UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-KSB



[X]

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



For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006



[ ]

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



For the transition period  _________to _________



Commission file number 0-13465



NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I

(Name of small business issuer in its charter)



|                                |                     
|------------------------------- | --------------------
|Maryland                        | 52-1358879          
|(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)



(864) 239-1000

Issuer's telephone number



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



None



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



Limited Partnership Interests

(Title of class)



Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934 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.   $7,000



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, 2006.  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



The matters discussed in this report contain certain forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements regarding future financial performance and the effect of government regulations. Actual results may differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a variety of risks and factors including, without limitation: national and local economic conditions; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Registrant and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the Registrant operates; financing risks, including the risk that cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest; real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and the general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such markets; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting and defending claims and any adverse outcomes, and possible environmental liabilities. Readers should carefully review the Registrant's financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the risk factors described in the documents the Registrant files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



PART I



Item 1.

Description of Business



National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I (A Maryland Limited Partnership) (the "Partnership" or the "Registrant") was formed under the Maryland Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act as of October 21, 1983. On May 25, 1984, the Partnership commenced offering 20,000 limited partnership interests, at a price of $1,000 per interest, through a public offering registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Offering"). The Offering was terminated on November 29, 1984, with subscriptions for 11,519 limited partnership interests.



The National Housing Partnership, a District of Columbia limited partnership ("NHP" or the "General Partner"), is the general partner of the Registrant. The General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company (AIMCO), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.



The Partnership's business is to hold a limited partnership interest in one limited partnership ("Local Limited Partnership"), which owns and operates a multi-family rental housing property ("Property") which receives one or more forms of assistance from the Federal Government at December 31, 2006.  The Partnership holds an interest in one additional Local Limited Partnership which sold its investment property during the year ended December 31, 2006. The Partnership held an interest in one Local Limited Partnership whose interest was foreclosed upon during the year ended December 31, 2005. The Partnership held interests in seven other Local Limited Partnerships, six of which sold their properties and one whose interest was foreclosed upon prior to 2005.



The Partnership acquired interests in the Local Limited Partnerships from sellers who originally developed the Property. In each instance, NHP is the general partner of the Local Limited Partnership and the Partnership is the principal limited partner. As a limited partner, the Partnership's liability for obligations of the Local Limited Partnerships is limited to its investment, and the Partnership does not exercise control over the activities of the Local Limited Partnerships in accordance with the partnership agreements. See Item 6. Managements Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation for information relating to the Partnerships rights and obligations to make additional contributions or loans to the Local Limited Partnerships.









The Partnership's investment objectives are to:



(1)

preserve and protect Partnership capital;



(2)

provide current tax benefits to Limited Partners to the extent permitted by law, including, but not limited to, deductions that Limited Partners may use to offset otherwise taxable income from other sources;



(3)

provide capital appreciation through increase in value of the Partnership's investments, subject to considerations of capital preservation and tax planning; and



(4)

provide potential cash distributions from sales or refinancings of the Partnership's investments and, on a limited basis, from operations.



The Partnership does not have any employees. Services are performed for the Partnership by the General Partner and agents retained by it.



The following is a schedule of the remaining Property owned by the Local Limited Partnerships in which the Partnership is a limited partner:



SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY OWNED BY LOCAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS

IN WHICH NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I HAS AN INVESTMENT



|                        |           |            |               |                     |     
|----------------------- | --------- | ---------- | ------------- | ------------------- | ----
|                        |           |            | Units         |                    
|                        |           | Financed,  | Authorized    | Occupancy          
|                        |           | Insured    | for Rental    | Percentage         
|                        |           | and        | Assistance    | for the Years Ended
|Property Name, Location | Number of | Subsidized | Under         | December 31,       
|and Partnership Name    | Units     | Under      | Section 8 (B) | 2006                | 2005
|                        |           |            |               |                     |     
|Talladega Downs         | 100       | (A)        | 100           | 100%                | 100%
|Talladega, Alabama      |           |            |               |                     |     
|(Hurbell IV Limited     |           |            |               |                     |     
|Partnership)            |           |            |               |                     |     



(A)

The mortgage is insured by the Federal Housing Administration under the provisions of Section 236 of the National Housing Act.



(B)

Section 8 of Title II of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.



On December 28, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership sold its investment property, San Jose Apartments, to an affiliate of the General Partner for a gross sale price of $4,500,000.  A portion of the net proceeds of approximately $3,572,000 was used to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. The Local Limited Partnership recognized a gain from the sale of approximately $1,267,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006.



Ownership Percentage



The following table details the Partnership's ownership percentage of Hurbell IV Limited Partnership and the cost of acquisition of such ownership. All interests are limited partner interests. Also included is the total mortgage encumbrance on the remaining property for the Local Limited Partnership as of December 31, 2006.



|            |                   |               |          |                      |  | 
|----------- | ----------------- | ------------- | -------- | -------------------- |  | 
|            | NHP Realty Fund I | Original Cost |          |                     
|            | Percentage        | of Ownership  | Mortgage | Note Payable and    
|Partnership | Interest          | Interest      | Note     | Accrued Interest (1)

|                |     |         |                |        |  | 
|--------------- | --- | ------- | -------------- | ------ |  | 
|                |     |         | (in thousands) |       
|                |     |         |                |       
|Hurbell IV L.P. | 99% | $   372 | $ 623          | $1,942



(1)

See "Item 6. Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation" for further details.



Although Hurbell IV Limited Partnership owns an apartment complex which must compete with other apartment complexes for tenants, government mortgage interest and rent subsidies make it possible to rent units to eligible tenants at below market rates. In general, this insulates the Property from market competition.



Regulation



General



Multifamily apartment properties are subject to various laws, ordinances and regulations, including regulations relating to recreational facilities such as swimming pools, activity centers and other common areas. Changes in laws increasing the potential liability for environmental conditions existing on properties or increasing the restrictions on discharges or other conditions, as well as changes in laws effecting development, construction and safety requirements, may result in significant unanticipated expenditures, which would adversely affect the Partnerships cash flow from operating activities. In addition, future enactment of rent control or rent stabilization laws or other laws regulating multi-family housing may reduce rental revenue or increase operating costs in particular markets.



Regulation of Affordable Housing



The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) has contracted with the subsidized rental project under Section 8 of Title II of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to make housing assistance payments to the Local Limited Partnership on behalf of qualified tenants. The term of the agreement is one year with one year renewal options.



In 1997 and again in 1999, Congress enacted new ways to determine rent levels for properties receiving HUDs rental assistance under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (Section 8") after the expiration of their original Section 8 contracts.   This legislation affects 100 units, or 100% of the units in which the Partnership had invested at December 31, 2006. On October 27, 1997, the President signed into law the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (the 1997 Housing Act).  Under the 1997 Housing Act, certain properties assisted under expiring Section 8 contracts and which have been receiving rents deemed to be above comparable market levels for unassisted properties, and financed with HUD-insured mortgage loans, will have, upon the renewal or extension of Section 8 contracts, rents marked to market.  This will be accomplished in various ways, the goal being to reduce Section 8 rents to comparable market levels, thereby reducing the federal Section 8 subsidy obligation, and (ideally) by simultaneously lowering, or eliminating, required debt service costs (and decreasing operating costs) as needed to ensure financial viability at the reduced rent levels.  The program also incorporates a requirement to perform any repair or rehabilitation deemed necessary by depositing funds to cover the first twelve month's work, and making sufficient monthly reserve deposits to ensure work required in succeeding years.  In 1999, Congress enacted legislation (the "1999 Housing Act") that expanded on and clarified the provisions of the 1997 Housing Act, including permitting properties whose Section 8 rents were below comparable market rents to increase their Section 8 rents to market.









The 1997 and 1999 Housing Acts (together, the Housing Acts) permit the retention of project based Section 8 contracts for most properties in rental markets with a limited supply of affordable housing or where the tenants are particularly vulnerable populations including the elderly, disabled or large families. In rental markets without a limited supply of affordable housing, the Housing Acts provide for phasing out project based subsidies, converting the assistance to tenant based assistance or vouchers.  Under a tenant based system, rental vouchers would be issued to qualified tenants who then could elect to reside at properties of their choice, including the property in which they currently reside. Voucher rent levels are established by local housing authorities under guidelines set by HUD.  While the Partnership does not expect the provisions of the Housing Acts to result in a significant number of tenants relocating from the property owned by the Local Limited Partnership, there can be no assurance that the legislation will not significantly and adversely affect the operations of the property of the Local Limited Partnership.



The following table indicates the year within which the Section 8 rent subsidy contract expires:



|     |           |                     |                 
|---- | --------- | ------------------- | ----------------
|     |           | Subsidized Units    | Subsidized Units
|     |           | Expiring as a       | Expiring as a   
|     | Number of | Percentage of Total | Percentage of   
|     | Units     | Subsidized Units    | Total Units     
|     |           |                     |                 
|2007 | 100       | 100%                | 100%            



All of the units (100 in total) receiving rent subsidies from Section 8 have their contracts expiring during the year ending December 31, 2007. The Housing Acts provide for several options under which a Local Limited Partnership may elect, as appropriate, to renew its Section 8 contracts: (1) marking rents up to the comparable market rent, if current rents are below market; (2) renewing rents at the current level, if the level does not exceed comparable market rents, and receiving an operating cost adjustment factor (an OCAF) or a budget based rent increase, as long as the rents do not exceed comparable market rents; (3) marking rents down to comparable market rents; (4) marking their rents down to an exception rent level, when comparable market rents would be too low to permit continued operation of the property under the Section 8 program, even with full debt restructuring; or (5) opting out of the Section 8 program.  For properties assisted by Section 8, but not subject to these provisions (including, but not limited to, properties which do not have underlying HUD insured mortgages, or which have been financed through certain state housing finance agency or bond-financed mortgage programs), rents will be continued at current levels, plus an OCAF or (in some instances) a budget based rent increase.  In addition, properties can opt out of the Section 8 program only if very strict notice requirements have been met, including a requirement that HUD, the tenants, and the local governing body, be given twelve months notice of a Local Limited Partnerships intention to opt out of the program prior to contract termination.



