organizations. The involvement of external resources, including the FDIC, Federal 

Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Pew Charitable Trusts, and the NLC put a spotlight on the Savannah effort, provided 

valuable insights, and lent confidence to the implementers that they were on the right track.

 • Access to program learnings and materials from other cities. Savannah had the opportunity to participate in 

the NLC asset building technical assistance programs (2005-2008) as well as seminars and workshops organized 

by the CFE coalition starting in 2008. Both of these city networking organizations provided opportunities 

for learning from peers that enriched Savannah’s initiative. In addition, Bank On materials used in other cities 

were made freely available to Savannah, reducing its start-up time and costs.

 • Funding for financial education programs and marketing. Access to quality financial education and counseling 

has been an important component to the program’s success. In Savannah, a strong nonprofit organization, 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

60 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Consumer Credit Counseling Services, led the financial education effort and obtained the necessary funding 

to do so. Although there have not been any formal evaluations to assess the success of the financial education 

program to Bank On Savannah’s success, anecdotal evidence suggests that customers that go through financial 

education classes are able to successfully maintain bank accounts.

Future vision

The Banking Task Force continues to provide the overall guidance for the Bank On Savannah program, with the 

active support of Step Up Savannah. Moving forward, the Bank On Savannah program has several goals which are 

focused on improving access and quality of services and products for underserved Savannah residents. 

Increase outreach to the Hispanic community. In 2009, an FDIC survey confirmed the Savannah financial services study 

findings, and provided new data regarding Hispanic households.76 The survey found 45.1 percent of Hispanic 

households in Georgia were unbanked. The findings of this study pointed to the importance of broadening the 

outreach and marketing of the Bank On Savannah program to include Savannah’s Hispanic population. As a result, 

the Task Force plans to substantially increase outreach to the Hispanic/Latino community, and has a plan for doing 

so by working with Hispanic churches, community groups and nonprofit organizations. 

Training of financial institution staff and improvement of data collection. Step Up Savannah’s Director of Asset Building 

and Financial Empowerment has formalized plans to increase the amount and intensity of training for financial 

institution staff as a way to improve both implementation of the program and data collection. 

Researching impact of lending by fringe financial institutions. Step Up Savannah has been asked by the Mayor and City 

Council to research the extent and impact of lending by fringe financial institutions, including Savannah’s car 

title lenders. This is an ambitious project, and the results will provide the Banking Task Force the data it needs to 

explore issues related to these institutions. 

Development of alternative financial products. Some members of the Banking Task Force are interested in expanding 

the availability of alternate financial products such as ARAL’s and small credit-builder loans for low income 

households. Bank On Savannah and the Banking Taskforce will provide the venue for financial institutions and 

other partners to work towards establishing these product offerings, which will likely be limited to specific banks 

and credit unions in the initial phases. 

76 FDIC, 2009
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 61

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 4: Funding and In-Kind Support 

Year Funding Amount and Source Nature of Assistance Specific Use of Funds

2005-2006 National League of Cities’ (NLC) 

Helping Families Build Assets 

Technical Assistance project, Phase I

Site visits to cities with advanced strategies in 

place in financial education, homeownership 

initiatives, & other asset building programs

Technical assistance only

2006-2008

NLC Cities Helping Families Build 

Assets Technical Assistance project, 

Phase II

Technical assistance from NLC staff and 

other experts in range of asset building 

programs

Technical assistance only

2007-2010 $250,000 Families and Work 

Institute/Ford Foundation 

Supporting Work Project (connecting low 

income workers with government provided 

support programs)

Estimated $10,000 used for 

increasing Direct Deposit 

and Financial Education at 

employers’ sites.

2008

$15,000 William J. Clinton 

Foundation, Clinton Economic 

Opportunity Initiative

Financial Services Study Costs associated with study

2008-2010

(2 years)

$200,000 AIG Financial Literacy 

Fund (component of $1.45 million 

grant to CFE)

Financial education & counseling

$50,000 per year directly 

linked with Bank on 

Savannah activities including 

marketing, personnel, and 

financial education.

2011-2013 

(2 years)

$150,000 Financial Industry 

Regulatory Authority (FINRA) 

Investor Financial Foundation

Financial education & counseling

$35,000 per year used for 

financial education classes 

linked with Bank on Savannah.

Annual, 

beginning 

2009

$15,000/year Bank on Savannah 

Sponsorship by Savannah banks

General funds for Step Up Savannah’s 

support to Bank on Savannah 

Administration and 

Marketing

Ongoing, 

beginning 

2009

FDIC In kind support for printing 

of brochures and filing of Bank on 

Savannah video—estimated value of 

$30,000

Direct support of Bank On Savannah

Printing of Bank on Savannah 

materials and development of 

video

In-Kind materials Materials for Bank On Savannah

Bank On materials developed 

in other cities (San Francisco 

and others)

Annual

$200,000/year City of Savannah

$20,000 per year support Bank on 

Savannah.

Support for Step Up Savannah, general 

operating costs

Annual $110,000/year City of Savannah

This is leveraged by linking all VITA 

sites with Bank On Savannah

Support for the Chatham Savannah Asset 

Development Coalition (VITA sites)
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

62 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 5: Personal Stories of Bank On Customers

Bank On Savannah client – Ms. Erika Wiggins

Ms. Erika Wiggins, a 34 year old working mother of four children, decided in 2008 that she needed to get 

her financial life together. She was tired of paying exorbitant fees to check cashers and get money orders. She 

went to Carver State Bank (CSB), a bank that participated in the Banker’s Task Force, and asked to reestablish 

her bank account which had been closed many years earlier due to repeated overdrafts. She was surprised and 

happy to find that in spite of her low credit rating and negative history with the bank, she would be offered a 

second chance through CSB’s Second Chance Checking program. This program followed the model that was 

developed by Savannah’s Banking Task Force in 2007. The Second Chance Checking account she was given was 

not substantially different from the other low cost checking accounts offered by CSB. What was different was 

the level of supervision of the account within the bank and the financial counseling provided to her. The CSB 

representative talked with Ms. Wiggins about how to manage her account and avoid overdraft problems, quizzed 

her on her financial goals, and referred her to a Saturday First-Time Homebuyers Seminar. The class was a turning 

point for her. For years she had worked two jobs – but had never saved a dime. She realized that if she was ever 

to achieve her goal of buying a home she needed to live on a budget, repay debts, repair her credit, and begin to 

save. Through Bank On Savannah, she learned about the free tax preparation services offered by the Neighborhood 

Improvement Association, and began saving the tax preparation fees she had been charged each year. In 2010, she 

applied for and received CSB’s Credit Rebuilder loan for $1,000 and enrolled in a compulsory savings program. 

Today, in 2011, she is well on the road toward financial health.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 63

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 6: Selected Financial Institution Descriptions

Three Bank On Savannah Banks:Carver State Bank, Coastal Bank and Wells Fargo Bank

Carver State Bank (CSB) is a Savannah-based community bank with deposits of $35 million. It is a certified 

Community Development Financial Institution and is one of only 33 banks in the U.S. that is African Americanowned. When the Banking Task Force was formed in 2006, CSB was already providing Second Chance checking, 

Credit Rebuilder loans, and financial education for its clients. Mr. Robert James, CEO of CSB, has been a major 

supporter of Bank on Savannah, saying: “The Bank on Savannah Program is part of the asset building approach 

to get people out of poverty. There is no way out of poverty if you are using check cashers and not involved in 

mainstream banking.” After the establishment of bank accounts, he views credit rebuilding and other ways to bring 

people into the financial mainstream as “a natural next step” that Bank on Savannah should take to achieve its goals. 

CSB’s Credit Rebuilder loans are short-term (3 year), small size loans (current minimum is $1,500) which require 

the customer to make regular deposits into savings as well as repaying the loan. The challenge in managing this 

program is that because of the small size of the loans, the cost in staff time to process the loans is not fully covered 

by the fees. While the program does not contribute to the Bank’s financial bottom line, this and other efforts have 

earned CSB an “outstanding” CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) rating from the FDIC for the past 6 years.

 

Coastal Bank is a Savannah-based community bank with deposits of $317 million. With the onset of Bank on 

Savannah, the leadership at Coastal decided that attracting and providing banking services to low income, “high 

risk” clients was one way the bank could give back to the community. Starting in 2009, Coastal Bank began 

offering a “Bank on Savannah” free basic checking account targeted to consumers who have little or no banking 

history. By earmarking the Bank on Savannah accounts, Coastal executives are able to review the status of these 

accounts and work with customers if they get into trouble. In addition to the somewhat lower minimum balance, 

the major difference of a Bank on Savannah account from its normal starter checking account is that the bank will 

accept customers with negative credit and financial histories and in turn will monitor and provide assistance to 

those customers who are having difficulties. Customers are encouraged to attend financial education sessions, and 

to use the services of the Consumer Credit Counseling Service if needed. In future, Coastal plans to have a new 

banking product that makes it hard to overdraw and incur fees. It is also exploring how the new mobile and webbased banking tools may be used by their Bank On customers to manage their accounts and budgets. 

With Wells Fargo’s acquisition of Wachovia Bank in 2010 it established local operations in Savannah with deposits 

of $969 million. Wachovia was one of the 8 original members of Bank on Savannah. Ms. Jenny Gentry, Market 

President for Wells Fargo, Savannah, became the chair of the Banking Task Force in 2010. She reports that from 

the beginning, “the Mayor’s initiative on poverty reduction sparked my interest in participating in the Banking Task 

Force.” For Wells Fargo, the development of banking products and services for customers targeted by Bank on 

Savannah had to result from decisions made at a corporate rather than local level. Wells Fargo met this challenge 

by creating the “Wells Fargo Opportunity Checking account,” a package of services designed to help customers get 

back into a checking account. Gentry found the 2008 financial services study done in Savannah to be extremely 

helpful. It showed that while the unbanked do include individuals with negative financial institution histories, 

many of the unbanked are individuals who have never had a bank account. Wells Fargo has targeted five of its 

branches for the implementation of the Bank on Savannah program, focusing on branches most accessible to low 

income households.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

64 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 7: Bank on Seattle-King County Case Study

Executive Summary

Bank on Seattle-King County (Bank on S-KC) publicly launched in September 2008 with a mission to connect 

low-income residents to affordable checking and savings accounts and high-quality financial education. The City 

of Seattle and the Seattle-King County Asset Building Collaborative brought together a wide range of financial 

institutions, community organizations, and public agencies to develop the initiative and ensure its success. Inspired 

by Bank on San Francisco, Bank on S-KC established a similar model which includes partnering with financial 

institutions to provide access to free or low-cost bank and credit union accounts that have a low opening deposit 

requirements and no monthly minimum balance. The initiative offers a pathway to mainstream financial services 

for people who previously had trouble managing their accounts, who need to use an alternative method of 

identification, or anyone else who does not feel comfortable with mainstream banking. Now in its third year, Bank 

on S-KC can offer the Bank On field some lessons in implementing a successful initiative:

 • Integration of financial education: Bank on S-KC partners recognized the importance of financial knowledge 

and skills for newly banked customers to be able to successfully utilize their checking and savings accounts. 

