Order Code RL34318
Housing Opportunities for
Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
January 14, 2008
Libby Perl
Analyst in Housing
Domestic Social Policy Division

---

Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
Summary
The Department of Housing and Urban Development administers the only
federal housing program created specifically for persons with acquired
immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) or related diseases. The National Affordable
Housing Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-625) established the Housing Opportunities for
Persons with AIDS program (HOPWA). HOPWA is designed to address the housing
and service needs of individuals with HIV/AIDS and their families.
In FY2008, Congress appropriated $300 million for HOPWA in the
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161). This is the most funding ever
appropriated for the program, exceeding the FY2004 appropriation by approximately
$6 million. HOPWA funds are distributed to states and localities through both
formula and competitive grants. HUD awards 90% of appropriated funds by formula
to states and eligible metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) based on population,
reported cases of AIDS, and incidence of AIDS. The remaining 10% is distributed
through a competitive grant competition. Funds are used primarily for housing
activities, although grant recipients must provide supportive services to those persons
residing in HOPWA-funded housing.

---

Contents
The Need for Affordable Housing for Persons with HIV/AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Distribution and Use of HOPWA Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Formula Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Competitive Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Eligible Uses of HOPWA Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
HOPWA Program Formula and Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
The HOPWA Formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
HOPWA Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Appendix A. HOPWA Formula Allocations, FY2004-FY2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
List of Tables
Table 1. HOPWA Funding and Eligible Jurisdictions, FY2001-FY2008 . . . . . . 9
Table A-1. HOPWA Formula Allocations, FY2004-FY2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

---

Housing Opportunities for Persons with
AIDS (HOPWA)
The Need for Affordable Housing
for Persons with HIV/AIDS
The availability of adequate, affordable housing for persons living with
HIV/AIDS has been an issue since AIDS was first identified in U.S. patients in the
early 1980s. The inability to afford housing and the threat of homelessness confront
many individuals living with HIV/AIDS. From the early years of the epidemic, those
who have been infected with HIV/AIDS face impoverishment as they become unable
to work, experience high medical costs, or lose private health insurance coverage.
In recent years, the incidence of HIV/AIDS has grown among vulnerable groups,
including minorities, women, and those living in poverty.1
Not surprisingly, researchers have found a co-occurrence between HIV/AIDS
and homelessness: homeless persons have a higher incidence of HIV/AIDS infection
than the general population, while many individuals with HIV/AIDS are at risk of
becoming homeless.2 Further, another study found that those who are HIV positive
and homeless are more likely than those who are HIV positive and housed to engage
in behaviors associated with the spread of HIV/AIDS: using injectable drugs, sharing
needles, and exchanging sex for drugs or money.3 When housing improved for
individuals in the study, their odds of engaging in these behaviors were reduced.
Congress established the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS
(HOPWA) program as part of the National Affordable Housing Act (P.L. 101-625)
1 John M. Karon, Patricia L. Fleming, Richard W. Steketee, and Kevin M. DeCock, “HIV
in the United States at the Turn of the Century: An Epidemic in Transition,” American
Journal of Public Health 91, no. 7 (July 2001): 1060-1068.
2 See, for example, D.P. Culhane, E. Gollub, R. Kuhn, and M. Shpaner, “The Co-Occurrence
of AIDS and Homelessness: Results from the Integration of Administrative Databases for
AIDS Surveillance, and Public Shelter Utilization in Philadelphia,” Journal of Epidemiology
and Community Health 55, no. 7 (2001): 515-520. Marjorie Robertson, et al., “HIV
Seroprevalence Among Homeless and Marginally Housed Adults in San Francisco,”
American Journal of Public Health 94, no. 7 (2004): 1207-1217. Angela A. Aidala and
Gunjeong Lee, Housing Services and Housing Stability Among Persons Living with
HIV/AIDS, Joseph L. Mailman School of Public Health, May 30, 2000, available online at
[http://www.nyhiv.org/pdfs/chain/CHAIN%20Housing%20Stability%2032.pdf].
3 Angela Aidala, Jay E. Cross, Ron Stall, David Harre, and Esther Sumartojo, “Housing
Status and HIV Risk Behaviors: Implications for Prevention and Policy,” AIDS and
Behavior 9, no. 3 (2005): 251-265.

