The Federal Housing Administration has been accused of playing a major role in neighbourhood change. This paper examines the empirical evidence from a comparison of FHA and conventional activity in Columbus, Ohio. Clear differences in areas and units served by the two loan types are found, but the lack of strong conceptual frameworks makes their interpretation unclear. The paper goes on to discuss these results in light of the theoretical issues involved in examining neighbourhood change. It concludes with a call for detailed empirical studies firmly grounded on improved theoretical constructs.