They created a network of financial education providers that offered free, high quality financial education to 

underserved communities. It made the delivery of financial education more accessible, efficient, and effective 

by avoiding duplication of efforts, sharing resources and information, establishing quality standards, and jointly 

promoting financial education training opportunities. Furthermore, community organizations and financial 

institutions have confidence in the quality of the education, enabling them to make referrals or offer incentives 

for people interested in improving their financial capability.

 • Centrality of community partners: With the joint leadership efforts of the Seattle-King County Asset Building 

Collaborative and the City of Seattle, Bank on S-KC is able to draw on an extensive group of communitybased organizations that endorse the initiative as credible and trustworthy to the targeted populations, 

particularly immigrant and refugee communities. A dedicated Outreach Coordinator provides opportunities 

to foster direct relationships between financial partners and community groups and can adapt the initiative to 

changing demographics and needs within the unbanked community. Bank on S-KC is one of many assetbuilding strategies that partners use to help move struggling families out of poverty and toward self-sufficiency.

 • Resources from financial partners: Contributions to the operational costs of the initiative by the financial 

partners allow the program to hire staff to promote and run the initiative, as well as engage in a substantial 

public awareness campaigns. Without requiring formal MOUs, financial assessments ensure the necessary 

commitment to program rules.

 • Innovative, well-designed, and functional website: Designed for both unbanked customers as well as social 

service agency staff, the website includes customized tools to locate appropriate financial institutions and 

financial education providers for each individual. The website is used to ensure the transparency across 

products offered by different financial institutions, thus encouraging them to offer accounts with features 

exceeding the minimum criteria.

Bank on S-KC has also faced challenges. Similar to many other Bank On campaigns, one of the most significant 

ongoing difficulties is the inability or unwillingness of some participating financial institutions to report all of the 

agreed-upon data. Because of the existing account-tracking systems, especially in larger institutions, some institutions 

were not able to “flag” and follow Bank on S-KC accounts. Consequently, the collected data is not complete, which 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 65

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

has made an insightful analysis of the program difficult. Bank on S-KC has taken steps to streamline its data collection, 

and developed an online tool for reporting that should increase the reliability of the data.

Another challenge has been to ensure that all participating financial institution personnel know about the program 

and the specific products and features offered by their own institution. With over 400 branches throughout the 

county, some frontline staff are unaware of the details of their own Bank on S-KC product. Greater public 

awareness and increased training of staff are still required to achieve the goal of welcoming all unbanked customers.

Overall, the financial institution and community partners agree that the Bank on S-KC has provided Seattle’s 

unbanked residents an unprecedented opportunity to access mainstream financial services and high quality financial 

education. Despite data reporting limitations, the initiative can still be considered a success in its documented 

opening of over 54,000 new accounts for previously unbanked customers since launching in 2008. 

In addition, some financial partners showed flexibility in offering new products, and all agreed that the connections 

with community partners helped them reach a population that they had not previously served. Community partners 

welcomed the opportunity to offer clients a safe place for their money and a chance to save and build assets.

Background and History

Bank on Seattle-King County (Bank on S-KC) was the second Bank On program to launch in the U.S. Inspired 

by the success of Bank on San Francisco, the idea was proposed in February 2007 by Jerry DeGrieck, Public 

Health Manager and Policy Advisor in the City of Seattle’s Human Services Department (HSD), and Seattle City 

Councilmember Sally Clark. Working with the Mayor’s office, DeGrieck proposed that the City of Seattle take 

the lead in bringing together the public and private partners that would be required for a successful initiative—

government agencies, financial institutions, and community partners.

HSD had received a National League of Cities Institute for Youth, Education and Families’ Technical Assistance 

grant in 2005 to explore how the City of Seattle could improve its asset-building strategies as a method of poverty 

reduction. Subsequently, the City formed the Seattle-King County Asset Building Collaborative (SKC ABC). 

The mission of SKC ABC is to create a cohesive and comprehensive system of high-quality, accessible financial 

empowerment services and networks throughout King County that connects people to mainstream financial 

services such as financial planning, education, coaching, credit and debt counseling, access to public benefits, free tax 

preparation, and homeownership and foreclosure prevention resources. SKC ABC was an ideal vehicle to take the 

lead in moving forward and implementing Bank on S-KC.

This was a key moment to implement such an initiative. Payday lenders in Washington State often charged up to 

390 percent APR on loans, stripping residents of hard-earned income. In a 2005 report, the Brookings Institution 

identified 55 payday lenders and 32 non-bank check cashers in Seattle, charging fees that cost borrowers a total 

of $15 million dollars and $1.8 million, respectively. In addition, the Washington State Budget and Policy Center 

found in their analysis “High Interest, Lost Opportunity,” that payday lenders, check cashers, and pawn shops are 

densely concentrated in lower-income neighborhoods. In Washington State, there were 26 such businesses per 

100,000 people in the lowest-income neighborhoods (median income below $39,452), as compared to two such 

businesses per 100,000 people in high-income neighborhoods (median income above $70,887). 

The goal of Bank on S-KC is to ensure that affordable financial products are available to everyone. In an effort to 

assess the magnitude of this challenge, Matt Fellowes with the Brookings Institution estimated in 2005 that Seattle 

had between 22,745 and 39,215 unbanked households, and roughly 58,349 to 125,675 unbanked adults. Since 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

66 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

research shows that twice as many people of color are unbanked as whites, the primary targets of the initiative 

would be Seattle and King County’s significant immigrant and refugee population. 

The City of Seattle already had in place a number of initiatives that provided outreach and services to low-income 

populations, including a public benefits screening tool known as “PeoplePoint,” family centers, and neighborhood 

services centers. The Bank On initiative would support the Human Services Department in achieving its Strategic 

Investment Plan by helping “vulnerable persons achieve social and economic success.” In addition, SKC ABC – 

with its wide network of community groups that focused their efforts on financial empowerment – was able to 

provide the leadership and outreach necessary to implement the Bank On campaign.

The City of Seattle and SKC ABC expected financial institutions to be reasonably receptive to developing a Bank 

on S-KC initiative. Seattle and King County have a high density of mainstream financial institutions throughout 

most neighborhoods. In fact, the Brookings study found that Seattle’s higher-income neighborhoods actually had 

fewer banks than low-income areas of the city. Bank of America, U.S. Bank, Washington Mutual, and Wells Fargo 

– four banks already participating in Bank on San Francisco – comprised about 78 percent of the market share in 

Seattle, which made the idea of engaging financial institutions very realistic. To further bolster the effort, national 

foundations and think tanks such as the Brooking Institution, the Clinton Foundation and the National League 

of Cities began paying extra attention to Bank on S-KC in early 2007, and provided it with extra resources and 

expertise, such as by connecting the program efforts with their own researchers and by offering financial support to 

bring the Bank on San Francisco team to Seattle in order to act as advisors to the project. 

Development of Bank on Seattle-King County

Under the auspices of the SKC ABC, the City convened representatives from the Federal Reserve Bank of San 

Francisco, Washington Mutual Bank, the Washington Department of Financial Institutions (DFI), and numerous 

community and non-profit partners such as United Way, Solid Ground, and Columbia Legal Services to form 

a working group to address the needs of the unbanked. The City also reached out to Bank on San Francisco 

representatives and other national partners, such as the National League of Cities, for their guidance. 

After several months of initial meetings, the working group settled on a purpose and scope for the initiative:

People in Seattle and King County who are unbanked will be connected with mainstream financial services including affordable 

checking, savings, credit, and financial education opportunities. We want to provide people with alternatives to paying exorbitant 

fees and interest for financial services. The initiative will help people keep more of what they earn and start on a pathway to 

improved financial success.

Two significant aspects of this mission expanded upon the Bank on San Francisco model and the City’s initial 

proposal: 1) Financial education became an integral component of the initiative, equal in importance to 

connecting people with accounts; and 2) the campaign took a county-wide approach due to the integration of 

the City and County populations and dispersion of low-income people in the area (not just concentrated in City 

neighborhoods). Financial institutions supported this plan because they had branches throughout the County, many 

located in lower-income neighborhoods outside the City of Seattle.

With the support and political clout of Mayor Nickels and Councilmember Clark, the working group issued 

an invitation to all banks and credit unions that had branches located within King County to join the Bank On 

initiative. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and the DFI were instrumental in providing names, addresses, 

and contact information for these financial institutions, and the Federal Reserve sponsored a luncheon during 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 67

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

an all-day work session. In January 2008, an invitation from several key stakeholders, including Mayor Nickels, 

Councilmember Clark, the Director of the DFI, and the Senior Vice President and Seattle Branch Manager of the 

Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, was sent to all of the financial institutions (Appendecies 10 and 11). The 

invitation explained the purpose of the “unbanked” initiative and requested the financial institutions to join a 

day-long working session to learn more about the proposal and to discuss next steps. San Francisco City Treasurer 

José Cisneros and the Bank on San Francisco team, as well as some of their financial institutions and community 

partners, participated in the meeting and described their efforts, successes, and lessons learned. Their presentation 

and convincing data were crucial in demonstrating the feasibility and necessity of the program, and provided 

guidance to move forward. National League of Cities staff were also present to talk about Seattle’s work in a 

national context.

The work session attracted more than 100 people, representing 

35 banks and credit unions and dozens of community partners 

from SKC ABC. Interested participants were invited to work 

together to develop and market financial products and services. 

Led by the City and SKC ABC, five work groups were 

formed: 

 1) Products and Services

 2) Marketing and Outreach

 3) Evaluation and Tracking of Data

 4) Financial Education

 5) Training of Branch Personnel

Volunteers from the work session began meeting regularly in 

these groups throughout the next few months. The City and 

SKC ABC provided direction and staffing, including detailed 

follow-up notes and draft proposals. Each work group was 

chaired by a representative of either a financial institution or 

a community organization. Each group’s recommendations 

were arrived at through consensus and were then vetted to the 

larger group. Five initial sponsors for the initiative emerged:77

 • City of Seattle

 • Seattle-King County Asset Building Collaborative (SKC ABC)

 • Federal Reserve Bank on San Francisco

 • Washington State Department of Financial Institutions

 • The Seattle Foundation

The sponsors eventually came to play different roles for 

the initiative, including lending credibility to the effort 

(Federal Reserve Bank), acting as the fiscal sponsor (Seattle 

Foundation), and acting as the data repository (the State 

Department of Financial Institutions). These roles will be 

explained in greater detail throughout the report.

By the end of May 2008, the contours of the initiative began taking shape, and financial institutions were asked to 

commit to the plan. By July, there was consensus on all of the essential elements of the initiative. Similar to Bank 

77 FDIC and King County were later added as sponsors.

 • Bank of America

 • Banner Bank

 • BECU

 • Cathay Bank

 • City Bank

 • Columbia Bank

 • Express Credit Union

 • Frontier Bank

 • HomeStreet Bank

 • KeyBank

 • Pacific International Bank

 • Plaza Bank

 • Seattle Metropolitan Credit Union (SMCU)

 • Seattle Savings Bank

 • United Commercial Bank

 • U.S. Bank

 • Verity Credit Union

 • Viking Bank

 • Washington Mutual

 • Watermark Credit Union

 • Wells Fargo Bank

 • Woodstone Credit Union

*For 2011-2012, City Bank, Pacific International, 

SMCU, Viking, Watermark, and Woodstone are no 

longer participating. Following takeovers, mergers, 

and other corporate changes, Frontier was replaced by 

Union Bank; Washington Mutual by Chase; United 

Commercial Bank by EastWest Bank.