---

CRS-2
in 1990.4 Members recognized that persons living with AIDS faced impoverishment
and discrimination5 that could prevent them from finding adequate housing.6 The
HOPWA program, administered by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), remains the only federal program solely dedicated to providing
housing assistance to persons living with HIV/AIDS and their families.7 The
program addresses the need for reasonably priced housing for thousands of low-
income individuals (those earning less than 80% of the area median income), and
thereby prevents homelessness and reduces the risk of homelessness. HOPWA was
reauthorized by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-
550). Although authorization for HOPWA expired after FY1994, Congress
continues to fund the program through annual appropriations.
Distribution and Use of HOPWA Funds
Formula Grants
HOPWA program funding is distributed both by formula allocations and
competitive grants. HUD awards 90% of appropriated funds by formula to states and
eligible metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) that meet the minimum requirements
according to data reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
in the previous year. (For the amounts distributed to eligible states and MSAs, see
Appendix A.) HOPWA formula funds are available through HUD’s Consolidated
Plan initiative. Jurisdictions applying for funds from four HUD formula grant
programs, including HOPWA,8 submit a single consolidated plan to HUD. The plan
includes an assessment of community needs and a proposal that addresses those
4 The 101st Congress, in separate legislation, also enacted in 1990 the Ryan White
Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act (CARE Act). Most of the funds in the
CARE Act, administered through the Department of Health and Human Services, are used
for medical treatment and medications, though funds are also used for support services. For
more information on the CARE Act, see CRS Report RL33279, AIDS: The Ryan White
CARE Act, by Judith A. Johnson and Paulette C. Morgan.
5 Individuals living with HIV/AIDS have experienced housing discrimination even though
they are protected as disabled persons under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), 42 U.S.C.
§§ 3601-3631. A number of court cases have established that the definition of “handicap”
protects persons who are HIV positive and persons with AIDS. See, for example, Baxter
v. City of Belleville, Ill., 720 F.Supp. 720, 729-730 (S.D.Ill.1989), and Support Ministries
for Persons With AIDS, Inc. v. Village of Waterford, N.Y., 808 F.Supp. 120, 129-133
(N.D.N.Y. 1992).
6 Hearing before the House Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs,
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development, “Housing Needs of Persons with
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome,” March 21, 1990, pp. 38, 73, 195, 348. See also,
Statement of Representative James A. McDermott, 135 Cong. Rec. 23641, October 5, 1989.
7 The law is codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 12901-12912, with regulations at 24 CFR. Parts 574.3-
574.655.
8 The others are the Community Development Block Grant, the Emergency Shelter Grants,
and HOME.