Each of the options requires an application to HUD, and, to a greater or lesser extent, the fulfillment of certain procedural submission requirements and financial requirements, which must be weighed in connection with the determination of which option to select.



The Section 8 requirements are separate from the requirements governing the underlying HUD-insured mortgage loans, and any other HUD, state or local requirements, all of which must be fulfilled, irrespective of the option chosen with regard to the continuation of Section 8 participation.



The Local Limited Partnership recorded approximately $505,000 of its revenues during 2006 from HUD under the terms of one or more HAP contracts which provide for rental assistance to the Local Limited Partnership on behalf of low-income tenants who meet certain qualifications. The Local Limited Partnership's future intentions and potential future changes in HUD regulations and the appropriations of related funds are uncertain, and accordingly, it is not possible to determine the ultimate impact on the operations of the Local Limited Partnership. The current contract(s) expire in May 2007.



HUD Approval and Enforcement



The property owned by the Local Limited Partnership is subject to regulations by HUD. Under its regulations, HUD reserves the right to approve the owner and the manager of HUD-insured and HUD-assisted properties, as well as their principals (e.g. general partners, stockholders with 10% or greater interest, officers and directors) in connection with the acquisition of a property, participation in HUD programs or the award of a management contract. This approval process is commonly referred to as 2530 Clearance. HUD monitors the performance of properties with HUD-insured mortgage loans. HUD also monitors compliance with applicable regulations, and takes performance and compliance into account in approving the acquisition of management of HUD-assisted properties.



Laws Benefiting Disabled Persons



Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, all places of public accommodations are required to meet certain Federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. These requirements became effective in 1992. A number of additional Federal, state and local laws may also require modifications to the Property, or restrict certain further renovations of the Property, with respect to access thereto by disabled persons. For example, the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 requires apartment properties first occupied after March 13, 1990 to be accessible to the handicapped. 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 General Partner believes that its property is substantially in compliance with present requirements, the Partnership may incur unanticipated expenses to comply with these laws.



Environment



Various Federal, state and local laws subject property owners or operators to liability for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous substances present on a property. Such laws often impart liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of the hazardous substances. The presence of, or failure to properly remediate, hazardous substances may adversely affect occupancy at contaminated apartment communities and the Partnerships ability to sell or borrow against contaminated properties. In addition to the costs associated with investigation and remediation actions brought by governmental agencies, the presence of hazardous wastes 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 or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances at the disposal or treatment facility.  Anyone who arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic 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 or operation of a property, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its property.



The General Partner believes that the property owned by the Partnership through the ownership of its limited partnership interest in a Local Limited Partnership is covered by adequate fire, flood and property insurance provided by reputable companies and with commercially reasonable deductibles and limits.



Item 2.

Property



See "Item 1. Description of Business" for the real estate owned by the Partnership through the ownership of its limited partnership interest in a Local Limited Partnership.



Item 3.

Legal Proceedings



The Partnership is unaware of any pending or outstanding litigation involving it or the underlying investment property of the Local Limited Partnership in which the Partnership invests that are not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business.



Item 4.

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders



On October 13, 2006, the Partnership filed a proxy statement soliciting consent from the holders of a majority of the limited partnership interests to amend the Partnership Agreement to permit sales of the Partnerships investment to an affiliate of the General Partner and to sell San Jose Apartments to an affiliate of the General Partner.



On December 1, 2006, the written consent expired pursuant to its terms.  Accordingly, the Partnership Agreement was amended and San Jose Apartments was sold to an affiliate of the General Partner for a gross sale price of approximately $4,500,000 on December 28, 2006.



PART II



Item 5.

Market for the Registrant's Partnership Interests and Related Partnership Matters



(a)

Interests in the Partnership were sold through a public offering. There is no established market for resale of Partnership interests nor is a market expected to develop in the near future. Accordingly, an investor may be unable to sell or otherwise dispose of his or her interest in the Partnership.



(b)

As of December 31, 2006, there were 924 registered holders of 11,040 limited partnership interests (in addition to 1133 Fifteenth Street Associates - See "Item 7. Financial Statements - Note 1"). In 2006 and 2005, the number of Limited Partnership Units decreased by 229 and 72 units, respectively, due to Limited Partners abandoning his or her units.  In abandoning his or her Limited Partnership Unit(s), a Limited Partner relinquishes all rights, title and interest in the Partnership as of the date of abandonment.



(c)

There were no distributions made to the partners during the years ended December 31, 2006 or 2005. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Partnership distributed approximately $117,000 to the limited partners (approximately $10.60 per limited partnership interest) from proceeds from the December 2006 sale of San Jose Apartments.



Item 6.

Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation



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



Liquidity and Capital Resources



The Property in which the Partnership has invested, through its investment in Hurbell IV Limited Partnership, receives one or more forms of assistance from the Federal Government. As a result, the Local Limited Partnership's ability to transfer funds to the Partnership in the form of cash distributions, loans or advances is generally restricted by these government assistance programs.  The General Partner monitors developments in the area of legal and regulatory compliance. For example, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 mandates or suggests additional compliance measures with regard to governance, disclosure, audit and other areas. In light of these changes, the Partnership expects that it will incur higher expenses related to compliance.



As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements included in Item 7. Financial Statements, Hurbell IV Limited Partnership has a note which was executed by the Local Limited Partnership with the seller as part of the acquisition of the property by the Local Limited Partnership.  The note is a nonrecourse note secured by both the Partnership's and NHP's interests in the Local Limited Partnership and is subordinated to the mortgage note on the property for as long as the mortgage note is insured by HUD.  Any payments due from project income are payable from surplus cash, as defined by the HUD Regulatory Agreement. Neither the Local Limited Partnership nor any partner thereof, present or future, assume any personal liability for the payment of the note. The note was due November 9, 1999.  Interest continues to be paid or accrued under the original terms of the agreement. The note is in default and the noteholder has not exercised its rights under the note, including the foreclosure on NHP's and the Partnership's interests in the Local Limited Partnership. There can be no assurance as to when, or if, such holder may seek to exercise such rights. Continuation of the Local Limited Partnership's operations in its present form is dependent on its ability to extend the maturity date of its note, or to repay or refinance the note.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments which might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.



On December 28, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership sold its investment property, San Jose Apartments, to an affiliate of the General Partner for a gross sale price of $4,500,000.  A portion of the net proceeds of approximately $3,572,000 was used to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the holder (AIMCO) of the San Jose note received payment of approximately $2,508,000 and the Partnership received a distribution of approximately $499,000 from the net sale proceeds. The Local Limited Partnership recognized a gain from the sale of approximately $1,267,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006.



On October 31, 2005, the Partnership received notice that the holders of the deferred acquisition notes in default at Gates Mills I Limited Partnership had exercised their rights under the notes and had foreclosed upon NHPs and the Partnerships interests in Gates Mills I Limited Partnership.  No gain or loss resulted from this transfer of interest, as the Partnership had no investment balance remaining in this Local Limited Partnership.



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Partnership made no advances for working capital purposes to any of the Local Limited Partnerships. There were no amounts owed to the Partnership for working capital advances to the Local Limited Partnerships at December 31, 2006.



During the year ended December 31, 2006, the General Partner advanced approximately $70,000 to San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership to fund expenses related to potential sale of the underlying property. During the year ended December 31, 2005, there were no advances made by the General Partner to the Local Limited Partnerships to fund partnership entity expenses, including expenses incurred relating to potential sales or refinancing under the Low Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA). There were no repayments of advances made to the General Partner by the Local Limited Partnerships during the years ended December 31, 2006 or 2005. At December 31, 2006, the balance owed to the General Partner by the Local Limited Partnerships was approximately $114,000, including accrued interest of approximately $15,000. Interest on these advances is charged at a rate equal to the Chase Manhattan Bank prime interest rate plus 2% or 10.25% at December 31, 2006.  Subsequent to December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership repaid advances of approximately $70,000 from proceeds from the sale of San Jose Apartments.



The Local Limited Partnerships accrued annual partnership administration fees payable to the General Partner of approximately $15,000 during each of the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. Payments of these fees are made to the General Partner from surplus cash available for distribution to partners pursuant to HUD regulations. No payments were made during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. The accumulated fees owed to NHP are approximately $129,000 at December 31, 2006. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership paid accrued fees of approximately $48,000 from proceeds from the sale of its property.



Net cash used in operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 was approximately $30,000, compared to net cash used in operations of approximately $25,000 for the year ended December 31, 2005. The increase in cash used in operations was a result of an increase in the payment of operating expenses.



Distributions received in excess of investment in the Local Limited Partnerships represent the Partnership's proportionate share of the excess cash available for distribution from the Local Limited Partnerships. As a result of the use of the equity method of accounting for the Partnership's investment in the Local Limited Partnership, investment carrying values for the remaining Local Limited Partnership has been reduced to zero. Cash distributions received are recorded in revenues as distributions received in excess of investment in Local Limited Partnerships for these partnerships. There were no distributions received from the Local Limited Partnership during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Partnership received approximately $499,000 from proceeds from the sale of San Jose Apartments. The receipt of distributions in future years is dependent on the operations of the remaining property of the Local Limited Partnership and the sale or refinancing of the remaining property.



The Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of less than $1,000 at December 31, 2006 as compared to cash and cash equivalents of approximately $1,000 at December 31, 2005. The ability of the Partnership to meet its on-going cash requirements, in excess of cash on hand at December 31, 2006, is dependent on distributions from recurring operations received from the Local Limited Partnerships and proceeds from the sale or refinancing of the remaining property.  The Partnerships only other form of liquidity is from General Partner loans. The General Partner will evaluate lending the Partnership additional funds as such funds are needed, but is in no way legally obligated to make such loans.



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the General Partner advanced approximately $29,000 and $26,000, respectively, to the Partnership to fund operating expenses. Interest is charged at the prime rate plus 2% (10.25% at December 31, 2006). Interest expense was approximately $5,000 and $2,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. At December 31, 2006, the total amount of advances and accrued interest is approximately $64,000. The advances and associated accrued interest were repaid to the General Partner subsequent to December 31, 2006.



As of December 31, 2006, the Partnership owed the General Partner approximately $240,000 for administrative and reporting services performed. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Partnership made a payment of approximately $236,000 from proceeds received from the sale of San Jose Apartments. There is no guarantee that Hurbell IV Limited Partnership will generate future surplus cash sufficient to distribute to the Partnership in amounts adequate to repay administrative and reporting fees owed; rather, the payment of future administrative and reporting fees will most likely result from the sale or refinancing of the underlying property of the Local Limited Partnership, rather than through recurring operations.



Results of Operations



At December 31, 2006, the Partnership holds an interest in one Local Limited Partnership, which operates one rental housing property.  The Partnership also holds an interest in one Local Limited Partnership which sold its investment property during the year ended December 31, 2006, as discussed above. Due to the use of the equity method of accounting as discussed in Note 1  Summary of Partnership Organization and Significant Accounting Policies to the financial statements included in Item 7. Financial Statements, to the extent the Partnership still has a carrying basis in a Local Limited Partnership, results of operations will be impacted by the Partnerships share of the profits or losses of the Local Limited Partnerships.  The remaining investment balance in the Local Limited Partnership has been reduced to zero.  As a result, the Partnerships operations are no longer being affected by its share of the Local Limited Partnerships operations.



The Partnership realized a net loss of approximately $81,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006, compared to a net loss of approximately $93,000 for the year ended December 31, 2005.  Net loss per unit of other limited partnership interest decreased to $7.01 from $8.02 for the units outstanding at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The decrease in net loss was primarily due to an increase in other income and a decrease in administrative and reporting fees, partially offset by an increase in other operating expenses.



The Partnership did not recognize approximately $22,000 of its allocated share of losses from one Local Limited Partnership for the year ended December 31, 2006, as the Partnership's net carrying basis in this partnership was reduced to zero in a prior year (see Note 2 to the Partnerships financial statements included in Item 7. Financial Statements). The Partnership did not recognize approximately $1,279,000 of its allocated share of profits from one Local Limited Partnership for the year ended December 31, 2006 because the Local Limited Partnership has cumulative losses. The Partnership did not recognize approximately $82,000 of its allocated share of losses from two Local Limited Partnerships for the year ended December 31, 2005, as the Partnership's net carrying basis in these partnerships was reduced to zero in a prior year.



Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements



The Partnership owns limited partnership interests in unconsolidated Local Limited Partnerships, in which the Partnerships ownership percentage is 99%. However, based on the provisions of the relevant partnership agreements, the Partnership, as a limited partner, does not have control or a contractual relationship with the Local Limited Partnerships that would require or allow for consolidation under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (see Note 1  Summary of Partnership Organization and Significant Accounting Policies of the financial statements in Item 7. Financial Statements).  There are no lines of credit, side agreements or any other derivative financial instruments between the Local Limited Partnerships and the Partnership.  Accordingly the Partnerships maximum risk of loss related to these unconsolidated Local Limited Partnerships is limited to the recorded investments in and receivables from the Local Limited Partnerships. See Note 2  Investments In and Advances to Local Limited Partnerships of the financial statements in Item 7. Financial Statements for additional information about our investments in unconsolidated Local Limited Partnerships.



FASB Interpretation No. 46



As of December 31, 2004, the Partnership adopted FASB Interpretation No. 46 Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (or FIN 46) and applied its requirements to all Local Limited Partnerships in which the Partnership held a variable interest.  FIN 46 addresses the consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities.  Generally, a variable interest entity, or VIE, is an entity with one or more of the following characteristics:  (a) the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about an entitys activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; or (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests and substantially all of the entitys activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights.  FIN 46 requires a VIE to be consolidated in the financial statements of the entity that is determined to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE.



Upon adoption of FIN 46, the Partnership determined that its three Local Limited Partnerships in which it held investments were not VIEs. During the year ended December 31, 2005, the Partnership reconsidered its initial determination of Local Limited Partnerships for VIE status. As a result, the Partnership determined it held variable interests in all three Local Limited Partnerships; however, the Partnership was not the primary beneficiary. During the year ended December 31, 2005, one Local Limited Partnership previously determined to be a VIE was lost by the Partnership to foreclosure.  During the year ended December 31, 2006, one Local Limited Partnership previously determined to be a VIE sold its investment property. The remaining Local Limited Partnership is directly engaged in the ownership and management of one apartment property with a total of 100 units. The Partnership is involved with this VIE as a non-controlling limited partner equity holder. The Partnerships maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with the unconsolidated VIE is limited to the Partnerships recorded investment in and receivables from this VIE, which were zero at December 31, 2006.  The Partnership may be subject to additional losses to the extent of any financial support that the Partnership voluntarily provides in the future.









Item 7.

Financial Statements



NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I



LIST OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



Balance Sheet - December 31, 2006



Statements of Operations - Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005



Statements of Changes in Partners' Deficit - Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005



Statements of Cash Flows - Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005



Notes to Financial Statements









Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





To The Partners of

National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I





We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I (the Partnership) as of December 31, 2006, and the related statements of operations, changes in partners' deficit, and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2006. 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 did not audit the financial statements of Hurbell IV Limited Partnership (investee of the Partnership) for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.  We did not audit the financial statements of San Jose Limited Partnership (investee of the Partnership) for the period ended December 27, 2006 and the year ended December 31, 2005. The financial statements of these investees have been audited by other auditors whose reports have been furnished to us; insofar as our opinion on the financial statements relates to amounts included for these investees, it is based solely on their reports.



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 and the reports of other auditors provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.



In our opinion, based upon our audits and the reports of other auditors, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I at December 31, 2006, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2006 in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.



As discussed in Note 6 to the financial statements, the due date of the Local Limited Partnerships note payable has expired, and therefore, the note is in default.  Continuation of the Partnerships operations in its present form is dependent on the Local Limited Partnerships ability to extend the maturity date of the note or repay or refinance the note.  These conditions raise substantial doubt about the Local Limited Partnerships and the Partnerships ability to continue as a going concern.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.







/s/Ernst & Young LLP

Indianapolis, Indiana

March 29, 2007









NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I





BALANCE SHEET



December 31, 2006



(in thousands, except unit data)













|                                                                   |          
|------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------
|ASSETS                                                             |          
|Cash and cash equivalents                                          | $      --
|Receivables from limited partners                                  | 6        
|Investments in and advances to Local Limited Partnerships (Note 2) | --       
|                                                                   | $6       
|LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' DEFICIT                                  |          
|                                                                   |          
|Liabilities                                                        |          
|Administrative and reporting fees payable to                       |          
|General Partner (Note 3)                                           | $     240
|Due to General Partner (Note 3)                                    | 64       
|Other accrued expenses                                             | 11       
|                                                                   | 315      
|Partners' deficit                                                  |          
|General Partner -- The National Housing Partnership (NHP)          | (92)     
|Original Limited Partner -- 1133 Fifteenth Street                  |          
|Associates                                                         | (97)     
|Other Limited Partners -- 11,040 investment units                  | (120)    
|                                                                   | (309)    
|                                                                   | $6       





See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements











NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I





STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS



(in thousands, except per unit data)



|                                                         |                          |         
|-------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | --------
|                                                         | Years Ended December 31,
|                                                         | 2006                     | 2005    
|Revenues                                                 |                          |         
|Other income                                             | $7                       | $--     
|                                                         |                          |         
|Expenses                                                 |                          |         
|Administrative and reporting fees to General             |                          |         
|Partner (Note 3)                                         | 43                       | 68      
|Interest expense (Note 3)                                | 5                        | 2       
|Other operating expenses                                 | 40                       | 23      
|                                                         | 88                       | 93      
|                                                         |                          |         
|Net loss (Note 4)                                        | $(81)                    | $(93)   
|                                                         |                          |         
|Allocation of net loss                                   |                          |         
|General Partner  NHP                                    | $    (1)                 | $    (1)
|Original Limited Partner - 1133 Fifteenth Street         |                          |         
|Associates                                               | (1)                      | (1)     
|Other Limited Partners                                   | (79)                     | (91)    
|                                                         | (81)                     | (93)    
|                                                         |                          |         
|Net loss per Other Limited Partnership interest (Note 7) | $(7.01)                  | $(8.02) 



See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements











NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I





STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT



(in thousands, except unit data)







|                               |              |            |          |         
|------------------------------ | ------------ | ---------- | -------- | --------
|                               | The National | 1133       |          |         
|                               | Housing      | Fifteenth  | Other    |         
|                               | Partnership  | Street     | Limited  |         
|                               | (NHP)        | Associates | Partners | Total   
|                               |              |            |          |         
|Partners (deficiency) capital |              |            |          |         
|at December 31, 2004           | $   (90)     | $  (95)    | $    50  | $  (135)
|                               |              |            |          |         
|Net loss for the year ended    |              |            |          |         
|December 31, 2005              | (1)          | (1)        | (91)     | (93)    
|                               |              |            |          |         
|Partners deficit at           |              |            |          |         
|December 31, 2005              | (91)         | (96)       | (41)     | (228)   
|                               |              |            |          |         
|Net loss for the year ended    |              |            |          |         
|December 31, 2006              | (1)          | (1)        | (79)     | (81)    
|                               |              |            |          |         
|Partners deficit at           |              |            |          |         
|December 31, 2006              | $(92)        | $(97)      | $(120)   | $(309)  
|                               |              |            |          |         
|Percentage interest at         |              |            |          |         
|December 31, 2006 and 2005     | 1%           | 1%         | 98%      | 100%    
|                               | (A)          | (B)        | (C)      |         



(A)

General Partner



(B)

Original Limited Partner



(C)

Consists of 11,040 investment units at December 31, 2006 and 11,269 investment units at December 31, 2005.   During 2006 and 2005, 229 and 72 units were abandoned, respectively (see Note 7).



