UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549



Form 10-KSB

(Mark One)

[X]

ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007



[ ]

TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



For the transition period from _________to _________



Commission file number 0-11766



ANGELES PARTNERS XI

(Name of small business issuer in its charter)



|                                |                     
|------------------------------- | --------------------
|California                      | 95-3788040          
|(State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer    
|incorporation or organization)  | (Identification No.)



55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089

Greenville, South Carolina  29602

(Address of principal executive offices)



Issuer's telephone number    (864) 239-1000



Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:



None



Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:



Limited Partnership Units

(Title of class)



Check whether the issuer is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. [ ]



Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YesX No___



Check if there is no disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-B contained in this form, and no disclosure will be contained, to the best of the registrant's knowledge in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-KSB or any amendment to this Form 10-KSB. [X]



Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes [ ]  No [X]



State issuer's revenues for its most recent fiscal year.  $10,011,000



State the aggregate market value of the voting partnership interests held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the partnership interests were sold, or the average bid and asked prices of such partnership interests as of December 31, 2007.  No market exists for the limited partnership interests of the Registrant, and, therefore, no aggregate market value can be determined.



DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE None



Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format (Check one): Yes [ ]; No [X]













FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS



The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for forward-looking statements in certain circumstances. Certain information included in this Report contains or may contain information that is forward-looking, including, without limitation, statements regarding the effect of redevelopments, the Partnerships future financial performance, including the Partnerships ability to maintain current or meet projected occupancy and rent levels, and the effect of government regulations. Actual results may differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements and, in addition, will be affected by a variety of risks and factors that are beyond the Partnerships control including, without limitation: natural disasters such as hurricanes; national and local economic conditions; the general level of interest rates; energy costs; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Partnerships property and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the Partnership operates; financing risks, including the risk that the Partnerships cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest; real estate risks, including fluctuations in real estate values and the general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such markets; insurance risks; development risks; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting or defending claims and any adverse outcomes; and possible environmental liabilities, including costs, fines or penalties that may be incurred due to necessary remediation of contamination of properties presently owned or previously owned by the Partnership.   Readers should carefully review the Partnerships consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the section entitled Risk Factors described in Item 1 of this Annual Report and the other documents the Partnership files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



PART I



Item 1.

Description of Business



Angeles Partners XI (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") is a publicly held limited partnership organized under the California Uniform Limited Partnership Act on February 14, 1983. The Partnership's managing general partner is Angeles Realty Corporation II ("ARC II" or the "Managing General Partner"), a California corporation.  The Managing General Partner is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company (AIMCO), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.  AIMCO Properties, L.P. and ARC II/AREMCO Partners, Ltd. are the non-managing general partners and are both affiliates of AIMCO. Effective November 30, 2001, AIMCO/IPT, Inc., an affiliate of the Managing General Partner, purchased the 99% limited partner interest in ARC II/AREMCO Partners, Ltd. The Elliott Accommodation Trust and the Elliott Family Partnership, a California Limited Partnership, were the non-managing general partners. Effective December 31, 1997, the Elliott Family Partnership, Ltd. acquired the Elliott Accommodation Trust's general partner interest in the Partnership. On June 30, 2000, the Elliott Family Partnership sold its general partner interest to AIMCO Properties, LP, a wholly owned subsidiary of AIMCO.  The Managing General Partner and the non-managing general partners are herein collectively referred to as the "General Partners". The Partnership Agreement provides that the Partnership is to terminate on December 31, 2035, unless terminated prior to such date.



The Partnership is engaged in the business of operating and holding real estate properties for investment. In 1983 and 1984, during its acquisition phase, the Partnership acquired eight existing apartment properties, a retail/apartment complex, a retail/office complex and an office/warehouse complex. In 1991, the Partnership invested in a joint venture along with two other related partnerships. On February 26, 1999, the joint venture sold its only investment property. The Partnership continues to own and operate one apartment complex. See "Item 2. Description of Property".



Commencing February 14, 1983, the Partnership offered up to 40,000 units of Limited Partnership Interest (the "Units"), at a purchase price of $1,000 per Unit with a minimum purchase of 5 Units ($5,000) pursuant to a Registration Statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Upon termination of the offering, the Partnership sold 40,000 units aggregating $40,000,000. The General Partners contributed capital in the amount of $30,000 for a 1% interest in the Partnership.  Since its initial offering, the Partnership has not received, nor are limited partners required to make, additional capital contributions.



The Partnership has no employees. Management and administrative services are provided by the Managing General Partner and by agents retained by the Managing General Partner. An affiliate of the Managing General Partner has been providing management services for the Partnership.



Risk Factors



The risk factors noted in this section and other factors noted throughout this Report describe certain risks and uncertainties that could cause the Partnerships actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.



Failure to generate sufficient net operating income may limit the Partnerships ability to pay distributions.



The Partnerships ability to make distributions to its investors depends on its ability to generate net operating income in excess of required debt payments and capital expenditure requirements. Net operating income may be adversely affected by events or conditions beyond the Partnerships control, including:



·

the general economic climate;

·

competition from other apartment communities and other housing options;

·

local conditions, such as loss of jobs or an increase in the supply of apartments, that might adversely affect apartment occupancy or rental rates;

·

changes in governmental regulations and the related cost of compliance;

·

increases in operating costs (including real estate taxes) due to inflation and other factors, which may not be offset by increased rents;

·

changes in tax laws and housing laws, including the enactment of rent control laws or other laws regulating multifamily housing; and

·

changes in interest rates and the availability of financing.



The Partnerships existing and future debt financing could render it unable to operate, result in foreclosure on its property or prevent it from making distributions on its equity.



The Partnerships strategy is generally to incur debt to increase the return on its equity while maintaining acceptable interest coverage ratios. Payments of principal and interest may leave the Partnership with insufficient cash resources to operate its property or pay distributions.  The Partnership is also subject to the risk that its cash flow from operations will be insufficient to make required payments of principal and interest, and the risk that existing indebtedness may not be refinanced or that the terms of any refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of existing indebtedness. If the Partnership fails to make required payments of principal and interest on secured debt, its lenders could foreclose on the property securing such debt, which would result in loss of income and asset value to the Partnership.



Competition could limit the Partnerships ability to lease apartments or increase or maintain rents.



The Partnerships apartment property competes for residents with other housing alternatives, including other rental apartments, condominiums and single-family homes that are available for rent, as well as new and existing condominiums and single-family homes for sale. Competitive residential housing in such market area could adversely affect the Partnerships ability to lease apartments and to increase or maintain rental rates.



Laws benefiting disabled persons may result in the Partnerships incurrence of unanticipated expenses.



Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or ADA, all places intended to be used by the public are required to meet certain Federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Likewise, the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, or FHAA, requires apartment properties first occupied after March 13, 1990, to be accessible to the handicapped. These and other Federal, state and local laws may require modifications to the Partnerships property, or restrict renovations of the property. Noncompliance with these laws could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants and also could result in an order to correct any non-complying feature, which could result in substantial capital expenditures. Although the Partnership believes that its property is substantially in compliance with present requirements, the Partnership may incur unanticipated expenses to comply with the ADA and the FHAA.



Potential liability or other expenditures associated with potential environmental contamination may be costly.



Various Federal, state and local laws subject property owners or operators to liability for management, and the costs of removal or remediation, of certain hazardous substances present on a property. Such laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release or presence of the hazardous substances. The presence of, or the failure to manage or remedy properly, hazardous substances may adversely affect occupancy at affected apartment communities and the ability to sell or finance affected properties. In addition to the costs associated with investigation and remediation actions brought by government agencies, and potential fines or penalties imposed by such agencies in connection therewith, the presence of hazardous substances on a property could result in claims by private plaintiffs for personal injury, disease, disability or other infirmities. Various laws also impose liability for the cost of removal, remediation or disposal of hazardous substances through a licensed disposal or treatment facility. Anyone who arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances is potentially liable under such laws. These laws often impose liability whether or not the person arranging for the disposal ever owned or operated the disposal facility. In connection with the ownership, operation and management of the property, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its property.



