The 1997/98 community testing program involved testing in twelve communities throughout the State over the course of a year, from September 1997 through August 1998. Housing, credit, and employment on-site race tests were conducted during two days of testing in each community. Familial status (housing) phone tests were also conducted in each community. Communities were selected randomly. The communities tested included: Ames, Cedar Falls, Cedar Rapids, Council Bluffs, Davenport, Des Moines, Fort Dodge, Marshalltown, Mason City, Muscatine, Ottumwa, and Waterloo.
The on-site race housing tests consisted of pre-application tests of rental property owners/managers and Realtors. Test sites were selected from advertisements in local newspapers. During these tests, matched-pair testers (one African American and one white) inquired about the availability of rental property. A minimum of three tests per community were attempted.
The on-site race credit tests consisted of pre-application tests of lenders. During these tests, matched-pair testers inquired about auto loans. Banks, credit unions, and savings and loans were tested. A minimum of three tests per community were attempted.
The on-site race employment tests consisted of pre-application tests of the major employers in each community. During these tests, matched-pair testers inquired about the availability of job openings. A minimum of three tests per community were attempted.
Familial status phone tests were conducted of rental property owners/managers and Realtors in each of the communities. During these tests, testers inquired about the availability of rental property. The number of tests conducted in each community varied depending on the availability of rental property. A minimum of ten phone tests per community were attempted.
Volunteers were recruited from the community to serve as testers. Testers received training prior to testing. They were coached on how to dress and behave during the test. The importance of neutrality was stressed over and over again. The testing coordinator developed profiles for each tester in each community for each type of test. The profiles included such items as previous employers/landlords, reasons for moving/changing jobs, income and credit histories, types of rental property desired, and family size. The profiles were carefully matched, with the African American testers slightly better qualified than the white testers. Testers were instructed on what to ask at each test site and how to respond to questions. Testers were also trained to behave similarly so as not to suggest varying responses.
A testing coordinator randomly selected test sites prior to arriving in the community. The testing coordinator prepared the testers for each test and conducted pre and post test interviews with each tester for each test. The pre-test interview confirmed the location of the test, the neutrality of the tester, and the tester's profile and script. The post test interview consisted of detailed questions about the visit: the person tested (name, position and physical description); the materials offered to the tester (e.g. applications, business cards, brochures); and the sequence and content of the events and conversations.
The testing coordinator summarized the test results for each community tested and presented the results to the Testing Team. Members of the Testing Team included the Testing Coordinator, the Manager of the Housing Investigations Unit, an Assistant Attorney General, an Investigator, and the Executive Director. The Testing Team determined whether the person tested "passed", whether a re-test was needed in order to draw any reasonable conclusions, or whether a commissioner complaint should be filed. If different treatment occurred, the Testing Team looked for possible explanations. If the Testing Team determined that different treatment occurred and the differences in treatment were serious and substantial and had no apparent logical explanation other than race, then the Team recommended to the Chair of the Commission that a commissioner complaint be filed. If the Testing Team determined that the different treatment was not serious and/or could be easily explained, the Executive Director contacted the person tested, explained the law, and reviewed the testing results.