---

CRS-3
needs, using both federal funds and community resources. Communities that
participate in the Consolidated Plan may receive HOPWA funds if they meet formula
requirements. Formula funds are allocated in two ways:
! First, 75% of the total available formula funds, sometimes referred
to by HUD as “base funding,” is distributed to
— the largest cities within metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs)9 with
populations of at least 500,000 and with 1,500 or more cumulative
reported cases of AIDS (which includes those who have died); and
— to states with at least 1,500 cases of AIDS in the areas outside of that
state’s eligible MSAs.10
! Second, 25% of total available formula funds — sometimes referred
to by HUD as “bonus funding” — is distributed on the basis of
AIDS incidence during the past three years.11 Only the largest cities
within MSAs that have populations of at least 500,000, with at least
1,500 reported cases of AIDS and that have a higher than average
per capita incidence of AIDS are eligible.12 States are not eligible
for bonus funding.
Although HOPWA funds are allocated to the largest city within an MSA, these
recipient cities are required to allocate funds “in a manner that addresses the needs
within the metropolitan statistical area in which the city is located.”13 States that
receive funds are to use them to benefit areas outside of eligible MSAs. In FY2007,
84 MSAs received funds, while 38 states and Puerto Rico received funds for use in
the areas outside of recipient MSAs.14 Jurisdictions that receive HOPWA funds may
administer housing and services programs themselves or may allocate all or a portion
of the funds to subgrantee private nonprofit organizations. HOPWA formula funds
remain available for obligation for two years.
As a result of language included in every HUD appropriations law since FY1999
(P.L. 105-276), states do not lose formula funds if their reported AIDS cases drop
below 1,500, as long as they received funding in the previous fiscal year. These states
are allocated a grant on the basis of the cumulative number of AIDS cases outside of
9 MSAs are defined by the Census Bureau as having at least one defined urban area of
50,000 or more and adjacent territory with social and economic integration. See Office of
Management and the Budget Bulletin 07-01 Attachment, “Update of Statistical Area
Definitions and Guidance on Their Use,” December 18, 2006, p. 2, available at
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/bulletins/fy2007/b07-01.pdf].
10 42 U.S.C. §12903(c)(1)(A).
11 AIDS incidence is measured as the number of new AIDS cases during a given time period.
12 42 U.S.C. §12903(c)(1)(B).
13 42 U.S.C. §12903(f).
14 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and
Development, Office of HIV/AIDS Housing, list of FY2007 grantees, available at
[http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/aidshousing/programs/formula/grants/fy07/2007.pdf].

---

CRS-4
their MSAs.15 States generally drop below 1,500 AIDS cases when a large
metropolitan area becomes separately eligible for formula funds.
Competitive Grants
The remaining 10% of HOPWA funding is available through competitive
grants. Funds are distributed through a national competition to two groups of
grantees: (1) states and local governments that propose to provide short-term,
transitional, or permanent supportive housing in areas that are not eligible for
formula allocations, and (2) government agencies or nonprofit entities that propose
“special projects of national significance.”16 A project of national significance is one
that uses an innovative service delivery model. In determining proposals that qualify,
HUD must consider the innovativeness of the proposal and its potential replicability
in other communities.17 Competitive grants may not be used to provide supportive
services alone; instead, services can only be provided in conjunction with housing
activities, and funds for services cannot exceed 35% of a project’s budget.18
The competitive grants are awarded through HUD’s annual SuperNOFA (Notice
of Funding Availability), which is generally published in the Federal Register in the
early spring. Since FY2000 (P.L. 106-377), Congress has required HUD to renew
expiring contracts for permanent supportive housing prior to awarding funds to new
projects. Beginning in FY2006, competitive funds remain available for obligation
for three years (from FY2002 through FY2005, competitive funds had been available
only for two years). The extension makes the rules for HOPWA’s competitive
program consistent with those of other competitive programs advertised in HUD’s
SuperNOFA.
Eligible Uses of HOPWA Funds
HOPWA grantees may use funds for a wide range of housing, social services,
program planning, and development costs. Housing and some supportive services
are available for family members of persons living with AIDS. When a person living
in HOPWA-supported housing dies, his or her family members are given a grace
period during which they may remain in the housing.19 This period may not exceed
one year, however. Supportive services must be provided together with housing.
Formula grantees may also choose to provide supportive services not in conjunction
with housing, although the focus of the HOPWA program is housing activities.
Allowable activities include the following.
15 States that have retained funding under this provision are Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii,
Minnesota, Nevada, and Utah.
16 42 U.S.C. §12903(c)(3).
17 Ibid.
18 See, for example, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, “FY2007 Notice
of Funding Availability Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS,” 72 Federal Register
p. 11665, March 13, 2007.
19 24C.F.R. §574.310(e).