Moisture infiltration and resulting mold remediation may be costly.



The Partnership is aware of lawsuits against owners and managers of multifamily properties asserting claims of personal injury and property damage caused by the presence of mold, some of which have resulted in substantial monetary judgments or settlements.  The Partnership has only limited insurance coverage for property damage loss claims arising from the presence of mold and for personal injury claims related to mold exposure.  Affiliates of the Managing General Partner have implemented policies, procedures, third-party audits and training and the Managing General Partner believes that these measures will prevent or eliminate mold exposure and will minimize the effects that mold may have on residents.  To date, the Partnership has not incurred any material costs or liabilities relating to claims of mold exposure or to abate mold conditions.  Because the law regarding mold is unsettled and subject to change the Managing General Partner can make no assurance that liabilities resulting from the presence of or exposure to mold will not have a material adverse effect on the Partnerships consolidated financial condition or results of operations.



A further description of the Partnership's business is included in "Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation" included in "Item 6" of this Form 10-KSB.



Item 2.

Description of Property



The following table sets forth the Partnership's investment in property:



|                       |          |                          |           
|---------------------- | -------- | ------------------------ | ----------
|                       | Date of  |                          |           
|Property               | Purchase | Type of Ownership        | Use       
|                       |          |                          |           
|Fox Run Apartments     | 5/27/83  | Fee ownership subject to | Apartments
|Plainsboro, New Jersey |          | first mortgage (1)       | 776 units 



(1)

Property is held by a wholly owned Limited Partnership.



Schedule of Property



Set forth below for the Partnership's property is the gross carrying value, accumulated depreciation, depreciable life, method of depreciation and federal tax basis.



|           |                |              |             |                |          
|---------- | -------------- | ------------ | ----------- | -------------- | ---------
|           | Gross          |              |             |                |          
|           | Carrying       | Accumulated  | Depreciable | Method of      | Federal  
|Property   | Value          | Depreciation | Life        | Depreciation   | Tax Basis
|           | (in thousands) |              |             | (in thousands)
|           |                |              |             |                |          
|Fox Run    |                |              |             |                |          
|Apartments | $44,530        | $33,885      | 5-30 yrs    | S/L            | $12,300  



See "Note A" of the consolidated financial statements included in "Item 7. Financial Statements" for a description of the Partnership's capitalization and depreciation policies.



Schedule of Property Indebtedness



The following table sets forth certain information relating to the loan encumbering the Partnership's property.



|                   |                |          |           |          |                | 
|------------------ | -------------- | -------- | --------- | -------- | -------------- | 
|                   | Principal      |          |           |          | Principal     
|                   | Balance At     |          |           |          | Balance       
|                   | December 31,   | Interest | Period    | Maturity | Due At        
|Property           | 2007           | Rate     | Amortized | Date (2) | Maturity      
|                   | (in thousands) |          |           |          | (in thousands)
|Fox Run Apartments |                |          |           |          |               
|1st mortgage       | $28,879        | 6.76%(1) | 20 yrs    | 12/2021  | $--           



(1)

Fixed rate mortgage.



(2)

See "Item 7. Financial Statements - Note B" for information with respect to the Partnership's ability to prepay this loan and other specific details about the loan.



Rental Rates and Occupancy



Average annual rental rates and occupancy for 2007 and 2006 for the property:



|                   |                |                |      |     
|------------------ | -------------- | -------------- | ---- | ----
|                   | Average Annual | Average Annual
|                   | Rental Rates   | Occupancy     
|                   | (per unit)     |                |     
|Property           | 2007           | 2006           | 2007 | 2006
|                   |                |                |      |     
|Fox Run Apartments | $12,275        | $11,551        | 97%  | 97% 



As noted under "Item 1. Description of Business", the real estate industry is highly competitive. The Partnership's property is subject to competition from other residential apartment complexes in the area.  The Managing General Partner believes that the property is adequately insured. The property is an apartment complex which leases its units for lease terms of one year or less. No tenant leases 10% or more of the available rental space. The property is in good physical condition, subject to normal depreciation and deterioration as is typical for assets of this type and age.



Real Estate Taxes and Rate



Real estate taxes and rate in 2007 were:



|                   |                |      
|------------------ | -------------- | -----
|                   | 2007           | 2007 
|                   | Billing        | Rate 
|                   | (in thousands) |      
|Fox Run Apartments | $957           | 2.11%



Capital Improvements



Fox Run Apartments



During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Partnership completed approximately $1,786,000 of capital improvements at Fox Run Apartments, primarily consisting of concrete, heating and structural upgrades, kitchen and bath resurfacing, installation of washers and dryers and floor covering, cabinetry, water heater, and appliance replacements. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. The Partnership regularly evaluates the capital improvement needs of the property. While the Partnership has no material commitments for property improvements and replacements, certain routine capital expenditures are anticipated during 2008. Such capital expenditures will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as anticipated cash flow generated by the property.



Capital improvements will be incurred only to the extent of cash available from operations, Partnership reserves or advances from an affiliate of the Managing General Partner. To the extent that capital improvements are completed, the Partnerships distributable cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term.















Item 3.

Legal Proceedings



In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. On January 28, 2002, the trial court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint.  Plaintiffs took an appeal from this order.



On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. On June 13, 2003, the court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an appeal (the Appeal) seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the courts use of a referee and its order requiring Objector to pay those fees.



On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.  With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals vacated the trial courts order and remanded to the trial court for further findings on the basis that the state of the record is insufficient to permit meaningful appellate review.  The matter was transferred back to the trial court on June 21, 2005.  With regard to the second appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. With respect to the related Heller appeal, on July 28, 2005, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial courts order striking the first amended complaint.



On August 18, 2005, Objector and his counsel filed a motion to disqualify the trial court based on a peremptory challenge and filed a motion to disqualify for cause on October 17, 2005, both of which were ultimately denied and/or struck by the trial court.  On or about October 13, 2005 Objector filed a motion to intervene and on or about October 19, 2005 filed both a motion to take discovery relating to the adequacy of plaintiffs as derivative representatives and a motion to dissolve the anti-suit injunction in connection with settlement.  On November 14, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a Motion For Further Findings pursuant to the remand ordered by the Court of Appeals. Defendants joined in that motion.  On February 3, 2006, the Court held a hearing on the various matters pending before it and ordered additional briefing from the parties and Objector. On June 30, 2006, the trial court entered an order confirming its approval of the class action settlement and entering judgment thereto after the Court of Appeals had remanded the matter for further findings.  The substantive terms of the settlement agreement remain unchanged.  The trial court also entered supplemental orders on July 1, 2006, denying Objectors Motion to File a Complaint in Intervention, Objectors Motion for Leave of Discovery and Objectors Motion to Dissolve the Anti-Suit Injunction.  Notice of Entry of Judgment was served on July 10, 2006.



On August 31, 2006, the Objector filed a Notice of Appeal to the Courts June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2006 orders. The matter was argued and submitted and the Court of Appeal issued an opinion on February 20, 2008 affirming the order approving the settlement and judgment entered thereto. On March 12, 2008, the Court of Appeal denied Appellants Petition for Re-Hearing.  Appellant has until April 1, 2008 to file a Petition for Review with the California Supreme Court.



The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnerships overall operations.



Item 4.

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders



During the quarter ended December 31, 2007, no matter was submitted to a vote of unitholders through the solicitation of proxies or otherwise.













PART II



Item 5.

Market for the Partnership's Common Equity and Related Security Holder Matters



In February 1983, the Partnership, a publicly-held limited partnership, offered and sold 40,000 Limited Partnership Units (the "Units") for an aggregate purchase price of $40,000,000. The Partnership currently has 39,627 Units outstanding held by 744 Limited Partners of record.  Affiliates of the Managing General Partner owned 32,604 Units or 82.28% of the outstanding Units at December 31, 2007.  No public trading market has developed for the Units, and it is not anticipated that such a market will develop in the future.



The Partnership had no distributions for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from operations and the timing of the sale of the property and/or refinancing. The Partnerships cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. There can be no assurance, however, that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after planned capital improvement expenditures, to permit any distributions to its partners in 2008.



