United States
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                   Form 10-QSB

(Mark One)
[X]   QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
      ACT OF 1934

                 For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002


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


             For the transition period from _________to _________

                         Commission file number 0-11934


                        CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
      (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)



         California                                              94-2834149
(State or other jurisdiction of                               (I.R.S. Employer
 incorporation or organization)                              Identification No.)

                       55 Beattie Place, P.O. Box 1089
                       Greenville, South Carolina 29602
                   (Address of principal executive offices)

                                 (864) 239-1000
                           (Issuer's telephone number)

<PAGE>

                         PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION


ITEM 1.     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                           CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
                                   (Unaudited)
                       (in thousands, except unit data)

                                  June 30, 2002

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

Assets
<S>                                                                          <C>
   Cash and cash equivalents                                                 $ 540
   Receivables and deposits                                                      40
   Restricted escrows                                                           101
   Other assets                                                                 270
   Investment properties:
      Land                                                   $ 7,296
      Buildings and related personal property                  21,476
                                                               28,772
      Less accumulated depreciation                           (13,308)       15,464
                                                                           $ 16,415
Liabilities and Partners' (Deficit) Capital
Liabilities
   Accounts payable                                                          $ 119
   Tenant security deposit liabilities                                           45
   Accrued property taxes                                                       243
   Other liabilities                                                            285
   Mortgage notes payable                                                    18,635

Partners' (Deficit) Capital
   General partner                                           $ (6,250)
   Limited partners (75,000 units issued and
      outstanding)                                              3,338        (2,912)
                                                                           $ 16,415


         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>

<PAGE>

                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
                                   (Unaudited)
                       (in thousands, except unit data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                       Three Months Ended             Six Months Ended
                                            June 30,                      June 30,
                                       2002           2001           2002          2001
Revenues:
<S>                                  <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
  Rental income                      $ 1,111        $ 1,234        $ 2,253        $ 2,481
  Other income                           109             81            227            157
      Total revenues                   1,220          1,315          2,480          2,638

Expenses:
   Operating                             568            458          1,043            875
   General and administrative             70            104            148            192
   Depreciation                          220            216            438            429
   Interest                              336            337            673            678
   Property tax                          122            150            243            286
      Total expenses                   1,316          1,265          2,545          2,460

Net (loss) income                     $ (96)          $ 50          $ (65)         $ 178

Net (loss) income allocated
  to general partner (9.9%)           $ (10)          $ 5            $ (7)         $ 18
Net (loss) income allocated
   to limited partners (90.1%)           (86)            45            (58)           160

                                      $ (96)          $ 50          $ (65)         $ 178

Net (loss) income per limited
  partnership unit                   $ (1.15)        $ 0.60        $ (0.77)       $ 2.13

Distributions per limited
  partnership unit                    $ 2.96         $ 0.96         $ 2.96        $ 6.11

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

</TABLE>

<PAGE>

                        CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
       CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIT) CAPITAL
                                   (Unaudited)
                       (in thousands, except unit data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                     Limited
                                   Partnership   General      Limited
                                      Units      Partner     Partners       Total

<S>                                   <C>          <C>        <C>          <C>
Original capital contributions        75,000       $ --       $75,000      $75,000

Partners' (deficit) capital
   at December 31, 2001               75,000     $(6,241)     $ 3,618      $(2,623)

Distributions to partners                 --          (2)        (222)        (224)

Net loss for the six months
   ended June 30, 2002                    --          (7)         (58)         (65)

Partners' (deficit) capital
   at June 30, 2002                   75,000     $(6,250)     $ 3,338      $(2,912)

