Ease the Regulatory and Reporting Process 

Navigation: Permanent Program Flexibilities | Update Davis-Bacon to Allow for Easier Maintenance of Federally Funded Properties | End the Burdensome and Inequitable Community Service Self-Sufficiency Requirement | A Workable Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Affordable Insurance Is Critical

Updated July 10, 2025

As funding for HUD programs has not kept up with the demand for affordable housing, PHAs have been forced to do more with less, which has had a particularly strong impact upon small housing agencies. As an organization, we seek to strike the correct balance between protecting residents and their rights, and the budgetary and staffing reality that our member agencies face. Our members exist to serve their residents and their communities, but the excessive regulatory burden they face is impeding their ability to effectively and efficiently carry out their mission. 

Permanent Program Flexibilities 

The CARES Act provided HUD with broad and sweeping statutory and regulatory waiver authority to allow PHAs to quickly meet the changing conditions on-the-ground. HUD waived and relaxed several Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher program statutory and regulatory requirements during the pandemic. PHAs and community development organizations used these waivers to serve residents and their community with speed and efficiency. These agencies, particularly smaller agencies, need continued flexibility to focus on outcomes even after the pandemic to focus on outcomes. 

Re-imagined inspection protocols, document requirements for tenants, and reporting needs will help agencies in the future, just as they are helping them now during the pandemic. The current tenant rent calculation structure must also be modernized to remove confusion and complexity. Let us use this moment to refocus on what matters to families: access to quality, affordable housing, strong communities, and hope. 

Recommendation: Reduce administrative burdens that decrease efficiencies by streamlining housing and community development statutes and regulations to meet existing funding challenge and provide PHAs additional flexibilities that have proven to keep families housed and communities safe. HUD should promote flexibility similar to those provided in the CARES Act to meet this need. 

Navigation: Back to Top

Update Davis-Bacon to Allow for Easier Maintenance of Federally Funded Properties 

The Davis-Bacon Act was passed in 1931 and requires contractors and subcontractors to pay laborers working on federally funded construction projects at least the local prevailing wage and fringe benefits if the contract for the construction, alteration, or repair (including painting and decorating) of public buildings or public works is in excess of $2,000. This amount has not changed since 1931. Using the consumer price index from the Federal Bank, $2,000 in 1931 is equivalent to approximately $41,350 in 2024. This means significantly more construction and maintenance projects must meet Davis Bacon requirements in 2024 than 1931. This has real impacts on PHAs abilities to modernize and maintain their public housing properties.  

PHAs, particularly small agencies in rural areas, often struggle to find local construction companies willing or able to meet Davis-Bacon requirements. The need to repeatedly bid projects or hire contractors from outside the local area can lead to significant delays and increased costs. Hiring non-local contractors also adds costs associated with travel, lodging, and unfamiliarity with local conditions. When contractors are brought in from outside the area, the local community misses out on the economic benefits that come with local hiring, such as job creation and the circulation of wages within the community. 

These challenges highlight the need for reconsidering the Act’s threshold in light of modern economic realities or finding alternative solutions to balance the benefits of prevailing wage requirements with the practical needs of small, rural PHAs. 

Recommendation:  As the Davis-Bacon threshold has not been adjusted since 1931 (93 years as of 2024), HUD and Congress should work toward increasing the threshold to $50,000 while tying the threshold to an annual inflation factor. HUD and Congress could also push for the Davis-Bacon threshold to match the federal procurement small purchase threshold of $250,000.  

Navigation: Back to Top

End the Burdensome and Inequitable Community Service Self-Sufficiency Requirement 

The Community Service Self-Sufficiency Requirement (CSSR) provides that every adult living in public housing, except for certain exempt individuals, contribute 8 hours per month of community service (excluding political activities), participate in an economic self-sufficiency program for 8 hours per month, or perform 8 hours per month of combined community service and self-sufficiency program participation.  

Residents may face formidable challenges in complying with these requirements. These concerns include childcare constraints, transportation challenges, limited volunteering activities (especially in rural communities), and health related challenges. Small agencies in particular (those with fewer than 250 units) may not be able to provide transportation services, child-care services, nor volunteer opportunities for their residents. 

