Some of the most successful approaches to affordable rural housing were once innovations. In the 1960s, for example, mutual self-help housing was such a departure from usual practice that USDA was reluctant to finance it, despite its basis in long-established rural traditions like barn raising. By 2015, when the department celebrated the program’s 50th anniversary, 50,000 USDA-supported self-help homes had made homeownership possible for people with incomes too low to afford a house any other way. Of course, not all innovations have been equally successful, but this issue of Rural Voices magazine looks at some that seem promising. Among the tactics described here is one derived from the way many low income rural Americans have constructed their homes piecemeal: start with a very small but high quality home that provides the basics, and then add on over time as finances allow. Tiny houses in Hale County, AL, for example, offer one or two bedrooms as well as a living area, kitchen, and bathroom in 400 to 850 square feet. The homes are livable, affordable, and also expandable. MiCASiTA homes in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas are similarly designed for eventual additions. Energy efficiency and construction costs are also targets for innovators. Alaska Community Development Corporation worried about the added construction costs of increased energy efficiency, but has discovered the long-term affordability benefits are worth the upfront investment. Low utility costs, as well as low initial costs, are important for very low income Kentuckians living in retrofitted cargo containers and for families purchasing high-quality manufactured homes through Next Step. Building decent, affordable housing for the lowest-income rural Americans requires creativity – in financing, design, planning, and even in administering organizations. We hope the examples in this Rural Voices issue are helpful, and we encourage readers to share other innovations as well.