Box 1

Participating Financial Institutions: 2008-2010*
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

68 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

on San Francisco, Bank on S-KC did not require a formal agreement to be signed by the financial institutions, in 

the fear that developing and signing an agreement would forestall implementing the initiative for many months. 

Eventually, 22 financial institutions signed on to participate in an initial phase that would last from the fourth 

quarter of 2008 through the end of 2010. 

Program Description

Products and Services Work Group

The Products and Services Work Group focused on how to provide affordable, accessible accounts to unbanked 

people, while ensuring the sustainability of the initiative by making the products reasonably profitable for 

the financial institutions. The City and SKC ABC used Bank on San Francisco criteria as a starting point for 

negotiation, since those criteria had already been agreed to by many of the same institutions, but also encouraged 

the work group to consider pushing the vision furtherby using San Francisco’s template as a floor.

A representative from HomeStreet Bank skillfully guided this diverse group, which included large and small 

bank and credit union representatives, non-profit partners, and one formerly unbanked community member. By 

providing a forum for all interested parties to express their preferences and develop the criteria, Bank on S-KC 

ensured the buy-in of participants. The final criteria included the provisions described below.

Each of these criteria represents some amount of compromise. The goal was to encourage as many financial 

institutions to participate as possible. Program planners recognized that a single institution would be unable to 

Characteristics of a Bank on S-KC Account

• Minimum opening deposit of $50 or less (Exceptions up to $100 will be noted)

• No minimum monthly balance requirement (beyond what credit unions require for continued membership)

• No monthly service/maintenance fee (Exceptions up to $6/month will be noted)

• ATM or debit cards when accounts are first opened with no fees for own or network ATMs (Exceptions for 

waiting up to six months to offer an ATM or debit card will be noted).

• One set (one day) of NSF/OD fees waived per year per customer 

• Each institution will specify one or more actions they will take in addition to waiving one set of NSF/OD 

fees, including but not limited to: 

 o Savings account or equity line linked to checking account for OD protection

 o Quick communication with customer at time of NSF/ OD (i.e., text messaging)

 o Ability to access account balance immediately

 o Offer account with no OD possibility

 o Offer checkless accounts with ATM and low or no cost money orders/cashier’s checks

 o More than one or one set of NSF/ODs waived

• Acceptance of alternative identification information (such as Mexican consular ID)

• Acceptance of ITINs in lieu of SS #s (not as ID)

• Pathways for customers with Chex System ‘activity’ that is more than six months old (Restitution and fraud 

policies of individual institutions still apply).

• Clear disclosure of fees, rates, and procedures (in addition to all of the notifications that institutions are required to provide)

• Savings account option

Box 2
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 69

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

meet the needs of all unbanked people, and that a diversity of institutions offering different products and services 

would be more conducive to meeting these needs on an individual basis. 

One method of achieving this was to set forth the preferred criteria, such as a minimum opening deposit of $50 or less, 

and then allow for “exceptions” that would be transparent to preserve alternatives for the customer. This path was also 

used to determine that some institutions could charge a small (originally up to $6 per month) monthly maintenance 

fee. In 2011, the maximum allowable fee was increased to $10 per month, as larger institutions began charging more 

substantial monthly fees even for these Bank On accounts, arguing that changing regulations had required them to 

increase their fees. As mainstay partners in the initiative, this change was made to accommodate them.

Bank on S-KC also developed a set of criteria that financial institutions were strongly encouraged, but not required 

to offer:

Bank on S-KC was designed to be sustainable for financial institutions, not just as charity or simply an avenue to 

Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) credit, but as a legitimate business segment that financial institutions would 

want to compete for. Thus, Bank on S-KC chose not to develop one Bank on S-KC account that all participating 

banks and credit unions would have to offer. Instead, the product criteria represented a minimum acceptable 

standard with room for additional, attractive features. This approach subsequently led Bank on S-KC to emphasize 

transparency and outreach and communication, letting the public and Bank on S-KC’s community partners know 

about the features and specific products offered by Bank on S-KC’s financial institutions.

Marketing and Outreach

Getting the word out to the community about the program is a challenge many Bank On programs face. Trusted 

community partners are the backbone of the Bank on S-KC effort, providing credibility to the financial institutions 

and the program itself. To address this challenge, the Marketing and Outreach workgroup, led by a local community 

organization representative, used county demographics to target different localities, languages, and ethnic groups. A plan 

was developed to distribute outreach brochures through dozens of SKC ABC partners. Based on demographic research, 

the group was determined to translate and disseminate the outreach materials in 12 languages, in addition to English: 

Characteristics of a Bank on S-KC Account

• Financial incentives for at least some who open accounts at their institutions through Bank 

on Seattle – King County who also complete high-quality financial education

• Programs that encourage savings (such as automatic savings programs)

• Foreign remittances (at low or no cost)

• Free online banking

• Actively encourage and promote direct deposit

• Accounts for those who have been on ChexSystems for less than six months on a case-by-case basis

• Referrals to other participating institutions for Bank on Seattle–King County customers 

unable to open an account 

Box 3
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

70 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

 • Amharic

 • Cambodian

 • Chinese

 • Korean

 • Laotian

 • Russian

 • Somali

 • Spanish

 • Tagalog

 • Tigrinya

 • Ukrainian

 • Vietnamese

Bank on S-KC sought the services of a pro bono marketing firm to design the materials, including an outreach 

brochure, a poster, “buck slips” (for mailing inserts and other documents), and bus ads. The Seattle branch of the 

firm used by San Francisco, MRM Worldwide, was chosen because of their familiarity with the program, and the 

options they proposed for planning an advertising campaign. Bank on S-KC decided against a hard-hitting, antipayday lender campaign used by some other cities – partly because of the lack of political will in taking on payday 

lenders locally–in favor of ads that promoted the benefits of opening an account. The firm eventually produced 

three separate bus ads that ran for four month intervals over a year. 

An outreach brochure (Appendix 12) was created as a tool for both financial institutions and community groups to 

familiarize clients and customers with the program, explain why and how to open an account, and let people know 

which institutions were participating.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 71

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

One of the primary challenges currently facing Bank on S-KC is maintaining the excitement and momentum 

of the campaign. For the first 18 months of the program, there were no staff dedicated solely to outreach. Once 

funds were available for an outreach position, Bank on S-KC was able to ramp up efforts by participating in 

community events, offering trainings and presentations to staff and clients of social service agencies, and contacting 

new community partners to spread the word. The Outreach Coordinator is alert to opportunities that foster direct 

relationships between financial partners and community groups and can help adapt to changing demographics and 

needs within the unbanked community, such as the need for translation into new languages.

Budget and Resources

In order to help pay for extensive outreach and marketing efforts, the financial institutions used a complex formula to 

determine contributions that balance the needs and requirements of both large and small institutions (See Appendix

13). The contribution plan was not overly burdensome to large institutions with dozens of branches within the 

County, nor was it prohibitively expensive for the smaller participating institutions with just a few branches. The 

formula required each institution to contribute an initial amount for participation, in addition to a set amount per 

branch, which decreased as the number of branches increased. Both large and small institutions viewed certain aspects 

of the plan as unfair, but for the initial phase of 2008-2010, all 22 participating institutions paid their share.78

These contributions totaled $185,000. The revenues paid for the printing of outreach materials, financial education 

brochures, and other promotional materials such as three different bus ads that ran for four months each, and some 

additional marketing, including Val-Pak coupons and advertising in a Spanish language newspaper.

The largest expenses of the program—leadership, coordination, and staffing—were donated by SKC ABC and 

the City. While the City continues to lead the initiative and set the agenda, a donated staff person from the SKC 

ABC provides ongoing coordination of meetings, acts as a liaison to financial institution representatives, responds 

to customer complaints, leads data collection and analysis, writes applications for funding, oversees marketing and 

media efforts, and supervises the work of the Outreach Coordinator and Financial Education Project Manager. 

SKC ABC staff also provides the leadership and staffing of the Financial Education Providers Network. It is only 

during the 2011-2012 phase that revenues raised from the financial institutions are being used to supplement 

staffing costs of SKC ABC. 

Another substantial program cost is the King County 2-1-1 Community Information Line, which costs Bank on S-KC 

$10,000 for a two year period. King County 2-1-1 includes Bank on S-KC in its resource and referral service, and includes a 

message on its hold line offering assistance in finding an appropriate bank or credit union for callers. The Seattle Foundation, 

a local community foundation, provided the funds to secure 2-1-1 as the portal for Bank on S-KC. The Seattle Foundation 

also became a sponsor of the initiative, agreeing to serve as the fiscal sponsor to which financial institutions make their 

contributions. The fiscal sponsorship allows the program to raise funds as a non-profit organization.

Finally, the City of Seattle pays $99 per year for the Bank On program website, www.everyoneiswelcome.org, which 

is updated and maintained by staff from the SKC ABC. Bank on S-KC saves thousands of dollars in information 

technology costs by relying on an SKC ABC volunteer to develop, customize, monitor, and improve the software, 

and update databases when necessary. The volunteer initially spent a large amount of time in developing the 

website, but only needs to spend a few hours per week to maintain it. 

Data Tracking and Evaluation

Since the program’s launch, data tracking and evaluation have presented themselves as significant challenges. The 

data tracking work group was led by a representative from one of the largest financial institution partners, U.S. 

Bank. The large banks maintained that they would be unable to alter any of their account-tracking processes to 

accommodate Bank on S-KC reporting. The banks that were also participating in Bank on San Francisco stated 

that they would only be able to report the same set of data. Bank of America was not even able to report what it 

had in the San Francisco initiative due to a different technology platform. Many institutions, including the largest 

participating credit union, stated they were unable to “flag” the accounts, which would have allowed them to pull 

information about the requested fields. 

78 The economic climate for financial institutions in mid-2007 was different than it is at present. Bank On S-KC launched at a time 

when financial institution support may have been easier to acquire but three years later, the Bank on S-KC is experiencing a greater 

challenge to garner the same financial resources that supported the initial effort.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

72 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

For the initial phase, the data committee established two underlying tracking agreements: only aggregate data 

would be reported publicly (no singling out of individual institutions), and each financial institution’s data would 

be reported to the DFI. All institutions were asked to report on “previously unbanked” customers, which included 

anyone who did not have a checking or savings account at the time of opening the new account. This definition 

permitted customers to be included even if they did not ask specifically for “Bank on Seattle-King County,” in part 

because many partners were using other names for their basic accounts.

The work group met with Matt Fellowes and then with Pew Charitable Trusts, who advocated for ambitious 

tracking and reporting in order to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of Bank on initiatives. Ultimately the 

work group recommended that financial institutions report extensive data, with the following caveat: “Participating 

financial institutions are expected to make a good faith effort to provide all of the recommended data elements 

in the recommended data set, although an institution’s inability to do so will be considered and may not preclude 

participation in the initiative.” The work group and key Bank on SKC leaders knew that it would be necessary to 

continue working after the launch with financial institutions on their tracking and reporting. 