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

</TABLE>

<PAGE>

                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
                                   (Unaudited)
                                (in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                  Six Months Ended
                                                                        June 30,
                                                                  2002        2001
Cash flows from operating activities:
<S>                                                              <C>          <C>
  Net (loss) income                                              $ (65)       $ 178
  Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash
   provided by operating activities:
     Depreciation                                                   438          429
     Amortization of loan costs                                      30           25
     Change in accounts:
      Receivables and deposits                                        6          (13)
      Other assets                                                  (76)         (31)
      Accounts payable                                               34          (29)
      Tenant security deposit liabilities                            (9)          (3)
      Accrued property taxes                                       (123)         (91)
      Other liabilities                                             176          124
        Net cash provided by operating activities                   411          589

Cash flows from investing activities:
  Property improvements and replacements                           (106)        (147)
  Net deposits to restricted escrows                                (24)         (28)
        Net cash used in investing activities                      (130)        (175)

Cash flows from financing activities:
  Distributions to partners                                        (224)        (463)
  Payments on mortgage notes payable                               (130)        (121)
        Net cash used in financing activities                      (354)        (584)

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents                           (73)        (170)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period                    613          870
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period                       $ 540        $ 700

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
  Cash paid for interest                                         $ 582        $ 653

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

</TABLE>

<PAGE>

                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                  NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                                   (Unaudited)


Note A - Basis of Presentation

The  accompanying   unaudited   consolidated  financial  statements  of  Century
Properties Fund XVIII (the  "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted  accounting  principles for interim financial
information  and  with the  instructions  to Form  10-QSB  and  Item  310(b)  of
Regulation  S-B.  Accordingly,  they do not include all of the  information  and
footnotes  required by generally  accepted  accounting  principles  for complete
financial  statements.  The Partnership's  general partner is Fox Partners.  The
general partners of Fox Partners are Fox Capital Management  Corporation ("FCMC"
or the  "Managing  General  Partner"),  Fox  Realty  Investors  ("FRI")  and Fox
Partners 82. In the opinion of the Managing  General  Partner,  all  adjustments
(consisting  of  normal  recurring  accruals)  considered  necessary  for a fair
presentation  have been included.  Operating results for the three and six month
periods ended June 30, 2002 are not  necessarily  indicative of the results that
may be expected  for the fiscal  year  ending  December  31,  2002.  For further
information,  refer  to the  consolidated  financial  statements  and  footnotes
thereto included in the Partnership's  Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year
ended December 31, 2001. The Managing  General Partner and the managing  general
partner of FRI are affiliates of Apartment  Investment  and  Management  Company
("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.

Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties

The  Partnership  has no employees  and is  dependent  on the  Managing  General
Partner  and  its  affiliates  for  the  management  and  administration  of all
Partnership  activities.  The Partnership Agreement provides for (i) 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 are entitled to receive 5% of gross
receipts  from  both  of the  Registrant's  properties  for  providing  property
management  services.  The  Registrant  paid  to such  affiliates  approximately
$129,000  and  $133,000  for the six  months  ended  June  30,  2002  and  2001,
respectively, which is included in operating expenses.

An  affiliate  of  the  Managing  General  Partner  received   reimbursement  of
accountable  administrative  expenses  amounting  to  approximately  $89,000 and
$118,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, which is
included in general and administrative expenses.

An  affiliate  of  the  Managing  General  Partner  has  made  available  to the
Partnership  a  credit  line  of  up to  $150,000  per  property  owned  by  the
Partnership. At the present time, the Partnership has no outstanding amounts due
under this line of credit.

Beginning in 2001, the  Partnership  began insuring its properties 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 and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its properties above the
AIMCO  limits  through  insurance  policies  obtained  by  AIMCO  from  insurers
unaffiliated with the Managing General Partner. During the six months ended June
30,  2002 and 2001,  the  Partnership  was  charged by AIMCO and its  affiliates
approximately $60,000 and $49,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees
associated with policy claims administration.

Note C - 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
purports  to  assert  claims  on  behalf  of a class  of  limited  partners  and
derivatively  on behalf  of a number  of  limited  partnerships  (including  the
Partnership)  which 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 which 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  seek  monetary
damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership.
On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking  dismissal
of the action.  In lieu of responding  to the motion,  the  plaintiffs  filed an
amended  complaint.  The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended
complaint which were heard February 1999.