The community service requirements also impose administrative burdens on agencies, including documentation requirements, enforcing the requirement, explaining the requirement to residents, and tracking and verifying compliance. . This is especially burdensome as not every resident must satisfy the community service requirement, so the housing agency must certify whether each resident is exempt or not. The only remedy that housing agencies have for non-compliant residents is eviction, which is a steep remedy and may include a long timeline in some jurisdictions with court system backlogs. This process may also be costly. 

CSSR is perceived as ineffective and inequitable – public housing is the only federal rental assistance program that has the requirement – and, more importantly, is of little benefit to residents.  

Recommendation: HUD should work with Congress to remove the CSSR which remains an inequitable and administratively burdensome policy that has little benefit for residents.  

Navigation: Back to Top

A Workable Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 

NAHRO strongly supports the Fair Housing Act. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing has been in place since the inception of the Fair Housing Act, and NAHRO believes that any process that furthers fair housing goals must be workable and balance the limited resources found in communities throughout the United States. To achieve this, the rule must provide clear and targeted questions that allow program participants to focus on setting goals that include factors program participants can address. While performing an analysis that includes examining factors outside of the control of program participants, there should be no requirement that expects entities to change issues they have no control over.  

Recommendation: NAHRO believes that there are certain principles that HUD should adhere to in ensuring AFFH requirements are met: 

• Program participants should not be forced to complete analyses on non-housing factors. 

• Program participants should not be forced to complete analyses outside their jurisdiction.  

• Additional funding is required to properly conduct a fair housing analysis. Program participants should be able to complete any required analysis and planning efforts without having to hire a consultant. 

• The Department should accept and approve Equity Plans from program participants that have made a good faith effort to comply with the AFFH process. 

• The Department should incentivize program participants to solve challenging issues by adding safe harbors to fair housing goals determined by the program participant. 

• Program participants that do not receive full funding or funding at certain thresholds should be able to list the lack of federal funding as a reason for not successfully mitigating and addressing certain impediments to fair housing. 

• The Department should provide clear guidance and update it regularly so that the guidance is never out of sync with the regulatory requirements. 

• The fair housing analysis process should provide an equal emphasis on place-based solutions. 

• The Department should closely follow all requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and any other process requirements required by law.  

• Cross-departmental data from HUD, Department of Justice, Department of Education, and others should be provided to PHAs to help complete Equity Plans. 

• Diversity, equity, and inclusion training should be made available by HUD to PHAs.  PHAs should be allowed to weigh fair housing goals based on what is attainable compared to what is more challenging. 

Navigation: Back to Top

Build America Buy America Requirements Will Make Affordable Housing Creation More Difficult 

NAHRO continues to have specific concerns about how Build America, Buy America (BABA) will harm the creation and maintenance of affordable housing once the currently proposed phased implementation waiver from HUD expires in 2024. NAHRO does not intend these comments to apply to the economic goals of a Build America Preference, nor does it mean to comment on the costs or benefits of American manufacturing. Instead, the reality is that agencies and the families they serve will face real challenges in developing and upkeeping housing because of BABA. 

PHAs and other HUD grantees work with outside contractors, and the BAP will deter potential partners from working with PHAs due to increased costs and compliance difficulties. Further, reporting requirements and compliance will be incredibly challenging and slow down critical maintenance and development projects. This does nothing to help address or help the current housing supply crisis we face. 

Recommendation: PHAs and other HUD grantees work with outside contractors, and the BAP will deter potential partners from working with PHAs due to increased costs and compliance difficulties. HUD should work to increase the small grants and de minimis thresholds and exempt housing and community development programs from Build America, Buy America (BABA) requirements. 

Navigation: Back to Top

Affordable Insurance Is Critical 

Property insurance costs are skyrocketing, making it nearly impossible for PHAs to insure their properties, especially with the increasing impact of extreme weather events. The Public Housing Operating Fund and general HUD funding don’t account for this challenge. This has proven to be an incredible obstacle for agencies trying to insure their properties so they remain fiscally viable for the foreseeable future. 

Recommendation: HUD should treat insurance proceeds as nonfederal, allowing PHAs to stretch those dollars further.  

Recommendation: HUD should also continue to work to find solutions to stabilize insurance costs, enabling agencies to access affordable property insurance. 

Navigation: Back to Top | Permanent Program Flexibilities | Update Davis-Bacon to Allow for Easier Maintenance of Federally Funded Properties | End the Burdensome and Inequitable Community Service Self-Sufficiency Requirement | A Workable Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Affordable Insurance Is Critical