Finally, Bank on S-KC developed a list of data that would allow for an incisive analysis of performance. Measures 

included:

 • Number of checking accounts opened during the quarter for previously unbanked customers

 • Number of newly banked customers during the quarter who were on ChexSystems at the time of opening the account

 • Total number of previously unbanked checking accounts currently open (cumulative)

 • Average balance during the quarter of all open checking accounts

 • Number of accounts that used direct deposit during the quarter

 • Number of accounts that had a non-sufficient funds (NSF) charge and/or an overdraft (OD) during the quarter

 • Total number of NSF and/or OD occurrences during the quarter

 • Number of accounts that had one or more ATM/debit transactions during the quarter

 • Total number of ATM/debit transactions during the quarter

 • Number of accounts that were active during the quarter (defined as at least three deposits, withdrawals, or 

other activity)

 • Number of accounts that were closed during the quarter

 • Total number of previously unbanked customers’ checking accounts closed (cumulatively since the inception of 

the program)

Financial institutions were also asked to report on the number of accounts closed and the reasons behind it, such 

as inactivity, excessive NSF/OD, customer request, or upgrade to other accounts. The reporting form also tracked 

the number and average balance of savings accounts, and requested the number of customers accessing home equity 

lines of credit, CDs, using online banking, and other products and services.

Financial Education

Financial education has always been an integral component of Bank on S-KC. The financial education workgroup, 

initially chaired by a representative from Apprisen Financial Advocates, subsequently evolved into a robust and growing 

Financial Education Providers Network (FEPN). Bank on S-KC partners recognized that many newly banked 

customers need financial knowledge and skills to successfully utilize their checking and savings accounts. Otherwise, 

those accounts could lead customers into even worse financial circumstances, with the accretion of overdraft fees and 

other unexpected fees. Therefore, one of the major goals of Bank on S-KC was to provide accessible, high quality 

financial education. However, program planners felt that requiring financial education as a precondition for an 

account was counterproductive. The solution was to create a network of financial education providers who would 

align their work with the Bank on S-KC to offer classes and one-on-one counseling for Bank On customers.

FEPN provides free, high quality financial education, particularly to underserved communities throughout King 

County. It makes the delivery of financial education more accessible, efficient, and effective by sharing resources 

and information, establishing quality standards, avoiding duplication of efforts, and jointly promoting financial 

education training opportunities. Furthermore, because community organizations and financial institutions have 

confidence in the quality of the education provided, this allows them to make referrals or offer incentives for people 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 73

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

interested in improving their financial acumen. Over 20 financial education providers, listed in the 

www.everyoneiswlecome.org website, agreed to the following participation requirements: 

 • Accept an agreed-upon set of standards defining the elements of high quality financial education;

 • Perform a self-assessment based on the standards, in order to determine where and how improvements need to 

be made within the organization;

 • Develop an organizational plan to improve the quality of education provided and/or increase in access to free 

financial education;

 • Share information about financial education programs and services among those in the network;

 • Agree to be listed on the Bank on Seattle-King County website as a source of free financial education; and

 • Help develop a system of evaluating effectiveness of methods and programs of financial education.

These financial education providers offer free classes, workshops, or one-on-one counseling to the public. They list their 

offerings through a locator tool on the www.everyoneiswelcome.org website, as well as on a calendar uploaded to the DFI 

website.

In one of its first activities, FEPN developed and adopted standards for curriculum content, adapted from standards 

advanced by Express Credit Union (Appendix 14). FEPN members conducted a self-assessment of their financial 

education curriculum based on those standards to identify where they needed to add curriculum or train staff in 

order to improve their financial education classes and counseling. FEPN has met monthly for two and a half years, 

hosting substantive professional development opportunities to improve members’ understanding and capability 

of financial topics, such as: credit reports; medical debt; financial empowerment for people with disabilities; basic 

investment strategies; accessing public benefits, and many others. FEPN meetings also provide opportunities for 

members to share experiences, resources, and best practices, as well as to collaborate on projects. Agencies seeking 

financial educators for their clients and classes can find partners at these meetings.

In addition, as part of its initial recommendations, the Bank on S-KC Financial Education work group created a 

Financial Education brochure (Appendix 15) intended to be distributed by banking partners to new customers 

when they opened their accounts, a time considered to be a “teachable moment”. The Financial Education 

brochure, available on the website, was translated and printed in the same 12 languages as the Outreach brochure. 

Community partners also use these brochures as a basic financial education resource.

Although the financial institutions decided not to use their pooled contributions to Bank on S-KC as incentive 

money for all customers who completed a series of financial education classes, four partners79 decided to offer 

financial incentives to their own Bank on S-KC customers. These partners met separately, with Bank on S-KC 

staff, to develop the criteria that would need to be met for a customer to qualify for the incentive. FEPN then 

certified which providers would be able to issue the certificates.80 The financial institution partners required that a 

qualifying financial education class must include the following standards:

 1. The following topics covered by the FEPN’s Financial Education Standards:

 • Financial Goal Setting

 • Controlling Your Money

 • Checking Accounts

 • Savings

 • Credit and Credit History

 • Credit Cards

 • Consumer Rights

 2. At least eight hours of class time

 3. A minimum of two separate class periods (e.g., four hours each)

 4. Take-home resources and/or homework between classes

 5. Testing of financial education knowledge acquired through these classes

79 Currently, three partners are offering the incentive.

80 American Financial Solutions, Apprisen Financial Advocates, CARES of Washington, ClearPoint Credit Counseling Solutions, 

Consumer Education and Training Services (CENTS), El Centro de la Raza, HomeSight, Hopelink, International District Housing 

Alliance, Jennifer Beach Foundation, Lutheran Community Service, Multi-Service Center, Neighborhood House, Parkview Services, 

Port Jobs, Seattle Goodwill, United Indians of All Tribes Foundation, Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle, Washington C.A.S.H., 

Washington Working Families Prosperity Center, YMCA Young Adult Services, and YWCA—Economic Resilience Program.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

74 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

The incentives offered by the partners vary. Each customer who successfully completes the minimum education 

requirements and obtains a certificate from the Bank on S-KC is offered

 • $100 from Banner Bank

 • $100 from HomeStreet Bank if the customer maintains a checking for a minimum of three months with a 

positive balance

 • a $50 matching deposit into a 6 month Savers Certificate from Verity Credit Union for each member who is in 

good standing with Verity at the certificate maturity date in order to withdraw the $50 matching deposit.81 

Training of Branch Personnel

Since most of Bank on S-KC financial partners do not consider Seattle as a stand-alone market, it was important 

for the initiative to be countywide, especially since the target populations the program hoped to serve—immigrants, 

refugees and lower income residents— are concentrated in neighborhoods in south Seattle and south King County. 

For this countywide initiative, the 22 participating banks and credit unions represented more than 400 branches 

with thousands of personnel. Ensuring that all personnel) were knowledgeable about the campaign and enthusiastic 

about welcoming new banking customers on a continuing basis posed a significant challenge.

Under the leadership of a credit union partner’s Training Manager, Bank on S-KC created a 1.5-hour presentation 

designed to familiarize branch managers with the purpose and requirements of the program, the standards of the 

accounts that could be offered, and the features of the accounts that each financial institution actually offers as 

part of Bank on S-KC. The training included a PowerPoint presentation and handouts that were designed to be 

used in the training of their own frontline branch personnel. Furthermore, under the guidance of another credit 

union partner’s Manager of Public Relations, Bank on S-KC produced a video featuring Mayor Nickels and 

Councilmember Clark, that introduced and explained Bank on S-KC. This video was later posted on 

www.youtube.com.

82 In addition, former President Clinton taped a video in support of the program that was also 

used in training and outreach. Financial Institutions use these training materials to train their own staff. Therefore 

the frequency of trainings varies from institution to institution. 

The Bank on Seattle-King County Launch

On September 22, 2008, Bank on S-KC was officially launched at a City Hall luncheon, sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank 

and FDICand featuring then-Mayor Greg Nickels, Councilmember Sally Clark, Washington State Representative Eric Pettigrew, 

DFI Director Scott Jarvis, and Urban League’s (one of SKC ABC’s partners) Executive Direction James Kelly. Sixteen banks and 

six credit unions signed on as participating financial institutions for the initial two-year phase through the end of 2010.

Following the launch, a Coordinating Committee was formed to provide leadership and monitor fund expenditures. 

The Committee consists of representatives from large banks, community banks, credit unions, and community 

partners, as well as from all sponsoring agencies. In 2009, Bank on S-KC added two sponsors, FDIC and King 

County government, and their representatives also joined the Coordinating Committee. This Committee meets 

quarterly, or more often when necessary to make key program decisions.

Challenges Faced by Bank on Seattle-King County

Diversity of Financial Institutions

At the outset, there was some concern about how such a diverse group of financial institutions—large banks, 

small banks, and credit unions—could agree on universal parameters for a common program. However, ensuring 

involvement of representatives from all types of institutions in the development of the initiative helped ensure 

buy-in with the purpose, principles, and framework of the program. No one institution or product could meet 

the financial needs of all unbanked and underbanked people in Seattle and King County. By having a diversity of 

institutions and clarity on the products and services each offers, Bank on S-KC could match customers with the 

institution that could best meet their needs and preferences. 

Moreover, Bank on S-KC embraced the notion of voluntary cooperation in order to accommodate these 

competing constituencies. There were no MOUs signed between the program and the financial institutions, but 

81 It is too soon to have meaningful results from the incentive programs. While about 500 certificates were provided to community 

partners, data has not yet been collected on how many have been deposited into financial institutions.

82 The link to the video is the following: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77prYFuW8iQ.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 75

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

rather an understanding—cemented by a substantial financial contribution—that participants would abide by the 

rules of the program, to the best of their abilities. 

For example, one requirement of the initiative was that each financial institution was required to offer a clear, 

written explanation of fees and rates to each newly banked customer. All institutions, of course, provided the 

required official notifications and disclosures, but Bank on S-KC also wanted an understandable and readable 

explanation to be given the newly banked customers. Bank on S-KC provided a template (Appendix 16) that 

could be customized for each participating institution. However, only six of the participating institutions actually 

created a document using the provided template to use with their customers. Other institutions had their own 

notices, which they believed complied with this Bank on S-KC requirement. 

Data Reporting and Tracking

Similar to many other Bank On campaigns, one of the most significant ongoing challenges confronting Bank 

on S-KC is the inability or unwillingness of participating financial institutions – especially the large banks – to 

report all of the agreed-upon data. As outlined above, the Tracking and Evaluation Committee, based on the 

advice of the Pew Fellow, recommended collecting an ambitious array of data that would help evaluate and 

analyze the effectiveness of the program. However, because of the existing tracking systems, especially in larger 

institutions, some institutions were unable to “flag” follow Bank on S-KC accounts. Furthermore, because most 

of the institutions did not have a product named “Bank on Seattle-King County,” it posed a challenge for them to 

identify all previously unbanked customers in their reporting. This was especially the case for the large banks, some 

of which could only report the number of new accounts; a few others could also report an average balance, but 

nothing else. 