Pending the ruling on such  demurrers,  settlement  negotiations  commenced.  On
November 2, 1999,  the parties  executed and filed a Stipulation  of Settlement,
settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all
limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of
the  settlement  was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court,  at which time
the Court set a final  approval  hearing for  December  10,  1999.  Prior to the
December  10,  1999  hearing,  the  Court  received  various  objections  to the
settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon
the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement.  On
December 14, 1999, the Managing  General  Partner and its affiliates  terminated
the  proposed  settlement.  In  February  2000,  counsel  for some of the  named
plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who
negotiated  the  settlement.  On June  27,  2000,  the  Court  entered  an order
disqualifying  them  from the case and an  appeal  was  taken  from the order on
October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court  appointed the law firm of Lieff
Cabraser  Heimann & Bernstein  LLP as new lead  counsel for  plaintiffs  and the
putative class.  Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001.
On March 2, 2001,  the  Managing  General  Partner  and its  affiliates  filed a
demurrer to the third amended  complaint.  On May 14, 2001,  the Court heard the
demurrer to the third amended  complaint.  On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an
order  sustaining  defendants'  demurrer on certain  grounds.  On July 20, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order
granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001,
Plaintiffs  filed a fourth amended class and  derivative  action  complaint.  On
September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration.  On
October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated  defendants filed a
demurrer to the fourth amended complaint,  which was heard on December 11, 2001.
On February 2, 2002,  the Court served its order  granting in part the demurrer.
The  Court has  dismissed  without  leave to amend  certain  of the  plaintiffs'
claims.  On February 11, 2002,  plaintiffs  filed a motion  seeking to certify a
putative  class  comprised of all  non-affiliated  persons who own or have owned
units  in  the  partnerships.   The  Managing  General  Partner  and  affiliated
defendants  oppose the motion.  On April 29,  2002,  the Court held a hearing on
plaintiffs' motion for class  certification and took the matter under submission
after further  briefing,  as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties.
On July 10, 2002,  the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of
January 13, 2003 (as well as the  pre-trial  and  discovery  cut-off  dates) and
stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can
have an opportunity to discuss settlement.

During the third  quarter of 2001, a complaint  (the "Heller  action") was filed
against  the same  defendants  that are named in the  Nuanes  action,  captioned
Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed
a first amended  complaint.  The first amended complaint in the Heller action is
brought as a purported  derivative  action,  and asserts  claims for among other
things  breach  of  fiduciary  duty;  unfair  competition;   conversion,  unjust
enrichment;  and judicial  dissolution.  Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a
motion to  consolidate  the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that
the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were
dismissed  without  leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated
July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing  General  Partner and affiliated
defendants  moved to strike the first  amended  complaint  in its  entirety  for
violating  the Court's July 10, 2001 order  granting in part and denying in part
defendants'  demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively,  to strike certain
portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations.  Other defendants
in the action  demurred to the fourth  amended  complaint,  and,  alternatively,
moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on
the motions  and took the matters  under  submission.  On February 4, 2002,  the
Court  served  notice of its order  granting  defendants'  motion to strike  the
Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action.
On March 27, 2002,  the plaintiffs  filed a notice  appealing the order striking
the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.

The Managing  General Partner does not anticipate that any costs,  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 that
is not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business.
<PAGE>

ITEM 2.     MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION

The  matters  discussed  in this Form  10-QSB  contain  certain  forward-looking
statements  and  involve  risks and  uncertainties  (including  changing  market
conditions,   competitive  and  regulatory   matters,   etc.)  detailed  in  the
disclosures  contained  in this  Form  10-QSB  and the  other  filings  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission made by the Registrant from time to time. The
discussion of the  Registrant's  business and results of  operations,  including
forward-looking  statements  pertaining  to such  matters,  does not  take  into
account the effects of any changes to the  Registrant's  business and results of
operation.  Accordingly,  actual  results  could  differ  materially  from those
projected in the forward-looking  statements as a result of a number of factors,
including those identified herein.

