Researcher

We evaluate laws designed to protect borrowers from foreclosure. We find that these laws delay but do not prevent foreclosures. We first compare states that require lenders to seek judicial permission to foreclose with states that do not. Borrowers in judicial states are no more likely to cure and no more likely to renegotiate their loans, but the delays lead to a build-up in these states of persistently delinquent borrowers, the vast majority of whom eventually lose their homes. We next analyze a "right-to-cure" law instituted in Massachusetts on May 1, 2008.

This article provides a plain-language description of behavioral economics and the role of common biases in financial decisionmaking, and reviews ways in which the findings of behavioral economics can help structure financial education and public policy.

This paper tests for the presence of age and gender discrimination in the loan underwriting process. We modify the tools used during the past exams to test for racial discrimination and apply them here to test for the presence of disparate treatment on the basis of age and gender. Using HMDA data along with data from 18 fair lending exams recently conducted by the OCC, between1996 – 2001, we find no evidence of systematic discrimination on the basis of age or gender. Further, the tools used and tested for in this analysis are now readily available for use in future fair lending exams.

This article presents best practices and lessons learnt from on the experiences of the National Endowment for Financial Education® (NEFE), a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan and noncommercial foundation committed to increas- ing access to financial education and to empowering in- dividuals to make positive and sound financial decision.

This article discusses the results of and lessons learnt from the Financial Opportunities Project (FOP), a comprehensive effort by the Center for Economic Progress identify, implement, and disseminate strategies for integrating financial services and asset-building opportunities with community-based tax-preparation services at IRS Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) sites.

This article provides an overview of bank-based financial education. The role of banks more generally is reviewed, and examples of Marshall and Isley (M&I) Bank's Consumer Education (CE) program are discussed. Evaluation methods used by M&I are described. Key factors for success include clearly defined priorities, a standardized high-quality curriculum, appropriately designed delivery, well-integrated assessment and evaluation, effective community partnerships and a willingness to provide supporting tools.

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. 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.

The Community Financial Access Pilot (CFAP) began in 2008 and was implemented through December 2009 by the U.S.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury and U.S. Department of Agriculture convened the National Research Symposium on Financial Literacy and Education on October 6-7, 2008 in Washington, DC. Twenty-nine experts from the fields of behavioral and consumer economics, financial risk assessment and financial education evaluation were invited to summarize existing research findings, identify gaps in the literature, and define and prioritize questions for future analysis.

The Community Development Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (FRBSF) commissioned this study to explore the feasibility of passing a financial education mandate in California. Specifically, we sought to understand the key barriers related to passing a mandate in California and to identify strategies to implement financial education in the current environment, despite the absence of a state mandate.