DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
The President’s Proposal:
-
Increases housing opportunities by providing a tax credit
for developers of affordable single-family housing;
-
Helps to increase minority homeownership rates by expanding
homeownership opportunities;
-
Strengthens and reforms public housing;
-
Strengthens housing assistance programs and promotes self-sufficiency
efforts;
-
Seeks to end chronic homelessness over the next decade;
-
Reforms the Community Development Block Grant program and
eliminates poor performing community and economic development programs; and
-
Improves agency management by setting aggressive short- and
long-term goals to overcome chronic weaknesses.
|
Department of Housing and
Urban Development
Mel Martinez, Secretary
www.hud.gov 202–708–1112
Number of Employees: 10,300
2002
Spending: $30.9 billion
Field
Offices: 80, including most major cities.
|
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) subsidizes housing
costs for about five million low-income households through rental assistance,
construction grants, and loans. It also helps revitalize over 4,000 localities
through community development programs and provides housing and services to
help families and the homeless toward self-sufficiency. HUD also encourages
homeownership by providing mortgage insurance for over six million homeowners,
many of whom otherwise might not qualify for loans, and by managing billions
of dollars in both guarantees of mortgages and mortgage-backed securities.
Overview
The budget proposes to maintain or increase support for housing assistance
and other programs to help low-income families and communities achieve their
goals. It provides 34,000 new housing vouchers targeted to ensure they provide
assistance to those most in need and increases other effective programs to
help meet HUD’s strategic objectives.
HUD Strategic Objectives
-
Reduce complexity, paperwork, and costs of the homebuying
process.
-
Help families move from rental housing to homeownership.
-
Improve the quality of public and assisted housing, and help
families find affordable housing.
-
Strengthen and expand faith-based and community partnerships.
-
End chronic homelessness and increase housing opportunities
for other homeless households.
-
Embrace a new sense of ethics and accountability.
-
Ensure equal opportunity and access to housing.
-
Support community development efforts.
|
In some cases, however, HUD programs have trapped families in poor quality
buildings or neighborhoods with safety concerns and with limited educational
and economic opportunities. Requiring families to accept these conditions
in order to receive housing assistance is unacceptable.
This budget, therefore, proposes to improve housing quality and choice
for the people HUD assists. It will strengthen public housing using an "asset
management" approach modeled on private sector practices to address the large
backlog of capital needs and provide better incentives for sound local management.
It will provide subsidized families with increased ability to move when their
needs or conditions warrant, without giving up their subsidy.
Helping families with their shelter costs is an important goal, yet
HUD would fail in its mission if families were not moving toward eventual
self-sufficiency. An important measure of HUD's success should be the number
of families that no longer need to reside in assisted housing because they
have moved to safe, decent, and affordable private housing. To that end,
the Administration will propose changes and work with the Congress to ensure
that HUD programs support self-sufficiency efforts.
The budget also proposes reforms to the Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) program to return its focus to low-income communities by redirecting
funds from the wealthiest, highest-income communities to lower-income areas.
Requiring that more CDBG funds be provided to those communities with the
greatest need will make the program truer to its intended purpose and less
like a general revenue sharing program.
The budget includes proposals addressing other ambitious goals for HUD,
such as increasing homeownership rates among minority households and ending
childhood lead poisoning in 10 years.
Status Report on Select Programs
The budget seeks to redirect funds from poorly performing programs to
higher priority or more effective ones, while working to improve the management
of ineffective programs.
Program | Assessment | Explanation |
Public Housing | Ineffective | Serves 1.2 million low-income households,
but properties are too often of poor quality and in high poverty or isolated
locations. |
Housing Vouchers | Effective | Cost-effective, market-driven portable
rental assistance. Serves over 1.8 million low-income households. |
Federal Housing Administration | Moderately
effective | Increases homeownership
opportunity. But inadequate, out-dated systems and controls hamper ability
to monitor private partners. |
Homeless Program | Unknown | Provides flexibility to serve homeless
families and individuals through coordinated local planning and consolidated
funding. Lack of data makes it difficult to measure progress toward achieving
nationwide objectives. |
Community Development Block
Grant | Unknown | Designed to boost low-income communities,
its effectiveness is diluted by the inclusion of some of the richest cities
in the country. Its flexibility permits use for a wide variety of community
and economic development activities. Because each community has different
needs and goals, it is difficult to assess performance, despite over $100
billion in grants since 1974. |
Lead Hazard Control Grants | Effective | Program has clear, measurable objectives,
and use of efficient technology is emphasized. |
Congressional Earmarks
|
Out
with the Old... In with the New
The County Sheriff’s
Department of Ashland, Wisconsin, received $80,000 as a congressional earmark
to purchase an Ice Angel Windsled, similar to the one shown here. Windsleds
have been used during the winter for rescue activities. Ashland’s gain
was Wisconsin’s loss, however, because if earmarked funds had been distributed
through the CDBG formula, Wisconsin would have received an additional $2.5
million. That’s enough for 30 windsleds, if you believe windsleds are
the best possible use of community development funds.