See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements













NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I





STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS



(in thousands)



|                                                         |                          |        
|-------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | -------
|                                                         | Years Ended December 31,
|                                                         | 2006                     | 2005   
|Cash flows from operating activities:                    |                          |        
|Miscellaneous receipts                                   | $     7                  | $    --
|Payment of non resident withholding on behalf of limited |                          |        
|partners                                                 | (3)                      | (3)    
|Operating expenses paid                                  | (34)                     | (22)   
|Net cash used in operating activities                    | (30)                     | (25)   
|                                                         |                          |        
|Cash flows provided by financing activities:             |                          |        
|Advances from General Partner                            | 29                       | 26     
|                                                         |                          |        
|Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents     | (1)                      | 1      
|                                                         |                          |        
|Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year             | 1                        | --     
|                                                         |                          |        
|Cash and cash equivalents, end of year                   | $--                      | $1     
|                                                         |                          |        
|Reconciliation of net loss to net cash used in           |                          |        
|operating activities:                                    |                          |        
|                                                         |                          |        
|Net loss                                                 | $(81)                    | $(93)  
|Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used       |                          |        
|in operating activities:                                 |                          |        
|Increase in receivables from limited partners            | (3)                      | (3)    
|Increase in administrative and reporting fees payable    |                          |        
|to General Partner                                       | 43                       | 68     
|Increase in accrued interest due to General Partner      | 5                        | 2      
|Increase in accrued expenses                             | 6                        | 1      
|                                                         |                          |        
|Total adjustments                                        | 51                       | 68     
|Net cash used in operating activities                    | $(30)                    | $(25)  





See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements















NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I





NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS





1.

SUMMARY OF PARTNERSHIP ORGANIZATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES



Organization



National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I (the Partnership or the Registrant) is a limited partnership organized under the laws of the State of Maryland under the Maryland Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act on October 21, 1983. The Partnership was formed for the purpose of raising capital by offering and selling limited partnership interests and then investing in limited partnerships (Local Limited Partnerships), each of which owns and operates an existing rental housing project which is financed and/or operated with one or more forms of rental assistance or financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). On May 25, 1984, inception of operations, the Partnership began raising capital and acquiring interests in Local Limited Partnerships.



The General Partner (as defined below) was authorized to raise capital for the Partnership by offering and selling not more than 20,000 limited partnership interests at a price of $1,000 per interest. During 1984, the sale of interests was closed after the sale of 11,519 interests to limited partners.



During 1984, the Partnership acquired limited partnership interests of 99% in nine Local Limited Partnerships and 98% in one Local Limited Partnership. Each Local Limited Partnership was organized to acquire and operate an existing rental housing project. During the year ended December 31, 2005 the Partnerships interest in Gates Mills I Limited Partnership was foreclosed upon. The Partnership continues to own a 99% interest in two Local Limited Partnerships, one of which, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership, sold its investment property during the year ended December 31, 2006 (as discussed in Note 2).



The National Housing Partnership, a District of Columbia limited partnership (NHP or the General Partner) is the general partner of the Partnership. The General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company (AIMCO), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.



The Original Limited Partner of the Partnership is 1133 Fifteenth Street Associates, whose limited partners were key employees of National Corporation for Housing Partnerships, a District of Columbia limited partnership and the general partner of NHP (NCHP), at the time the Partnership was formed and whose general partner is NHP.



Significant Accounting Policies



The financial statements of the Partnership are prepared on the accrual basis of accounting. Direct costs of acquisition, including acquisition fees and reimbursable acquisition expenses paid to the General Partner, have been capitalized as investments in the Local Limited Partnerships. Other fees and expenditures of the Partnership are recognized as expenses in the period the related services are performed.



Investments in Local Limited Partnerships are accounted for using the equity method and thus are carried at cost plus the Partnerships share of the Local Limited Partnerships profits less the Partnership's share of the Local Limited Partnerships losses and distributions (see Note 2). An investment account is maintained for each of the limited partnership investments and losses are not recognized once an investment account has decreased to zero. Cash distributions are limited by the Regulatory Agreements between the Local Limited Partnerships and HUD to the extent of surplus cash as defined by HUD. Undistributed amounts are cumulative and may be distributed in subsequent years if future operations provide surplus cash in excess of current requirements. Distributions received from the Local Limited Partnerships in which the Partnership's investment account has decreased to zero are recorded as revenue in the year they are received. Advances to the Local Limited Partnerships are included with Investments in Local Limited Partnerships to the extent that the advances are not temporary advances of working capital.



The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.



For purposes of the Statements of Cash Flows, the Partnership considers all highly liquid debt instruments purchased with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents.



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 significant financial instruments, when it is practicable to estimate that value and excessive costs would not be incurred. The Partnership believes that the carrying value of other assets and liabilities reported on the balance sheet that require such disclosure approximates fair value.



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.



FASB Interpretation No. 46



As of December 31, 2004, the Partnership adopted FASB Interpretation No. 46 Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (or FIN 46) and applied its requirements to all Local Limited Partnerships in which the Partnership held a variable interest.  FIN 46 addresses the consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities.  Generally, a variable interest entity, or VIE, is an entity with one or more of the following characteristics:  (a) the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about an entitys activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; or (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests and substantially all of the entitys activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights.  FIN 46 requires a VIE to be consolidated in the financial statements of the entity that is determined to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE.



Upon adoption of FIN 46, the Partnership determined that its three Local Limited Partnerships in which it held investments were not VIEs. During the year ended December 31, 2005, the Partnership reconsidered its initial determination of Local Limited Partnerships for VIE status. As a result, the Partnership determined it held variable interests in all three Local Limited Partnerships; however, the Partnership was not the primary beneficiary. During the year ended December 31, 2005, one Local Limited Partnership previously determined to be a VIE was lost by the Partnership to foreclosure.  During the year ended December 31, 2006, one Local Limited Partnership previously determined to be a VIE sold its investment property. The remaining Local Limited Partnership is directly engaged in the ownership and management of one apartment property with a total of 100 units. The Partnership is involved with this VIE as a non-controlling limited partner equity holder. The Partnerships maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with the unconsolidated VIE is limited to the Partnerships recorded investment in and receivables from this VIE, which were zero at December 31, 2006.  The Partnership may be subject to additional losses to the extent of any financial support that the Partnership voluntarily provides in the future.



Reclassifications



Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2005 balances to conform to the 2006 presentation.



Recent Accounting Pronouncements



In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, which replaces APB Opinion No. 20 and SFAS No. 3, and changes the requirements for the accounting for and reporting of a change in accounting principle. This statement is effective for accounting changes and corrections of errors made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. The Partnership adopted SFAS No. 154 effective January 1, 2006. The adoption of SFAS No. 154 did not have a material effect on the Partnerships financial condition or results of operations.



In September 2006, the 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 in the market in which the reporting entity transacts. 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. SFAS No. 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Partnershipdoes not anticipate that the adoption of SFAS No. 157 will have a material effect on the Partnerships 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 has not yet determined whether it will elect the fair value option for any of its financial instruments.



2.

INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO LOCAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS



The Partnership owns 99% limited partnership interests in two Local Limited Partnerships: Hurbell IV Limited Partnership and San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership.



On December 28, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership sold its investment property, San Jose Apartments, to an affiliate of the General Partner for a gross sale price of $4,500,000.  A portion of the net proceeds of approximately $3,572,000 was used to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the holder (AIMCO) of the San Jose note received payment of approximately $2,508,000 and the Partnership received a distribution of approximately $499,000 from the net sale proceeds. The Local Limited Partnership recognized a gain from the sale of approximately $1,267,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006.



On October 31, 2005, the Partnership received notice that the holders of the deferred acquisition notes in default at Gates Mills I Limited Partnership had exercised their rights under the notes and had foreclosed upon NHPs and the Partnerships interests in Gates Mills I Limited Partnership.  No gain or loss resulted from this transfer of interest, as the Partnership had no investment balance remaining in this Local Limited Partnership.



Since the Partnership, as a limited partner, does not exercise control over the activities of the Local Limited Partnerships in accordance with the partnership agreements, these investments are accounted for using the equity method. Thus, the investments are carried at cost plus the Partnerships share of the Local Limited Partnerships profits less the Partnership's share of the Local Limited Partnerships losses and distributions. However, since the Partnership is not legally liable for the obligations of the Local Limited Partnerships, or is not

otherwise committed to provide additional support to them, it does not recognize losses once its investment in each of the individual Local Limited Partnerships, increased for its share of profits, reduced for its share of losses and cash distributions, reaches zero.



