The 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) established a bold agenda requiring financial institutions in the USA to serve the credit needs of low- and moderate-income areas, including traditionally excluded minority residential areas. Initially opposed by both bankers and the federal regulatory authorities responsible for enforcement, the CRA has been contentious for decades. This study explores CRA impacts by investigating whether small businesses located in minority neighbourhoods have the same degree of bank-loan access as equally creditworthy firms located in other environs. We analysed both the unmet credit needs of small firms and the outcomes of their loan applications. We found that equality in loan access has been attained in some respects, indicating the CRA has had positive effects on loan availability. Inequality nonetheless persists. Regarding unmet credit needs, firms are penalised if their owners are African American, Latino or Asian American. Since roughly half of owners in minority communities are minorities, our challenge was to disentangle the effects on loan access of small-business geographic location versus owner race. Causal factors underlying our findings were investigated. Did bank regulators take the initiative in lessening traditional discriminatory lending practices? Alternatively, were activist community groups responsible? While the agenda advocated by activist groups coincides closely with actual gains, the overlapping but differing stated objectives of regulators did not.