---

CRS-5
! The Development and Operation of Multi-Unit Community
Residences, Including the Provision of Supportive Services for
Persons Who Live in the Residences.20 Funds may be used for the
construction, rehabilitation, and acquisition of facilities, for payment
of operating costs, and for technical assistance in developing the
community residence.
! Short-Term Rental, Mortgage, and Utility Assistance to Persons
Living with AIDS Who Are Homeless or at Risk of Homelessness.21
Funds may be used to acquire and/or rehabilitate facilities that will
be used to provide short-term housing, as well as to make payments
on behalf of tenants or homeowners, and to provide supportive
services. Funds may not be used to construct short-term housing
facilities.22 Residents may not stay in short-term housing facilities
more than 60 days in any 6-month period, and may not receive short-
term rental, mortgage and utility assistance for more than 21 weeks
in any 52 week period. These limits are subject to waiver by HUD,
however, if a project sponsor is making an attempt to provide
permanent supportive housing for residents and has been unable to
do so. Funds may also be used to pay operating and administrative
expenses.
! Project-Based or Tenant-Based Rental Assistance for Permanent
Supportive Housing, Including Shared Housing Arrangements.23 In
general, tenants must pay approximately 30% of their income toward
rent.24 Grant recipients must ensure that residents receive supportive
services, and funds may also be used for administrative costs in
providing rental assistance.
! The New Construction or Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Property
for Single-Room Occupancy Dwellings.25
! Supportive Services, Which Include Health Assessments, Counseling
for Those with Addictions to Drugs and Alcohol, Nutritional
Assistance, Assistance with Daily Living, Day Care, and Assistance
in Applying for Other Government Benefits.26
20 42 U.S.C. §12910.
21 42 U.S.C. §12907.
22 HOWPA funds may only be used for construction of community residences and single-
room occupancy dwellings. See 24 C.F.R. §574.300(b)(4).
23 42 U.S.C. §12908.
24 See 24 C.F.R. §574.310(d).
25 42 U.S.C. §12909.
26 24 C.F.R. §574.300(b)(7).

---

CRS-6
! Housing Information Such as Counseling and Referral Services.27
Assistance may include fair housing counseling for those
experiencing discrimination.28
The majority of HOPWA funds are used to provide housing. According to
recent HUD data, 66% of HOPWA funds support housing activities.29 Grantee
performance reports indicate that clients who receive housing assistance through
HOPWA are often at the lowest income levels; in its FY2008 Annual Performance
Plan, HUD estimated that 81% of households served have either extremely-low
incomes (at or below 30% of area median income) or very-low incomes (at or below
50% of area median income).30
HOPWA Program Formula and Funding
The HOPWA Formula
The HOPWA method for allocating formula funds has been an ongoing issue
because the cumulative number of AIDS cases — including those who have died —
is used to distribute funds. A 2006 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
found that the cumulative measure resulted in disproportionate funding per living
AIDS case, depending on the jurisdiction. In 2004, the amount of money grantees
received per living AIDS case ranged from $387 per person to $1,290.31 If only
living AIDS cases were counted, 92 of 117 grantees would have received more
formula funding, while 25 would have received less.32
In FY2008 and FY2007, the President’s budget stated that the Administration
would submit a legislative proposal to Congress to change the way in which HOPWA
funds are distributed. The FY2008 budget stated that “[w]hereas the current formula
distributes formula grant resources by the cumulative number of AIDS cases, the
revised formula will account for the present number of people living with AIDS as
well as the housing costs in each jurisdiction.” The President’s FY2007 budget
contained identical language. HUD’s budget justifications for FY2008 elaborated
somewhat on the Administration’s proposal to change the HOPWA distribution
27 42 U.S.C. §12906.
28 24 C.F.R. §574.300(b)(1).
29 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Housing Opportunities for Persons
with AIDS Fact Sheet, November 2006, p. 2, available at [http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/
aidshousing/library/factsheet2006.pdf].
30 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Annual Performance Plan FY2008,
September 2007, p. 48, available at [http://www.hud.gov/offices/cfo/reports/pdfs/app
2008.pdf].
31 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Changes Needed to Improve the Distribution of
Ryan White CARE Act and Housing Funds, GAO-06-332, February 2006, p. 23, available
at [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06332.pdf].
32 Ibid., p. 24.

