This policy brief presents case studies from seven universities in the United States that have implemented various models to address affordable housing challenges in their communities. The Penn IUR convened an Anchor Institution Roundtable with representatives from peer institutions to discuss strategies and tactics for affordable housing. The case studies highlight the approaches taken by Duke University, Harvard University, Marquette University, University of Pittsburgh, University of Southern California, University of Virginia, and the University of Pennsylvania.
Universities have a significant role in addressing affordable housing through innovative partnerships and community-focused strategies. The case studies illustrate various successful models:
Duke University | The Model: Empowerment (and Reciprocity), Purposeful Partnership with Public Commitment, and Transformative Action
Harvard University | The Model: Multi-Faceted University Approach to Housing via Student Mitigation, Partnerships, and Community Benefits
Marquette University | The Model: Two Generations of Neighborhood Revitalization via Multi-Anchor Partnerships
University of Pennsylvania | The Model: Sole Developer, Joint Venturing, Land Leasing
University of Pittsburgh | The Model: Diversifying Neighborhood Housing, Reducing Student Demand, and Institutional Support for Affordable Housing
University of Southern California | The Model: University Focus on Decreasing Neighborhood Housing Pressure through Increased Student Supply and Financial Resources Allocated towards Affordable Housing Funds/Projects
University of Virginia | The Model: Leveraging University Land and Staff Resources to Facilitate Affordable Housing Development Partnerships
Duke University is located across three campuses (Central, East, and West) that claim more than 8,600 acres in Durham, N.C. Established in the late 1800s, Duke’s campuses were largely acquired in the early 1900s, pushing westward and negating early conflicts with Durham’s urbanization to the east (Moyne 2004). As of 2021, Duke enrolls approximately 17,600 students (almost entirely on a full-time basis), including roughly 6,900 undergraduates and 10,700 graduate students (enrollments based on 2021 statistics from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System; Ginder, Kelly-Reid, and Mann 2018). The scale and location of its landholdings have lessened student housing demands—though not removed them entirely. The university mandates three-year on-campus residency for its undergraduate population (Duke University n.d.), resulting in approximately 80 percent of its undergraduate students living in Duke owned and/or operated housing .*
Duke’s relationships with Durham neighborhoods, however, have still experienced tensions over the years. Historically, Duke’s perceived ambivalence and inaction, especially towards Durham’s African American population, generated ill will (Moyne 2004; Talhelm 1995a). At neighborhood meetings and in newspapers, local residents expressed suspicion about Duke’s motives, as well as the sentiment that Duke did not embody unilateral opportunity—particularly for residents in low-wage Duke jobs (e.g., housekeeping, groundskeepers, and seasonal workers; Duke-Durham Neighborhood Partnership 1996; Talhelm 1995b). As Durham experienced economic decline in the 1990s (and Duke’s academic stock was rising), there was a moment of recognition that Duke could not isolate itself from neighborhood decline without consequence. Alongside the appointment of the university’s first woman president, Nannerl Keohane in 1993, Duke embarked on a multi-faceted anchor institution strategy that prioritized a community-led model intended to change the “story [from] look at what Duke did,” to “can you imagine what’s happened in Durham?” (Ehlenz 2020).
Duke’s anchor model has been built upon community-defined needs rather than institutionally established priorities (Ehlenz 2020). Conceiving of institutional resources as tools for change, its strategy relies on three factors: empowerment, partnership, and evolution. Empowerment engages community leaders and community members in a bottom-up neighborhood planning process on Duke’s behalf. Partnership embodies Duke’s primary investment strategy, distributing Duke investments among nonprofit community organizations to mobilize local change. Evolution allows neighborhood-specific problems to dictate solutions over time, enabling Duke to invest differently within neighborhoods. And, most recently, Duke has expanded its strategy to facilitate coalition building among regional stakeholders and invest in affordable housing preservation at a larger, coordinated scale.