In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 32,604 Units in the Partnership representing 82.28% of the outstanding Units at December 31, 2007.  A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates.  It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will acquire additional units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in AIMCO Properties, L.P, the operating partnership of AIMCO, either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 82.28% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the Managing General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Managing General Partner, as managing general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Managing General Partner to AIMCO as its sole stockholder.



Item 6.

Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation



This item should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and other items contained elsewhere in this report.



The Partnerships financial results depend upon a number of factors including the ability to attract and maintain tenants at the investment property, interest rates on mortgage loans, costs incurred to operate the investment property, general economic conditions and weather. As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner monitors the rental market environment of its investment property to assess the feasibility of increasing rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy levels and protecting the Partnership from increases in expenses. As part of this plan, the Managing General Partner attempts to protect the Partnership from the burden of inflation-related increases in expenses by increasing rents and maintaining a high overall occupancy level. However, the Managing General Partner may use rental concessions and rental rate reductions to offset softening market conditions; accordingly, there is no guarantee that the Managing General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan. Further, a number of factors that are outside the control of the Partnership, such as the local economic climate and weather can adversely or positively affect the Partnerships financial results.



Results of Operations



The Partnerships net income for the year ended December 31, 2007 was approximately $1,528,000 compared to net income of approximately $1,137,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006.  Net income increased for the year ended December 31, 2007 due to an increase in total revenues partially offset by an increase in total expenses.



Total revenues increased for the year ended December 31, 2007 due to an increase in rental income, partially offset by a decrease in other income.  Rental income increased due to an increase in the average rental rate at the Partnerships investment property. Other income decreased primarily due to a decrease in resident utility reimbursements partially offset by an increase in lease cancellation fees and application fees.



Total expenses increased for the year ended December 31, 2007 due to increases in operating, property tax and general and administrative expenses, partially offset by decreases in depreciation and interest expenses. Operating expense increased due to increases in maintenance, property and management fee expenses.  Maintenance expense increased primarily due to increases in snow removal costs, plumbing repairs and contract services. Property expense increased primarily due to increases in utility expense and salaries and related benefits partially offset by a decrease in commissions and incentives. Management fees increased due to an increase in rental income, upon which such fee is based. Property tax expense increased due to an increase in the property tax rate.  Depreciation expense decreased due to assets becoming fully depreciated during the year ended December 31, 2007 which more than offset depreciation on additions placed into service during the year.  Interest expense decreased due to a decrease in interest on the mortgage encumbering the investment property as a result of scheduled principal payments which reduced the carrying amount of the mortgage and a decrease in interest on advances from an affiliate of the Managing General Partner as a result of payments on advances made during the year ended December 31, 2007.



General and administrative expense increased for the year ended December 31, 2007 due to a partnership management fee earned during the year ended December 31, 2007 and an increase in legal fees associated with Partnership matters. The Partnership management fee is based on net cash flow from operations, as defined in the Partnership Agreement.  No similar fee was earned during the year ended December 31, 2006.  In addition, there was an increase in the cost of services included in management reimbursements to the Managing General Partner allowed under the Partnership Agreement. Also included in general and administrative expenses are costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement.



Liquidity and Capital Resources



At December 31, 2007 the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $199,000 compared to approximately $589,000 at December 31, 2006. Cash and cash equivalents decreased approximately $390,000 since December 31, 2006 due to approximately $2,012,000 and $1,734,000 of cash used in financing and investing activities, respectively, partially offset by approximately $3,356,000 of cash provided by operating activities. Cash used in financing activities consisted of payments made on advances from an affiliate of the Managing General Partner and principal payments on the mortgage encumbering the Partnerships investment property. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements. The Partnership invests its working capital reserves in interest-bearing accounts.



The sufficiency of existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital expenditure requirements is directly related to the level of capital expenditures required at the property to adequately maintain the physical assets and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with federal, state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. The Managing General Partner monitors developments in the area of legal and regulatory compliance.  The Partnership regularly evaluates the capital improvement needs of the property. While the Partnership has no material commitments for property improvements and replacements, certain routine capital expenditures are anticipated during 2008. Such capital improvements will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as anticipated cash flow generated by the property.



Capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available from operations, Partnership reserves, or advances from an affiliate of the Managing General Partner. To the extent that capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's distributable cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected, at least in the short term.



The Partnerships assets are thought to be generally sufficient for any near term needs (exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage indebtedness encumbering Fox Run Apartments of approximately $28,879,000 is being amortized over 20 years and matures in December 2021, at which time it is scheduled to be fully amortized.



The Partnership had no distributions for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from operations, the timing of the sale of the property and/or refinancing. The Partnerships cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. There can be no assurance, however, that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after planned capital improvement expenditures, to permit any distributions to its partners in 2008.



Other



In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 32,604 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 82.28% of the outstanding Units at December 31, 2007.  A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates.  It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will acquire additional units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in AIMCO Properties, L.P, the operating partnership of AIMCO, either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 82.28% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the Managing General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Managing General Partner, as managing general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Managing General Partner to AIMCO as its sole stockholder.



Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates



A summary of the Partnerships significant accounting policies is included in "Note A  Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies" which is included in the consolidated financial statements in "Item 7. Financial Statements".  The ManagingGeneral Partner believes that the consistent application of these policies enables the Partnership to provide readers of the consolidated financial statements with useful and reliable information about the Partnerships operating results and financial condition.  The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the Partnership to make estimates and assumptions.  These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements as well as reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Actual results could differ from these estimates.  Judgments and assessments of uncertainties are required in applying the Partnerships accounting policies in many areas. The Partnership believes that of its significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity.



Impairment of Long-Lived Asset



Investment property is recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation, unless the carrying amount of the asset is not recoverable.  If events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the property may not be recoverable, the Partnership will make an assessment of its recoverability by comparing the carrying amount to the Partnerships estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows, excluding interest charges, of the property. If the carrying amount exceeds the aggregate undiscounted future cash flows, the Partnership would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the estimated fair value of the property.



Real property investment is subject to varying degrees of risk.  Several factors may adversely affect the economic performance and value of the Partnerships investment property. These factors include, but are not limited to, general economic climate; competition from other apartment communities and other housing options; local conditions, such as loss of jobs or an increase in the supply of apartments that might adversely affect apartment occupancy or rental rates; changes in governmental regulations and the related cost of compliance; increases in operating costs (including real estate taxes) due to inflation and other factors, which may not be offset by increased rents; and changes in tax laws and housing laws, including the enactment of rent control laws or other laws regulating multi-family housing.  Any adverse changes in these factors could cause impairment of the Partnerships asset.



Revenue Recognition



The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.  The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area. Rental income attributable to leases, net of any concessions, is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease.  The Partnership evaluates all accounts receivable from residents and establishes an allowance, after the application of security deposits, for accounts greater than 30 days past due on current tenants and all receivables due from former tenants.













Item 7.

Financial Statements





ANGELES PARTNERS XI



LIST OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



Consolidated Balance Sheet - December 31, 2007



Consolidated Statements of Operations - Years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006



Consolidated Statements of Changes in Partners' Deficit - Years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006



Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows - Years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006



Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements













Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm







The Partners

Angeles Partners XI





We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Angeles Partners XI as of December 31, 2007, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in partners' deficit, and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2007.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership's management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.



We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. We were not engaged to perform an audit of the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.



In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Angeles Partners XI at December 31, 2007, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.