---

CRS-7
formula. HUD’s explanation indicated that a new formula would use the number of
persons living with AIDS, and that eventually, when consistent data on the number
of persons living with HIV become available, that measure might also be used in
determining the distribution of HOPWA funding.33
Discussions regarding the HOPWA formula and its use of cumulative AIDS
cases to distribute funds are not new. In 1997, GAO released a report regarding the
performance of the HOPWA program in which it recommended that HUD look at
recent changes to the Ryan White CARE Act formula to “determine what legislative
revisions are needed to make the HOPWA formula more reflective of current AIDS
cases....”34 (At the time of the GAO report, Congress had recently changed the
CARE Act formula to use estimates of persons living with AIDS instead of
cumulative AIDS cases.35) In response to the GAO report, the House Appropriations
Committee included the GAO language in its report accompanying the FY1998 HUD
Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-65) and directed HUD to make recommendations to
Congress about its findings regarding an update to the formula.36
In response to the FY1998 Appropriations Act, HUD then issued a report to
Congress in 1999 that proposed changes that could be made to the HOPWA
formula.37 The proposed formula in HUD’s 1999 report would have used an estimate
of persons living with AIDS (instead of all cumulative AIDS cases), together with
housing costs, to distribute formula funds. It also would have included a protection
for existing grantees. Those recommendations were not adopted by Congress.
No legislation to change the HOPWA formula has been introduced in the 110th
Congress. In the 109th Congress, two bills (S. 2339 and H.R. 5009) would have
changed the way that HOPWA formula funds are allocated by counting the number
of “reported living cases of HIV disease” instead of cumulative AIDS cases. This
change would have been phased in during FY2007 and FY2008 and fully
implemented in FY2009. The two bills also provided that not less than 75% of
formula funds would be used for housing assistance. Neither bill was enacted.
33 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development FY2008 Congressional Budget
Justifications, Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS, p. S-2, available at
[http://www.hud.gov/offices/cfo/reports/2008/cjs/part1/cpd/hopwa.pdf].
34 U.S. Government Accountability Office, HUD’s Program for Persons with AIDS,
GAO/RCED-97-62, March 1997, p. 27, available at [http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/
rc97062.pdf].
35 Ryan White CARE Act Amendments of 1996, P.L. 104-146.
36 See H.Rept. 105-175 to accompany H.R. 2158 (P.L. 105-65).
37 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1999 Report on the Performance
of the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Program, October 6, 1999 (hereafter
1999 HUD Report).