The Partnership's  investment properties consist of two apartment complexes. The
following  table sets forth the average  occupancy of the properties for the six
months ended June 30, 2002 and 2001.

                                                   Average Occupancy
      Property                                      2002       2001

      Oak Run Apartments                            83%        91%
         Dallas, Texas
      Overlook Point Apartments                     95%        95%
         Salt Lake City, Utah

Occupancy at Oak Run Apartments  has decreased due to a softening  market and an
increase in competition from newer properties in the local market. Management is
implementing  new marketing  strategies and has lowered rental rates to make Oak
Run Apartments more competitive within its market.

Results of Operations

The Partnership had a net loss of approximately $65,000 for the six months ended
June 30, 2002 as compared with net income of approximately $178,000 for the same
period in 2001. The Partnership had a net loss of approximately  $96,000 for the
three  months  ended June 30, 2002 as  compared  to net income of  approximately
$50,000  for the same  period in 2001.  The  decrease in net income for both the
three and six month  periods  ended June 30,  2002 is due to a decrease in total
revenues and an increase in total  expenses.  The decrease in total  revenues is
due to a decrease  in rental  income  partially  offset by an  increase in other
income.  The  decrease  in rental  income is  primarily  due to the  decrease in
occupancy  at Oak Run  Apartments  and a decrease in rental rates at both of the
Partnership's  properties.  Other income increased primarily due to increases in
corporate  unit income at Overlook Point  Apartments,  laundry income at Oak Run
Apartments and an increase in tenant reimbursements at both of the Partnership's
properties.

Total expenses increased for both the three and six month periods ended June 30,
2002 due to an increase in operating  expense offset by decreases in general and
administrative  and property tax expenses.  Operating  expense  increased due to
increases in  property,  insurance,  administrative  and  maintenance  expenses.
Property expense increased  primarily due to an increase in salaries and related
employee  expenses at Oak Run Apartments and corporate unit expenses at Overlook
Point  Apartments.  Insurance  expense  increased  due to  increases  in  hazard
insurance  premiums  at both  of the  Partnership's  properties.  Administrative
expenses  increased  as a result of an  increase  in legal  expenses  related to
tenant/employee  issues occurring in the normal course of business.  Maintenance
expense  increased due to increases in interior painting and cleaning at Oak Run
Apartments. Property tax expense decreased as a result of the expense recognized
for the first six months of 2001,  which was based on  estimates of the 2001 tax
liability,  being  overstated.  The expense for 2001 was adjusted upon receiving
the  actual  bills in the third  quarter of 2001 and the 2002  expense  has been
based on a slight increase over the actual 2001 liability.

General and  administrative  expense  decreased due to a decrease in the cost of
services  provided by the Managing General Partner and its affiliates as 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.

As part of the ongoing  business plan of the  Partnership,  the Managing General
Partner monitors the rental market  environment of its investment  properties 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,  due to changing  market
conditions,  which  can  result  in the use of  rental  concessions  and  rental
reductions to offset softening market conditions, there is no guarantee that the
Managing General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At June 30, 2002, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$540,000 as compared to  approximately  $700,000 at June 30, 2001. Cash and cash
equivalents  decreased  approximately  $73,000  since  December  31, 2001 due to
approximately  $354,000  and $130,000 of cash used in  financing  and  investing
activities,  respectively,  partially offset by  approximately  $411,000 of cash
provided by operating activities. Cash used in financing activities consisted of
distributions to the partners,  and to a lesser extent,  principal payments made
on  the  mortgages  encumbering  the  Partnership's  properties.  Cash  used  in
investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements and, to
a lesser extent,  net deposits to restricted  escrows maintained by the mortgage
lender. The Partnership invests its working capital reserves in interest bearing
accounts.