/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP





Greenville, South Carolina

March 20, 2008













ANGELES PARTNERS XI



CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET

(in thousands, except unit data)



December 31, 2007





|                                                       |             |         
|------------------------------------------------------ | ----------- | --------
|Assets                                                 |             |         
|Cash and cash equivalents                              |             | $    199
|Receivables and deposits                               |             | 384     
|Other assets                                           |             | 357     
|Investment property (Notes B and E):                   |             |         
|Land                                                   | $  3,998    |         
|Buildings and related personal property                | 40,532      |         
|                                                       | 44,530      |         
|Less accumulated depreciation                          | (33,885)    | 10,645  
|                                                       |             | $11,585 
|                                                       |             |         
|Liabilities and Partners' Deficit                      |             |         
|Liabilities                                            |             |         
|Accounts payable                                       |             | $    196
|Tenant security deposits                               |             | 323     
|Other liabilities                                      |             | 391     
|Due to affiliates (Note D)                             |             | 255     
|Mortgage note payable (Note B)                         |             | 28,879  
|                                                       |             |         
|Partners' Deficit                                      |             |         
|General partners                                       | $     (503) |         
|Limited partners (39,627 units issued and outstanding) | (17,956)    | (18,459)
|                                                       |             | $11,585 





See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements











ANGELES PARTNERS XI



CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands, except per unit data)





|                                               |              |        
|---------------------------------------------- | ------------ | -------
|                                               | Years Ended 
|                                               | December 31,
|                                               | 2007         | 2006   
|Revenues:                                      |              |        
|Rental income                                  | $ 9,197      | $ 8,608
|Other income                                   | 814          | 864    
|Total revenues                                 | 10,011       | 9,472  
|                                               |              |        
|Expenses:                                      |              |        
|Operating                                      | 3,328        | 3,045  
|General and administrative                     | 414          | 374    
|Depreciation                                   | 1,713        | 1,783  
|Interest                                       | 2,071        | 2,203  
|Property taxes                                 | 957          | 930    
|Total expenses                                 | 8,483        | 8,335  
|                                               |              |        
|Net income (Note C)                            | $1,528       | $1,137 
|                                               |              |        
|Net income allocated to general partners (1%)  | $    15      | $    11
|Net income allocated to limited partners (99%) | 1,513        | 1,126  
|                                               |              |        
|                                               | $1,528       | $1,137 
|                                               |              |        
|Net income per limited partnership unit        | $38.18       | $28.41 





See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements











ANGELES PARTNERS XI



CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT

(in thousands, except unit data)











|                               |             |          |           |          
|------------------------------ | ----------- | -------- | --------- | ---------
|                               | Limited     |          |           |          
|                               | Partnership | General  | Limited   |          
|                               | Units       | Partners | Partners  | Total    
|                               |             |          |           |          
|Original capital contributions | 40,000      | $30      | $40,000   | $40,030  
|                               |             |          |           |          
|Partners' deficit at           |             |          |           |          
|December 31, 2005              | 39,627      | $  (529) | $(20,595) | $(21,124)
|                               |             |          |           |          
|Net income for the year ended  |             |          |           |          
|December 31, 2006              | --          | 11       | 1,126     | 1,137    
|                               |             |          |           |          
|Partners' deficit at           |             |          |           |          
|December 31, 2006              | 39,627      | (518)    | (19,469)  | (19,987) 
|                               |             |          |           |          
|Net income for the year ended  |             |          |           |          
|December 31, 2007              | --          | 15       | 1,513     | 1,528    
|                               |             |          |           |          
|Partners' deficit at           |             |          |           |          
|December 31, 2007              | 39,627      | $(503)   | $(17,956) | $(18,459)





See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements











ANGELES PARTNERS XI



CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)





|                                                         |                          |        
|-------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | -------
|                                                         | Years Ended December 31,
|                                                         | 2007                     | 2006   
|Cash flows from operating activities:                    |                          |        
|Net income                                               | $ 1,528                  | $ 1,137
|Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided |                          |        
|by operating activities:                                 |                          |        
|Depreciation                                             | 1,713                    | 1,783  
|Amortization of loan costs                               | 17                       | 17     
|Change in accounts:                                      |                          |        
|Receivables and deposits                                 | 43                       | (48)   
|Other assets                                             | 3                        | 91     
|Accounts payable                                         | 14                       | 68     
|Tenant security deposit liabilities                      | 57                       | 17     
|Other liabilities                                        | 61                       | (62)   
|Due to affiliates                                        | (80)                     | 64     
|Net cash provided by operating activities                | 3,356                    | 3,067  
|                                                         |                          |        
|Cash flows from investing activities:                    |                          |        
|Property improvements and replacements                   | (1,734)                  | (1,993)
|Withdrawals from restricted escrow                       | --                       | 625    
|Net cash used in investing activities                    | (1,734)                  | (1,368)
|                                                         |                          |        
|Cash flows from financing activities:                    |                          |        
|Payment on advances from affiliate                       | (812)                    | (277)  
|Payments on mortgage note payable                        | (1,200)                  | (1,121)
|Net cash used in financing activities                    | (2,012)                  | (1,398)
|                                                         |                          |        
|(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents         | (390)                    | 301    
|Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of the year       | 589                      | 288    
|                                                         |                          |        
|Cash and cash equivalents at end of the year             | $199                     | $589   
|                                                         |                          |        
|Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:        |                          |        
|Cash paid for interest                                   | $2,109                   | $2,185 
|                                                         |                          |        
|Supplemental disclosure of non-cash flow activity:       |                          |        
|Property improvements and replacements included in       |                          |        
|accounts payable                                         | $99                      | $47    



Included in property improvements and replacements for the year ended December 31, 2006 are approximately $81,000 of property improvements and replacements which were included in accounts payable at December 31, 2005.





See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements











ANGELES PARTNERS XI



NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



December 31, 2007





Note A - Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies



Organization: Angeles Partners XI (the "Registrant" or "Partnership") is a California limited partnership organized on February 14, 1983 to acquire and operate residential and commercial real estate properties.  The Partnership's managing general partner is Angeles Realty Corporation II ("ARC II" or the "Managing General Partner"), a California corporation. The Managing General Partner is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company (AIMCO), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. AIMCO Properties, L.P. and ARC II/AREMCO Partners, Ltd. are the Non-Managing General Partners.  Effective November 30, 2001, AIMCO/IPT Inc., an affiliate of the Managing General Partner, purchased the 99% limited partner interest in ARC II/AREMCO Partners, Ltd.  The Elliott Accommodation Trust and the Elliott Family Partnership, a California Limited Partnership, were the non-managing general partners.  Effective December 31, 1997, the Elliott Family Partnership, Ltd. acquired the Elliott Accommodation Trust's general partner interest in the Partnership. On June 30, 2000, the Elliott Family Partnership sold its general partner interest to AIMCO Properties, LP, a wholly owned subsidiary of AIMCO. The Managing General Partner and the Non-Managing General Partners are herein collectively referred to as the "General Partners". The Partnership Agreement provides that the Partnership is to terminate on December 31, 2035, unless terminated prior to such date.  As of December 31, 2007, the Partnership operates one residential property located in Plainsboro, New Jersey.



Principles of Consolidation: The Partnership's consolidated financial statements include all of the accounts of Fox Run AP XI, L.P., a wholly-owned limited partnership.  All interpartnership balances have been eliminated.



Allocation of Profits, Losses, Gains and Distributions to Partners: In accordance with the Partnership Agreement, any gain from the sale or other disposition of Partnership assets will be allocated first to the Managing General Partner to the extent of the amount of any brokerage compensation and incentive interest to which the Managing General Partner is entitled plus any prior brokerage compensation and incentive interest to the extent not previously allocated. Next, to any Partners to the extent they have a negative capital balance.  The remainder of the gain is allocated in proportion with the partnership interests.



The Partnership will allocate other profits and losses 1% to the General Partners and 99% to the Limited Partners.



Except as discussed below, the Partnership will allocate distributions 1% to the General Partners and 99% to the Limited Partners.



Upon the sale or other disposition, or refinancing, of any asset of the Partnership the Distributable Net Proceeds shall be distributed as follows: (i) first, to the Partners in proportion to their interests until the limited partners have received cumulative distributions equal to their original capital contributions reduced by the amount of any previous distributions; (ii) second, to the Partners until the Limited Partners have received distributions from all sources equal to their 6% Cumulative Distribution; (iii) third, to the Managing General Partner until it has received an amount equal to the difference between (a) 3% of the Aggregate Disposition Prices (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) of all properties and investments sold or otherwise disposed of, or refinanced by the Partnership, on a cumulative basis and (b) all distributions previously received by the Managing General Partner pursuant to this clause; (iv) fourth, to the Partners until the Limited Partners have received distributions from all sources equal to an additional cumulative return of 4% per annum on their Adjusted Capital Investment; and (v) thereafter, 85% to the Limited Partners and Non-Managing General Partners in proportion to their interests and 15% to the Managing General Partner.