The Partnership did not recognize approximately $22,000 of its allocated share of losses from one Local Limited Partnership for the year ended December 31, 2006, as the Partnership's net carrying basis in this Local Limited Partnership was reduced to zero in a prior year.  The Partnership did not recognize approximately $1,279,000 of its allocated share of profits from one Local Limited Partnership for the year ended December 31, 2006, because the Local Limited Partnership has cumulative losses. The Partnership did not recognize approximately $82,000 of its allocated share of losses from two Local Limited Partnerships for the year ended December 31, 2005, as the Partnership's net carrying basis in these Local Limited Partnerships was reduced to zero in a prior year.  As of December 31, 2006, the Partnership has not recognized approximately $2,825,000 of its allocated share of cumulative losses from the two Local Limited Partnerships in which its investment is zero.



Advances made by the Partnership to the individual Local Limited Partnerships are considered part of the Partnerships investment in the Local Limited Partnerships. When advances are made, they are charged to operations as a loss on investment in the Local Limited Partnership using previously unrecognized cumulative losses. As discussed above, due to the cumulative losses incurred by the Local Limited Partnerships, the aggregate balance of investments in and advances to Local Limited Partnerships has been reduced to zero at December 31, 2006 for the Local Limited Partnerships. To the extent these advances are repaid by the Local Limited Partnerships in the future, the repayments will be credited as distributions and repayments received in excess of investment in Local Limited Partnerships. These advances are payable to the Partnership. Interest is calculated at the Chase Manhattan prime rate plus 2% or 10.25% at December 31, 2006. Payment of principal and interest is contingent upon the Local Limited Partnerships having available surplus cash, as defined by HUD regulations, from operations or from refinancing or sale of the Local Limited Partnership properties.



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Partnership made no advances to the Local Limited Partnerships. There were no amounts owed to the Partnership for working capital advances to the Local Limited Partnerships at December 31, 2006.



A summary of the balance sheet of the aforementioned Local Limited Partnership as of December 31, 2006, and the results of operations for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2006, are as follows (2005 amounts exclude the operations of Gates Mills I Limited Partnership, for which the Partnership lost its investment in 2005 and San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership, which sold its investment property during 2006):



|                                               |                  
|---------------------------------------------- | -----------------
|CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET                       
|OF THE LOCAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP              
|(in thousands)                                
|                                               | December 31, 2006
|Assets:                                        |                  
|Land                                           | $   101          
|Buildings and improvements, net of accumulated |                  
|depreciation of approximately $437             | 430              
|Other assets                                   | 293              
|                                               | $824             
|Liabilities and Partners' Deficit:             |                  
|Liabilities:                                   |                  
|Mortgage note payable                          | $   623          
|Note payable                                   | 648              
|Accrued interest on note payable               | 1,294            
|Other liabilities                              | 144              
|                                               | 2,709            
|Partners' Deficit:                             |                  
|National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I     | (1,817)          
|Other partners                                 | (68)             
|                                               | (1,885)          
|                                               | $824             













|                                   |                          |           
|---------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ----------
|CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|OF THE LOCAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP  
|(in thousands)                    
|                                   | Years Ended December 31,
|                                   | 2006                     | 2005      
|Revenues:                          |                          | (Restated)
|Rental income                      | $  544                   | $  514    
|Other income                       | 22                       | 18        
|                                   |                          |           
|Total revenues                     | 566                      | 532       
|                                   |                          |           
|Expenses:                          |                          |           
|Operating expenses                 | 495                      | 454       
|Financial expenses                 | 7                        | 6         
|Interest on note payable           | 59                       | 58        
|Depreciation                       | 27                       | 27        
|                                   |                          |           
|Total expenses                     | 588                      | 545       
|                                   |                          |           
|Loss from continuing operations    | $(22)                    | $(13)     



The financial statements of Hurbell IV Limited Partnership are prepared on the accrual basis of accounting. The Local Limited Partnership was formed during 1984 for the purpose of acquiring and operating a rental housing project originally organized under Section 236 of the National Housing Act. During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 the projects received a total of approximately $505,000 and $440,000, respectively of rental assistance from HUD.



In 1997 and again in 1999, Congress enacted new ways to determine rent levels for properties receiving HUDs rental assistance under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (Section 8") after the expiration of their original Section 8 contracts.  This legislation affects 100 units, or 100% of the units in which the Partnership has invested at December 31, 2006.  On October 27, 1997, the President signed into law the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (the 1997 Housing Act).  Under the 1997 Housing Act, certain properties assisted under expiring Section 8 contracts and which have been receiving rents deemed to be above comparable market levels for unassisted properties, and financed with HUD-insured mortgage loans, will have, upon the renewal or extension of Section 8 contracts, rents marked to market.  This will be accomplished in various ways, the goal being to reduce Section 8 rents to comparable market levels, thereby reducing the federal Section 8 subsidy obligation, and (ideally) by simultaneously lowering, or eliminating, required debt service costs (and decreasing operating costs) as needed to ensure financial viability at the reduced rent levels.  The program also incorporates a requirement to perform any repair or rehabilitation deemed necessary by depositing funds to cover the first twelve months work, and making sufficient monthly reserve deposits to ensure work required in succeeding years.  In 1999, Congress enacted legislation (the 1999 Housing Act) that expanded on and clarified the provisions of the 1997 Housing Act, including permitting properties whose Section 8 rents were below comparable market rents to increase their Section 8 rents to market.



The 1997 and 1999 Housing Acts (together, the Housing Acts) permit the retention of project based Section 8 contracts for most properties in rental markets with a limited supply of affordable housing or where the tenants are particularly vulnerable populations including the elderly, disabled or large families. In rental markets without a limited supply of affordable housing, the Housing Acts provide for phasing out project based subsidies, converting the assistance to tenant based assistance or vouchers.  Under a tenant based system, rental vouchers would be issued to qualified tenants who then could elect to reside at properties of their choice, including the property in which they currently reside. Voucher rent levels are established by local housing authorities under guidelines set by HUD.  While the Partnership does not expect the provisions of the Housing Acts to result in a significant number of tenants relocating from the property owned by the Local Limited Partnership, there can be no assurance that the legislation will not significantly and adversely affect the operations of the property of the Local Limited Partnership.



The following table indicates the year within which the Section 8 rent subsidy contract expires:



|     |           |                     |                 
|---- | --------- | ------------------- | ----------------
|     |           | Subsidized Units    | Subsidized Units
|     |           | Expiring as a       | Expiring as a   
|     | Number of | Percentage of Total | Percentage of   
|     | Units     | Subsidized Units    | Total Units     
|     |           |                     |                 
|2007 | 100       | 100%                | 100%            



All of the units (100 in total) receiving rent subsidies from Section 8 have their contracts expiring during the year ending December 31, 2007. The Housing Acts provide for several options under which a Local Limited Partnership may elect, as appropriate, to renew its Section 8 contracts: (1) marking rents up to the comparable market rent, if current rents are below market; (2) renewing rents at the current level, if the level does not exceed comparable market rents, and receiving an operating cost adjustment factor (an OCAF) or a budget based rent increase, as long as the rents do not exceed comparable market rents; (3) marking rents down to comparable market rents; (4) marking their rents down to an exception rent level, when comparable market rents would be too low to permit continued operation of the property under the Section 8 program, even with full debt restructuring; or (5) opting out of the Section 8 program.  For properties assisted by Section 8, but not subject to these provisions (including, but not limited to, properties which do not have underlying HUD insured mortgages, or which have been financed through certain state housing finance agency or bond-financed mortgage programs), rents will be continued at current levels, plus an OCAF or (in some instances) a budget based rent increase.  In addition, properties can opt out of the Section 8 program only if very strict notice requirements have been met, including a requirement that HUD, the tenants, and the local governing body, be given twelve months notice of a Local Limited Partnerships intention to opt out of the program prior to contract termination.



Each of the options requires an application to HUD, and, to a greater or lesser extent, the fulfillment of certain procedural submission requirements and financial requirements, which must be weighed in connection with the determination of which option to select.



The Section 8 requirements are separate from the requirements governing the underlying HUD-insured mortgage loans, and any other HUD, state or local requirements, all of which must be fulfilled, irrespective of the option chosen with regard to the continuation of Section 8 participation.



The Local Limited Partnership recorded approximately $505,000 of its revenues during 2006 from HUD under the terms of one or more HAP contracts which provide for rental assistance to the Local Limited Partnership on behalf of low-income tenants who meet certain qualifications. The Local Limited Partnership's future intentions and potential future changes in HUD regulations and the appropriations of related funds are uncertain, and accordingly, it is not possible to determine the ultimate impact on the operations of the Local Limited Partnership. The current contract(s) expire in May 2007.



Fixed assets are recorded on the basis of cost. Depreciation of the buildings and improvements and equipment is computed generally by the straight-line method over the estimated lives of the related assets.



The mortgage note payable is insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and collateralized by first deeds of trust on the rental property. The note bears interest at 7% per annum. However, FHA makes subsidy payments directly to the mortgage lender reducing the monthly principal and interest payments of the project owner to an effective interest rate of 1% over the forty-year term of the note. The liability of the Local Limited Partnership under the mortgage note is limited to the underlying value of the real estate collateral plus other amounts deposited with the lenders.



A note payable was executed by Hurbell IV Limited Partnership with the former owner as part of the acquisition of the property by the Local Limited Partnership.  This note bears simple interest at 9% per annum. The note is a nonrecourse note secured by a security interest in all partnership interests in the Local Limited Partnership and is subordinated to the mortgage note for as long as the mortgage note is insured by HUD. Any payments due from project income are payable from the Local Limited Partnerships surplus cash, as defined by the HUD Regulatory Agreement. The note may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time without penalty. Neither the Local Limited Partnership nor any partner thereof, present or future, assumes any personal liability for the payment of the note.



The note matured as follows:



|                               |          |                |                 
|------------------------------ | -------- | -------------- | ----------------
|Local Partnership              | Due Date | Note Amount    | Accrued Interest
|                               |          | (in thousands)
|Hurbell IV Limited Partnership | 11/9/99* | $648           | $1,294          



* Note is in default.