---

CRS-8
HOPWA Funding
As a result of advances in medical science and in the care and treatment of
persons living with HIV and AIDS, persons are living longer with the diseases.38
Program proponents point out that stable housing is critical to the success of the drug
regimen necessary to control the illness. The medications, which are usually very
expensive, must often be refrigerated and taken on a rigid time schedule. These
factors have increased the demand for adequate housing and supportive services,
especially for low-income individuals and their families.
As the number of those with AIDS grows, so do the jurisdictions that qualify for
formula-based HOPWA funds. Since 1999, there has been a steady increase in the
number of jurisdictions that meet the eligibility test to receive formula-based
HOPWA funds. Funding for the HOPWA program has increased in almost every
year since the program was created, eventually reaching $295 million in FY2004,
before declining to $282 million in FY2005. (See Table 1.) In FY2006 and
FY2007, funding increased by 1.52% over FY2005, to $286 million, but still
remained below the FY2004 funding level. In FY2008, Congress appropriated $300
million for HOPWA in the Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161), an
increase of almost 5% more than the FY2007 funding level, and the most ever
appropriated for the program.
The number of households receiving HOPWA housing assistance (including
short term housing assistance, housing provided through community residences, or
rental assistance in permanent housing) declined from FY2003 through FY2006.
(See Table 1.) In FY2003, 78,467 households were served; in FY2004, this number
dropped to 70,779. The number of households served continued to fall in FY2005
(67,012 households), and in FY2006 (67,000 households).39 Although the number
increased in FY2007 to 67,850,40 the number of households assisted still remained
below earlier levels in FY2001 through FY2004. These general reductions in
households served could be due to a number of factors, including the growth in
jurisdictions eligible for HOPWA grants, the amount of available funds, and housing
costs.
38 CDC data indicate a steady rate of growth in the number of people living with AIDS. For
example, in 1993 there were 173,772 people reportedly living with AIDS; in 2005 there
were 433,760 people reportedly living with AIDS. See Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, Revised June 2007, p. 21, Table 10, available
at [http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/reports/2005report/pdf/2005
SurveillanceReport.pdf].
39 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, FY2006 Performance and
Accountability Report, November 15, 2006, p. 136, available at [http://www.hud.gov/
offices/cfo/reports/2006/2006par.pdf].
40 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, FY2007 Performance and
Accountability Report, November 15, 2007, pp. 167-168, available at [http://www.hud.gov/
offices/cfo/reports/2007/2007par.pdf].

---

CRS-9
Table 1. HOPWA Funding and Eligible Jurisdictions,
FY2001-FY2008
Number of
Households
Funding
Qualifying
Receiving Housing
(thousands of
Fiscal Year
Jurisdictions
Assistancea
dollars)
2001
105
72,117
257,432
2002
108
74,964
277,423
2003
111
78,467
290,102
2004
117
70,779
294,751
2005
121
67,012
281,728
2006
122
67,000
286,110
2007
122
67,850
286,110
2008
—
—
300,100
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service based on data from the Department
of Housing and Urban Development budget justifications (number of qualifying jurisdictions and
funding levels), FY2004, FY2006, and FY2007 Performance and Accountability Reports (number of
households assisted), and appropriations legislation (FY2008 funding). For a breakdown of formula
funding by jurisdiction, see Appendix A.
a. Housing assistance includes short-term assistance with rent, mortgage or utilities, residence in
short-term housing facilities, housing provided through community residences and single room
occupancy dwellings, and rental assistance for permanent supportive housing.