Restricted Escrow: In connection with the December 2001 refinancing of Fox Run Apartments, approximately $625,000 of the net proceeds was placed in a restricted escrow account held by the mortgage lender.  These funds were to be held until the property reached 95% average annual occupancy and maintained that level for three consecutive months. This criteria was met during the year ended December 31, 2006, and the Partnership received approximately $625,000 in funds which were used to fund operations at the property and to partially repay amounts due to affiliates (see Note D).



Fair Value of Financial Instruments: Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 107, "Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments", as amended by SFAS No. 119, "Disclosures about Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair Value of Financial Instruments", requires disclosure of fair value information about financial instruments, whether or not recognized in the balance sheet, for which it is practicable to estimate fair value.  Fair value is defined in the SFAS as the amount at which the instruments could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. The Partnership believes that the carrying amounts of its financial instruments (except for long term debt) approximate their fair values due to the short term maturity of these instruments. The Partnership estimates the fair value of its long term debt by discounting future cash flows using a discount rate commensurate with that currently believed to be available to the Partnership for similar term, fully amortizing long term debt. The fair value of the Partnerships long term debt at the Partnerships incremental borrowing rate is approximately $30,685,000.



Cash and Cash Equivalents: Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand and in banks. At certain times, the amount of cash deposited at a bank may exceed the limit on insured deposits. Cash balances include approximately $124,000 at December 31, 2007 that are maintained by an affiliated management company on behalf of affiliated entities in cash concentration accounts.



Tenant Security Deposits: The Partnership requires security deposits from all apartment lessees for the duration of the lease and such deposits are included in receivables and deposits. Deposits are refunded when the tenant vacates the apartment if there has been no damage to the unit and the tenant is current on rental payments.



Deferred Costs: Loan costs of approximately $337,000 less accumulated amortization of approximately $101,000 at December 31, 2007, are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheet.  The loan costs are amortized over the term of the related loan agreement.  Amortization expense was approximately $17,000 for each of the years 2007 and 2006 and is included in interest expense. Amortization expense is expected to be approximately $17,000 for each of the years 2008 through 2012.



Leasing commissions and other direct costs incurred in connection with successful leasing efforts are deferred and amortized over the terms of the related leases.  Amortization of these costs is included in operating expenses.



Investment Property: Investment property consists of one apartment complex and is stated at cost.  The Partnership capitalizes costs incurred in connection with capital expenditure activities, including redevelopment and construction projects, other tangible property improvements and replacements of existing property components.  Costs including interest, property taxes and operating costs associated with redevelopment and construction projects are capitalized during periods in which redevelopment and construction projects are in progress in accordance with SFAS No. 34 Capitalization of Interest Costs and SFAS No. 67, Accounting for Costs and the Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate Properties.  Costs incurred in connection with capital projects are capitalized where the costs of the project exceed $250.  Included in these capitalized costs are payroll costs associated with time spent by site employees in connection with the planning, execution and control of all capital expenditure activities at the property level.  The Partnership did not capitalize any costs related to interest, property taxes or operating costs during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006. Capitalized costs are depreciated over the useful life of the asset.  Expenditures for ordinary repairs, maintenance and apartment turnover costs are expensed as incurred.



In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, the Partnership records impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations when events and circumstances indicate the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the carrying amounts of those assets.  No adjustments for impairment of value were necessary for the years ending December 31, 2007 and 2006.



Depreciation: Depreciation is provided by the straight-line method over the estimated lives of the apartment property and personal property.  For Federal income tax purposes, the modified accelerated cost recovery method is used for depreciation of (1) real property additions over 27 1/2 years and (2) personal property additions over 5 years.



Leases: The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.  The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area.  Rental income attributable to leases, net of any concessions, is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease.  The Partnership evaluates all accounts receivable from residents and establishes an allowance, after the application of security deposits, for accounts greater than 30 days past due on current tenants and all receivables due from former tenants.



Segment Reporting: SFAS No. 131, "Disclosure about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information" established standards for the way that public business enterprises report information about operating segments in annual financial statements and requires that those enterprises report selected information about operating segments in interim financial reports. SFAS No. 131 also established standards for related disclosures about products and services, geographic areas and major customers. As defined in SFAS No. 131, the Partnership has only one reportable segment.



Use of Estimates: The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.



Advertising: The Partnership expenses the costs of advertising as incurred. Advertising costs of approximately $66,000 and $75,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, were charged to operating expense.



Recent Accounting Pronouncements: In September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. SFAS No. 157 applies whenever other standards require assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value and does not expand the use of fair value in any new circumstances. SFAS No. 157 establishes a hierarchy that prioritizes the information used in developing fair value estimates. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets and the lowest priority to unobservable data, such as the reporting entitys own data. SFAS No. 157 requires fair value measurements to be disclosed by level within the fair value hierarchy. In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 157-2, Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, which deferred the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for all nonrecurring fair value measurements of non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities until fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008.  The provisions of SFAS No. 157 are applicable to recurring fair value measurements of financial assets and liabilities for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, which for the Partnership is generally limited to annual disclosures required by SFAS No. 107.  The Partnership is in the process of implementing SFAS No. 157; however, it has not completed its evaluation and thus has not yet determined the effect that SFAS No. 157 will have on the Partnerships consolidated financial statements.



In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. SFAS No. 159 permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value. The objective is to improve financial reporting by providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without having to apply complex hedge accounting provisions. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between entities that choose different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Partnership adopted SFAS No. 159 on January 1, 2008, and at that time did not elect the fair value option for any of its financial instruments or other items within the scope of SFAS No. 159.



In June 2007, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (the AICPA) issued Statement of Position No. 07-1, Clarification of the Scope of the Audit and Accounting Guide Investment Companies and Accounting by Parent Companies and Equity Method Investors for Investments in Investment Companies ("SOP 07-1").  SOP 07-1 provides guidance for determining whether the accounting principles of the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide Investment Companies are required to be applied to an entity by clarifying the definition of an investment company and, whether investment company accounting should be retained by a parent company upon consolidation of an investment company subsidiary, or by an investor in the application of the equity method of accounting to an investment company investee.  In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position SOP 07-1-1 that indefinitely defers the effective date of SOP 07-1.



Note B - Mortgage Note Payable



|                   |                |           |          |                |          
|------------------ | -------------- | --------- | -------- | -------------- | ---------
|                   | Principal      | Monthly   |          |                | Principal
|                   | Balance At     | Payment   | Stated   |                | Balance  
|                   | December 31,   | Including | Interest | Maturity       | Due At   
|Property           | 2007           | Interest  | Rate     | Date           | Maturity 
|                   | (in thousands) |           |          | (in thousands)
|Fox Run Apartments |                |           |          |                |          
|1st mortgage       | $28,879        | $266      | 6.76%    | 12/2021        | $--      



The mortgage note payable is a fixed rate mortgage that is non-recourse and is secured by a pledge of the Partnership's investment property and by a pledge of revenues from the investment property. The mortgage note payable includes a prepayment penalty if repaid prior to maturity. Further, the property may not be sold subject to existing note indebtedness.



Scheduled principal payments of the mortgage note payable subsequent to December 31, 2007, are as follows (in thousands):



|           |        
|---------- | -------
|2008       | $ 1,283
|2009       | 1,373  
|2010       | 1,468  
|2011       | 1,571  
|2012       | 1,680  
|Thereafter | 21,504 
|Total      | $28,879



Note C - Income Taxes



The Partnership has received a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service that it will be classified as a partnership for Federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, taxable income or loss of the Partnership is reported in the income tax returns of its partners.  No provision for income taxes is made in the consolidated financial statements of the Partnership.