As a result, the collected data is not complete because many of the larger banks declined to include any information 

on numerous categories. Based on the initial agreement, Bank on S-KC may only report aggregate data, which 

makes the missing pieces even more problematic. In an effort to ameliorate the situation, upon the completion of 

the initial commitment through the end of 2010, Bank on S-KC has implemented a streamlined, online reporting 

system. This new quarterly reporting plan will request the following data on the accounts:

 • Total number of checking and savings accounts opened quarterly, and cumulatively

 • Average balances during the quarter

 • Number of accounts with an NSF and/or OD during the quarter

Bank on S-KC anticipates improved compliance and will be able to compile the data more efficiently through the 

website database.

Despite the reporting limitations encountered during the initiative’s first two years, Bank on S-KC has documented 

the opening of over 54,000 new accounts for previously unbanked customers. As of the 2011 first Quarter, 

checking accounts had an average balance of $652, and savings accounts had an average balance of $932.

Funding Challenges

Moving forward beyond the initial commitment period, Bank on S-KC faces challenges in raising funds for 

the ongoing operational support necessary to ensure a successful initiative. Funds are needed to update and 

reprint outreach and educational materials, to support staffing costs, and for marketing and outreach to maintain 

momentum. Although the original Financial Assessment was approved for the 2011-12 campaign, the partners also 

agreed that contributions were voluntary, and more limited monetary sums could be complemented with in-kind 

support. For example, one bank partner is re-designing outreach materials to supplement its financial contribution.

Training and Awareness of Financial Institution Personnel

For a large Bank on initiative, one of the major challenges is to ensure that all participating financial institution 

personnel know about the program and the specific products and features offered by their own institution that are 

aligned with Bank on. During the first two years of the initiative, 2-1-1 received about 50 calls from customers 

who were told by bank or credit union personnel that they had never heard of the program. However, so far in 

2011, no complaints have yet been reported by 2-1-1. Bank on S-KC has trained trainers from all participating 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

76 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

financial institutions and has offered to provide training directly to branch personnel, but most of the financial 

institutions prefer to do the training themselves. They acknowledge, however, that it is difficult to keep the program 

at the forefront, as their frontline staff have so many other products and programs that they need to know about.

Change in Political Leadership

Bank on S-KC has successfully weathered the political challenge of a change in mayoral leadership. Along with 

Councilmember Clark, Former Mayor Nickels provided the high-level political leadership necessary to convene the 

financial institutions in the initial stages. However, steadfast support from the City Council and the City of Seattle 

Human Services Department allowed the program to transition smoothly to a new Mayor. Councilmember Clark 

notes that the challenge for the future will be to determine how to best sustain the program, and whether it would 

be preferable if City government had less of a direct leadership role, allowing Bank on S-KC to transition into 

becoming its own distinct non-profit entity. On the other hand, Human Services staff believes it may be difficult to 

sustain the initiative without the political leadership and convening role of the City.

Innovative Strategies and Best Practices

EveryoneIsWelcome website

Bank on S-KC adopted the Bank on San Francisco tagline “Everyone Is Welcome” as its website name (partly 

because “BankonSeattleKingCounty” was deemed too long), and initially used the San Francisco “look and feel” 

to build its own website. Over time, Bank on S-KC substantially adapted the site in order to meet the needs of its 

partners and customers. A pro bono technical expert developed and customized a locator tool and map, simplified 

the language and look of the website, and added numerous enhancements and resources. Most importantly, the 

following added tools increased the utility of the site and transparency of the products for customers.

 • Bank and Credit Union Profiles

 Each financial partner completed a template delineating the contours of the products and features of their 

“Bank on S-KC” account and other information relevant to customers. This “Profile” can be accessed from 

the website’s home page, allowing customers to view the fees charged on the accounts and any additional 

features they might need, such as the availability and cost of foreign wire transfers; the cost of money orders 

and cashier’s checks; and opportunities for incentive and savings programs. 

 • Comparison Chart

 Transparency is a fundamental tenet to providing trustworthy access to affordable financial products. In 

an effort to streamline a customer’s efforts to find the best alternatives for his or her needs, Bank on S-KC 

created a Comparison Chart (available a click away from the home page) that lists the costs and products 

offered by each financial partner. This Comparison Chart was designed—at the request of community 

partners—to be downloadable for easy reference for case managers working with clients to find the most 

appropriate bank or credit union.

 • Financial Education Providers

 The website is designed to be a destination for people seeking financial education resources, which is 

a crucial component of the initiative. Contact information for the agencies in the Financial Education 

Providers Network is listed, as well as a link to the DFI’s Financial Education calendar, which provides the 

dates and times of free classes offered. Most importantly, the site includes a customized locator tool that 

allows customers to choose topics, location, language, audience, and type of setting (workshop, one-on-one, 

or classroom) for the financial education and counseling that they seek.

 • Additional Links

 The site provides additional useful information, including sections on “How to Avoid Overdraft Fees,” 

“Affordable Alternatives to Payday Loans,” and “Helpful Links and Resources.” The outreach and education 

materials have been translated into 13 languages, and allare available for download from the website. The 

websites of the community partners can also be accessed through the links on the homepage.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 77

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

The website is used as the primary tool for 2-1-1 and other case managers to help them recommend appropriate financial 

institutions for customers. It is also directly accessible to the public, and receives approximately 1,500 visitors each month.

Financial Education Providers Network

As mentioned earlier, the Financial Education Providers Network (FEPN), led by the SKC ABC, represents a best 

practice of Bank on S-KC, providing a key systems change in King County. This network provides significant 

incentives to community groups to stay involved with the campaign and promote financial access and education to their 

constituencies on a professional manner. The high quality monthly training workshops and opportunities for networking 

is beneficial for case managers and financial educators who work directly with clients. FEPN serves as a vehicle to break 

down the silos of agencies and lets them establish collaborative relationships to increase the financial capability of their 

clients. FEPN has evolved from a loose collection of financial education providers to a more structured entity, providing 

guidance on financial coaching and education for a wide range of community partners. The network provides ongoing 

opportunities for professional development and sharing of promising practices. Some of the most active members of the 

network include Hopelink, Urban League, YWCA, and three non-profit credit counseling agencies.

Small Dollar Loans

A major goal of Bank on S-KC is to provide affordable credit opportunities to unbanked and underbanked customers, and 

help them avoid high rates charged by payday lenders. Consequently, Bank on S-KC formed a working group on Credit 

Alternatives soon after launching. This group met throughout 2009 with numerous bank and credit union partners and 

community organization representatives to establish the basic criteria for “small dollar loans” within Bank on S-KC. The 

objective was to increase access to fair, responsible loans that were sustainable for lenders. While open to loans that would 

charge up to 36 percent APR, as the discussions continued, it became clear that institutions that planned to offer a loan would 

not charge more than 18 percent APR, so that became the standard. After extensive negotiations among interested parties, the 

following criteria were established:

Product Requirements:

 • Loan minimum of $500 or less (No maximum limit required)

 • APR not to exceed 18%

 • Payment terms beyond one paycheck cycle for closed-end loans (such as, 90 days, or one month for every $100 

borrowed)

 • No prepayment penalties

 • Closed-end loans should be paid in full before another advance

 • Streamlined underwriting (determined by each institution, but lenders are encouraged not to use an arbitrary 

FICO score cut-off, and to approve loans within 24 hours)

Recommended, but non-required features are:

 • Participation in financial education

 • Automatic savings component (whereby a portion of each loan repayment goes into a savings account)

 • Direct deposit

 • Payment terms beyond one paycheck cycle for open-ended loans

Three financial partners—a major bank and two credit unions--committed to offering this loan (although one has 

since dropped out of Bank on S-KC after being absorbed by another credit union). Several others have expressed 

interest in developing a loan product aligned with Bank on S-KC criteria. These loans are described and promoted 

through the website and community outreach.83

Program Impact and Systems Change

Impact from Strong Relationships

One of the most important positive impacts is the improved, strong relationships among financial institutions, the 

City, and community partners that were fostered by Bank on S-KC. Financial institutions have become integral 

partners in the work of the SKC ABC and its efforts to increase access to high-quality, financial education and 

financial empowerment services. Some financial institutions have participated in workshops for the Financial 

83 The small dollar loan product is relatively new at the time of writing this report and there have been no data yet reported from the 

banks on the success of these loans.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

78 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Education Providers Network, and several have partnered with community groups to present financial education 

workshops or to open accounts for clients in classes or at events. Some of the institutions that offer financial 

incentives form partnerships with community organizations that award certificates to their clients after completion 

of the prescribed financial education classes. 

Many partners—such as community organizations and financial institutions—have sponsored or participated 

in community-based events designed to reach out to and provide residents with a wide variety of financial 

empowerment services and connect them to providers. These events have included a Your Money Helpline phonea-thon, Financial Planning Day, and Financial Fitness Day, which took place during Financial Literacy Month. 

Connections between financial institutions and SKC ABC have also facilitated work on foreclosure prevention, 

such as promoting partners who offer mortgages to participate in community events geared towards connecting 

homeowners with their lenders, housing counselors, and pro bono attorneys.

In addition, the City of Seattle has benefitted from a closer relationship with financial partners. For example, when the 

City recently wanted more housing for victims of domestic violence, they were able to use their strong relationships 

with financial institution partners to broker conversations about possible funding assistance. Moreover, the City has 

incorporated Bank on S-KC into its one-stop public benefits initiative, PeoplePoint, and now screens residents seeking 

State- or City-administered benefits on whether they use check cashers and if they have a bank account.

Systems Change

A significant system change that Bank on S-KC created is a pathway for people with troubled banking histories to 

join the financial mainstream. In the past, people who were placed on ChexSystems would have been denied the 

opportunity to open a bank account for five years. Under the protocol established by Bank on S-KC, banks and 

credit unions agreed to open accounts for people who were placed on the system over six months ago and if they 

met the institution’s fraud and restitution policies. 

Significantly, some institutions agreed to go beyond Bank on S-KC’s minimum criteria and consider opening accounts 

even when customers had not made restitution or had been placed on ChexSystems for an incident that occurred less 

than six months previously. In fact, the loosening of the standards for opening Bank on accounts is one of the major 

changes noted by financial institution representatives (see below). For those financial institutions that reported on 

this indicator, 40 percent of their newly banked customers through Bank on S-KC were on ChexSystems at the time 

of opening their accounts. Bank on S-KC takes pride in living up to its tagline, Everyone Is Welcome. Most of the 

difficult-to-bank cases are referred to SKC ABC, which has been able to connect virtually everyone with a financial 

institution that provides an appropriate financial product, even if the customer does not meet Bank on S-KC criteria. 

Only customers who are listed in ChexSystems for fraudulent activities are turned away. 

Another important systems change is that the Bank on S-KC spawned the widely regarded FEPN (described 

above), which grew out of the initiative’s emphasis on financial education. FEPN has promoted the development 

of financial coaching and provides opportunities for community partners to share effective practices. As a result 

of Bank on S-KC, King County now has a cohesive system of financial education providers with opportunities 

for cross-collaboration and skills enhancement, offering people access to high-quality education opportunities. In 

part because of FEPN, SKC ABC has been able to develop a Financial Empowerment workshop series designed 

for agencies interested in embedding financial education and financial empowerment services into their service 

delivery. The workshops, and follow up technical assistance, raise awareness about the importance of mainstream 

banking and the Bank on S-KC initiative, and provide resources and tools that agencies can use when working with 

their clients. Bank on S-KC, FEPN, and SKC ABC are systematically increasing knowledge about the capacity to 

provide financial empowerment.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 79

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Financial Institution Perspectives

Why participate?