An  affiliate  of  the  Managing  General  Partner  has  made  available  to the
Partnership  a  credit  line  of  up to  $150,000  per  property  owned  by  the
Partnership. At the present time, the Partnership has no outstanding amounts due
under this line of credit.  Other  than cash and cash  equivalents,  the line of
credit is the Partnership's only unused source of liquidity.

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  properties  to  adequately  maintain the physical
assets and other  operating  needs of the Registrant and to comply with Federal,
state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. Capital improvements planned
for each of the Registrant's properties are detailed below.

Oak Run  Apartments:  For  2002,  the  Partnership  has  budgeted  approximately
$132,000 for capital  improvements  at Oak Run  Apartments  consisting  of floor
covering  replacements,  interior decorations and air conditioning units. During
the six months ended June 30, 2002 the property spent  approximately  $81,000 in
capital  expenditures  consisting  primarily  of  floor  covering  replacements,
structural improvements, and water heater replacements.  These improvements were
funded from operations and replacement reserves.  Additional improvements may be
considered and will depend on the physical  condition of the property as well as
replacement reserves and anticipated cash flow generated by the property.

Overlook Point Apartments:  For 2002, the Partnership has budgeted approximately
$100,000 for capital  improvements  at Overlook Point  Apartments  consisting of
appliance and floor  covering  replacements,  major  landscaping,  swimming pool
improvements  and computer  upgrades.  During the six months ended June 30, 2002
the property  spent  approximately  $25,000 in capital  expenditures  consisting
primarily of appliance and floor covering replacements.  These improvements were
funded from  operations.  Additional  improvements  may be  considered  and will
depend on the physical  condition of the  property as well as  anticipated  cash
flow generated by the property.

The additional capital  expenditures planned will be incurred only to the extent
of cash available from operations and Partnership  reserves.  To the extent that
such budgeted capital improvements are completed, the Registrant's distributable
cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term.

The  Registrant's  current assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term
needs  (exclusive  of capital  improvements)  of the  Registrant.  The  mortgage
indebtedness  of  approximately  $18,635,000 is amortized over thirty years with
balloon payments of approximately  $9,728,000 and $8,127,000 due in October 2004
and September 2005,  respectively.  The Managing General Partner will attempt to
refinance such  indebtedness  and/or sell the properties  prior to such maturity
dates. If the properties  cannot be refinanced or sold for a sufficient  amount,
the Partnership may risk losing such properties through foreclosure.

The Partnership  distributed  the following  amounts during the six months ended
June 30, 2002 and 2001 (in thousands, except per unit data):
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                       Six Months       Per Limited       Six Months     Per Limited
                          Ended         Partnership         Ended        Partnership
                      June 30, 2002         Unit        June 30, 2001        Unit
Sale and
<S>           <C>         <C>              <C>              <C>             <C>
  Refinancing (1)         $ 224            $ 2.96           $ 463           $ 6.11
</TABLE>

(1)   From prior cumulative undistributed sale and refinancing proceeds.

Future cash  distributions  will depend on the levels of net cash generated from
operations,   the  availability  of  cash  reserves,  and  the  timing  of  debt
maturities,  refinancings and/or property sales. The Registrant's cash available
for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis.  There can be no assurance that
the Registrant will generate  sufficient  funds from  operations  after required
capital  improvements  expenditures to permit any  distributions to its partners
during the remainder of 2002 or subsequent periods.