---

CRS-10
Appendix A. HOPWA Formula Allocations,
FY2004-FY2007
Table A-1. HOPWA Formula Allocations, FY2004-FY2007
MSA, State, or Territory
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
Alabama State Program
1,139,000
1,117,000
1,145,000
1,163,000
Birmingham
520,000
497,000
511,000
516,000
Arkansas State Program
752,000
723,000
707,000
720,000
Arizona State Program
164,000
164,000
173,000
180,000
Phoenix
1,434,000
1,391,000
1,433,000
1,456,000
Tucson
402,000
390,000
389,000
390,000
California State Program
3,042,000
2,869,000
2,929,000
2,926,000
Los Angeles
10,476,000
11,848,000
10,310,000
10,393,000
Oakland
2,006,000
1,879,000
1,905,000
1,896,000
Riverside
1,772,000
1,683,000
1,684,000
1,689,000
Sacramento
844,000
795,000
786,000
784,000
San Diego
2,683,000
2,527,000
2,549,000
2,551,000
San Francisco
8,562,000
8,466,000
8,070,000
8,189,000
San Jose
792,000
736,000
738,000
739,000
Santa Anna
1,436,000
1,342,000
1,359,000
1,345,000
Colorado State Program
366,000
354,000
364,000
363,000
Denver
1,424,000
1,342,000
1,359,000
1,361,000
Connecticut State Program
251,000
242,000
253,000
252,000
Bridgeport
779,000
717,000
737,000
739,000
Hartford
1,023,000
1,285,000
1,108,000
1,098,000
New Haven
1,232,000
1,624,000
1,178,000
1,075,000
Washington, DC
11,802,000
10,535,000
11,370,000
11,118,000
Delaware State Program
164,000
162,000
166,000
167,000
Wilmingtona
798,000
703,000
679,000
552,000
Florida State Program
4,063,000
3,581,000
3,312,000
3,316,000
Cape Coralb
—
—
336,000
332,000
Fort Lauderdale
6,240,000
6,106,000
6,637,000
6,878,000
Jacksonville
1,564,000
1,624,000
1,587,000
1,630,000
Lakelandb
—
378,000
445,000
418,000
Miami
10,715,000
10,351,000
11,189,000
11,689,000
Orlando
3,189,000
2,871,000
2,906,000
2,895,000
Sarasota
397,000
548,000
390,000
391,000
Tampa
2,389,000
3,049,000
2,542,000
2,772,000
West Palm Beach
3,836,000
3,426,000
3,595,000
3,235,000
Georgia State Program
1,515,000
1,527,000
1,576,000
1,621,000
Atlanta
4,899,000
6,592,000
5,290,000
6,801,000
Augusta
373,000
418,000
376,000
394,000
Hawaii State Program
181,000
169,000
162,000
160,000
Honolulu
452,000
428,000
429,000
419,000
Iowa State Program
347,000
329,000
330,000
336,000
Illinois State Program
864,000
827,000
875,000
875,000
Chicago
8,338,000
5,379,000
5,561,000
5,572,000
Indiana State Program
836,000
806,000
818,000
822,000
Indianapolis
759,000
738,000
751,000
752,000
Kansas State Program
363,000
349,000
331,000
332,000
Kentucky State Program
423,000
407,000
410,000
408,000
Louisville
462,000
443,000
447,000
453,000

---

CRS-11
MSA, State, or Territory
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
Louisiana State Program
940,000
932,000
951,000
975,000
Baton Rouge
1,813,000
1,659,000
1,572,000
1,409,000
New Orleans
2,992,000
3,398,000
2,997,000
2,914,000
Massachusetts State Program
525,000
178,000
168,000
166,000
Boston
1,829,000
1,721,000
1,719,000
1,690,000
Lowell
659,000
623,000
627,000
622,000
Lynn
—
316,000
317,000
312,000
Springfield
461,000
433,000
424,000
418,000
Worcester
369,000
348,000
354,000
349,000
Maryland State Program
345,000
335,000
348,000
345,000
Baltimore
7,936,000
7,754,000
7,649,000
8,038,000
Frederickc
535,000
518,000
524,000
539,000
Michigan State Program
911,000
862,000
877,000
893,000
Detroit
1,979,000
1,554,000
1,597,000
1,640,000
Warren
405,000
392,000
397,000
409,000
Minnesota State Program
110,000
105,000
112,000
114,000
Minneapolis
839,000
797,000
829,000
833,000
Missouri State Program
496,000
475,000
455,000
450,000
Kansas City
978,000
924,000
918,000
918,000
St. Louis
1,217,000
1,158,000
1,150,000
1,140,000
Mississippi State Program
756,000
749,000
778,000
783,000
Jackson
724,000
998,000
868,000
899,000
North Carolina Program
2,082,000
2,010,000
2,097,000
2,154,000
Charlotte
571,000
565,000
597,000
626,000
Wake County
352,000
337,000
366,000
382,000
New Jersey State Programa
1,106,000
1,050,000
1,064,000
1,056,000
Camden
657,000
628,000
620,000
610,000
Jersey City
—
2,240,000
2,545,000
2,443,000
Newark
5,182,000
5,014,000
5,246,000
4,924,000
Paterson
—
1,265,000
1,282,000
1,250,000
Woodbridge
1,462,000
1,366,000
1,375,000
1,351,000
New Mexico State Program
533,000
503,000
514,000
514,000
Nevada State Program
238,000
219,000
219,000
219,000
Las Vegas
916,000
886,000
882,000
897,000
New York State Program
1,776,000
1,702,000
1,797,000
1,809,000
Albany
429,000
415,000
436,000
439,000
Buffalo
472,000
456,000
480,000
480,000
Islip
1,660,000
1,565,000
1,617,000
1,608,000
New York City
60,355,000
47,056,000
56,610,000
54,723,000
Poughkeepsie
604,000
577,000
679,000
812,000
Rochester
597,000
575,000
599,000
605,000
Ohio State Program
1,041,000
1,024,000
1,037,000
1,051,000
Cincinnati
550,000
517,000
518,000
530,000
Cleveland
854,000
822,000
826,000
840,000
Columbus
584,000
584,000
596,000
608,000
Oklahoma State Program
518,000
494,000
498,000
506,000
Oklahoma City
466,000
441,000
435,000
437,000
Oregon State Program
—
321,000
319,000
317,000
Portland
1,006,000
949,000
947,000
943,000
Pennsylvania State Program
1,540,000
1,511,000
1,548,000
1,527,000
Philadelphia
7,632,000
7,336,000
7,083,000
6,650,000
Pittsburgh
626,000
620,000
623,000
619,000
Puerto Rico State Program
1,748,000
1,636,000
1,633,000
1,616,000