|
The Administration objects to the Congress’s traditional practice
of funding unrequested earmarks. In 2002, the $336 million that might have
been used for HUD’s programs was earmarked instead for 831 congressional
projects. These earmarks avoid the competitive process and often come at the
expense of more urgent needs. For example, Carmel, Indiana, with a poverty
rate of one percent and median household income over $77,000, received $1
million for its parks. On the other hand, Gary, Indiana, with a 26 percent
poverty rate and a median income less than a third of Carmel’s, did
not receive a project grant. Since 1998, the Congress has siphoned off over
$1.2 billion for unrequested earmarks in HUD appropriations.
|
Notable Congressional Earmarks
$2,250,000
for the city of Fairbanks, AK to provide winter recreation opportunities at
the Fairbanks North Star Borough Birch Hill recreation area;
$1,000,000
for the Southern New Mexico Fair and Rodeo;
$2,450,000 to restore
six zoos; and
$340,000 to restore opera houses in Connecticut,
Michigan, and Washington.
|
Moreover, many states do not receive their share of earmarked funding—that’s
a natural consequence of earmarking. The accompanying chart shows each state’s
earmarked dollars less the amount of funds they would have received if the
$336 million had been distributed through the congressionally authorized state
CDBG formula.
Reform Community Development Block Grants and Eliminate Poor Performing
Community and Economic Development Programs
Under a two decade old formula, over 1,000 cities, urban counties, and
the states (for non-metropolitan areas) receive about $4.3 billion of CDBG
funds annually. CDBG supports various community development activities that
are supposed to be directed primarily at low- and moderate-income persons.
Several smaller programs are also funded within CDBG. A three-fold increase
for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program will provide $65 million
for competitive grants to non-profit faith-based and community-oriented organizations
that support homeownership.
Reform CDBG
While it favors poorer communities, the current distribution of CDBG
formula funds includes many grants to higher income cities and counties.
The budget proposes a legislative change to reduce grants to the wealthiest
one percent of eligible communities, defined as those with per capita income
two times the national average. The savings from this proposal will fund a
regional initiative to enhance the availability of affordable housing, economic
opportunity, and infrastructure in the Colonias. Colonias are communities
within 150 miles of the U.S.-Mexican border that lack adequate infrastructure
and other basic services. These communities have greater needs and fewer
resources, and are better targets for such funds.
In addition, the CDBG formula program grows by $95 million in 2003,
giving communities an increase in their annual allocations. As 2000 Census
data become available, HUD will develop proposals for a new CDBG allocation
formula and process, to allocate more to those who need these funds and will
use them effectively.
Tale
of Two Cities |
| Newton, MA* | Compton, CA |
Population | 83,829 | 93,493 |
Per capita income | $28,840 | $7,842 |
Average home sale price | $512,000 | $120,000 |
CDBG dollars per resident | $31.76 | $31.16 |
Annual CDBG funds 2002 | $2.663
million | $2.914 million |
Proposed CDBG funds 2003 | $1.359
million | $2.987 million |
* Newton
allocated $30,000 of its CDBG funding to design a traffic signal and $80,000
to fund a historic lighting project. |
Wealthiest
CDBG Entitlement Communities |
Community | Per capita income as a multiple
of the national average | 2002
CDBG Funds |
Greenwich, CT | 3.2 | $1,157,000 |
Newport Beach, CA | 3.2 | $490,000 |
Colorado Springs, CO | 3.1 | $3,199,000 |
Lower Merion, PA | 2.9 | $1,407,000 |
Naples, FL | 2.9 | $149,000 |
Penn Hills, PA | 2.8 | $849,000 |
Virginia Beach, VA | 2.6 | $3,012,000 |
Palo Alto, CA | 2.3 | $808,000 |
Malden, MA | 2.2 | $1,780,000 |
Westchester County, NY | 2.1 | $7,004,000 |
Santa Monica, CA | 2.0 | $1,787,000 |
Brookline, MA | 2.0 | $1,872,000 |
Newton, MA | 2.0 | $2,663,000 |
Eliminate Poor Performing and Duplicative Community and Economic Development
Programs
To stem mission creep, this budget proposes to streamline HUD’s
efforts to promote community and economic development by eliminating two community
planning and development programs, Rural Housing and Economic Development
grants and Round II Empowerment Zones grants. Since 1999, these two programs
have received over $430 million. Evaluations and other performance information
provide no convincing evidence that adding grants to the tax benefits of Empowerment
Zones increases that program’s effectiveness. Moreover, HUD’s
CDBG program lets localities meet the same needs. For example, through CDBG,
smaller communities will receive $1.3 billion in 2003 for locally designed
programs that meet their own housing and economic development needs. The savings
from eliminating these programs will be reinvested in the CDBG program.