Other

In addition to its indirect  ownership of the general  partner  interests in the
Partnership,  AIMCO and its affiliates owned 41,630.50 limited partnership units
(the "Units") in the Partnership  representing  55.51% of the total  outstanding
Units at June 30, 2002. 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 of limited partnership  interest in the
Partnership  in  exchange  for cash or a  combination  of cash and  units in the
operating  partnership  of AIMCO  either  through  private  purchases  or tender
offers. Under the Partnership  Agreement,  unitholders holding a majority of the
Units are  entitled to take action with  respect to a variety of matters,  which
would  include  without   limitation,   voting  on  certain  amendments  to  the
Partnership  Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General  Partner.  As a
result of its ownership of 55.51% of the total outstanding  Units, AIMCO is in a
position to  influence  all voting  decisions  with  respect to the  Registrant.
Insignia  Properties  L.P.  ("IPLP"),  an  affiliate  of AIMCO and the  Managing
General  Partner  indirectly,  had  agreed  for  the  benefit  of  non-tendering
unitholders,  that it would vote the 21,513 Units  acquired in January 1996: (i)
against any increase in compensation  payable to the Managing General Partner or
to affiliates;  and (ii) on all other matters submitted by it or its affiliates,
in proportion  to the votes cast by  non-tendering  unitholders.  Except for the
foregoing,  no other limitations are imposed on IPLP's,  AIMCO's or any of their
affiliates  right to vote each Unit  acquired.  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 Partnerships 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

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States which require the Partnership
to  make  estimates  and  assumptions.  The  Partnership  believes  that  of its
significant  accounting  policies,  the following may involve a higher degree of
judgment and complexity.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Investment  properties  are  recorded at cost,  less  accumulated  depreciation,
unless  considered  impaired.  If  events  or  circumstances  indicate  that the
carrying  amount of a property may be  impaired,  the  Partnership  will make an
assessment of its  recoverability  by estimating  the  undiscounted  future cash
flows,  excluding  interest  charges,  of the property.  If the carrying  amount
exceeds the aggregate  future cash flows,  the  Partnership  would  recognize an
impairment  loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the
property.

Real  property  investments  are  subject  to varying  degrees of risk.  Several
factors  may  adversely  affect  the  economic  performance  and  value  of  the
Partnership's  investment  properties.  These  factors  include  changes  in the
national,  regional and local economic  climate;  local  conditions,  such as an
oversupply  of  multifamily   properties;   competition   from  other  available
multifamily  property  owners and changes in market  rental  rates.  Any adverse
changes in these factors could cause an impairment in the Partnership's assets.

Revenue Recognition

The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
Rental income  attributable to leases is recognized monthly as it is earned. The
Partnership will offer rental concessions during  particularly slow months or in
response  to  heavy  competition  from  other  similar  complexes  in the  area.
Concessions are charged to income as incurred.



<PAGE>



                           PART II - OTHER INFORMATION



ITEM 1.     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
purports  to  assert  claims  on  behalf  of a class  of  limited  partners  and
derivatively  on behalf  of a number  of  limited  partnerships  (including  the
Partnership)  which 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 which 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  seek  monetary
damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership.
On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking  dismissal
of the action.  In lieu of responding  to the motion,  the  plaintiffs  filed an
amended  complaint.  The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended
complaint which were heard February 1999.

Pending the ruling on such  demurrers,  settlement  negotiations  commenced.  On
November 2, 1999,  the parties  executed and filed a Stipulation  of Settlement,
settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all
limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of
the  settlement  was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court,  at which time
the Court set a final  approval  hearing for  December  10,  1999.  Prior to the
December  10,  1999  hearing,  the  Court  received  various  objections  to the
settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon
the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement.  On
December 14, 1999, the Managing  General  Partner and its affiliates  terminated
the  proposed  settlement.  In  February  2000,  counsel  for some of the  named
plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who
negotiated  the  settlement.  On June  27,  2000,  the  Court  entered  an order
disqualifying  them  from the case and an  appeal  was  taken  from the order on
October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court  appointed the law firm of Lieff
Cabraser  Heimann & Bernstein  LLP as new lead  counsel for  plaintiffs  and the
putative class.  Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001.
On March 2, 2001,  the  Managing  General  Partner  and its  affiliates  filed a
demurrer to the third amended  complaint.  On May 14, 2001,  the Court heard the
demurrer to the third amended  complaint.  On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an
order  sustaining  defendants'  demurrer on certain  grounds.  On July 20, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order
granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001,
Plaintiffs  filed a fourth amended class and  derivative  action  complaint.  On
September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration.  On
October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated  defendants filed a
demurrer to the fourth amended complaint,  which was heard on December 11, 2001.
On February 2, 2002,  the Court served its order  granting in part the demurrer.
The  Court has  dismissed  without  leave to amend  certain  of the  plaintiffs'
claims.  On February 11, 2002,  plaintiffs  filed a motion  seeking to certify a
putative  class  comprised of all  non-affiliated  persons who own or have owned
units  in  the  partnerships.   The  Managing  General  Partner  and  affiliated
defendants  oppose the motion.  On April 29,  2002,  the Court held a hearing on
plaintiffs' motion for class  certification and took the matter under submission
after further  briefing,  as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties.
On July 10, 2002,  the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of
January 13, 2003 (as well as the  pre-trial  and  discovery  cut-off  dates) and
stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can
have an opportunity to discuss settlement.