---

CRS-12
MSA, State, or Territory
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
San Juan
7,140,000
5,324,000
5,874,000
5,632,000
Providence
807,000
764,000
776,000
773,000
South Carolina State Program
1,387,000
1,356,000
1,387,000
1,403,000
Charleston
418,000
390,000
397,000
401,000
Columbia
1,270,000
1,160,000
1,041,000
1,034,000
Tennessee State Program
739,000
718,000
747,000
756,000
Memphis
2,134,000
1,462,000
1,882,000
1,879,000
Nashville
737,000
840,000
737,000
757,000
Texas State Program
2,736,000
2,634,000
2,691,000
2,733,000
Austin
988,000
931,000
940,000
947,000
Dallas
3,192,000
3,867,000
3,141,000
3,134,000
Fort Worth
835,000
805,000
813,000
819,000
Houston
5,068,000
9,669,000
6,039,000
6,579,000
San Antonio
1,027,000
960,000
971,000
972,000
Utah State Program
120,000
111,000
112,000
111,000
Salt Lake City
386,000
354,000
353,000
346,000
Virginia State Program
640,000
612,000
618,000
615,000
Richmond
692,000
658,000
665,000
660,000
Virginia Beach
1,022,000
958,000
941,000
937,000
Washington State Program
652,000
619,000
620,000
622,000
Seattle
1,688,000
1,611,000
1,615,000
1,604,000
Wisconsin State Program
405,000
383,000
389,000
391,000
Milwaukee
512,000
487,000
497,000
492,000
— Subtotal formula grants
263,039,000
251,323,000
256,162,000
256,162,000
— Subtotal competitive
grants
29,227,000
27,925,000
28,463,000
—
— Subtotal technical asst.
2,485,000
2,480,000
1,485,000
—
Total HOPWA
294,751,000
281,728,000
286,110,000
286,110,000
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and
Development, available at [http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/about/budget/budget07/].
a. According to directions in the HUD Appropriations Act, funds awarded to the Wilmington MSA are
transferred to the State of New Jersey to administer the HOPWA program for the one New Jersey
county that is in the Wilmington MSA (Salem county).
b. The State of Florida administers the grants for the Cape Coral and Lakeland MSAs.
c. The State of Maryland administers the grant for the Bethesda-Frederick-Gaithersburg MSA.
crsphpgw

---