Reinvigorating Renewal Communities and Empowerment Zones
To help develop the economies of distressed urban and rural areas, HUD
has just designated 40 Renewal Communities (RCs) and seven additional Round
III urban Empowerment Zones (EZs). Private investors in both RC and EZ areas
are eligible for tax benefits over the next 10 years tied to the expansion
of job opportunities in these locations. Like CDBG, these programs allow communities
to design and administer their own economic development strategies with a
minimum of federal involvement.
Strengthen Public Housing
HUD low-income housing assistance programs, including public housing,
other project-based subsidies, and housing vouchers, help approximately five
million low-income families pay the rent. They do much good, but the Administration
is committed to improving their operation.
The budget will improve the physical condition and financial management
of the 1.2 million public housing units subsidized by HUD, and give new choices
to the families who live there. As a whole, these properties have approximately
$20 billion in modernization needs. While most are inhabitable, 30 percent
fail HUD’s physical quality standards.
The reform of public housing introduces a way to end the practice of
subsidizing substandard housing. More specifically, the reforms, introduced
on a voluntary basis in 2003, will contribute to:
-
Meeting two goals stated in the President’s Management
Agenda—that 84 percent of public housing units will meet HUD’s
physical standards by 2005; and that HUD, working with the Congress, will
ensure families are not required to live in substandard housing as a condition
of retaining their subsidy;
-
Providing better management of public housing with less intrusive
federal micro-management;
-
Using the market to test projects’ viability and guide
local investment decisions;
-
Introducing choice and competition in public housing; and
-
Substantially reducing, and within a decade eliminating, an
estimated $20 billion of accumulated capital needs.
Local housing authorities will be able to employ real estate management
and financing practices that are standard in the private sector. This approach
to public housing will treat each property as a separate real estate investment.
Housing authorities will finance the capital needs of their individual properties
with private mortgages, while the federal government will continue to subsidize
operating and debt service costs not covered by rent collections. Properties
that cannot support a private mortgage but are deemed worthy investments by
local communities can use other local resources to make mortgages affordable
and finance capital improvements.
The Administration also proposes to extend choice to families living
in public housing properties that are refinanced and rehabilitated under this
model. As the program operates now, low-income families are required to reside
where public housing exists as a condition of receiving rental assistance—even
if properties fail HUD’s physical standards. The Administration’s
plan would allow families to move after the initial one year lease period
and retain their subsidy, giving them choice in the selection of their housing
and creating parity among HUD’s assisted-housing programs. When residents
have the option to leave a property, housing authorities must do a good job
serving them or they will move out. Competitive market forces are thereby
introduced and a property is more likely to be well managed and stay in good
condition. This model corresponds to the existing project-based voucher program.
Strengthen Housing Assistance to Increase Affordable Housing and Promote
Self-Sufficiency
The budget includes both funding increases and management reforms to
create a full "toolbox" of options for overcoming particular obstacles to
affordable housing. HUD will measure performance against the goals for assisted
housing, including a new measure to keep a count of the number of families
moving from subsidized housing assistance to self-sufficiency.
-
The number of households leaving assisted housing and achieving
housing self-sufficiency will increase from 2002 to 2003.
-
The number of households with worst case housing needs will
drop three percent between 2001 and 2003.
-
The share of assisted multifamily units that meet HUD-established
physical standards will rise by 1.5 percentage points between 2002 and 2003.
Vouchers Have Lower Costs
and Greater Benefits
On average, the cost per unit
of public housing exceeds the voucher program by 18 percent.
