Trending
MARQUETTE -- From Ironwood to the Soo, U.P. families who need help repairing aging homes face a statewide patchwork of programs that are hard to find, hard to combine and, for small rural agencies, hard to run, according to a new report funded in part by InvestUP. The study by Public Policy Associates (PPA) estimates more than 520,000 owner-occupied homes across Michigan, 17% of the state’s total, may need subsidized repair.
To ensure a rural focus with the report, InvestUP joined five other investors in financially supporting the study entitled Coordinating Homeowner Rehabilitation in Michigan: Recommendations for Policymakers. The study lays out how state leaders could make home repair, weatherization, and energy efficiency programs easier to combine and easier for homeowners to use. Representatives of InvestUP, county government, and U.P. utilities were among the 57 housing leaders researchers consulted.
The report maps eight active statewide programs serving homeowners with low and moderate incomes. They draw on nine funding streams from four federal agencies, plus state funds and utility ratepayers, and are run by three state agencies and one state commission. Each has its own eligibility rules, intake process, and reporting requirements.
“Housing is consistently named the biggest economic obstacle facing the Upper Peninsula, and building new homes is only part of the answer,” said Marty Fittante, CEO of InvestUP. “Keeping the homes U.P. families already own safe, warm, and livable matters just as much. This report gives policymakers a practical roadmap to make Michigan’s repair programs work together instead of in silos.”
Why it matters for the U.P.
Rural Michigan has about the same share of older owner-occupied homes as urban areas, and a slightly higher share of very old homes (18% vs. 15%). Rural homes are also more likely to rely on septic systems and private wells. A needs map, prepared by the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) for the report, rates many U.P. cities and townships among the areas with higher need for homeowner rehabilitation.
Capacity is a hurdle, too. Housing leaders told researchers some funding, such as Community Development Block Grants, can be too laborious to take on; a problem the report says can be worse in rural areas with fewer staff. Competitive federal grants for rural home repair, such as USDA Housing Preservation Grants, have reached only a handful of Michigan communities since fiscal 2022.
Key findings
Michigan’s homes are aging. 73% of occupied homes are owner-occupied, and nearly 75% of those were 30 years or older in 2024, up from about 63% in 2006.
Lead risk is widespread. About 61% of owner-occupied homes were built in 1979 or earlier. Around the time Michigan banned lead-based paint.
Lower-income owners live in older homes. About 83% of homes owned by households at or below 200% of the federal poverty level are 30 or more years old, compared with 69% for households at 400% or above.
The system wears on homeowners and providers. Housing leaders described a client who had to enter information into nine separate databases. Homes deferred from weatherization for roof or structural problems often have no easy path to the programs that fund those repairs.
What the report recommends
An interagency coordinating council, created by executive order within the Statewide Housing Partnership and led by a policy advisor in the Governor’s office. MSHDA, the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE), the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) and the Michigan Public Service Commission would be core partners.
Consolidation under fewer agencies for policymakers to consider, such as bringing utility Energy Waste Reduction programs under one state program and moving the Weatherization Assistance Program to MSHDA alongside MI Neighborhood.
Stronger local and regional coordinators, such as community action agencies, counties, or Regional Housing Partnership lead organizations, that can handle applications, funds, and reporting for multiple programs across a region.
Common systems: a review of state rules that exceed federal requirements, a single application and eligibility review, shared client data and household assessments, and a shared directory of available programs.
Flexible gap funding for repairs that exceed program caps, prepare a home for weatherization, or aren’t allowed under other funding sources.
Rob Fowler, CEO, Public Policy Associates states, "For too long, Michigan homeowners most in need have faced significant barriers to accessing state and federal home rehabilitation programs. This work aims to rethink the delivery system for these critical programs. Consistent with PPA's vision of better public policy for a better world, these recommendations offer a path
forward that benefits homeowners, communities, and taxpayers alike."
About the study
PPA gathered input from 57 housing leaders representing 33 organizations through 19 interviews, two roundtables and three feedback sessions held from December 2025 through May 2026. The team also analyzed American Community Survey data from 2006 through 2024 and scanned Michigan housing rehabilitation policy since 2006. Case studies cover New York, Oregon, Vermont and Illinois, along with local efforts in Detroit, Kent County and Ingham County.
The study was funded by Rocket Community Fund, Hudson-Webber Foundation, the Wege Foundation, Frey Foundation, InvestUP, and Wayne Metropolitan Community Action Agency. The Michigan Municipal League Foundation administered the grant funds.
The full report and a two-page summary are available at publicpolicy.com/featured- work/housingrehabstudy.