. in addition to increasing funding options, research can also increase the scope and scale of programs. as effective strategies are identified, they can be replicated and incorporated into efforts in other communities, as well as by organizations seeking to develop programs to address related issues. in conclusion, i want to emphasize the importance of the role of those who interpret the research. analysts must be scrupulous in characterizing research results, or their work becomes advocacy rather than research. objectivity is paramount because research findings from previous efforts become the basis for subsequent efforts to target scarce resources as effectively as possible. objectivity requires great discipline and integrity ; it requires that researchers resist any innate desire to characterize results in the most - or least - favorable light possible. the failure of a program is not a research failure ; it is a source of information. and acknowledgment of the research findings, regardless of how disappointing, contributes to a foundation of knowledge upon which future successes can be built. in the quest to do good for our society's most - vulnerable populations and communities - the objective compelling the work of this group - analysts must embrace the challenge to develop objective and quantifiable standards for assessing community development programs. ultimately, research is the only means for determining whether we are making advances in distressed neighborhoods by improving access to economic opportunities for traditionally underserved populations. i applaud your efforts and look forward to learning of your future progress.

and funding costs and in anticipation of future regulatory requirements. despite this tightening of bank lending standards, we have not seen signs of a sharp contraction in credit that would significantly slow economic activity. though bank loan balance growth has slowed, the ongoing strong balance sheets of households and businesses combined with the growing importance of nonbanks as sources of credit suggest that the effects of monetary policy on bank lending may have smaller effects on the economy than in the past. 1 / 3 bis - central bankers'speeches given the mixed data releases - strong spending data but a decline in inflation and downward revisions to jobs created in previous months - i supported the fomc's decision to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate. but i continue to expect that further rate hikes will likely be needed to return inflation to 2 percent in a timely way. the summary of economic projections released in connection with the september fomc meeting showed that the median participant expects inflation to stay above 2 percent at least until the end of 2025. this, along with my own expectation that progress on inflation is likely to be slow given the current level of monetary policy restraint, suggests that further policy tightening will be needed to bring inflation down in a sustainable and timely manner. it is important to reiterate that monetary policy is not on a pre - set course. my colleagues and i will make our decisions based on the incoming data and its implications for our economic outlook. we should remain willing to raise the federal funds rate at a future meeting if the incoming data indicates that progress on inflation has stalled or is too slow to bring inflation to 2 percent in a timely way. returning inflation to our 2 percent goal is necessary to achieve a sustainably strong labor market and an economy that works for everyone. turning to bank regulation and supervision, i would also like to briefly address bank regulatory policy. with the bank failures and accompanying banking system stress earlier this year, it was clear that the federal reserve, and in some cases the other federal banking agencies, need to address supervisory shortcomings and potentially consider revision of some failure - related bank regulations. in my view, any proposals considered by the board and any others jointly proposed by the bank regulatory agencies should be 1. focused on remediating identified issues and shortcomings ; 2. informed by data, analysis, and genuine debate and discussion among policymakers within each of the participating agencies ; and 3. developed through a transparent and open process that allows policymakers and the public to understand the context