In a Nutshell
What: An interview with Sarah Zager, owner and principal architect of Zager Architecture, about the value of working with CDFIs that have facilities expertise to better serve nonprofit clients.
Location: Rensselaer, IN
Sarah Zager
In place-based, community development, the path from concept to completed physical space is rarely, if ever, a straight line. For nonprofits and community changemakers, navigating the convoluted path of construction logistics, funding compliance, and contractor vetting can quickly become overwhelming.
Far too often, these challenges fall onto the project’s architects who, wanting the best for their client and the project, stand in the gap. However, when architects find themselves stepping outside their core disciplines to act as project managers, financial guides, and compliance advisors just to keep a vital community project moving forward, boundaries blur and the full potential of the project becomes much harder to realize.
Sarah Zager, owner and principal architect of Zager Architecture in Northwestern Indiana, often finds herself in this position. She notes that when architects absorb operational and financial logistics, it limits their bandwidth to bring the full extent of their expertise to a project—especially in rural areas where resources and development and facilities experts are typically harder to come by.
We talked with Zager about the importance and impact of partnering with an intermediary, such as IFF, and how doing so can help architects stay focused on design while providing nonprofits with the guidance needed to navigate complex development projects.
IFF: Can you start by sharing a bit about your architecture practice?
Zager: I operate as a solo practitioner, a “one-woman shop,” personally working on every single aspect of every project that comes through my office. My practice is based in Northwestern Indiana, roughly halfway between Indianapolis and Chicago.
Because of my location, the vast majority of the communities and groups I serve are rural. The clients I predominantly work with are grassroots organizations, local community groups, towns, and nonprofits like Appleseed Childhood Education (in Rensselaer, IN), which focused on establishing a high-quality early childhood education (ECE) center for the community. These smaller entities frequently struggle to find professional services to help them realize their building projects simply because of their size and their location.
Appleseed Childhood Education
Through a partnership between a nonprofit—Appleseed Childhood Education—and a health system—Franciscan Health—a rural community in Indiana is addressing two needs simultaneously by increasing access to quality early childhood education, which is expected to help recruit and retain qualified health care professionals at a local hospital while supporting the town’s ability to grow by attracting young families. The partnership serves as a model for other rural communities facing similar challenges.
Click here to read more about Appleseed.
IFF: How do those challenges, specifically in rural areas, manifest for architects trying to execute these projects?
Zager: In a rural area, there is a natural and very strong desire to utilize local labor. Clients want their investment to support contractors in their own community. However, we face a dual challenge: finding qualified local labor that has the capacity for commercial work and attracting outside talent. Because our projects are often smaller in scope and have a lower total dollar value, larger contracting firms from urban centers like Chicago, Indianapolis, or even nearby Lafayette often find it doesn’t warrant the travel time or resources to bid on them.
Consequently, we rely on local contractors whose operations are typically much smaller. While they are highly skilled builders, community development projects frequently involve multiple funding sources and compliance requirements. Successfully navigating these complexities requires close collaboration across different project roles and expertise.
IFF: When these responsibilities fall on to an architect, how does that impact the project and your workload and role as the architect?
Zager: When there is no CDFI or intermediary involved, the boundaries of my job description expand dramatically. I find that I have to step completely outside of my traditional design scope and assume the role of a project manager, financial guide, and administrative counselor.
I end up doing an immense amount of hand holding throughout the entire timeline. I have to guide the owners through the complexities of public bidding, explain why certain procedural steps are mandatory, and interface heavily with local contractors. For instance, I frequently have to sit down with local builders and walk them through how to fill out and submit the required compliance paperwork just so they can successfully participate in the project. Taking on that level of administrative oversight is incredibly time consuming and pulls my focus away from the actual architecture.
IFF: When an intermediary, such as IFF, is involved in a project, how does that dynamic change?
Zager: The single greatest benefit of working with IFF is that it completely unburdens the design team. IFF steps in and takes over the entire operational arm of the development. They handle the contractor vetting process, work directly with the owners to establish realistic budgets, and manage the complexities of how the funding is going to flow.
When IFF manages those heavy administrative and financial logistics, it takes that massive weight entirely off my shoulders. It allows me to stay completely focused on the design, the technical execution, and what is truly best for the building itself. Instead of splitting my time between managing paperwork and drafting plans, I can dedicate 100% of my energy to delivering a high-quality architectural product.
It also creates a much healthier, more balanced project dynamic. In construction, differences of opinion naturally arise between the design team and the construction team. An architect might recommend a specific path for long-term building health, while a contractor might suggest an alternative based on construction limits. When a project doesn’t have an intermediary, the owner is caught in the middle, forced to make a technical decision they might not fully understand. This can easily put the architect at odds with the contractor.
Having IFF involved introduces an objective, expert voice that solely represents the owner’s interest. Because they are not a party to the architectural or construction contracts, they can evaluate opinions neutrally and guide the owner toward the path that serves them best. This third-party mediation eliminates friction on the job site and gives me, as the architect, an immense layer of comfort. I can make my professional recommendations knowing there is an expert guide helping the client make well-informed decisions.
“IFF maps out a clear, predictable path forward. They act as a steady guide, which allows clients to, quite frankly, sleep at night. When an owner is calm, organized, and confident in their timeline, it makes the entire collaborative process much more efficient for the architect.”
IFF: ECE projects have very specialized requirements. How does IFF’s specific expertise in this sector assist you during construction?
Zager: ECE facilities are governed by rigid, highly specific building and safety codes that are completely non-negotiable. Everything from square footage ratios to plumbing fixtures and emergency egress must meet exacting institutional standards.
Local contractors who primarily build residential or light commercial structures often ask, “Do we really have to do it this way?” Having IFF as a partner is incredibly valuable because they possess deep institutional knowledge of the ECE sector. They understand the codes perfectly, they back up my architectural specifications, and they can provide specialized resources or connect local teams with the right direction. Their expertise prevents compliance errors that could cause costly retrofits or delays prior to licensing.
IFF: How does having an intermediary affect the experience from the client’s perspective, and how does that impact your job?
Zager: It results in an exponentially smoother project that alleviates immense stress for the owner. Many of my clients are community foundations or local boards. They are experts at philanthropy or community organizing, but they do not run construction projects. They easily become overwhelmed by the sheer scale of building a new facility, including the logistics they don’t think about initially, like scheduling or procurement of fixtures, furniture, and equipment (FF&E).
IFF maps out a clear, predictable path forward. They act as a steady guide, which allows clients to, quite frankly, sleep at night. When an owner is calm, organized, and confident in their timeline, it makes the entire collaborative process much more efficient for the architect.
An unexpected benefit that I visibly noticed during stakeholder and fundraising meetings is the impact IFF has simply by being there. When a local grassroots group is trying to raise money or justify public expenditures, stakeholders want absolute assurance that the money is being handled responsibly.
When IFF walks into the room, their reputation and statewide footprint bring immediate credibility. It presents a highly professional, serious front to the community.
Stakeholders realize that their financial contributions are not just being handed over to a potentially inexperienced local committee but are being managed by an organization that does this successfully every single day. That level of professional assurance is amazing to witness. You can see the relief on people’s faces. It builds trust across the board, which is why I am incredibly appreciative of IFF’s services and always wish they could be involved in our projects.