The following is a reconciliation of reported net income and Federal taxable income (in thousands, except per unit data):



|                             |         |        
|---------------------------- | ------- | -------
|                             | 2007    | 2006   
|                             |         |        
|Net income as reported       | $ 1,528 | $ 1,137
|(Deduct) add:                |         |        
|Depreciation differences     | (11)    | (39)   
|Unearned income              | 63      | (84)   
|Other                        | 20      | 45     
|Federal taxable income       | $1,600  | $1,059 
|Federal taxable income       |         |        
|per limited partnership unit | $39.98  | $26.46 



The following is a reconciliation between the Partnership's reported amounts and Federal tax basis of net liabilities (in thousands):



|                                    |          
|----------------------------------- | ---------
|Net liabilities as reported         | $(18,459)
|Land and buildings                  | 2,885    
|Accumulated depreciation            | (1,230)  
|Syndication and distribution costs  | 5,261    
|Other                               | 113      
|                                    |          
|Net liabilities - Federal tax basis | $(11,430)



Note D - Transactions with Affiliated Parties



The Partnership has no employees and depends on the Managing General Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities.  The Partnership Agreement provides for (i) certain payments to affiliates for services and (ii) reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership.



Affiliates of the Managing General Partner receive 5% of gross receipts from the Partnership's property as compensation for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $503,000 and $473,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which is included in operating expenses.



Affiliates of the Managing General Partner charged the Partnership for reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $308,000 and $331,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses and investment property. The portion of these reimbursements included in investment property for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 are construction management services provided by an affiliate of the Managing General Partner of approximately $157,000 and $193,000, respectively.



The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 7.5% of "net cash from operations", as defined in the Partnership Agreement to be paid to the Managing General Partner for executive and administrative management services. One half of this fee is to be accrued and not paid unless the limited partners have received distributions equal to a 5% cumulative annual return on their adjusted capital investment as defined in the Partnership Agreement or there are net proceeds from the sale or financing of the investment property. During the year ended December 31, 2007, a fee of approximately $32,000 was earned and is included in due to affiliates. During the year ended December 31, 2006 no fees were earned or paid. In addition, at December 31, 2007, the Partnership has accrued approximately $21,000 of Partnership management fees, representing one half of the fees earned in 2000, 2001 and 2002 which are included in due to affiliates. This amount plus one half of the fee earned during the year ended December 31, 2007 will remain accrued until the criteria for payment has been met.



Prior to 2006, AIMCO Properties, L.P., an affiliate of the Managing General Partner, advanced to the Partnership approximately $1,288,000 to cover capital improvements and operations at Fox Run Apartments. There were no advances from AIMCO Properties, L.P. during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006. During the year ended December 31, 2007 the Partnership repaid advances and accrued interest of approximately $925,000.  During the year ended December 31, 2006 the Partnership repaid approximately $388,000 of outstanding advances and accrued interest from amounts released from a restricted escrow (see Note A). Interest is charged at prime plus 2% (9.25% at December 31, 2007) and was approximately $62,000 and $114,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Total advances and accrued interest of approximately $202,000 remain unpaid at December 31, 2007 and are included in due to affiliates. The Partnership may receive additional advances of funds from AIMCO Properties, L.P. although AIMCO Properties, L.P. is not obligated to provide such advances.  For more information on AIMCO Properties, L.P., including copies of its audited balance sheet, please see its reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



The Partnership insures its property up to certain limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally self-insured for a portion of losses and liabilities related to workers compensation, property casualty, general liability and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the Managing General Partner. During the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $192,000 and $179,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration.



In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 32,604 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 82.28% of the outstanding Units at December 31, 2007.  A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates.  It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will acquire additional units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in AIMCO Properties, L.P, the operating partnership of AIMCO, either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 82.28% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the Managing General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Managing General Partner, as managing general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Managing General Partner to AIMCO as its sole stockholder.



Note E - Investment Property and Accumulated Depreciation



|                   |                |                |             |               
|------------------ | -------------- | -------------- | ----------- | --------------
|                   |                | Initial Cost   |            
|                   |                | To Partnership |            
|                   |                | (in thousands) |            
|                   |                |                | Buildings   | Cost          
|                   |                |                | and Related | Capitalized   
|                   |                |                | Personal    | Subsequent to 
|Description        | Encumbrances   | Land           | Property    | Acquisition   
|                   | (in thousands) |                |             | (in thousands)
|Fox Run Apartments | $28,879        | $3,998         | $20,990     | $19,542       





|                   |                               |             |         |                |          |             | 
|------------------ | ----------------------------- | ----------- | ------- | -------------- | -------- | ----------- | 
|                   | Gross Amount At Which Carried |             |         |               
|                   | At December 31, 2007          |             |         |               
|                   | (in thousands)                |             |         |               
|                   |                               |             |         |                |          |            
|                   |                               | Buildings   |         |                |          |            
|                   |                               | And Related |         |                |          |            
|                   |                               | Personal    |         | Accumulated    | Date     | Depreciable
|Description        | Land                          | Property    | Total   | Depreciation   | Acquired | Life-Years 
|                   |                               |             |         | (in thousands) |          |            
|                   |                               |             |         |                |          |            
|Fox Run Apartments | $3,998                        | $40,532     | $44,530 | $33,885        | 5/27/83  | 5-30       



Reconciliation of "Investment Property and Accumulated Depreciation":



|                                       |                          |         | 
|-------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ------- | 
|                                       | Years Ended December 31,
|                                       | 2007                     | 2006   
|                                       | (in thousands)          
|Investment Property                    |                          |        
|Balance at beginning of year           | $42,744                  | $40,785
|Property improvements and replacements | 1,786                    | 1,959  
|Balance at end of year                 | $44,530                  | $42,744
|                                       |                          |        
|Accumulated Depreciation               |                          |        
|Balance at beginning of year           | $32,172                  | $30,389
|Additions charged to expense           | 1,713                    | 1,783  
|Balance at end of year                 | $33,885                  | $32,172



The aggregate cost of the investment property for Federal income tax purposes at December 31, 2007 and 2006 is approximately $47,415,000 and $45,629,000, respectively.  The accumulated depreciation for Federal income tax purposes at December 31, 2007 and 2006, is approximately $35,115,000 and $33,391,000, respectively.



Note F - Contingencies



In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. On January 28, 2002, the trial court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint.  Plaintiffs took an appeal from this order.



On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. On June 13, 2003, the court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an appeal (the Appeal) seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the courts use of a referee and its order requiring Objector to pay those fees.





On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.  With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals vacated the trial courts order and remanded to the trial court for further findings on the basis that the state of the record is insufficient to permit meaningful appellate review.  The matter was transferred back to the trial court on June 21, 2005.  With regard to the second appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. With respect to the related Heller appeal, on July 28, 2005, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial courts order striking the first amended complaint.



On August 18, 2005, Objector and his counsel filed a motion to disqualify the trial court based on a peremptory challenge and filed a motion to disqualify for cause on October 17, 2005, both of which were ultimately denied and/or struck by the trial court.  On or about October 13, 2005 Objector filed a motion to intervene and on or about October 19, 2005 filed both a motion to take discovery relating to the adequacy of plaintiffs as derivative representatives and a motion to dissolve the anti-suit injunction in connection with settlement.  On November 14, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a Motion For Further Findings pursuant to the remand ordered by the Court of Appeals. Defendants joined in that motion.  On February 3, 2006, the Court held a hearing on the various matters pending before it and ordered additional briefing from the parties and Objector. On June 30, 2006, the trial court entered an order confirming its approval of the class action settlement and entering judgment thereto after the Court of Appeals had remanded the matter for further findings.  The substantive terms of the settlement agreement remain unchanged.  The trial court also entered supplemental orders on July 1, 2006, denying Objectors Motion to File a Complaint in Intervention, Objectors Motion for Leave of Discovery and Objectors Motion to Dissolve the Anti-Suit Injunction.  Notice of Entry of Judgment was served on July 10, 2006.