During the third  quarter of 2001, a complaint  (the "Heller  action") was filed
against  the same  defendants  that are named in the  Nuanes  action,  captioned
Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed
a first amended  complaint.  The first amended complaint in the Heller action is
brought as a purported  derivative  action,  and asserts  claims for among other
things  breach  of  fiduciary  duty;  unfair  competition;   conversion,  unjust
enrichment;  and judicial  dissolution.  Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a
motion to  consolidate  the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that
the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were
dismissed  without  leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated
July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing  General  Partner and affiliated
defendants  moved to strike the first  amended  complaint  in its  entirety  for
violating  the Court's July 10, 2001 order  granting in part and denying in part
defendants'  demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively,  to strike certain
portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations.  Other defendants
in the action  demurred to the fourth  amended  complaint,  and,  alternatively,
moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on
the motions  and took the matters  under  submission.  On February 4, 2002,  the
Court  served  notice of its order  granting  defendants'  motion to strike  the
Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action.
On March 27, 2002,  the plaintiffs  filed a notice  appealing the order striking
the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.

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

ITEM 6.     EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

            a)    Exhibits:

                  Exhibit 3.4, Agreement of Limited Partnership, incorporated by
                  reference  to Exhibit A to the  Prospectus  of the  Registrant
                  dated  November 5, 1982,  as revised  December 30,  1982,  and
                  after supplemented, contained in the Registrant's Registration
                  Statement on Form S-11 (Reg. No. 2-78495).

                  Exhibit 99,  Certification  of Chief  Executive  Officer and
                  Chief Financial Officer.

            b)    Reports on Form 8-K:

                  None filed during the quarter ended June 30, 2002.




<PAGE>



                                   SIGNATURES



In accordance with the  requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant  caused
this  report to be  signed on its  behalf  by the  undersigned,  thereunto  duly
authorized.



                                    CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII


                                    By:   FOX PARTNERS
                                          General Partner


                                    By:   FOX CAPITAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
                                          Managing General Partner


                                    By:   /s/Patrick J. Foye
                                          Patrick J. Foye
                                          Executive Vice President


                                    By:   /s/Thomas C. Novosel
                                          Thomas C. Novosel
                                          Senior Vice President
                                          and Chief Accounting Officer


                                    Date: August 14, 2002


<PAGE>


Exhibit 99


                          Certification of CEO and CFO
                     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                            As Adopted Pursuant to
                Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In  connection  with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of Century  Properties
Fund XVIII (the "Partnership"),  for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  Patrick J. Foye, as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer of
the Partnership, and Paul J. McAuliffe, as the equivalent of the Chief Financial
Officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that, to the best of his knowledge:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Partnership.


                                    /s/  Patrick J. Foye
                                    Name:  Patrick J. Foye
                                    Date:  August 14, 2002


                                    /s/  Paul J. McAuliffe
                                    Name:  Paul J. McAuliffe
                                    Date:  August 14, 2002


This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the  Partnership for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.