3.

TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATED PARTIES



The Partnership accrued administrative and reporting fees payable to the General Partner of approximately $43,000 and $68,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.  As of December 31, 2006, the Partnership owed approximately $240,000 to the General Partner for accrued administrative and reporting fees. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Partnership made a payment of approximately $236,000 from proceeds received from the sale of San Jose Apartments.



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the General Partner advanced approximately $29,000 and $26,000, respectively, to the Partnership to fund operating expenses.  Interest is charged at the prime rate plus 2% (10.25% at December 31, 2006).  Interest expense was approximately $5,000 and $2,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. At December 31, 2006, the total amount of advances and accrued interest is approximately $64,000 and is included in due to General Partner.  The advances and associated accrued interest were repaid to the General Partner subsequent to December 31, 2006.



During the year ended December 31, 2006, the General Partner advanced approximately $70,000 to San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership to fund expenses related to potential sale of the underlying property. During the year ended December 31, 2005, there were no advances made by the General Partner to the Local Limited Partnerships to fund partnership entity expenses, including expenses incurred relating to potential sales or refinancing under the Low Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA).



There were no repayments of advances made to the General Partner by the Local Limited Partnerships during the years ended December 31, 2006 or 2005. At December 31, 2006, the balance owed to the General Partner by the Local Limited Partnerships was approximately $114,000, including accrued interest of approximately $15,000. Interest on these advances is charged at a rate equal to the Chase Manhattan Bank prime interest rate plus 2% or 10.25% at December 31, 2006.  Subsequent to December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership repaid advances of approximately $70,000 from proceeds from the sale of San Jose Apartments.



The Local Limited Partnerships accrued annual partnership administration fees payable to the General Partner of approximately $15,000 during each of the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. Payments of these fees are made to the General Partner from surplus cash available for distribution to partners pursuant to HUD regulations. No payments were made during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. The accumulated fees owed to NHP are approximately $129,000 at December 31, 2006. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership paid accrued fees of approximately $48,000 from proceeds from the sale of its property.



An affiliate of the General Partner, NHP Management Company (NHPMC) was the project management agent for the project operated by San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. NHPMC and other affiliates of NCHP earned approximately $115,000 and $165,000 from San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership for management fees provided to San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.  During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, one Local Limited Partnership operated by an affiliate of the General Partner was charged construction management services provided by AIMCO and its affiliates. This reimbursement is payable from surplus cash.  This reimbursement of approximately $6,000 and $3,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, was capitalized as part of fixed assets for the respective Local Limited Partnership.



Personnel working at the project sites, which are managed by NHPMC, are employees of NHPMC. The projects reimburse NHPMC for the actual salaries and related benefits of such employees. Total reimbursements earned for salaries and benefits for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 were approximately $180,000 and $186,000, respectively. Additionally, approximately $15,000 was paid to an affiliate for accounting services for each of the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the General Partner was entitled to reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses, including interest, of approximately $60,000 and $57,000, respectively, from San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership.



San Jose Apartments Limited 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. San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership insures its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the General Partner. During the year ended December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $46,000 for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration.



4.

INCOME TAXES



The Partnership is not taxed on its income. The partners are taxed in their individual capacities based upon their distributive share of the Partnership's taxable income or loss and are allowed the benefits to be derived from off-setting their distributive share of the tax losses against taxable income from other sources subject to passive loss limitations. The taxable income or loss differs from amounts included in the statements of operations because different methods are used in determining the losses of the Local Limited Partnerships as discussed below. The tax loss is allocated to the partner groups in accordance with Section 704(b) of the Internal Revenue Code and therefore is not necessarily proportionate to the interest percentage owned.



A reconciliation follows:



|                                                  |                          |        
|------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | -------
|                                                  | Years Ended December 31,
|                                                  | 2006                     | 2005   
|                                                  | (in thousands)          
|Net loss per financial statements                 | $  (81)                  | $  (93)
|Gain on foreclosure of local partnership property | --                       | 5,937  
|Other                                             | 48                       | 69     
|Partnership's share of local limited              |                          |        
|partnerships income                              | 1,426                    | 326    
|Income per tax return                             | $1,393                   | $6,239 



The following is a reconciliation between the Partnerships reported amounts and the Federal tax basis of net assets and liabilities:



|                               |                  
|------------------------------ | -----------------
|                               | December 31, 2006
|                               | (in thousands)   
|Net liabilities as reported    | $  (309)         
|Add (deduct):                  |                  
|Investment in Partnerships     | (49)             
|Other                          | 449              
|Net assets  Federal tax basis | $91              



5.

ALLOCATION OF RESULTS OF OPERATIONS, CASH DISTRIBUTIONS AND GAINS AND LOSSES FROM SALES OR REFINANCING



Cash received by the Partnership from the sale or refinancing of any underlying property of the Local Limited Partnerships, after payment of the applicable mortgage debt and the payment of all expenses related to the transaction is to be distributed in the following manner in accordance with Realty Fund I's Partnership Agreement.



First, to the General Partner for any unrepaid loans to the Partnership and any unpaid fees (other than disposition and refinancing fees);



Second, to the establishment of any reserves which the General Partner deems reasonably necessary for contingent, unmatured or unforeseen liabilities or obligations of the Partnership.



Third, to the Limited Partners until the Limited Partners have received a return of their capital contributions, after deduction for prior cash distributions from sales or refinancing, but without deduction for prior cash distributions from operations;



Fourth, to the Limited Partners, until each Limited Partner has received an amount equal to a cumulative noncompounded 6% annual return on its capital contribution, after deduction of (a) an amount equal to 50% of the tax losses allocated to the Limited Partner and (b) prior cash distributions from operations and prior cash distributions from sales or refinancing;



Fifth, to the General Partner until the General Partner has received a return of its capital contribution, after deduction for prior cash distributions from sales or refinancing, but without deduction for prior cash distributions from operations;



Sixth, to the General Partner for disposition and refinancing fees, including prior disposition and refinancing fees which have been accrued but are unpaid;



Seventh, to the partners with positive capital accounts to bring such accounts to zero; and



Finally, 85% of the remaining sales proceeds to the Limited Partners and 15% to the General Partner.



Net income or loss from operations of the Partnership is allocated 98% to the Limited Partners, 1% to the General Partner and 1% to the Original Limited Partner. Cash distributions from operations, after payment of certain obligations including reimbursement on a cumulative basis of direct expenses incurred by the General Partner or its affiliate in managing the properties and payment of annual cumulative administrative and reporting fees, is distributed 98% to the Limited Partners, 1% to the General Partner and 1% to the Original Limited Partner.



Gain for federal income tax purposes realized in the event of dissolution of the Partnership or upon sale of interests in a Local Limited Partnership or underlying property will be allocated in the following manner:



First, to the Limited Partners in an amount up to the negative balances of the capital accounts of Limited Partners in the same proportion as each Limited Partner's negative capital account bears to such aggregate negative capital accounts;



Second, to the General Partner in an amount up to the General Partner's negative capital account, if any;



Third, to the Limited Partners up to the aggregate amount of capital contributions of the Limited Partners, after deduction for prior cash distributions from sales or refinancing, but without deduction for prior cash distributions from operations, in the same proportion that each Limited Partner's capital contribution bears to the aggregate of all Limited Partners' capital contributions;



Fourth, to the Limited Partners, until each Limited Partner has been allocated an amount equal to a cumulative noncompounded 6% annual return on its capital contribution, after deduction of (a) an amount equal to 50% of the tax losses allocated to the Limited Partner and (b) prior cash distributions from operations and prior cash distributions from sales or refinancing;



Fifth, to the General Partner up to the aggregate amount of capital contributions made by the General Partner, after deduction for prior cash distributions from sales or refinancing, but without deduction for prior cash distributions from operations; and



Finally, 85% of the remaining gain to the Limited Partners and 15% to the General Partner.



Losses for federal income tax purposes realized in the event of dissolution of the Partnership or upon sale of interests in a Local Limited Partnership or underlying property will be allocated 85% to the Limited Partners and 15% to the General Partner.



6.

GOING CONCERN



Hurbell IV Limited Partnerships note payable is past due, and therefore, the note is in default (see Note 2). Continuation of the Local Limited Partnerships operations in its present form is dependent on its ability to extend the maturity date of the note, or to repay or to refinance the note. These conditions raise substantial doubt about the Local Limited Partnerships ability and the Partnerships ability to continue as a going concern.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments which might result from the outcome of these uncertainties.



7.

ABANDONMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNITS



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the number of Limited Partnership Units decreased by 229 and 72 units, respectively, due to limited partners abandoning their units. In abandoning his or her Limited Partnership Unit(s), a limited partner relinquishes all right, title, and interest in the Partnership as of the date of abandonment. However, the limited partner is allocated his or her share of net income or loss for that year.  The loss per Limited Partnership Unit in the accompanying statements of operations is calculated based on the number of units outstanding at the beginning of the year.  The number of units outstanding was 11,269 and 11,341 at January 1, 2006 and 2005, respectively.



8.

CONTINGENCIES



The Partnership is unaware of any pending or outstanding litigation involving it or the underlying investment property of the Local Limited Partnership in which the Partnership invests that are not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business.



9.

REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION OF THE LOCAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP IN WHICH NHP REALTY FUND I HAS INVESTED





|                    |              |                |             |                |              
|------------------- | ------------ | -------------- | ----------- | -------------- | -------------
|                    |              | Initial Cost   | Net Cost   
|                    |              | To Partnership | Capitalized
|                    |              | (in thousands) | (Removed)  
|                    |              |                |             | Subsequent    
|                    |              |                |             | to Acquisition
|                    |              |                |             | (in thousands)
|                    |              |                | Buildings   |                |              
|                    |              |                | and Related |                |              
|                    |              |                | Personal    |                | Carrying Cost
|Description         | Encumbrances | Land           | Property    | Improvements   | Adjustments  
|                    |              |                |             |                |              
|Hurbell IV          | (1)          | $100           | $2,159      | $169           | $(1,460)     
|Limited Partnership |              |                |             |                |              



|                    |                               |           |              |                  |              |          |             |  | 
|------------------- | ----------------------------- | --------- | ------------ | ---------------- | ------------ | -------- | ----------- |  | 
|                    | Gross Amount At Which Carried
|                    | At December 31, 2006         
|                    | (in thousands)               
|                    |                               |           |              |                  |              |          |            
|                    |                               | Buildings |              |                  |              |          |            
|                    |                               | And       |              |                  |              |          |            
|                    |                               | Related   |              |                  |              |          |            
|                    |                               | Personal  |              | Accumulated      | Date of      | Date     | Depreciable
|Description         | Land                          | Property  | Total(2) (3) | Depreciation (3) | Construction | Acquired | Life       
|                    |                               |           |              |                  |              |          |            
|Hurbell IV          |                               |           |              |                  |              |          |            
|Limited Partnership | $101                          | $867      | $968         | $437             | 1974         | 11/84    | 5-30 yrs   



(1)

Schedule of Encumbrances



|                               |          |                |       
|------------------------------ | -------- | -------------- | ------
|                               |          | Note           |       
|                               |          | Payable and    |       
|                               | Mortgage | Accrued        |       
|Partnership Name               | Note     | Interest       | Total 
|                               |          | (in thousands) |       
|Hurbell IV Limited Partnership | $623     | $1,942         | $2,565



(2)

The unaudited aggregate cost of land for Federal income tax purposes is approximately $100,000 and the unaudited aggregate costs of buildings and improvements for Federal income tax purposes is approximately $2,330,000. The unaudited total of the above-mentioned items is approxima0ely $2,430,000.



(3)

Reconciliation of real estate



|                                    |                          |         
|----------------------------------- | ------------------------ | --------
|                                    | Years Ended December 31,
|                                    | 2006                     | 2005    
|                                    | (in thousands)          
|Balance at beginning of year        | $  8,546                 | $ 15,499
|Improvements                        | 175                      | 117     
|Disposal of rental property         | (7,753)                  | --      
|Foreclosure of Partnership interest | --                       | (7,070) 
|Balance at end of year              | $968                     | $8,546  

Reconciliation of accumulated depreciation



|                                    |                          |         
|----------------------------------- | ------------------------ | --------
|                                    | Years Ended December 31,
|                                    | 2006                     | 2005    
|                                    | (in thousands)          
|Balance at beginning of year        | $  4,692                 | $  7,300
|Depreciation expense                | 342                      | 337     
|Disposal of rental property         | (4,597)                  | --      
|Foreclosure of Partnership interest | --                       | (2,945) 
|Balance at end of year              | $437                     | $4,692  











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 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 such term is 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 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.



(b)

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There have not been any changes in the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fourth quarter of 2006 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 and Executive Officers of the Registrant and Corporate Governance



The Partnership has no directors, executive officers or significant employees of its own.



The names, ages, business experience and involvement in legal proceedings of the directors and officers of National Corporation for Housing Partnerships (NCHP), the sole general partner of The National Housing Partnership, the sole general partner of the Partnership (the General Partner), and certain of its affiliates, are as follows:



Directors of NCHP



Two individuals comprise the Board of Directors of NCHP.



|                   |    |                                        
|------------------ | -- | ---------------------------------------
|Jeffrey W. Adler   | 45 | Director and Executive Vice President  
|David R. Robertson | 41 | Director, President and Chief Executive
|                   |    | Officer                                



Jeffrey W. Adler has been a Director and an Executive Vice President of the General Partner since February 2004.  Mr. Adler was appointed Executive Vice President, Conventional Property Operations of AIMCO in February 2004.  Previously he served as Senior Vice President of Risk Management and Marketing of AIMCO from 2002 to 2004.  Prior to joining AIMCO from 2000 to 2002, Mr. Adler was Vice President, Property/Casualty for Channelpoint, a software company.



David R. Robertson has been a Director and President and Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner since February 2004.   Mr. Robertson has been an Executive Vice President of AIMCO since February 2002, and was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of AIMCO Capital in October 2002.  Mr. Robertson is responsible for property operations, asset management and transaction activities within AIMCO Capitals portfolio of affordable properties, and for redevelopment and construction activities for both the conventional and affordable property portfolios.  Since February 1996, Mr. Robertson had been Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Robeks Corporation, a privately held chain of specialty food stores.













Officers



The current officers of NCHP and a description of their principal occupations in recent years are listed below.



|                     |    |                                               
|-------------------- | -- | ----------------------------------------------
|Martha L. Long       | 47 | Senior Vice President                         
|Harry G. Alcock      | 44 | Executive Vice President and Chief            
|                     |    | Investment Officer                            
|Miles Cortez         | 63 | Executive Vice President, General Counsel     
|                     |    | and Secretary                                 
|Patti K. Fielding    | 43 | Executive Vice President  Securities and Debt
|Thomas M. Herzog     | 44 | Executive Vice President and Chief            
|                     |    | Financial Officer                             
|Lance J. Graber      | 45 | Executive Vice President                      
|Robert Y. Walker, IV | 41 | Executive Vice President                      
|Scott W. Fordham     | 39 | Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting    
|                     |    | Officer                                       
|Stephen B. Waters    | 45 | Vice President                                
|Jeffrey Adler        |    | See Directors of NCHP.                      
|David R. Robertson   |    | See Directors of NCHP.                      



Martha L. Long has been a Senior Vice President of the 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 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 General Partner in October 2004 and was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer of the General Partner in February 2004 and has been Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer 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 and as Senior Vice President from October 1997 to October 1999.



Miles Cortez was appointed Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of the General Partner in February 2004 and of AIMCO in August 2001.  Prior to joining AIMCO, Mr. Cortez was the senior partner of Cortez Macaulay Bernhardt & Schuetze LLC, a Denver law firm, from December 1997 through September 2001.



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



Thomas M. Herzog was appointed Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner and AIMCO in November 2005 and was appointed Executive Vice President of the 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 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.



Lance J. Graber was appointed Executive Vice President of the General Partner and AIMCO in October 1999 and focuses on transactions related to Aimco Capitals portfolio of affordable properties in the eastern portion of the country.  Prior to this time, Mr. Graber was a Director at Credit Suisse First Boston from 1994 to May 1999.



Robert Y. Walker, IV was appointed Senior Vice President of the General Partner and AIMCO in August 2005 and served as the Chief Accounting Officer of the General Partner and AIMCO from November 2005 to January 2007. Mr. Walker was promoted to Executive Vice President of the General Partner and AIMCO in July 2006 and in January 2007 became the chief financial officer of Conventional Property Operations for AIMCO. From June 2002, until he joined AIMCO, Mr. Walker served as senior vice president and chief financial officer at Miller Global Properties, LLC, a Denver-based private equity, real estate fund manager.  From May 1997 to June 2002, Mr. Walker was employed by GE Capital Real Estate, serving as global controller from May 2000 to June 2002.



Scott W. Fordham was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer in January 2007 of the General Partner and AIMCO. Prior to joining AIMCO, Mr. Fordham served as Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of Brandywine Realty Trust. 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 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 principal financial officer of the General Partner.



There is no family relationship between any of the foregoing directors and officers.



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



The directors and officers of the 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



National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I has no directors or officers. No direct form of compensation or remuneration was paid by the Partnership to any director or officer of the General Partner.  However, reimbursements and other payments have been made to the Partnership's General Partner and its affiliates, as described in "Item 12. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.













Item 11. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management



1133 Fifteenth Street Associates, a Maryland Limited Partnership, whose general partner is NHP and whose limited partners were key employees of NCHP at the time the Partnership was formed, owns a 1% interest in the Partnership.



The following table sets forth certain information regarding limited partnership units of the Partnership owned by each person or entity as known by the Partnership to own beneficially or exercise voting or dispositive control over more than 5% of the Partnerships limited partnership units as of December 31, 2006.



|                                      |                 |           
|------------------------------------- | --------------- | ----------
|Name of Beneficial Owner              | Number of Units | % of Class
|                                      |                 |           
|AIMCO Properties, L.P.                | 1,332.50        | 12.07%    
|(an affiliate of the General Partner) |                 |           



The business address of AIMCO Properties, L.P. is 4582 S. Ulster St. Parkway, Suite 1100, Denver, Colorado 80237.



Item 12.    Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence



The Partnership accrued administrative and reporting fees payable to the General Partner of approximately $43,000 and $68,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.  As of December 31, 2006, the Partnership owed approximately $240,000 to the General Partner for accrued administrative and reporting fees. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, the Partnership made a payment of approximately $236,000 from proceeds received from the sale of San Jose Apartments.



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the General Partner advanced approximately $29,000 and $26,000, respectively, to the Partnership to fund operating expenses.  Interest is charged at the prime rate plus 2% (10.25% at December 31, 2006).  Interest expense was approximately $5,000 and $2,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. At December 31, 2006, the total amount of advances and accrued interest is approximately $64,000 and is included in due to General Partner.  The advances and associated accrued interest were repaid to the General Partner subsequent to December 31, 2006.