All
HUD subsidy programs target low-income households. However, 26 percent of
all voucher recipients live in neighborhoods with poverty levels below 10
percent, while only about eight percent of public housing residents live in
such areas. Vouchers give low income families a better chance of residing
in a more economically diverse neighborhood.
|
The number of households assisted is maintained by renewing all subsidy
contracts that expire in 2003. The budget also expands assistance with over
34,000 new housing vouchers that will give families the financial power to
choose from a variety of housing options in the private rental market. The
Administration favors vouchers because they are proven to provide greater
benefits at lower cost than older subsidy approaches. By relying on the private
market and competitive forces, vouchers allow families to choose the best
available housing. Vouchers also relieve HUD of the difficult management
burden of overseeing numerous housing properties.
Comparison
of Housing Assistance Approaches |
| Public
Housing | Housing Vouchers | Project-based Subsidies |
Choice and Mobility | Low | High | Low |
Cost Effectiveness and Avoidance of Federal
Liability | Low | High | Low |
The budget supports other approaches for increasing affordable housing,
by including a $100 million increase for the HOME block grant, a flexible
program that localities can tailor to their particular housing needs. This
program will produce about 23,000 new affordable rental units in 2003 and
rehabilitate another 23,000. Other programs in the budget that support the
supply of affordable housing are CDBG and the low-income housing tax credit.
The budget increases CDBG formula funds, about 30 percent of which goes to
housing, by $95 million. The tax credit was recently increased by 40 percent
and now supports the production of about 100,000 units of moderate-rent housing
a year. HUD is working to ensure that tax credit and HOME units are available
in all cases to voucher families.
End Chronic Homelessness in 10 Years
The Administration has made ending chronic homelessness in the next
decade a top objective. The chronically homeless number perhaps 100,000 to
200,000 persons who are without a home for long periods of time, or on many
occasions. They typically have many difficult-to-treat disabilities or mental
health problems that lead to severe personal suffering. Serving this group
consumes a large share of all resources dedicated to the homeless. HUD will
work to move more of the chronically homeless from the dangerous streets to
safe, permanent housing.
HUD will establish a baseline measure in 2003 of the chronic homeless
population in communities with Homeless Management Information Systems. The
performance measure for those communities will be achievement of a reduction
in the number of chronically homeless persons by up to one-half over five
years.
HUD's homeless assistance programs, along with those of the Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS) and five other Departments, will all contribute
to this result. Federal spending for the homeless will increase in 2003 to
$2.2 billion, including $1.1 billion in HUD.
The budget proposes consolidating HUD’s largest homeless programs
into one. It also transfers two homeless programs from departments with other
missions to departments with major responsibility for aiding the homeless.
The result of the new structure will consolidate program administration into
five agencies rather than the current structure that includes seven. The
Federal Emergency Management Agency's Emergency Food and Shelter program will
be shifted intact to HUD, where it will continue to operate with its non-profit,
private sector partners. The Department of Labor’s Homeless Veterans
Reintegration program will be moved to the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Both transfers will allow agencies to focus on the mission of reducing chronic
homelessness without reducing programs that are vital to the homeless population.
Expand Homeownership Opportunity
Families took advantage of strong economic conditions in recent years,
increasing the national homeownership rate to a record level of 68.1 percent
in 2001. The homeownership rate among minority households also increased
over this period, reaching 47.8 percent in 2001. HUD’s goals for 2003
are to increase the homeownership rate for minority households and protect
the recent homeownership gains nationwide. HUD’s homeownership efforts
will seek to increase the homeownership rate among minority households to
50 percent.
The Administration will use several means to reach these objectives:
-
To promote the development of affordable single-family housing
in low-income urban and rural neighborhoods, the budget proposes a tax credit
of up to 50 percent of the cost of constructing a new home or rehabilitating
an existing property. Eligible homebuyers would be required to have incomes
of not more than 80 percent of area median income.
-
The budget quadruples the President’s Down Payment Assistance
Initiative from its 2002 level to $200 million. Through HUD’s HOME
program, this initiative provides state and local governments with matching
grants to provide down payment assistance to first-time home buyers.
-
The budget triples funding to $65 million for the Self-Help
Homeownership Opportunity program, which helps families realize their homeownership
dreams through sweat equity.
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
I look forward to the
day when we measure compassion not by the number of families living in assisted
housing, but the number of families who have moved into a home of their own.
Secretary Martinez December 13,
2001 |
Continued support for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation is another
element of the Administration’s homeownership strategy. The Corporation
is a non-profit organization outside of HUD and chartered by the Congress.
