<PAGE>

                                    FORM 10-Q
                UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549


                   Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d)
                     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934


For the Quarter Ended    June 30, 1997
                         -------------


Commission file number      0-11973
                         -------------


                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)




           Maryland                                     52-1321492
-----------------------------------------         --------------------
     (State or other jurisdiction of                (I.R.S. Employer
     incorporation or organization)                Identification No.)



11200 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland                 20852
-----------------------------------------         --------------------
(Address of principal executive offices)                (Zip Code)



                                 (301) 468-9200
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
              (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)


     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes [X]   No [ ]   

     Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes
of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.



          Class                            Outstanding at June 30, 1997
----------------------------------      ----------------------------------
     (Not applicable)                             (Not applicable)
<PAGE>


                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                               INDEX TO FORM 10-Q

                       FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1997



                                                            PAGE
                                                            ----

PART I.   Financial Information (Unaudited)

Item 1.   Financial Statements

          Balance Sheets - June 30, 1997 and
            December 31, 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . .        1

          Statements of Operations - for the three
            and six months ended June 30, 1997 and 1996        2

          Statements of Cash Flows - for the six
            months ended June 30, 1997 and 1996 . . . .        3

          Notes to Financial Statements . . . . . . . .        4

Item 2.   Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial
            Condition and Results of Operations . . . .        15

PART II.  Other Information

Item 3.   Defaults Upon Senior Securities . . . . . . .        25

Item 6.   Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K  . . . . . .        25

Signature   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        26

Exhibit Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        27
<PAGE>
PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 1.   FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
          ---------------------

                CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                                BALANCE SHEETS

                                    ASSETS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                  June 30,       December 31,
                                                                                                   1997             1996
                                                                                               ------------      ------------
                                                                                                (Unaudited)
<S>                                                                                            <C>               <C>
Investments in and advances to partnerships                                                    $  5,973,010      $  5,962,920
Assets held for sale                                                                                     --           789,258
Cash and cash equivalents                                                                         6,308,934         2,128,849
Acquisition fees, principally paid to related parties, net of
  accumulated amortization of $408,864 and $393,948,
  respectively                                                                                      486,087           501,003
Property purchase costs, net of accumulated amortization of
  $268,990 and $258,870, respectively                                                               338,258           348,378
Other assets                                                                                         26,960             9,657
                                                                                               ------------      ------------
      Total assets                                                                             $ 13,133,249      $  9,740,065
                                                                                               ============      ============


                          LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' DEFICIT

Due on investments in partnerships, net of unamortized discount on
  purchase money notes of $3,208,051 and $5,159,494, respectively                              $ 15,639,627      $ 14,981,184
Accrued interest payable                                                                         29,628,185        30,584,862
Accounts payable and accrued expenses                                                               113,053            91,418
                                                                                               ------------      ------------
      Total liabilities                                                                          45,380,865        45,657,464
                                                                                               ------------      ------------
Commitments and contingencies

Partners' capital (deficit):
  Capital paid-in:
    General Partners                                                                                  2,000             2,000
    Limited Partners                                                                             50,015,000        50,015,000
                                                                                               ------------      ------------
                                                                                                 50,017,000        50,017,000
  Less:
    Accumulated distributions to partners                                                        (1,254,612)       (1,254,612)
    Offering costs                                                                               (5,278,980)       (5,278,980)
    Accumulated losses                                                                          (75,731,024)      (79,400,807)
                                                                                               ------------      ------------
      Total partners' deficit                                                                   (32,247,616)      (35,917,399)
                                                                                               ------------      ------------
      Total liabilities and partners' deficit                                                  $ 13,133,249      $  9,740,065
                                                                                               ============      ============
</TABLE>

                       The accompanying notes are an integral part
                             of these financial statements.