During the year ended December 31, 2006, the General Partner advanced approximately $70,000 to San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership to fund expenses related to potential sale of the underlying property. During the year ended December 31, 2005, there were no advances made by the General Partner to the Local Limited Partnerships to fund partnership entity expenses, including expenses incurred relating to potential sales or refinancing under the Low Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA). There were no repayments of advances made to the General Partner by the Local Limited Partnerships during the years ended December 31, 2006 or 2005. At December 31, 2006, the balance owed to the General Partner by the Local Limited Partnerships was approximately $114,000, including accrued interest of approximately $15,000. Interest on these advances is charged at a rate equal to the Chase Manhattan Bank prime interest rate plus 2% or 10.25% at December 31, 2006.  Subsequent to December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership repaid advances of approximately $70,000 from proceeds from the sale of San Jose Apartments.



The Local Limited Partnerships accrued annual partnership administration fees payable to the General Partner of approximately $15,000 during each of the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. Payments of these fees are made to the General Partner from surplus cash available for distribution to partners pursuant to HUD regulations. No payments were made during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. The accumulated fees owed to NHP are approximately $129,000 at December 31, 2006. Subsequent to December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership paid accrued fees of approximately $48,000 from proceeds from the sale of its property.



An affiliate of the General Partner, NHP Management Company (NHPMC) was the project management agent for the project operated by San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005. NHPMC and other affiliates of NCHP earned approximately $115,000 and $165,000 from San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership for management fees provided to San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.  During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, one Local Limited Partnership operated by an affiliate of the General Partner was charged construction management services provided by AIMCO and its affiliates. This reimbursement is payable from surplus cash.  This reimbursement of approximately $6,000 and $3,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, was capitalized as part of fixed assets for the respective Local Limited Partnership.



Personnel working at the project sites, which are managed by NHPMC, are employees of NHPMC. The projects reimburse NHPMC for the actual salaries and related benefits of such employees. Total reimbursements earned for salaries and benefits for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 were approximately $180,000 and $186,000, respectively. Additionally, approximately $15,000 was paid to an affiliate for accounting services for each of the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.



During the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, the General Partner was entitled to reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses, including interest, of approximately $60,000 and $57,000, respectively, from San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership.



San Jose Apartments Limited 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. San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership insures its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the General Partner. During the year ended December 31, 2006, San Jose Apartments Limited Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $46,000 for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration.



Neither of the 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 General Partner.



Item 13.

Exhibits



See Exhibit Index.



Item 14.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services



The General Partner has reappointed Ernst & Young LLP as independent auditors to audit the financial statements of the Partnership for 2007.  The aggregate fees billed for services rendered by Ernst & Young LLP for 2006 and 2005 are described below.



Audit Fees.  Fees for audit services totaled approximately $31,000 and $17,000 for 2006 and 2005, 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 $5,000 and $4,000 for 2006 and 2005, respectively.











NATIONAL HOUSING PARTNERSHIP REALTY FUND I



INDEX OF EXHIBITS



10.1

Amended and Restated Agreement of Sale and Purchase dated September 30, 2006, by and between San Jose Limited Partnership, a Texas limited partnership, and AIMCO Equity Services, Inc., a Virginia corporation with the right to assign its title and interest to San Jose Preservation, L.P., a Texas limited partnership is incorporated by reference to the Partnerships Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006.



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 equivalent of 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.



32.2

Independent Auditors Report for Hurbell IV Limited Partnership  year ended December 31, 2006.



32.3

Independent Auditors Report for San Jose Limited Partnership  period ended December 27, 2006.



32.4 Independent Auditors Report for Hurbell IV Limited Partnership  year ended December 31, 2005.



32.5 Independent Auditors Report for San Jose Limited Partnership - year ended December 31, 2005.











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.





| |                                           
| | ------------------------------------------
| | National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I
| |                                           
| | By:   The National Housing Partnership,   
| | its sole general partner                  
| |                                           
| | National Corporation for Housing          
| | Partnerships,                             
| | its sole general partner                  
| |                                           
| | By:   /s/David R. Robertson               
| | David R. Robertson                        
| | Director, President and Chief Executive   
| | Officer                                   
| |                                           
| | By:   /s/Stephen B. Waters                
| | Stephen B. Waters                         
| | Vice President                            
| |                                           
| | Date: April 2, 2007                       



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/David R. Robertson | Director, President and | Date: April 2, 2007
|David R. Robertson    | Chief Executive Officer |                    
|                      |                         |                    
|/s/Jeffrey W. Adler   | Director and Executive  | Date: April 2, 2007
|Jeffrey W. Adler      | Vice President          |                    
|                      |                         |                    
|/s/Stephen B. Waters  | Vice President          | Date: April 2, 2007
|Stephen B. Waters     |                         |                    







Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, David R. Robertson, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: April 2, 2007

/s/David R. Robertson

David R. Robertson

President and Chief Executive Officer of National Corporation for Housing Partnerships, equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership







Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Stephen B. Waters, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: April 2, 2007

/s/Stephen B. Waters

Stephen B. Waters

Vice President of National Corporation for Housing Partnerships, equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership













Exhibit 32.1



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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of National Housing Partnership Realty Fund I (the "Partnership"), for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), David R. Robertson, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, 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/David R. Robertson   
| | Name: David R. Robertson
| | Date: April 2, 2007     
| |                         
| | /s/Stephen B. Waters    
| | Name: Stephen B. Waters 
| | Date: April 2, 2007     





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













Exhibit 32.2

Independent Auditor's Report



To the Partners

Hurbell IV Limited Partnership



We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Hurbell IV Limited Partnership, a Limited Partnership, HUD Project No. 062-44054-LD, as of December 31, 2006, and the related statements of profit and loss, changes in partners' equity (deficit) and cash flows for the year then ended.  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 audit.



We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the 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.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.



In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Hurbell IV Limited Partnership as of December 31, 2006, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Partnership will continue as a going concern.  As discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements, the Partnership has notes payable that matured on November 9, 1999.  This condition raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.



In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued a report dated February 6, 2007 on our consideration of Hurbell IV Limited Partnerships internal control over financial reporting. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and the results of that testing and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued an opinion dated February 6, 2007 on Hurbell IV Limited Partnerships compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, and other matters that could have a direct and material effect on a major HUD-assisted program.  Those reports are an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit.



Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole.  The accompanying supplemental information shown on pages 14-18 is presented for the purpose of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements of the Partnership. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.

/s/Carter & Company



Destin, Florida

February 6, 2007













Exhibit 32.3







Independent Auditors Report





To the Partners

San Jose Limited Partnership



We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of San Jose Limited Partnership, a Limited Partnership, HUD Project Number 115-44003-LDP-SUP, as of December 27, 2006, and the related statements of profit and loss, changes in partners equity (deficit) and cash flows for the period then ended.  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 audit.



We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the 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.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.



As described in Note 2, the Partnerships financial statements have been prepared on the basis of accounting and reporting practices prescribed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  These prescribed practices are a comprehensive basis of accounting other than the accounting generally accepted in the United States of America.



In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of San Jose Limited Partnership, at December 27, 2006 (day before sale), and the results of its operations, changes in partners equity (deficit) and its cash flows for the period from January 1, 2006, through December 27, 2006 (day before sale), in conformity with accounting principles described in Note 2.



As described in Note 10, on December 28, 2006, the Property was sold to an unrelated party at a price of $4,500,000.  The Partnerships financial statements reflect activity for the period from January 1, 2006, through December 27, 2006 (day before sale), immediately prior to the closing of the sale transaction.



In accordance with Government Auditing Standards,we have also issued a report dated February 12, 2007, on our consideration of San Jose Limited Partnerships internal control over financial reporting.  The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and the results of that testing and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting.  In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued an opinion dated February 12, 2007, on San Jose Limited Partnerships compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, and other matters that could have a direct and material effect on a major HUD-assisted program.  Those reports are an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit.



Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying supplemental information shown on pages 14-18 is presented for the purpose of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements of the Partnership. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.



/s/Carter & Company



Destin, Florida

February 12, 2007















Exhibit 32.4

Independent Auditor's Report



To the Partners

Hurbell IV Limited Partnership



We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Hurbell IV Limited Partnership, a Limited Partnership, FHA Project No. 062-44054-LD, as of December 31, 2005, and the related statements of profit and loss, changes in partners' equity (deficit) and cash flows for the year then ended.  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 audit.



We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the 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.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.



In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Hurbell IV Limited Partnership as of December 31, 2005, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Partnership will continue as a going concern.  As discussed in Note 8 to the financial statements, the Partnership has notes payable that matured on November 9, 1999.  This condition raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.  The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.



In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued reports dated February 1, 2006 on our consideration of Hurbell IV Limited Partnerships internal control over financial reporting. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and the results of that testing and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards we have also issued an opinion dated February 1, 2006 on Hurbell IV Limited Partnerships compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, and other matters that could have a direct and material effect on a major HUD-assisted program.  Those reports are an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit.



Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole.  The accompanying supplemental information shown on pages 14-18 is presented for the purpose of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements of the Partnership. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.

/s/Carter & Company



Destin, Florida

February 1, 2006











Exhibit 32.5



Independent Auditors Report



To the Partners

San Jose Limited Partnership



We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of San Jose Limited Partnership, a Limited Partnership, Project Number 115-44003-LDP-SUP, as of December 31, 2005, and the related statements of profit and loss, changes in partners equity (deficit) and cash flows for the year then ended. 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 audit.



We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the 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.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.



In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of San Jose Limited Partnership as of December 31, 2005, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our reports dated January 12, 2006 on our consideration of San Jose Limited Partnerships internal control over financial reporting. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and the results of that testing and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards we have also issued an opinion dated January 12, 2006 on San Jose Limited Partnerships compliance with certain provisions and other matters that could have a direct and material effect on a major HUD-assisted program. Those reports are an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit.



Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying supplemental information shown on pages 13  17 is presented for the purpose of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements of the Partnership. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.



/s/Carter & Company



Destin, Florida

January 12, 2006