below the top. in focusing on these four building blocks, i do not mean to suggest that they account for all economic opportunity, but i do believe they are all significant sources of opportunity for individuals and their families to improve their economic circumstances. income and wealth inequality in the survey of consumer finances i will start with the basics about widening inequality, drawing heavily on a trove of data generated by the federal reserve ’ s triennial survey of consumer finances ( scf ), the latest of which was conducted in 2013 and published last month. 4 the scf is broadly consistent with other data that show widening wealth and income inequality over the past several decades, but i am employing the scf because it offers the added advantage of specific detail on income, wealth, and debt for each of 6, 000 households surveyed. 5 this detail from family balance sheets provides a glimpse of the relative access to the four sources of opportunity i will discuss. while the recent trend of widening income and wealth inequality is clear, the implications for a particular family partly depend on whether that family ’ s living standards are rising or not as its relative position changes. there have been some times of relative prosperity when income has grown for most households but inequality widened because the gains were proportionally larger for those at the top ; widening inequality might not be as great a concern if living standards improve for most families. that was the case for much of the 1990s, when real incomes were rising for most households. at other times, however, inequality has widened because income and wealth grew for those at the top and stagnated or fell for others. and at still other times, inequality has widened when incomes were falling for most households, but the declines toward the bottom were proportionally larger. unfortunately, the past several decades of widening inequality has often involved stagnant or falling living standards for many families. since the survey began in its current form in 1989, the scf has shown a rise in the concentration of income in the top few percent of households, as shown in figure 1. 6 by asset questions in the scf are based on the value at the time of the survey. since most interviews were completed between april and december 2013, some of the asset values do not reflect price increases experienced in late 2013, and none reflect increases in 2014. income questions in the scf refer to the prior calendar year, so the 2013 survey reports 2012 income. see jesse bricker, lisa j. dettling, alice henriques, joanne w.

not been spared from the financial disruptions of the past two years. while many cdfi portfolios have continued to hold up relatively well despite the financial crisis, rates of delinquencies and defaults on cdfi loans have risen as economic conditions have worsened. 8 in light of the mission of cdfis, it is not surprising that their financial concerns often reflect economic distress in the broader community : the once - thriving local business that is shutting its doors, the affordable rental housing complex that is struggling to make payments as tenants lose jobs and fall behind, and the after - school youth center that cannot repay its loan because its donor base has shrunk. even as the capacity of cdfis has become more constrained, economic conditions and pullbacks by mainstream lenders have increased the demands being placed on these organizations to provide credit and services. 9 traditionally, cdfis have been able to fund a majority of their operating activities through earnings. 10 however, those earnings have come under pressure as loan losses have risen, deal volumes have declined, and sources of capital for new activities have become more expensive or unavailable altogether. moreover, cdfis'main sources of outside capital and operating support are facing significant pressures of their own. funding from philanthropic sources has been reduced as endowments have suffered capital losses and rates of giving have declined. 11 indeed, two - thirds of foundations surveyed recently reported that they plan to reduce the number and size of their grants in 2009, and cuts are expected to continue in 2010 and beyond. 12 funding from state and local governments that sometimes support cdfis is also dwindling, reflecting increased fiscal pressures. and mainstream financial institutions have reduced their support of cdfis, both by providing less direct funding and by extending less credit in support of projects done in partnership with them. just as banks are adapting to the changing financial landscape, the community development industry can adopt changes to help it emerge stronger from this crisis. cdfis are taking steps to minimize losses, strengthen their portfolios and liquidity positions, and assess existing activities and planned investments in light of the worsened financial and economic environment. as cdfis move past the immediate hurdles, however, careful consideration will need to be given to more systemic changes to correct weaknesses that have emerged in the current cdfi model. notably, the reduction of funding by key participants highlights the importance of broadening and diversifying the industry's funding base. for example, in the case of the see " observations on the