On August 31, 2006, the Objector filed a Notice of Appeal to the Courts June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2006 orders. The matter was argued and submitted and the Court of Appeal issued an opinion on February 20, 2008 affirming the order approving the settlement and judgment entered thereto. On March 12, 2008, the Court of Appeal denied Appellants Petition for Re-Hearing. Appellant has until April 1, 2008 to file a Petition for Review with the California Supreme Court.



The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnerships overall operations.



The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation matters involving it or its investment property that are not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business.



Environmental



Various Federal, state and local laws subject property owners or operators to liability for management, and the costs of removal or remediation, of certain hazardous substances present on a property.  Such laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release or presence of the hazardous substances.  The presence of, or the failure to manage or remedy properly, hazardous substances may adversely affect occupancy at affected apartment communities and the ability to sell or finance affected properties.  In addition to the costs associated with investigation and remediation actions brought by government agencies, and potential fines or penalties imposed by such agencies in connection therewith, the presence of hazardous substances on a property could result in claims by private plaintiffs for personal injury, disease, disability or other infirmities.  Various laws also impose liability for the cost of removal, remediation or disposal of hazardous substances through a licensed disposal or treatment facility.  Anyone who arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances is potentially liable under such laws.  These laws often impose liability whether or not the person arranging for the disposal ever owned or operated the disposal facility.  In connection with the ownership, operation and management of its property, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its property.



Mold



The Partnership is aware of lawsuits against owners and managers of multifamily properties asserting claims of personal injury and property damage caused by the presence of mold, some of which have resulted in substantial monetary judgments or settlements.  The Partnership has only limited insurance coverage for property damage loss claims arising from the presence of mold and for personal injury claims related to mold exposure.  Affiliates of the Managing General Partner have implemented policies, procedures, third-party audits and training and the Managing General Partner believes that these measures will prevent or eliminate mold exposure and will minimize the effects that mold may have on residents.  To date, the Partnership has not incurred any material costs or liabilities relating to claims of mold exposure or to abate mold conditions.  Because the law regarding mold is unsettled and subject to change the Managing General Partner can make no assurance that liabilities resulting from the presence of or exposure to mold will not have a material adverse effect on the Partnerships consolidated financial condition or results of operations.













ITEM 8.

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure



None.



Item 8A.

Controls and Procedures



(a)

Disclosure Controls and Procedures



The Partnerships management, with the participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Managing General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnerships principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnerships disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act)) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Managing General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnerships principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Partnerships disclosure controls and procedures are effective.



Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting



The Partnerships management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the principal executive and principal financial officers of the Managing General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnerships principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, and effected by the Partnerships management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:



·

pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of assets;



·

provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of the Partnerships management; and



·

provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of assets that could have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements.



Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.



The Partnerships management assessed the effectiveness of the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007.  In making this assessment, the Partnerships management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.



Based on their assessment, the Partnerships management concluded that, as of December 31, 2007, the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting is effective.



This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Partnerships registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Managements report was not subject to the attestation by the Partnerships registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Partnership to provide only managements report in this annual report.



(b)

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.



There have been no significant changes in the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fourth quarter of 2007 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting.



Item 8B.

Other Information



None.













PART III



Item 9.

Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters and Control Persons and Corporate Governance; Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act



The Partnerships managing general partner is Angeles Realty Corporation II ("ARC II" or the "Managing General Partner"), a California corporation. The Managing General Partner is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO").



The names and ages of, as well as the positions and offices held by, the directors and officers of the Managing General Partner, are set forth below. There are no family relationships between or among any directors and officers.



|                  |     |                                                
|----------------- | --- | -----------------------------------------------
|Name              | Age | Position                                       
|                  |     |                                                
|Martha L. Long    | 48  | Director and Senior Vice President             
|Harry G. Alcock   | 45  | Director and Executive Vice President          
|Timothy Beaudin   | 49  | Executive Vice President and Chief Development 
|                  |     | Officer                                        
|Lisa R. Cohn      | 39  | Executive Vice President, General Counsel      
|                  |     | and Secretary                                  
|Patti K. Fielding | 44  | Executive Vice President  Securities and Debt;
|                  |     | Treasurer                                      
|Thomas M. Herzog  | 45  | Executive Vice President and Chief             
|                  |     | Financial Officer                              
|Scott W. Fordham  | 40  | Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting     
|                  |     | Officer                                        
|Stephen B. Waters | 46  | Vice President                                 



Martha L. Long has been a Director and Senior Vice President of the Managing General Partner since February 2004.  Ms. Long has been with AIMCO since October 1998 and has served in various capacities.  From 1998 to 2001, Ms. Long served as Senior Vice President and Controller of AIMCO and the Managing General Partner.  During 2002 and 2003, Ms. Long served as Senior Vice President of Continuous Improvement for AIMCO.



Harry G. Alcock was appointed as a Director of the Managing General Partner in October 2004 and was appointed Executive Vice President of the Managing General Partnerin February 2004 and has been Executive Vice President of AIMCO since October 1999.  Mr. Alcock has had responsibility for acquisition and financing activities of AIMCO since July 1994, serving as Vice President from July 1996 to October 1997. Mr. Alcock focuses on transactions related to AIMCOs portfolio of properties in the western portion of the United States.



Timothy Beaudin was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Development Officer of the Managing General Partner and AIMCO in October 2005.  Prior to this time, beginning in 1995, Mr. Beaudin was with Catellus Development Corporation, a San Francisco, California-based real estate investment trust.  During his last five years at Catellus, Mr. Beaudin served as Executive Vice President, with management responsibility for development, construction and asset management.



Lisa R. Cohn was appointed Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of the Managing General Partner and AIMCO in December 2007.  From January 2004 to December 2007, Ms. Cohn served as Senior Vice President and Assistant General Counsel of AIMCO.  Ms. Cohn joined AIMCO in July 2002 as Vice President and Assistant General Counsel.  Prior to joining AIMCO, Ms. Cohn was in private practice with the law firm of Hogan and Hartson LLP.



Patti K. Fielding was appointed Executive Vice President - Securities and Debt of the Managing General Partner in February 2004 and of AIMCO in February 2003.  Ms. Fielding was appointed Treasurer of AIMCO and the Managing General Partner in January 2005.  Ms. Fielding is responsible for debt financing and the treasury department.  Ms. Fielding previously served as Senior Vice President - Securities and Debt of AIMCO from January 2000 to February 2003.  Ms. Fielding joined AIMCO in February 1997 as a Vice President.



Thomas M. Herzog was appointed Chief Financial Officer of the Managing General Partner and AIMCO in November 2005 and was appointed Executive Vice President of the Managing General Partner and AIMCO in July 2005.  In January 2004, Mr. Herzog joined AIMCO as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer and of the Managing General Partner in February 2004.  Prior to joining AIMCO in January 2004, Mr. Herzog was at GE Real Estate, serving as Chief Accounting Officer & Global Controller from April 2002 to January 2004 and as Chief Technical Advisor from March 2000 to April 2002.  Prior to joining GE Real Estate, Mr. Herzog was at Deloitte & Touche LLP from 1990 to 2000.



Scott W. Fordham was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer in January 2007 of the Managing General Partner and AIMCO. Prior to joining AIMCO, Mr. Fordham served as Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of Brandywine Realty Trust from January 2006 through December 2006. Prior to the merger of Prentiss Properties Trust with Brandywine Realty Trust, Mr. Fordham served as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of Prentiss Properties Trust and was in charge of the corporate accounting and financial reporting groups. Prior to joining Prentiss Properties Trust in 1992, Mr. Fordham worked in public accounting with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.



Stephen B. Waters was appointed Vice President of the Managing General Partner and AIMCO in April 2004.  Mr. Waters previously served as a Director of Real Estate Accounting since joining AIMCO in September 1999.  Mr. Waters has responsibility for partnership accounting with AIMCO and serves as the principal financial officer of the Managing General Partner.