                                         -1-
<PAGE>
PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 1.   FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
          ---------------------

                    CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                               STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

                                      (Unaudited)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                For the three months ended         For the six months ended
                                                                          June 30,                          June 30,
                                                               -----------------------------     -----------------------------
                                                                   1997             1996             1997             1996
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
<S>                                                            <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>
Share of income from partnerships                              $    245,347     $     85,199     $    326,610     $     44,426
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
Other revenue and expenses:
 Revenue:
    Interest and other income                                        88,529           25,813          122,123           50,396
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
 Expenses:
    Interest                                                      1,391,001        1,349,380        2,772,942        2,703,258
    Management fee                                                   62,499           62,499          124,998          124,998
    General and administrative                                       61,455           36,026          104,314           68,485
    Professional fees                                               265,811           54,797          308,629           75,139
    Amortization                                                     12,518           13,810           25,036           27,622
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
                                                                  1,793,284        1,516,512        3,335,919        2,999,502
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
       Total other revenue and expenses                          (1,704,755)      (1,490,699)      (3,213,796)      (2,949,106)
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
Loss before gain on disposition of investment in partnership     (1,459,408)      (1,405,500)       (2,887,186)     (2,904,680)

Gain on disposition of investment in partnership                     19,216               --        4,903,873               --
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
(Loss) income before extraordinary gain from
  extinguishment of debt                                         (1,440,192)      (1,405,500)       2,016,687       (2,904,680)
Extraordinary gain from extinguishment of debt                           --               --        1,653,096        1,803,902
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
Net (loss) income                                                (1,440,192)      (1,405,500)       3,669,783       (1,100,778)

Accumulated losses, beginning of period                         (74,290,832)     (75,180,686)     (79,400,807)     (75,485,408)
                                                               ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------
Accumulated losses, end of period                              $(75,731,024)    $(76,586,186)    $(75,731,024)    $(76,586,186)
                                                               ============     ============     ============     ============
(Loss) income allocated to General Partners (1.51%)            $    (21,747)    $    (21,223)    $     55,414     $    (16,622)
                                                               ============     ============     ============     ============
(Loss) income allocated to Initial and Special
  Limited Partners (1.49%)                                     $    (21,459)    $    (20,942)    $     54,679     $    (16,402)
                                                               ============     ============     ============     ============
(Loss) income allocated to Additional Limited Partners (97%)   $ (1,396,986)    $ (1,363,335)    $  3,559,690     $ (1,067,754)
                                                               ============     ============     ============     ============
(Loss) income per unit of Additional Limited Partnership
  Interest based on 50,000 units outstanding                   $     (27.94)    $     (27.27)    $      71.19     $     (21.36)
                                                               ============     ============     ============     ============
</TABLE>

                        The accompanying notes are an integral part
                               of these financial statements.

                                            -2-
<PAGE>
PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 1.   FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
          ---------------------

                      CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                                  STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

                                        (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                                  For the six months ended
                                                                                                          June 30,
                                                                                                -----------------------------
                                                                                                    1997            1996
                                                                                                ------------    ------------
<S>                                                                                             <C>             <C>
Cash flows from operating activities:
  Net income (loss)                                                                             $  3,669,783    $ (1,100,778)

  Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash used in
    operating activities:
    Share of income from partnerships                                                               (326,610)        (44,426)
    Amortization of deferred costs                                                                    25,036          27,622
    Amortization of discount on purchase money notes                                               1,567,813       1,442,566
    Extraordinary gain on extinguishment of debt                                                  (1,653,096)     (1,803,902)
    Gain on disposition of investment in partnership                                              (4,903,873)             --
    Payment of purchase money note interest                                                          (32,926)        (34,799)

    Changes in assets and liabilities:
      (Increase) decrease in other assets                                                            (17,303)          2,632
      Increase in accrued interest payable                                                         1,205,129       1,260,692
      Increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses                                               21,635          25,019
                                                                                                ------------    ------------
         Net cash used in operating activities                                                      (444,412)       (225,374)
                                                                                                ------------    ------------
Cash flows from investing activities:
  Receipt of distributions from partnerships                                                         344,520         534,384
  Proceeds from disposition of investment in partnership                                           5,643,131              --
  Advances made to local partnerships                                                                (28,000)             --
                                                                                                ------------    ------------
         Net cash provided by investing activities                                                 5,959,651         534,384
                                                                                                ------------    ------------

Cash flows used in financing activities:
  Pay-off of purchase money note and related interest                                             (1,385,154)     (1,500,000)
                                                                                                ------------    ------------

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents                                               4,130,085      (1,190,990)

Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period                                                     2,128,849       3,192,539
                                                                                                ------------    ------------
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period                                                        $  6,258,934    $  2,001,549
                                                                                                ============    ============

</TABLE>

                     The accompanying notes are an integral part
                             of these financial statements.