From the perspective of financial institutions, what makes Bank on S-KC successful is the community involvement. 

This initiative provided an unprecedented opportunity for financial institutions to collaborate with a large network 

of community groups serving a traditionally hard to reach population. As Todd Pietzsch of BECU explains, 

“This program reaches the unbanked in ways we couldn’t by leveraging the trust and credibility of non-profits.” 

For credit unions and small community banks, their missions aligned perfectly and Bank on S-KC provided 

an effective way to reach out to ease the burdens of struggling community members. They were “appalled” to 

learn how much payday lenders and check cashers charged. For larger institutions, the regulatory imperative of 

community reinvestment and civic responsibility is paramount. One major national bank partner, Courtney Jinjika 

of KeyBank, commented that Bank on S-KC provided the opportunity for the bank to learn why people were 

unbanked and opened an avenue to attract that population to their appropriate products. Thus, both the desire to 

serve the community, as well as the opportunity to increase their business through new consumer accounts, drives 

their enthusiasm to participate. As Mr. Pietzsch elaborated, “If you are doing this right, these are people who will 

eventually need a car, a new home, and you will have a relationship with them.”

All of the financial institutions agreed that the greatest benefit to them and the most effective way for institutions to 

get the most out of the program is to take advantage of the partnerships offered by community organizations. Bank 

on S-KC’s Outreach Coordinator introduces financial institution branch managers to nearby community partners 

to facilitate direct relationships. Many of the financial institutions are eager to go onsite to the community groups 

to educate clients about banking and opening accounts. Financial partners have been able to take advantage of the 

financial empowerment community events sponsored by SKC ABC, and in one case, a partner was thrilled to open ten 

accounts in one day for previously unbanked customers. Some of the financial institutions have strategically utilized 

Bank on S-KC in their work with businesses. Kathy Williams of HomeStreet points out that when their business 

development account representatives talk to small businesses (for example, restaurateurs), they now have a vehicle to 

offer accounts to all of the business’s employees, allowing them to implement company-wide direct deposit.

Products and Services

One of the most significant impacts that Bank on S-KC had on the banking community was insisting that the 

Mexican Matricula card be used as an acceptable form of identification. In addition, many institutions loosened 

their standards on approving accounts for people on ChexSystems, as well as agreeing to waive one set of overdraft 

fees. Some financial institutions were also motivated to lower their minimum opening deposit requirement, 

realizing that an initial commitment should be small until the customer grew to trust and use the new account. A 

few began offering incentives for customers to complete a prescribed course of financial education.

Since the financial institutions developed the minimum criteria for participation themselves, there was a largely 

enthusiastic buy-in with the final recommendations. Most agree that having some flexibility within the criteria 

(e.g., range of opening deposit; level of monthly fee) is positive, allowing for a diversity of institutions to join the 

initiative, especially larger institutions that have less flexibility in accommodating local initiatives. However, some 

of the community banks and credit unions would have preferred to require institutions to offer an account with no 

monthly maintenance fees at all. 

Challenges

Financial institutions point to data tracking and reporting as their biggest challenge. Many of the larger institutions 

had difficulty in flagging accounts for previously unbanked customers and needed to report numbers based on only 

a particular type of account opened in low-income neighborhoods (acknowledging that their reporting was thus 

not entirely accurate for Bank on S-KC accounts). Furthermore, many could only report basic information about 

the accounts rather than all of the data that had initially been agreed upon. Smaller institutions also had to make 

adjustments that were difficult, and some did not have the technological infrastructure capable of reporting all of the 

data elements. The institutions are hopeful that the new, streamlined online reporting will make the process easier. 

Even among institutions that have been closely tracking their data, some have not analyzed the data to determine 

if the Bank on S-KC accounts are profitable or breaking even. From the reported data, the accounts appear to 

have a higher rate of overdrafts. However, since only a few of the financial institutions report overdraft information, 
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

80 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

it is difficult to determine the validity of this observation. Financial institutions acknowledge that they earn 

money with the customer’s use of debit cards, but some are focused on providing these accounts as a service to the 

community, without specifically looking at the bottom line.

One partner pointed to the importance of obtaining “buy-in” from the highest levels of the financial institution. 

When serving the unbanked population is not established as part of the bank culture by those in leadership 

positions, frontline staff often lack the will and ability to market the program. It can be difficult to convince 

someone to become banked just because “it is the right thing to do.” Bank executives must know how the program 

works, what their obligations are, and who will be managing it in order to ensure for successful implementation. 

Transparency in the initiative was helpful to bring them on board.

Many of the partners anticipate that federal regulatory changes may limit the ability of some institutions to 

continue offering free checking accounts. Although these changes may primarily affect larger banks, they could test 

the limits of what is acceptable as an “affordable” mainstream account. 

Community Partner Perspectives

More than 100 community agencies have worked with Bank on S-KC in some fashion to disseminate program 

details and materials to their constituencies. Some of these groups have handed out materials, while others have 

worked closely with the Financial Education Providers Network and SKC ABC to integrate financial education 

and counseling into their one-on-one case management systems.

Community partners have been integral to the success of the Bank on S-KC initiative by increasing public 

awareness of the opportunities, reaching specific population groups – such as immigrants and refugees– that 

otherwise would be very difficult to reach, and lending credibility to financial institutions that their clients might 

not otherwise trust. Similarly, the outreach for the program has increased the visibility and credibility of some of 

the community partners. In general, community groups are thrilled to have an option for their clients that allow 

them access into the financial mainstream and give them an opportunity to save money. As Audi Ritz of American 

Financial Solutions states, Bank on S-KC is “another tool in the toolbox to help people reach their financial 

goals.” Tracy Greene of Hopelink has used the financial incentive as part of her financial education curriculum, 

encouraging students to use their incentives to open savings accounts. Staff from King County 2-1-1 saw many 

of their callers having financial problems as a result of involvement with payday lenders, allowing for a “natural 

partnership” with Bank on S-KC to form.

The community partners themselves have benefitted from being able to pool resources, expand

 their networks, and share best practices, including financial education curriculum, around financial empowerment issues. 

They are grateful to have a network of high quality service providers they can trust in referring their clients to. They also 

point to how Bank on S-KC worked with agencies with diverse viewpoints to bring a variety of social and cultural issues 

to the table, including addressing the needs of immigrants, refugees, and people with a variety of disabilities. 

Some of the improvements they would like to see include:

 • Explicit, transparent options explained (e.g., what advantage does an account with a monthly fee have over the 

free ones?);

 • More flexibility for people who are on ChexSystems and cannot pay back the fees they owe; and

 • More short-term, low interest, small dollar loans (including employers using payroll deductions for creditbuilding loans).

One of the primary challenges for community partners is to keep the initiative front-and-center and 

maintain the momentum of the campaign. After the initial excitement and before Bank on S-KC hired an 

Outreach Coordinator, it was more difficult to maintain partner engagement in the ongoing discussions of the 

implementation. The Outreach Coordinator is working with the partners to build meaningful relationships that 

reinforce the value of the initiative.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 81

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Next Steps for Bank on Seattle-King County

Making Connections

Bank on S-KC has been a catalyst to integrating financial empowerment initiatives into the poverty reduction 

strategies of the City of Seattle, adding a significant component to the work of HSD. Bank on S-KC collaborates 

with the City’s PeoplePoint initiative, which offers a one-stop access to public benefits. The collaboration allows 

for the Bank On initiative to be incorporated into the PeoplePoint electronic benefits screening tool. In addition, 

Bank On is an essential feature of the SKC ABC’s financial empowerment workshop series offered to social service 

case managers throughout the county, and used to raise awareness and understanding of financial issues. These 

workshops have helped connect these disparate networks and systems and have begun the process of embedding 

financial empowerment throughout the local social services system. Bank on S-KC is prominently featured in the 

series and provides some of the tools and resources the case managers need to help clients improve their financial 

situations.

Bank on Washington

As the first and largest “Bank On” campaign in the state of Washington, Bank on S-KC has been a leader and 

moving force in the effort to create a Bank on Washington initiative, with Diana Stone, Director of SKC ABC, 

serving as Co-Chair of the statewide effort. As local campaigns have begun to sprout across Washington, many 

statewide and national financial institutions have been clamoring for a coordinated campaign to standardize criteria 

and avoid duplication of efforts. Under the auspices of the statewide Washington Asset Building Coalition, a 

Bank on Washington Initiative Manager has been hired to plan this statewide coordination effort. Since many of 

the local campaigns are already using Bank on S-KC’s model, many of the major aspects of Bank on S-KC will 

probably be replicated for Bank on Washington. For example, it is likely the minimum criteria will follow closely 

to those already established by Bank on S-KC, and that the marketing materials to bedeveloped will utilize much 

of the same content and general designs as the Bank on S-KC brochures. In addition, Bank on S-KC has made 

its website software, including the two locator tools, free and available nationally, and anticipates they will be used 

statewide. Finally, the online reporting form developed will also likely be the basis for the reporting required under 

Bank on Washington.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

82 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 8: Success! Newly Banked Customers Tell Their Stories

Major Bank Customer Carmen 

A $500 minimum balance may not seem unreasonable to many affluent customers, but it’s a daunting monthly 

sum to maintain for a hard-working house cleaner. When Carmen’s hours were reduced, she could no longer 

afford minimal fees on her bank account and cancelled it. For more than a year, she struggled without a checking 

account, asking employers to pay in cash. When she started a job that paid her with checks, she asked her boyfriend 

to cash them whenever he could. She had no opportunities to save her money in a secure place, and saw no other 

options. Sitting on the bus on the way to work in the summer of 2010, Carmen saw an ad declaring, “Banking for 

Everyone: Open a bank account today!” It promised “no minimum balance.” Most significantly, when she went to 

the website, she learned that the bank would accept an ITIN, instead of a social security number, which allowed her 

to open an account legally, without any fear. 

Carmen reports that she has found a very welcoming branch of a major national bank that has provided her with a 

debit card and a free account that encourages her to start saving. She is trying to save 10% of each check, even if it’s 

just $10, to begin saving for emergencies. She has already saved $200 in her second account, and she declares, “It’s 

wonderful to have the freedom to be independent with my own account.”

Community Bank Customer Michael

“Sometimes people just need a second chance to do the right thing,” says Michael in explaining how Bank on 

Seattle-King County offered him a lifeline when he most needed it. Michael faced a series of catastrophic events 

that snowballed to cause a perfect storm of financial instability. In 2005, Michael, a college-educated corporate 

employee working in the account and finance sector, was still married and had good credit that allowed him to 

purchase a condo in downtown Seattle. After completing a degree in multi-media web design, Michael sought 

to switch careers but was unable to find another job in his new field. When he and his wife divorced shortly 

afterwards, he lost the condo and began bouncing between apartments, borrowing money from relatives and couchsurfing with friends. Eventually, he had nowhere else to go and ended up living at homeless shelters.