One or more of the above persons are also directors and/or officers of a general partner (or general partner of a general partner) of limited partnerships which either have a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or are subject to the reporting requirements of Section 15(d) of such Act. Further, one or more of the above persons are also officers of Apartment Investment and Management Company and the general partner of AIMCO Properties, L.P., entities that have a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or are subject to the reporting requirements of Section 15 (d) of such Act.



The board of directors of the Managing General Partner does not have a separate audit committee. As such, the board of directors of the Managing General Partner fulfills the functions of an audit committee. The board of directors has determined that Martha L. Long meets the requirement of an "audit committee financial expert".



The directors and officers of the Managing General Partner with authority over the Partnership are all employees of subsidiaries of AIMCO. AIMCO has adopted a code of ethics that applies to such directors and officers that is posted on AIMCO's website (www.AIMCO.com). AIMCO's website is not incorporated by reference to this filing.



Item 10.

Executive Compensation



None of the directors and officers of the Managing General Partner received any remuneration from the Partnership during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006.









Item 11.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management



Except as noted below, no person or entity was known by the Registrant to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the Limited Partner Units of the Registrant as of December 31, 2007.



|                             |                 |           
|---------------------------- | --------------- | ----------
|Entity                       | Number of Units | Percentage
|                             |                 |           
|AIMCO IPLP, L.P.             | 80              | 0.20%     
|(an affiliate of AIMCO)      |                 |           
|Cooper River Properties, LLC | 8,782           | 22.16%    
|(an affiliate of AIMCO)      |                 |           
|AIMCO Properties, L.P.       | 23,742          | 59.92%    
|(an affiliate of AIMCO)      |                 |           



Cooper River Properties, LLC is indirectly ultimately owned by AIMCO. Its business address is 55 Beattie Place, Greenville, SC 29602.



AIMCO Properties, L.P. and AIMCO IPLP, L.P. are indirectly ultimately controlled by AIMCO. Their business addresses are 4582 S. Ulster St. Parkway, Suite 1100, Denver, Colorado 80237.



The Partnership knows of no contractual arrangements, the operation of the terms of which may at a subsequent date result in a change in control of the Partnership, except for:  Article 12.1 of the Agreement, which provides that upon a vote of the Limited Partners holding more than 50% of the then outstanding Limited Partnership Units, the General Partners may be expelled from the Partnership upon 90 days written notice.  In the event that a successor general partner has been elected by Limited Partners holding more than 50% of the then outstanding Limited Partnership Units and if said Limited Partners elect to continue the business of the Partnership, the Partnership is required to pay in cash to the expelled General Partners an amount equal to the accrued and unpaid management fee described in Article 10 of the Agreement and to purchase the General Partners' interest in the Partnership on the effective date of the expulsion, which shall be an amount equal to the difference between (i) the balance of the General Partner's capital account and (ii) the fair market value of the share of Distributable Net Proceeds to which the General Partner would be entitled.  Such determination of the fair market value of the share of Distributable Net Proceeds is defined in Article 12.2(b) of the Agreement.



Item 12.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence



The Partnership has no employees and depends on the Managing General Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities.  The Partnership Agreement provides for (i) certain payments to affiliates for services and (ii) reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership.



Affiliates of the Managing General Partner receive 5% of gross receipts from the Partnership's property as compensation for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $503,000 and $473,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which is included in operating expenses.



Affiliates of the Managing General Partner charged the Partnership for reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $308,000 and $331,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses and investment property. The portion of these reimbursements included in investment property for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 are construction management services provided by an affiliate of the Managing General Partner of approximately $157,000 and $193,000, respectively.



The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 7.5% of "net cash from operations", as defined in the Partnership Agreement to be paid to the Managing General Partner for executive and administrative management services. One half of this fee is to be accrued and not paid unless the limited partners have received distributions equal to a 5% cumulative annual return on their adjusted capital investment as defined in the Partnership Agreement or there are net proceeds from the sale or financing of the investment property. During the year ended December 31, 2007, a fee of approximately $32,000 was earned and is included in due to affiliates. During the year ended December 31, 2006 no fees were earned or paid. In addition, at December 31, 2007, the Partnership has accrued approximately $21,000 of Partnership management fees, representing one half of the fees earned in 2000, 2001 and 2002, which are included in due to affiliates. This amount plus one half of the fee earned during the year ended December 31, 2007 will remain accrued until the criteria for payment has been met.



Prior to 2006, AIMCO Properties, L.P., an affiliate of the Managing General Partner, advanced to the Partnership approximately $1,288,000 to cover capital improvements and operations at Fox Run Apartments. There were no advances from AIMCO Properties, L.P. during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006. During the year ended December 31, 2007 the Partnership repaid advances and accrued interest of approximately $925,000.  During the year ended December 31, 2006 the Partnership repaid approximately $388,000 of outstanding advances and accrued interest from amounts released from a restricted escrow (see Note A). Interest is charged at prime plus 2% (9.25% at December 31, 2007) and was approximately $62,000 and $114,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Total advances and accrued interest of approximately $202,000 remain unpaid at December 31, 2007 and are included in due to affiliates. The Partnership may receive additional advances of funds from AIMCO Properties, L.P. although AIMCO Properties, L.P. is not obligated to provide such advances.  For more information on AIMCO Properties, L.P., including copies of its audited balance sheet, please see its reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



The Partnership insures its property up to certain limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally self-insured for a portion of losses and liabilities related to workers compensation, property casualty, general liability and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the Managing General Partner. During the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $192,000 and $179,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration.



In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 32,604 imited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 82.28% of the outstanding Units at December 31, 2007.  A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates.  It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will acquire additional units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in AIMCO Properties, L.P, the operating partnership of AIMCO, either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 82.28% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the Managing General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Managing General Partner, as managing general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Managing General Partner to AIMCO as its sole stockholder.



Neither of the Managing General Partner's directors is independent under the independence standards established for New York Stock Exchange listed companies as both directors are employed by the parent of the Managing General Partner.



Item 13.

Exhibits



See Exhibit Index attached.



Item 14.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services



The Managing General Partner has reappointed Ernst & Young, LLP as independent auditors to audit the consolidated financial statements of the Partnership for 2008. The aggregate fees billed for services rendered by Ernst & Young, LLP for 2007 and 2006 are described below.



Audit Fees. Fees for audit services totaled approximately $35,000 and $31,000 for 2007 and 2006, respectively. Fees for audit services also include fees for the reviews of the Partnerships Quarterly Reports on Form 10-QSB.



Tax Fees. Fees for tax services totaled approximately $7,000 and $6,000 for 2007 and 2006, respectively.













SIGNATURES







In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.





| |                                    
| | -----------------------------------
| | ANGELES PARTNERS XI                
| | (A California Limited Partnership) 
| |                                    
| | By:   Angeles Realty Corporation II
| | Managing General Partner           
| |                                    
| | By:   /s/Martha L. Long            
| | Martha L. Long                     
| | Senior Vice President              
| |                                    
| | By:   /s/Stephen B. Waters         
| | Stephen B. Waters                  
| | Vice President                     
| |                                    
| | Date: March 25, 2008               





In accordance with the Exchange Act this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.



|                     |                        |                     
|-------------------- | ---------------------- | --------------------
|/s/Harry G. Alcock   | Director and Executive | Date: March 25, 2008
|Harry G. Alcock      | Vice President         |                     
|                     |                        |                     
|/s/Martha L. Long    | Director and Senior    | Date: March 25, 2008
|Martha L. Long       | Vice President         |                     
|                     |                        |                     
|/s/Stephen B. Waters | Vice President         | Date: March 25, 2008
|Stephen B. Waters    |                        |                     















ANGELES PARTNERS XI



EXHIBIT INDEX





Exhibit Number

Description of Exhibit





3.1

Amended Agreement of Limited Partnership dated February 26, 1982, filed in Form 10-K dated November 30, 1983, incorporated herein by reference.



10.13

Promissory Note between New York Life Insurance, a New York mutual insurance company and Fox Run AP XI, LP., a South Carolina limited partnership dated December 5, 2001, filed as exhibit 10.13 to the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB dated March 25, 2002, incorporated herein by reference.



31.1

Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.



31.2

Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.



32.1

Certification of the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.