                                          -3-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)


1.   BASIS OF PRESENTATION

     In the opinion of C.R.I., Inc. (CRI), the Managing General Partner, the
accompanying unaudited financial statements contain all adjustments of a normal
recurring nature necessary to present fairly the financial position of Capital
Realty Investors-II Limited Partnership (the Partnership) as of June 30, 1997
and December 31, 1996, and the results of its operations for the three and six
months ended June 30, 1997 and 1996 and its cash flows for the six months ended
June 30, 1997 and 1996.

     These unaudited financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the
rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Certain
information and note disclosures normally included in financial statements
prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles have been
condensed or omitted.  While the Managing General Partner believes that the dis-
closures presented are adequate to make the information not misleading, it is
suggested that these condensed financial statements be read in conjunction with
the financial statements and the notes included in the Partnership's Annual
Report filed on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996.


2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS

     The Partnership's obligations with respect to its investments in Local
Partnerships, in the form of purchase money notes having a principal balance of
$18,847,678 (exclusive of unamortized discount on purchase money notes of
$3,208,051) plus accrued interest of $29,628,185 as of June 30, 1997, are
payable in full upon the earliest of:  (i) sale or refinancing of the respective
Local Partnership's rental property; (ii) payment in full of the respective
Local Partnership's permanent loan; or (iii) maturity.  Purchase money notes in
an aggregate principal amount of $2,100,000 matured on December 31, 1996, as
discussed below.  Purchase money notes in an aggregate principal amount of
$1,900,000, $2,380,000 and $3,150,000 mature on December 31, 1997, January 1,
1998, and June 1, 1998, respectively, as discussed below.  The remaining
purchase money notes mature later in 1998 and 1999.  The purchase money notes
are generally secured by the Partnership's interest in the respective Local
Partnerships.  There is no assurance that the underlying properties will have
sufficient appreciation and equity to enable the Partnership to pay the purchase
money notes' principal and accrued interest when due.  If a purchase money note
is not paid in accordance with its terms, the Partnership will either have to
renegotiate the terms of repayment or risk losing its partnership interest in
the Local Partnership.  The Managing General Partner is continuing to
investigate possible alternatives to reduce the Partnership's long-term debt
obligations.  These alternatives include, among others, retaining the cash
available for distribution to meet the purchase money note requirements, buying
out certain purchase money notes at a discounted price, extending the due dates
of certain purchase money notes, or refinancing the respective properties'
underlying debt and using the Partnership's share of the proceeds to pay off or
buy down certain purchase money note obligations.

     Interest expense on the Partnership's purchase money notes was $1,391,001
and $2,772,942 for the three and six months ended June 30, 1997, respectively,
and $1,349,380 and $2,703,258 for the three and six months ended June 30, 1996,
respectively.  Amortization of the imputed interest on purchase money notes
increased interest expense during the three and six months ended June 30, 1997
by $799,064 and $1,567,813, respectively, and by $721,283 and $1,442,566 during

                                       -4-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

the three and six months ended June 30, 1996, respectively.  The accrued
interest on the purchase money notes of $29,628,185 and $30,584,862 as of June
30, 1997 and December 31, 1996, respectively, is due on the respective maturity
dates of the purchase money notes or earlier, in some instances, if the
pertinent Local Partnership has distributable net cash flow, as defined in the
relevant Local Partnership agreements.

     As of June 30, 1997 and December 31, 1996, the Partnership had advanced
funds to Local Partnerships totalling $352,410 and $324,410, respectively.