Not surprisingly, as Michael tried to make ends meet, he began taking out payday loans. Unfortunately, his efforts 

to pay them off and break what he calls a “disastrous cycle” took a ruinous turn. Unbeknownst to him, the payday 

lenders were demanding payment automatically at his bank, even when he did not have the funds to cover the 

withdrawals. Thus, each loan created a cascade of bank fees--which he didn’t have money to repay—causing the 

bank to close his account. With this history of unpaid fees, Michael was unable to open a new checking account, 

even when he returned to work and attempted to rebuild his economic security.

Michael spent the next several years paying check cashers hundreds of dollars to cash his pay checks and pay his 

bills. In late 2009, sitting on a bus, he noticed the ads for Bank on Seattle-King County and reached out for help. 

One of the community bank partners offered him that second chance, opening a checking account that prevented 

unintentional overdrafts, but provided him with a debit card. He sees the debit card as the most valuable part of 

having an account, as he needs it to register for classes he is taking and to purchase materials for the classes online. 

Although he is still working on digging himself out of debt, he gratefully acknowledges that “having a relationship 

with a bank is the first step in getting back on my feet.” His community bank has been very welcoming, and 

despite the inconvenience of very few branches, he intends to stick with them, as he regains his financial legs with 

his new job.
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 83

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 9: Seattle-King County Case Study Sources

Bank on Seattle-King County, www.everyoneiswelcome.org

www.JoinBankOn.org 

Interviews

Customers:

KeyBank Customer Carmen, April 25, 2011

HomeStreet Bank Customer Michael, April 25, 2011

Bank on Seattle-King County staff:

Alice Coday, April 27, 2011

Jerry DeGrieck, April 25, 2011

Jennifer McAdam, April 27, 2011

Political Leadership:

Sally Clark, April 29, 2011

Financial Institution Partners:

Michael Dotson, Bank of America, April 29, 2011

Courtney Jinjika, KeyBank, April 27, 2011

Todd Pietzsch, BECU, April 26, 2011

Bev Roach, Union Bank (formerly Frontier Bank), April 26, 2011

Kathy Williams, HomeStreet Bank, April 27, 2011

Community Partners:

Jane Bloom, Parkview Services, April 27, 2011

Dana Easterling, May 4, 2011

Audi Ritz, American Financial Solutions, April 25, 2011

Tracy Greene, Hopelink, April 28, 2011
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

84 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Contacts

Diana Stone

Director of Initiatives, Seattle-King County Asset-Building Collaborative 

dstone@skcabc.org

206-275-1811

Jerry DeGrieck

Public Health and Policy Advisor

City of Seattle, Human Services Department

Jerry.degrieck@seattle.gov

206-684-0684

Alice Coday

Project Manager, Seattle-King County Asset Building Collaborative

acoday@skcabc.org

206-973-7474

Jennifer McAdam

Bank on Seattle-King County Outreach Coordinator

jmcadam@skcabc.org

253-297-0482
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 85

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 10: Initial Invitation to Banks
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

86 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 11: Initial Invitation to Credit Unions
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 87

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 12: Outreach Brochure

What is Bank on Seattle-King 

County?

Bank on Seattle-King County is an initiative to help 

anyone without a bank account find affordable 

financial services. Bank on Seattle-King County is 

sponsored by the City of Seattle, FDIC, the Federal 

Reserve Bank of San Francisco, King County, The 

Seattle Foundation, the Seattle-King County Asset 

Building Collaborative, and the Washington State 

Department of Financial Institutions.

> For more information about Bank on Seattle-King 

County, visit www.EveryoneIsWelcome.org or 

call 2-1-1 or 1-800-621-4636. On our website, to help 

you figure out which bank or credit union will best 

meet your needs, click on “Find a Bank or Credit 

Union” under “How Do I Open an Account.”

Why should I use a checking account?

It’s convenient, safe, and a lot less expensive than 

using a check cashing service. And you can’t lose 

your money or have it stolen while it’s in the account.

What does it cost to cash my paycheck?

NOTHING! It is absolutely free to cash your paycheck 

at your financial institution. Also, you can arrange for 

direct deposit of your paycheck or other checks and 

be able to use your money right away.

Is my money safe?

Yes, your money is safe. Even if something happens 

to your bank, the federal government will make sure 

you get your money back.

What else can my bank or credit union 

do for me?

Money transfers. 

Send money to family and friends.

ATM/Debit Cards.

Access your money for free through your bank or 

credit union’s ATM network. 

Online bill paying.

Pay your bills online without having to mail a check.

Q&A How to open your own account: Banking

•	 Find a participating bank or credit union

near you.

Check the list of financial institutions in this 

brochure or online at www.EveryoneIsWelcome.org, 

or call 2-1-1 or 1-800-621-4636.

•	 Visit a participating bank or credit union

and open an account through Bank on 

Seattle-King County.

They’ll answer your questions and help you 

open an account that’s right for you.

•	 Bring identification.

To open a checking account, you’ll need to 

bring your primary ID. You can use a driver’s 

license or other government-issued ID, or the 

Mexican Matricula card, as primary ID. You may 

need a second form of ID such as a utility bill or 

other ID card. Because you can earn interest on 

savings accounts and some checking accounts, you 

may also need your Social Security number or an 

Individual Taxpayer Identification Number.

Learn to make the most of your money.

Bank on Seattle-King County can help you learn 

how to use your new account, stay on budget, 

improve your credit rating, pay off debt, and more. 

> Visit www.EveryoneIsWelcome.org, or call 2-1-1 

or 1-800-621-4636 to find out about money 

management classes.

Why spend hundreds of dollars a year at a check cashing company when you can deposit 

your own checks and pay your bills at no additional cost?

For more information about Bank on Seattle-King County, visit www.EveryoneIsWelcome.org or call 2-1-1.

CASH YOUR CHECKS

 FOR FREE

Now everyone can open a checking account.

Bank on Seattle-King County is 

working with area banks and credit 

unions to help you open an account 

and keep more of your money.

•	 Using check cashers or buying money

orders?

Open an account today. Cash your checks and 

pay your bills for free.

•	 Don’t have a lot of money?

Depending on the bank or credit union you 

go to, you may need as little as $5 to open an 

account. Most will open an account for $50 or 

less, although a few may require up to $100 to 

open an account.

•	 How much will an account cost?

Most participating banks and credit unions 

offer checking accounts with no monthly fees. 

A few charge a low monthly fee.

•	 Need to spend all of your money?

You don’t have to keep a minimum amount of 

money in your account each month to keep it 

open.

•	 Troubled banking history?

If you’ve had a bank account closed or you’ve 

bounced checks more than six months ago, 

you may still be eligible for an account.

Open a free or low-cost checking 

account and a savings account at any

of these Bank on Seattle-King County 

participating financial institutions:

Bank of America

Banner Bank

BECU

Cathay Bank

Chase

City Bank

Columbia Bank

Express Credit Union

Frontier Bank

HomeStreet Bank

KeyBank

Pacific International Bank

Plaza Bank

Seattle Metropolitan Credit Union

Seattle Bank

United Commercial Bank

U.S. Bank

Verity Credit Union

Viking Bank

Watermark Credit Union

Wells Fargo Bank

Woodstone Credit Union > For more information about Bank on SeattleKing County, visit www.EveryoneIsWelcome.org 

or call 2-1-1 or 1-800-621-4636.
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

88 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 13: Financial Assessment Plan

Bank on Seattle – King County

Assessment of Financial Institutions for 

Advertising, Printing and Financial Incentives for Financial Education

May 28, 2008

To participate in Bank on Seattle-King County, every institution would contribute an initial amount:

$1,000 (for institutions with 10 or fewer branches in King County)

$1,500 (for institutions with 11-20 branches in King County)

$2,500 (for institutions with more than 20 branches in King County)

In addition, every institution would contribute a set amount per branch:

• $450 per branch for the first ten branches 

• $400 per branch for the 11th through the 20th branches

• $350 per branch for the 21st through the 30th branches 

• $300 per branch for the 31st through 40th branches 

• $250 per branch for the 41st through 50th branches

• $200 per branch for the 51st through 60th branches

• $150 per branch for the 61st through 70th branches

• $100 per branch for each branch over 70 branches

Example # 1: Financial institution X has 7 branches in Seattle and King County. Its assessment would be $4,150 

($1,000 to participate + $3,150 for seven branches @ $450 per branch)

Example # 2: Financial institution Y has 54 branches in Seattle and King County. Its assessment would be $20,800 

($2,500 to participate + $4,500 for the first 10 branches @ $450 per branch + $4,000 for the next 10 branches @ 

$400 per branch + $3,500 for the next 10 branches@ $350 per branch +$3,000 for the next 10 branches @ $300 per 

branch + $2,500 for the next 10 branches@ $250 per branch + $800 for the final four branches @ $200 per branch) 

Please Note:

• The financial assessment is based on the total number of branches each institution has in Seattle and King County. 

Each institution will report the number of their branches that are located within Seattle/King County.

• Funds will be used for printing and placement of marketing materials, advertising, and printing and mailing of 

outreach materials, and public relations.

• Depending on the number (and size) of financial institutions that ultimately decide to participate, we anticipate 

that the proposed financial assessment plan will raise from $150,000 to $200,000.

• Our marketing firms estimates that the minimum amount we’ll need for advertising/PR is from $150,000 to 

$200,000. 

• This assessment plan is for two years. We would like to have as much of the funds up front as possible because 

printing and advertising expenses will be greatest at the beginning of the initiative. Some institutions may need 

to provide half of their assessment soon and then half later on. 

• In the second year of the initiative, we may wish to raise additional funds for more advertising and PR, but no 

participating institution will be obligated to contribute more than their initial assessment.

• Institutions will contribute their funds to a 501 c 3 organization. 
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 89

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 14: Financial Education Content Standards

Appendix 14-Financial Education Content standards.doc

10/13/2011

Savings Understand the 

importance of saving 

money to improve 

their life situation

• Explain the importance of saving

• How to get started with savings

• Identify different ways to save including regular savings 

accounts, CDs, IRAs, savings bonds, and other savings options

• Describe the concept of interest

• Determine goals towards which they want to save

• Growing their money, the miracle of compound interest

• Choose the best savings option to achieve their goal

• Paying off debt to help them meet a savings goal

• Connections between saving and building credit

• Connections between saving and borrowing for major purchases

• Connections between saving and building wealth

Credit and credit 

history

Understand how to 

establish and maintain 

good credit

• How to get and read their credit report

• Build credit, one step at a time

• Repair credit

• Acquire secured and unsecured loans

• Understand factors creditors look for when making credit 

decisions

• Know the costs and benefits of borrowing money

• Apply for credit

• Why good credit can work for them

• Why using “rent to own”, payday loans and refund anticipation 

loans may not be worth it

• The pros and cons of having your credit in both your and your 

spouse’s/partner’s name

• Credit building steps: 

1. Get a credit card. Buy something with it, and then pay it 

off quickly.