It is primarily funded by the American taxpayer. The Corporation’s
Campaign for Homeownership enabled over 34,000 low-income families to become
new homeowners since 1998 by using $155 million in public funds to generate
$2.3 billion in private investment (a 15–to–1 ratio).
|
Meet the Simpsons
Dimple Simpson, a single
mother of three living in Nashville, Tennessee, yearned to own a home, but
thought she faced overwhelming odds. As a cook and cashier at an area high
school, her income plunges during the summer break, making it a challenge
to save for a down payment. She had received HUD housing assistance for the
last 16 years, but did not know how she could afford to purchase a home or
find her way through an unknown process.
Through an innovative
programmatic partnership among HUD, the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
and a private lender, Ms. Simpson’s dreams became a reality. She purchased
the home she longed for by using her HUD voucher as part of the financing
structure, and relying on the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation and local
partners to guide her through the process.
After building home
equity for a few years, Ms. Simpson will be self-sufficient, thereby freeing
up her housing subsidy to help another needy family. "I have proved to my
girls that [their] Mom… can do ANYTHING,” Simpson says. “This
was a hand up, not a hand out."
|
Other HUD Programs
Lead Paint Hazards
HUD is committed to eliminating childhood lead poisoning by 2010, working
with other federal agencies, including HHS and the Environmental Protection
Agency. HUD’s primary role in keeping children from lead exposure is
through grants to localities for control of lead paint hazards in low-income
housing. HUD promotes the use of new, low-cost technologies that can be replicated
across the nation. For 2003, the budget proposes a 15 percent increase (to
$126 million) for this program.
Faith-Based and Community Initiatives
HUD is one of the five agencies that has established an Office of Faith-Based
and Community Initiatives in response to the President’s Executive Order
published in January 2001. Expanding the opportunities and success of faith-based
and community development organizations is a HUD strategic goal. More information
on the coordinated effort across the federal government regarding faith-based
and community initiatives appears in the HHS chapter.
Strengthening Management
HUD is one of the nation’s largest financial guarantors, with
large mortgage obligations and exposure. It is responsible for managing more
than $500 billion worth of insured mortgages, more than $700 billion in outstanding
mortgage-backed securities, and about $120 billion in still-to-be-outlayed
funds from past appropriations. To meet its commitments, HUD must improve
its management capability and performance.
HUD’s chronic management weaknesses are well documented. The
General Accounting Office labeled HUD at high risk of waste, fraud, abuse,
and mismanagement from 1994 to 2000. HUD’s weaknesses harm those whom
the agency was created to serve. For example, subsidized families are sometimes
trapped in substandard, poorly maintained housing; homebuyers are exposed
to fraudulent practices; and some families receive excessive rental subsidies
that could have been used to aid others in need. HUD has resolved to fix
these problems as part of the President’s Management Agenda. HUD will
adopt a rating system to objectively measure subsidized housing performance
with mandatory remedies for lack of performance. HUD will greatly reduce
fraudulent practices in FHA by holding lenders accountable for the performance
of brokers and appraisers. HUD will develop an expert system to help lower
the 60 percent error rate in calculating the rents of subsidized tenants.
Initiative | 2001 Status |
Human
Capital—HUD has the oldest workforce of any Cabinet department.
After many years of downsizing, HUD faces a potential retirement wave and
loss of experienced staff. HUD’s managers for many years have been
hindered by a lack of workforce measurement tools to evaluate how long tasks
take or determine staff productivity. In addition, after several reorganizations,
HUD workers are not all in the right places with the right skills to do priority
work. The Department is taking actions to correct these deficiencies. HUD
is expanding recruitment programs, including a new intern program to help
replace those who could retire soon. The Department is delegating more hiring
to the field offices to accelerate the filling of vacancies. The Department’s
new work measurement system will complete its first full year of data collection
in December. Managers then will create a staffing plan based on needs to
better align work effort with priority tasks. | • |
Competitive
Sourcing—HUD works primarily through intermediaries or grantees
to deliver its programs to recipients, seeking to maintain a proper balance
between in-house expertise and oversight capacity and outsourcing. The General
Accounting Office and the HUD Inspector General have repeatedly found long-standing
deficiencies in HUD’s program oversight. HUD has failed to analyze regularly
its tasks to determine if competition of functions identified as commercial
would result in better performance and value for the government. However,
given HUD’s significant downsizing over the past decade, opportunities
for additional outsourcing may be limited. In an effort to eventually compete
50 percent of all commercial activities in accordance with the President’s
Management Agenda, HUD will need to compete at least five percent, or 290
positions, in 2002 and an additional 10 percent, or 580 positions, in 2003. | • |
Financial
Management—HUD’s financial systems have been plagued
with deficiencies for many years. HUD’s financial statements improved
last year to merit an unqualified audit opinion, albeit with citations for
10 reportable conditions and four material weaknesses. In 2002, the Department
will continue progress by maintaining an unqualified audit opinion and eliminating
at least three of its material weaknesses or reportable conditions. The Department
will revamp its funds control system in 2002 to overcome internal control
deficiencies that led to overspending of its appropriation in 2000. The Department
will improve the inadequate FHA accounting system with a new FHA general ledger
by October 2002. A Departmental task force has been working with HUD’s
intermediaries and clients for several months on plans to reduce the overpayment
of rent subsidies; HUD will set aggressive interim targets to reduce overpayments
in each of the next three years. | • |
E-Government—HUD
has encountered chronic implementation problems in delivering information
technology (IT) systems. Often HUD’s IT investments start well but
then experience problems and start to lag, and some projects are never completed.