     Purchase money notes relating to Wexford Ridge Associates (Wexford Ridge)
in the principal amount of $1,900,000 mature on December 31, 1997.  The Managing
General Partner anticipates negotiating with the purchase money note holders for
a five year extension on the purchase money notes.  There is no assurance that
the Managing General Partner will reach an agreement of any kind with the
noteholders.  Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the Partnership will
be able to retain its interest in the Local Partnership.  The uncertainty about
the continued ownership of the Partnership's interest in the related Local
Partnership does not impact the Partnership's financial condition because the
related purchase money notes are nonrecourse and secured solely by the
Partnership's interest in the Local Partnership.  Therefore, should the
investment in Wexford Ridge not produce sufficient value to satisfy the purchase
money notes related to Wexford Ridge, the Partnership's exposure to loss is
limited since the amount of the nonrecourse indebtedness exceeds the carrying
amount of the investment in and advances to the Local Partnership.  Thus, even a
complete loss of this investment would not have a material impact on the
operations of the Partnership.

     The Partnership defaulted on its purchase money notes relating to Chevy
Chase Park, Limited (Chevy Chase) on December 31, 1996 when the notes matured
and were not paid.  The default amount included principal and accrued interest
of $2,100,000 and $3,553,912, respectively.  As of July 22, 1997, principal and
accrued interest totalling $2,100,000 and $3,714,848, respectively, were due. 
The Managing General Partner is currently negotiating a five year extension of
the purchase money notes with the noteholders.  The Managing General Partner is
also awaiting the potential future sale of the property under the Low Income
Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA) program. 
There is no assurance that a sale will take place under the LIHPRHA program, nor
is there any assurance that an agreement will be reached with the noteholders. 
As such, there is no assurance that the Partnership will be able to retain its
interest in Chevy Chase.  The uncertainty regarding the continued ownership of
the Partnership's interests in Chevy Chase does not impact the Partnership's
financial condition because the related purchase money notes are nonrecourse and
secured solely by the Partnership's interest in the related Local Partnership. 
Therefore, should the investment in Chevy Chase not produce sufficient value to
satisfy the related purchase money notes, the Partnership's exposure to loss is
limited since the amount of the nonrecourse indebtedness exceeds the carrying
amount of the investment in and advances to the Local Partnership.  Thus, even a
complete loss of this investment would not have a material impact on the
operations of the Partnership.

     The Partnership defaulted on its purchase money notes relating to Beech
Hill Development Co. (Beech Hill I) and Beech Hill Development Co. II (Beech
Hill II) on August 1, 1995 when the notes matured and were not paid.  On March
29, 1996, the noteholders agreed to extend the purchase money note due dates to

                                       -5-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

January 1, 1998.  Under the agreement, the Partnership will pay the purchase
money noteholders of Beech Hill I and Beech Hill II all annual cash flow
distributions received from the related Local Partnerships in excess of $5,000
and $2,500, respectively.  There were no annual cash flow distributions made to
the Partnership from the related Local Partnerships during the six months ended
June 30, 1997 and 1996.  Also under the agreement, documents transferring the
Partnership's interests in the related Local Partnerships to the noteholders
have been placed in escrow and would be released to the noteholders upon a
future default by the Partnership on the respective purchase money notes.

     The Partnership defaulted on its purchase money note relating to Rock Glen
Limited Partnership (Rock Glen) on August 1, 1995 when the note matured and was
not paid.  The noteholder signed a standstill agreement which expired on October
31, 1995.  The Managing General Partner made an offer to the noteholder to
extend the purchase money note due date to August 2000.  This offer was rejected
by the noteholder.  On January 11, 1996, the Partnership paid off the purchase
money note at a discount, resulting in a gain on extinguishment of debt of
approximately $1.8 million.

     On May 23, 1994, the local general partner of Tanglewood Apartments
Associates II Limited Partnership (Tanglewood II) filed a notice of intent to
participate under LIHPRHA.  On July 11, 1996, the local managing general
partner's plan of action regarding the sale of Tanglewood II under the LIHPRHA
program was approved by HUD.  On February 19, 1997, Tanglewood II sold the
property, a 192-unit apartment complex located in Westwego, Louisiana, under the
LIHPRHA program.  The sale of the property generated net cash proceeds to the
Partnership of $933,987.  The proceeds were net of $1,385,154 used to retire, at
a discount, the Partnership's purchase money note obligation with respect to the
property.  The sale provided proceeds to the Partnership in excess of its
investment in the Local Partnership, and resulted in a net financial statement
gain of approximately $3.2 million, of which approximately $1.7 million resulted
from the retirement of the purchase money note obligation with respect to the
property.  The federal tax gain is estimated to be approximately $4.9 million.  