2. Get a small loan from your bank. Pay it back on time

Credit Cards Be able to use credit 

cards wisely

• How and when to use a credit card

• Choose a credit card that meets their needs and has best 

interest rates

• Know what a credit card costs

• Identify steps to take when a credit card is lost or stolen

• How to read your monthly statement

• Deciding for yourself whether you need a credit card

• Typical credit card tricks and scams

• The risks of using a credit card too much

• Questions to ask about annual fees, interest rates, grace periods, 

over limit fees

Consumer Rights Know their legal rights 

and how to protect 

their finances and 

identity

• Protect their money

• Understand the importance of protecting their identity

• Have the ability to advocate for their rights

• Understand consumer protection laws, consumer protection 

agencies, and discrimination in lending

• Rules to protect their money in the bank

• Rules to protect them when applying for a loan

• Ways to monitor their finances and identity

• Online banking risks; phishing, unsecured sites

• What to do when their identity is stolen

• Preparing for financial disaster

Consumer loans Know how they could 

use consumer loans 

responsibly to make a 

large purchase

• Differentiate between types of consumer loans

• Understand the factors lenders use to make loan decisions

• Describe the cost of borrowing money

• Compare the benefits and disadvantages of different loan offers

• Picking a loan that meets their needs

• Difference between installment loans and rent to own services

• Things to know when borrowing to buy a car

• Advantages and disadvantages of borrowing against a home

Appendix 14-Financial Education Content standards.doc

10/13/2011

Financial Education Standards

Topic Objective

by the end of this 

module participants will:

To achieve the objective, participants will be able to: Class discussions may include:

Financial goal 

setting

Be able to set financial 

goals and meet them

• Identify important short and long-term financial goals 

• Identify steps to reach their goals

• Create a written plan to accomplish their goals

• Identify benchmarks that help track success with respect to 

reaching their goals

• Financial hopes and dreams 

• Talk about personal views on money

• Habits and customs when they were growing up

• How their current family relates to money

• Managing money in the household

• Changes they would like to make to better use their money

• The difference between short- and long-term goals

Controlling your 

money

Understand how to 

manage their money 

successfully

• Specify savings goals they have

• Identify relevant income and expense categories they deal with

• Manage cash flow to pay bills on time

• Create a savings and spending plan to estimate monthly income 

and expenses

• Identify strategies they can employ to decrease spending and 

increase income

• Track their periodic expenses

• Adjust their savings and spending plans as life-situation changes

• Managing their money because “every dollar has a job to do” 

• Sharing ideas about how to develop the habit of writing down all 

income and expenses

• How controlling their money better can help you increase savings 

to meet their goals

• The importance of planning their expenses and checking their 

plan against reality

• The importance of “paying yourself first”

• Living within their means

• Strategies to pay down debt quickly

• Why reducing debt is a form of saving

Checking accounts Understand how to 

use a checking 

account responsibly

• State the benefits of using a checking account

• Determine which checking account works best for them

• Identify the steps involved in opening a checking account

• Deposit and withdraw money from a checking account

• Write checks correctly to pay bills

• Reconcile their checking account by using a check register

• Avoid overdrafts and other necessary fees

• How to bank online

• Ways they can assure that their money is safe 

• Why using a checking account makes sense for them

• Accessing money through debit cards, checks or ATMs 

• Automatically depositing pay checks and benefit checks

• The amount they save by using a checking account vs. using 

check cashers

• Purchasing what they need using online banking

• Strategies to avoid overdraft fees

• Strategies to ensure they pay bills on time

• Availability of Bank on Seattle-King County accounts

• Experiences they have had with a bank or credit union in the past

• General differences between credit unions and banks

Topic Objective

by the end of this 

module participants will:

To achieve the objective, participants will be able to: Class discussions may include:
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

90 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 14-Financial Education Content standards.doc

10/13/2011

Topic Objective

by the end of this 

module participants will:

To achieve the objective, participants will be able to: Class discussions may include:

Home ownership Buy a home when 

they are ready

• Understand the benefits of renting vs. owning a home

• Identify steps required to buy a home

• Purchase a recent merge Credit Report (30 days)

• Create a homeownership action plan

• Complete Washington State Housing Finance Commission 

homeownership workshop

• Participate in at least 1 individual one-on-one homeownership 

counseling session

• Questions to ask before deciding to buy a home

• Keeping their home and building value 

• Basic terms used in mortgage transactions

• Advantages and disadvantages of different mortgage options

Personal taxes Know how to 

maximize their tax 

return

• Understand how to complete a W-4 to maximize their 

withholdings

• Understand how to file for the EITC and other tax credits

• Tax filing and tax credits for undocumented workers

• Tax credits for children and families 

• Getting a big tax refund is not necessarily a good thing

• Split refunds as an opportunity to save

• Alternatives to high cost tax preparation (availability of free tax 

prep through UWKC and ACORN EITC campaigns)

(Optional) Insurance Be able to describe 

the benefits of 

insurance 

• Understand the value of rental insurance, driver’s insurance, 

disability insurance, homeowners insurance

• Insurance options / pro and con
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 91

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 15: Financial Education Brochure

CREATING YOUR

 FINANCIAL FUTURE

Making the most of your 

new bank account

> Keep track of your money.

Use your check register to write down every 

time you write a check or use your ATM or 

debit card.

> Use online banking. 

It’s easy to use and keep track of your 

transactions. You can check how much money 

you have in your account whenever you want.

> Balance your account.

Carefully read your statements and compare 

them to your check register. This will help you 

catch errors. 

> Spend only what you have.

Writing a check or making an ATM or debit 

card withdrawal or purchase for more money 

than you have in your checking account can 

cost you a lot in fees.

> Keep your PIN secret.

The personal identification number (PIN) that 

you use with your debit card should be kept 

secret. If someone else finds out what your 

PIN is, they can steal your money.

> Keep your checks to yourself.

Don’t sign blank checks or let anyone else 

use them. 

> Use direct deposit. 

Your paycheck will go straight into your 

account on payday. No more waiting in lines, 

and you can use your money right away.

> Avoid ATM fees. 

Only use ATMs provided by your bank 

or credit union. 

New Account Tips and Tricks

American Financial Solutions

www.myfinancialgoals.org

888 282-5811

Consumer Counseling Northwest

www.ccnw.org

253 588-1858 ext 307

El Centro de la Raza

www.elcentrodelaraza.org

206 957-4646

Hopelink

www.hope-link.org

425 869-6000

International District Housing Alliance

www.apialliance.org 

206 623-5132

Multi-Service Center

www.multi-servicecenter.com

253 854-4406

Neighborhood House

www.nhwa.com

206 461-4554 ext 30

Parkview Services

www.parkviewservices.org

206 529-4114

United Indians of All Tribes

www.unitedindians.org

206 285-4425

Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle

www.urbanleague.org

206 461-3792 ext 3004

YWCA

www.ywcaworks.org

206 336-4601

To learn more about managing 

your money, contact one of these 

organizations.

BOS_FinEdBro_V2.indd 1 1/14/10 4:00 PM

For more information about Bank on Seattle-King County, visit www.EveryoneIsWelcome.org or call 2-1-1.

How do I know how much money 

I have in my checking account?

You will get a check register when you open 

your account. Use it any time you:

•	 Write a check.

•	 Make a purchase or withdrawal with your

ATM or debit card.

•	 Deposit money in your account.

•	 Have money automatically deposited

in or withdrawn from your account.

What else can my bank 

or credit union do for me?

Money Transfers. 

Send money to family and friends.

Online Bill Paying.

Pay your bills online without having 

to mail a check.

ATM/Debit Cards

Access your money for free through your 

bank or credit union’s ATM network.

Why should I use a checking account?

It’s convenient. You can’t lose your money or have it 

stolen while it’s in the account. You can write checks 

to pay your bills. You can sign up for online banking 

and have your bills paid from your checking account 

automatically. You can use a debit card to get cash 

whenever you need to.

What does it cost to cash my 

paycheck?

NOTHING! It is absolutely free to cash your

paycheck at your financial institution. However, if

you do not have direct deposit, you may have to 

wait a few days to access your money if you do not 

already have enough money in the account to cover 

the check. Talk to your bank or credit union and 

employer about starting direct deposit.

What is a savings account?

Savings accounts usually pay higher interest than 

checking accounts. You can deposit money in or 

withdraw money from your savings account, but 

you can’t write checks with it. 

Q&A

How can I avoid bouncing checks?

Know how much you have in your account!

A substantial fee is charged when you write a check 

or make a withdrawal from an ATM or use your ATM or 

debit card to make a purchase for more money than 

you have in your account. A fee may be charged every 

time you try to take out more than is in your account. 

Be sure you have enough money in your account 

to cover your checks, withdrawals, and purchases. 

Some banks and credit unions have features that 

help you avoid paying fees, for example, by declining 

your purchase or withdrawal request if you don’t 

have enough money in your account. For more 

specific bank and credit union information, go to 

www.EveryoneIsWelcome.org and click on “Avoid 

Overdraft Fees” under “How Do I Open an Account.”

Yes, your money is safe. Even if something happens 

to your bank, the federal government will make sure 

you get your money back (up to $250,000).

What does it cost to have 

a checking account?

Most Bank on Seattle-King County banks and credit 

unions offer checking accounts that don’t cost 

anything. A few charge a low monthly fee. 

BOS_FinEdBro_V2.indd 2 1/14/10 4:00 PM
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

92 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

Appendix 16: Template for Clear, Written Explanation of Fees

** SAMPLE**

(To be customized by each institution)

Bank on Seattle-King County

Explanation of Fees, Rates, and Procedures*

There is no initial cost to you to open an account. However, you need to put a minimum of $__ 

into the account to open it.

No minimum monthly balance is required. You can let the balance go to zero at any time. 

However, if you do not use the account for 6 months, it may be closed.

You will not be charged fees to write checks, deposit money, or take out money (if you use our 

ATM machines). You can do any of those activities as often as you like at no cost.

You will not be charged for depositing a check. However, you may not be able to receive cash 

back from the check for __ days, unless you have an equivalent amount available in your 

account. If a hold is placed on your deposit items, you will be informed at the time of the 

deposit or within 24 business hours. You may have your employer deposit your paycheck 

directly into your account. It is free and it will allow you to receive cash from the check 

immediately.

If you write a check for more money than you have in the account, you will be charged $ ___. 

You may also get charged $__ per day. [Other NSF/OD consequences] The first time you do 

this, you should call us as soon as possible and let us know that you are a Bank on Seattle-King 

County customer and should not be charged this fee the first time. [Other procedures for 

NSF/OD] After the first time, we will __________________.

You will not be charged a fee to use our network of ATMs. However, if you use an ATM 

outside of our network, then you may be charged $__ by us and an additional amount by the 

ATM network that you use.

You may also open a savings account. You need $__ for your initial deposit. It will cost 

_______________. [Fees/costs associated with a savings account] 

[Benefits/incentives for opening a savings account]

You may do your banking online for [free/$__]. To do this, go to [website].

A money order or cashier’s check costs $___.

[Cost/fees associated with equity lines/small dollar loans, if available]

If you wish to send money overseas, it will cost $___.

*This is not a complete list of contractual obligations and should be used only in conjunction 

with _________ as required by regulators. Services and Fees Brochures are subject to change.

Effective: [Date]
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 93

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

94 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 95

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives
BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives

96 US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives
A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives BANKING ON OPPORTUNITY

US DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 97

Office of Financial Education and Financial Access

Banking on Opportunity

A Scan of the Evolving Field of Bank On Initiatives