Laserfiche WebLink
Tracking of affordable units remains inconsistent. <br />There remains a big gap in knowledge about the <br />administrative practices of IH programs. While about <br />one-third of local governments reported partnering with <br />external agencies to manage IH programs, the GSN study <br />found that that many programs report either not having <br />a tracking system in place or not even knowing if such a <br />system exists. <br />100% <br />80% <br />60% <br />40% <br />20% <br />0 <br />All <br />(n = 421) <br />Survey respondents were asked whether inclusionary <br />units and fees generated by IH programs were tracked <br />systematically in a database (Figure 7). Based on <br />available responses, it appears that 241 programs, 57% <br />of traditional IH programs, report outcome tracking in <br />place. However, 180 programs, 43%, do not track units/ <br />fees generated by IH programs. <br />U.S., excluding California Massachusetts New Jersey <br />CA, MA, & NJ (n = 72) (n =194) (n =1) <br />(n =154) <br />Figure 7. Breakdown of whether outcome -tracking exists (n = 421, or 61% of all) <br />12 <br />Yes <br />No <br />E <br />