     On January 31, 1996, the local managing general partner of Palatine-
Barrington Associates Limited Partnership (Deer Grove) received an offer to sell
the property to an unaffiliated entity.  This offer was rejected by the local
managing general partner.  On September 13, 1996, the local  managing general
partner of Deer Grove received another offer to sell the property.  The local
managing general partner accepted the offer and on March 18, 1997, Deer Grove
sold the property, a 448-unit apartment complex located in Palatine, Illinois. 
The sale of the property generated cash proceeds to the Partnership of $3.4
million at closing.  On June 30, 1997, the Partnership received additional
proceeds of $50,000 representing the final release of the property's reserves. 
The proceeds received during and subsequent to closing were in excess of the
Partnership's investment in the Local Partnership and resulted in a net
financial statement gain of approximately $3.4 million.  The federal tax gain is
estimated to be approximately $17.8 million.

     On May 1, 1996, CRHC, Inc. (CRHC), an affiliate of the Managing General
Partner, notified the local managing general partner of Arrowhead Apartments
Associates Limited Partnership (Arrowhead) and Moorings Apartments Associates
Limited Partnership (Moorings) that he was in default under the Partnership
Agreements and threatened to remove him as managing general partner of the Local
Partnerships.  The managing agent of Arrowhead and Moorings, which is an

                                       -6-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

affiliate of the local managing general partner, filed arbitration against CRHC
seeking, among other things, a declaration that the allegations set forth in
CRHC's notice did not constitute grounds for removal of the local managing
general partner.  CRHC subsequently filed for arbitration against the local
managing general partner seeking his removal.  On September 3, 1996, CRHC filed
an emergency petition in the arbitration to have a trustee appointed to serve as
local managing general partner and managing agent of the Local Partnerships
until the arbitration hearings are held.  The emergency petition was denied.  On
May 7, 1997, the parties reached a settlement whereby the property management
agent was changed and the local managing general partner was removed from the
Local Partnership in exchange for $210,000.  The settlement was paid by the
Partnership and is included as legal fees in the accompanying financial
statements.

     The local general partner of Lake Properties Limited Partnership
(Frenchman's Wharf II), in conjunction with the Managing General Partner,
engaged in extensive negotiations with the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), holder of the mortgage on the property, to extend the
previous workout arrangement related to the mortgage loan on the property, which
expired in December 1993.  On April 30, 1996, the local general partner received
approval from HUD for a four-year workout.  Under the workout agreement,
Frenchman's Wharf II makes minimum monthly payments, consisting of a service
charge and tax escrow.  Additionally, Frenchman's Wharf II makes monthly
interest payments representing approximately 50%, 65%, 85% and 100% of the
interest due on the outstanding principal balance of the note for the periods
July 1 through June 30 during the years 1996 through 2000, respectively.  As of
July 17, 1997, Frenchman's Wharf II made all monthly payments in accordance with
the workout arrangement.  There is, however, no assurance that the Local
Partnership, upon expiration of the workout, will be able to repay the loan in
accordance with the terms.

     To cover operating deficits incurred in prior years for Frenchman's Wharf
II, the Partnership advanced funds totalling $324,410 as of both June 30, 1997
and December 31, 1996.  The last advance was made to Frenchman's Wharf II in
March 1987.  The Partnership does not expect to advance any additional funds in
connection with Frenchman's Wharf II's loan workout with HUD.  These loans,
together with accrued interest of $187,372 as of both June 30, 1997 and December
31, 1996, are payable from cash flow of Frenchman's Wharf II after payment of
first-mortgage debt service and after satisfaction by the Partnership of certain
other interest obligations on the purchase money notes relating to the Local
Partnership.  There is no assurance that the Local Partnership, upon expiration
of the workout, will be able to repay the loans in accordance with the terms.