Beginning in the mid-1990s, Duke’s anchor strategies largely engaged with 12 of its surrounding neighborhoods; more recently, its efforts have expanded to 14 neighborhoods (the original 12, plus two additional communities including Bragtown, a historically Black community that sought Duke’s partnership in the face of gentrification pressures and the need for advocacy support). The neighborhoods include five communities to the north-east of the Duke campuses, situated approximately north of Main Street (and the Durham Freeway) and south of I-85, and seven neighborhoods to the south-east of the campuses, roughly south of the Durham Freeway and north of Cornwallis Road (see Figure 1 for the original 12 neighborhood partners).
* Portions of this case study are excerpted from the author’s published research on Duke University. The full article can be found here: Ehlenz, Meagan M. 2020. “‘Can You Imagine What’s Happened in Durham?’: Duke University and a New University–Community Engagement Model.” Journal of the American Planning Association, August, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2020.1782766.
Figure 1. Duke University and the Duke-Durham Neighborhood Partnership Study Area (Ehlenz 2020)
Duke University is located across three campuses (Central, East, and West) that claim more than 8,600 acres in Durham, N.C. Established in the late 1800s, Duke’s campuses were largely acquired in the early 1900s, pushing westward and negating early conflicts with Durham’s urbanization to the east (Moyne 2004). As of 2021, Duke enrolls approximately 17,600 students (almost entirely on a full-time basis), including roughly 6,900 undergraduates and 10,700 graduate students (enrollments based on 2021 statistics from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System; Ginder, Kelly-Reid, and Mann 2018). The scale and location of its landholdings have lessened student housing demands—though not removed them entirely. The university mandates three-year on-campus residency for its undergraduate population (Duke University n.d.), resulting in approximately 80 percent of its undergraduate students living in Duke owned and/or operated housing .*
Duke’s relationships with Durham neighborhoods, however, have still experienced tensions over the years. Historically, Duke’s perceived ambivalence and inaction, especially towards Durham’s African American population, generated ill will (Moyne 2004; Talhelm 1995a). At neighborhood meetings and in newspapers, local residents expressed suspicion about Duke’s motives, as well as the sentiment that Duke did not embody unilateral opportunity—particularly for residents in low-wage Duke jobs (e.g., housekeeping, groundskeepers, and seasonal workers; Duke-Durham Neighborhood Partnership 1996; Talhelm 1995b). As Durham experienced economic decline in the 1990s (and Duke’s academic stock was rising), there was a moment of recognition that Duke could not isolate itself from neighborhood decline without consequence. Alongside the appointment of the university’s first woman president, Nannerl Keohane in 1993, Duke embarked on a multi-faceted anchor institution strategy that prioritized a community-led model intended to change the “story [from] look at what Duke did,” to “can you imagine what’s happened in Durham?” (Ehlenz 2020).
Duke’s anchor model has been built upon community-defined needs rather than institutionally established priorities (Ehlenz 2020). Conceiving of institutional resources as tools for change, its strategy relies on three factors: empowerment, partnership, and evolution. Empowerment engages community leaders and community members in a bottom-up neighborhood planning process on Duke’s behalf. Partnership embodies Duke’s primary investment strategy, distributing Duke investments among nonprofit community organizations to mobilize local change. Evolution allows neighborhood-specific problems to dictate solutions over time, enabling Duke to invest differently within neighborhoods. And, most recently, Duke has expanded its strategy to facilitate coalition building among regional stakeholders and invest in affordable housing preservation at a larger, coordinated scale.
Beginning in the mid-1990s, Duke’s anchor strategies largely engaged with 12 of its surrounding neighborhoods; more recently, its efforts have expanded to 14 neighborhoods (the original 12, plus two additional communities including Bragtown, a historically Black community that sought Duke’s partnership in the face of gentrification pressures and the need for advocacy support). The neighborhoods include five communities to the north-east of the Duke campuses, situated approximately north of Main Street (and the Durham Freeway) and south of I-85, and seven neighborhoods to the south-east of the campuses, roughly south of the Durham Freeway and north of Cornwallis Road (see Figure 1 for the original 12 neighborhood partners).
* Portions of this case study are excerpted from the author’s published research on Duke University. The full article can be found here: Ehlenz, Meagan M. 2020. “‘Can You Imagine What’s Happened in Durham?’: Duke University and a New University–Community Engagement Model.” Journal of the American Planning Association, August, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2020.1782766.