Recently, HUD made improvements. It installed a capital planning process
for all major IT systems. HUD now requires a business case to make better
investment decisions. HUD stages projects in modular increments that can
be more carefully tracked for success or failure. The challenge is to deliver
IT systems on time and within budget. | • |
Budget/Performance
Integration—HUD has too little focus on outcomes, or how
programs influence them. Some programs do not measure important outcomes,
only inputs. For example, HUD measures the amount of money spent to subsidize
housing for a low-income household. However, HUD does not measure if that
subsidized household now does better in terms of employment, earnings, children’s
education, or stability of the family, nor does it track the length of time
the household continues to receive housing assistance. This lack of performance
information inhibits HUD’s ability to compare different types of programs
and strategies. HUD is also hindered by inconsistent collaboration between
performance planning and budgeting. Recently, though, HUD has made progress
in simplifying its budget to a more understandable presentation. In the coming
year, HUD will integrate its performance planning into the 2004 budget process
in the proper sequence, i.e., to determine the outcomes it aims for first
and then the program and resources required. | • |
Department of Housing and Urban Development
(In millions of dollars)
| 2001 Actual | Estimate |
2002 | 2003 |
Spending: | | | |
Discretionary Budget Authority: | | | |
Community Development Block Grant: | | | |
Existing law | 5,112 | 5,000 | 4,716 |
Legislative proposal | — | — | 16 |
HOME Investment Partnership | 1,796 | 1,846 | 2,084 |
Homeless Grants | | | |
Existing law | 1,123 | 1,123 | 1,130 |
Legislative proposal | — | — | 153 |
AIDS Housing Grants | 257 | 277 | 292 |
Housing Certificate Fund (Housing Vouchers) | 13,941 | 15,641 | 17,527 |
Public Housing | 6,228 | 6,338 | 5,956 |
Revitalization of Severely Distressed
Housing (HOPE IV) | 574 | 574 | 574 |
Housing for Special Populations (elderly
and disabled) | 994 | 1,024 | 1,024 |
Federal Housing Administration (FHA) | -2,702 | -2,066 | -2,285 |
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity | 46 | 46 | 46 |
Lead Hazard Reduction | 100 | 110 | 126 |
All other programs | 943 | -443 | 138 |
Subtotal, Discretionary budget authority
adjusted 1 | 28,412 | 29,470 | 31,497 |
Remove contingent adjustments | -55 | -55 | -56 |
Total, Discretionary budget authority | 28,357 | 29,415 | 31,441 |
| | | |
Emergency Response Fund, Budgetary Resources: | | | |
Community Development Block Grant | — | 2,700 | — |
Inspector General | — | 1 | — |
Total Emergency Response Fund, Budgetary
resources | — | 2,701 | — |
| | | |
Mandatory Outlays | 921 | -3,445 | -1,607 |
| | | |
Credit
activity: | | | |
Direct Loan Disbursements | | | |
FHA | 2 | 129 | 54 |
Other loans | 24 | 17 | 1 |
Total, Direct loan disbursements | 26 | 146 | 55 |
Guaranteed Loans | | | |
FHA | 122,687 | 150,584 | 141,566 |
Community Development Loan Guarantees | 335 | 400 | 400 |
Other Guaranteed Loans | 21 | 47 | 59 |
Total, Guaranteed loans | 123,043 | 151,031 | 142,025 |
| | | |
1 Adjusted to include the full
share of accruing employee pensions and annuitants health benefits. For more
information on these items, see Chapter 14, "Preview Report," in Analytical Perspectives. |
|