     The purchase money notes related to Frenchman's Wharf II in the principal
amount of $3,150,000 which were initially due to mature on June 1, 1988 have
been extended to mature on June 1, 1998.  In conjunction with the four-year
workout agreement, the Partnership is currently negotiating with the purchase
money note holders to reach an extension agreement which would be coterminous
with the expiration of the HUD workout arrangement.  There is no assurance that
the noteholders will consent to an extension agreement.  As of July 17, 1997,
the noteholders had not consented to an extension agreement.  There is no
assurance that any agreement will be reached with the noteholders.  As such,
there is no assurance that the Partnership will be able to retain its interest
in Frenchman's Wharf II.  The uncertainty regarding the continued ownership of
the Partnership's interest in Frenchman's Wharf II does not impact the

                                       -7-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

Partnership's financial condition because the related purchase money notes are
nonrecourse and secured solely by the Partnership's interest in the related
Local Partnership.  Therefore, should the investment in Frenchman's Wharf II not
produce sufficient value to satisfy the related purchase money notes, the
Partnership's exposure to loss is limited since the amount of the nonrecourse
indebtedness exceeds the carrying amount of the investment in and advances to
the Local Partnership.  Thus, even a complete loss of this investment would not
have a material impact on the operations of the Partnership.

     The report of the auditors on the financial statements of Frenchman's Wharf
II for the year ended December 31, 1996 indicated that substantial doubt exists
about the ability of the Local Partnership to continue as a going concern due to
the Local Partnership's default on its mortgage loan and the expiration of its
Section 8 Rental Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contract with HUD on November
30, 1997.  The uncertainty about the Local Partnerships' continued ownership of
the property does not impact the Partnership's financial condition because the
amount of the Partnership's nonrecourse indebtedness related to this property
exceeds the carrying value of the investment in and advances to the Local
Partnership, as discussed above.

     Posada Associates Limited Partnership (Posada Vallarta Apartments) was
operating under an extension of a three-year workout agreement with HUD, the
holder of the mortgage.  The workout provided for, among other things, a minimum
monthly debt service payment, with excess cash, if any, being applied to
delinquent interest.  All debt service payments were made in accordance with the
workout.  In June 1995, the three-year workout which originally expired on
October 1, 1995 was extended to October 1, 1996.  In June 1996, HUD sold the
mortgage loan to a third party.  The new mortgagee issued a notice of default
and acceleration of the loan to Posada Vallarta Apartments.  The notice was
determined to be in error, and on July 8, 1996 the notice of default and
acceleration was withdrawn by the new mortgagee.  The workout agreement related
to Posada Vallarta Apartments provided that upon cancellation of the workout
agreement, the loan would be recast at an annual interest rate of 7.5%, if
certain conditions are satisfied.  As of October 1, 1996, the expiration date of
the workout agreement, the local managing general partner and the new mortgagee
were disputing whether or not those conditions had been satisfied.  On October
1, 1996, the Local Partnership made a monthly payment on the debt, and has
continued to make such monthly payments, in the amount which would be due if the
loan is recast at a 7.5% annual interest rate.  The new mortgagee made an offer
to extend the workout agreement for two years.  The local managing general
partner made a counter-offer to extend the workout agreement for ten years.  On
February 6, 1997, the local managing general partner and the new mortgagee
reached an agreement in principle to recast the loan at a 7.5% annual interest
rate with a ten-year call provision, as stated in the workout agreement.  As of
July 17, 1997, the parties are negotiating revised loan documents implementing
their agreement.  There is no assurance that a final agreement will be reached
on these documents.  Should the mortgagee begin foreclosure proceedings, the
Partnership intends to vigorously defend such action.

     Wexford Ridge, its local general partner, and its management agent were
named in eight sexual harassment and discrimination complaints filed with HUD. 
The complaints were reviewed by the HUD Fair Housing Council and during April
1997, the council determined that no basis had been found to pursue further
action and dismissed the complaints.


                                       -8-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

     The Managing General Partner and trustees representing the purchase money
note holders related to Roberts Fall River Associates (Rolling Green at Fall
River) and Roberts Amherst Associates (Rolling Green at Amherst) have reached an
agreement in principle to extend the purchase money notes related to these Local
Partnerships for ten years.  This agreement in principle is subject to the
consent of the purchase money note holders.  The purchase money notes, which
aggregate a principle amount of $4,600,000 and $1,927,500 for Rolling Green at
Fall River and Rolling Green at Amherst, respectively, are currently due to
mature August 31, 1998.  In connection with the proposed extension of the
purchase money notes, the Managing General Partner, the local managing general
partner and the purchase money note holders are jointly exploring various
options to refinance the MHFA and HUD Section 236 interest rate subsidized
mortgage loans related to these Local Partnerships.  There is no assurance that
the purchase money note holders will agree to a ten year extension on the
purchase money notes, or that a refinancing of these mortgage loans will be
obtained.

     The local managing general partner of Blackburn Limited Partnership
(Country Place I) and Second Blackburn Limited Partnership (Country Place II)
and the Managing General Partner have submitted an application to refinance the
first mortgages of the Local Partnerships.  On April 7, 1997, the Partnership
advanced funds totalling $14,000 and $14,000 to Country Place I and Country
Place II, respectively, to fund costs associated with the refinancing
application.  On July 18, 1997, the Partnership and the lender signed a loan
commitment and the Partnership paid a $74,250 and $45,000 loan commitment fee
for Country Place I and Country Place II, respectively.  The Managing General
Partner anticipates that closing on the refinancing of the mortgages will occur
on August 1, 1997.  There is, however, no assurance that a refinancing of the
mortgages on these Local Partnerships will be obtained.

     Some of the rental properties owned by the Local Partnerships have
mortgages which are federally insured under Section 236 or Section 221(d)(3)of
the National Housing Act, as amended.  LIHPRHA, which provided property owners
with restricted opportunities to sell low income housing, ended effective
September 30, 1996.  However, HUD received approximately $175 million to fund
sales of qualifying properties under the LIHPRHA program during the federal
government's fiscal year 1997, which began October 1, 1996.  Continued funding
of the LIHPRHA program after fiscal year 1997 is uncertain.  There is no
assurance that a sale of any properties that previously qualified under the
LIHPRHA program will occur.

     Some of the rental properties owned by the Local Partnerships are financed
by state housing agencies.  The Managing General Partner has been working to
develop strategies to sell or refinance certain properties pursuant to programs
developed by these agencies or other potential buyers.  These programs may
include opportunities to sell the property to a qualifying purchaser who would
agree to maintain the property as low to moderate income housing in perpetuity,
or to refinance the property, or to obtain supplemental financing.  The Managing
General Partner continues to monitor certain state housing agency programs
and/or programs provided by certain lenders, to ascertain whether the properties
would qualify within the parameters of a given program and whether these
programs would provide an appropriate economic benefit to the limited partners
of the Partnership.



                                       -9-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

     Some of the rental properties owned by the Local Partnerships are dependent
on the receipt of project-based rental housing assistance payments provided by
HUD pursuant to Section 8 HAP contracts.  In 1995 and 1996, HUD released its
Reinvention Blueprint and a revision to its Reinvention Blueprint which
contained proposals that have come to be known as "Mark-to-Market".  Congress,
HUD and the Clinton Administration continue to struggle with the Mark-to-Market
initiative.  This initiative was intended to deal with HUD's increasing burden
of funding HAP contracts.  Under the initiative, HUD would eliminate the
project-based subsidy and provide the residents with "sticky vouchers" which
would allow residents to move to other developments should they so choose.  The
initiative will impact those properties that have HAP contracts with shorter
terms than that of the underlying property mortgage.  For instance, some
properties may have a 20-year HAP contract while the underlying mortgage has a
40-year term.  In the interim, Congress has authorized one-year extensions for
properties with HAP contracts expiring during the government's fiscal year 1997,
which began October 1, 1996.  In light of recent political scrutiny of
appropriations for HUD programs, a one year extension of Section 8 HAP contracts
expiring during the government's fiscal year 1998 is possible however, such an
extension as well as continued funding of annual renewals for Section 8 HAP
contracts expiring after fiscal year 1998 is uncertain.  The Section 8 HAP
contracts for the following properties expire during the government's fiscal
year 1998:


































                                      -10-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                              Units Authorized for
                          Number of          Rental Assistance Under       Expiration of Section 8
Property                 Rental Units             Section 8                HAP Contract
--------                 ------------        -----------------------       -----------------------
<S>                      <C>                 <C>                           <C>
Beech Hill I                 200                   39                           08/31/98 (1)
Beech Hill II                120                   24                           08/31/98 (1)
Chevy Chase                  232                  228                           09/23/98
Four Winds West               62                   62                           10/17/97
Frenchman's Wharf II         324                   31                           11/30/97
Princeton                    239                   26                           01/01/98
Wexford Ridge                246                  242                           09/30/98

</TABLE>

(1)  As discussed previously, the Partnership's interests in these Local
     Partnerships are held in escrow and will be automatically transferred to
     the purchase money note holders on January 1, 1998 if the related purchase
     money notes are not paid off in full at such time.

     With the potential elimination of the HAP contracts, there is no assurance
that these rental properties would be able to maintain the rental income and
occupancy levels necessary to pay operating costs and debt service.  

     With the ending of the LIHPRHA program and with the uncertainty surrounding
renewals of expiring Section 8 HAP contracts, the Managing General Partner is
developing new strategies to deal with the ever changing environment of
affordable housing policy.  Section 236 and Section 221(d)(3) properties that
are in the 18th year of their mortgage may be eligible for pre-payment of the
mortgage.  Properties with expiring Section 8 HAP contracts may become
convertible to market-rate apartment properties.  Currently, there are a few
lenders that will provide financing either to prepay the existing mortgage or
provide additional funds to allow the property to convert to market rate units. 
Where opportunities exist, the Managing General Partner will continue to work
with the Local Partnerships to develop a strategy that makes economic sense for
all parties involved.

     The following are combined statements of operations for the twenty and
twenty-two Local Partnerships in which the Partnership had invested as of June
30, 1997 and June 30, 1996, respectively.  The 1997 statements of operations
contain information on Tanglewood II and Deer Grove through the respective dates
of sale.  The statements are compiled from information supplied by the
management agents of the projects and are unaudited.










                                                                -11-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)

2.   INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO PARTNERSHIPS - Continued

                        COMBINED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
                                   (Unaudited)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                             For the three months ended          For the six months ended
                                                                       June 30,                           June 30,
                                                            -----------------------------      -----------------------------
                                                                1997             1996              1997             1996
                                                            ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
<S>                                                         <C>              <C>               <C>              <C>
Revenue:
  Rental revenue                                            $  6,253,627     $  7,303,990      $ 13,594,722     $ 14,618,691
  Other                                                          313,280          301,324           647,542          604,606
                                                            ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
                                                               6,566,907        7,605,314        14,242,264       15,223,297
                                                            ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
Expenses:
  Operating                                                    4,169,260        4,813,084         9,267,902       10,002,211
  Interest                                                     1,626,408        2,114,726         3,693,568        4,229,458
  Depreciation and amortization                                1,206,743        1,378,535         2,579,264        2,757,070
                                                            ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
                                                               7,002,411        8,306,345        15,540,734       16,988,739
                                                            ------------     ------------      ------------     ------------
Net loss                                                    $   (435,504)    $   (701,031)     $ (1,298,470)    $(1,765,442)
                                                            ============     ============      ============     ============

</TABLE>

     As of June 30, 1997 and December 31, 1996, the Partnership's share of
cumulative losses to date for eleven of the twenty and twenty-two Local
Partnerships, respectively, exceeds the amount of the Partnership's investments
in and advances to those Local Partnerships by $29,820,036 and $28,225,703,
respectively. As the Partnership has no further obligation to advance funds or
provide financing to these Local Partnerships, the excess losses have not been
reflected in the accompanying financial statements.

3.   RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS

     In accordance with the terms of the Partnership Agreement, the Partnership
is obligated to reimburse the Managing General Partner for its direct expenses
in managing the Partnership.  The Partnership paid $43,284 and $72,353 for the
three and six months ended June 30, 1997, respectively $30,025 and $55,523 for
the three and six months ended June 30, 1996, respectively, as direct
reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of the Partnership.  Such expenses
are included in the statements of operations as general and administrative
expenses. Additionally, the Partnership is obligated to pay an annual incentive
management fee (the Management Fee) after all other expenses of the Partnership
are paid.  The Partnership paid the Managing General Partner a Management Fee of
$62,499 and $124,998 for the three and six months respectively ended June 30,
1997 and 1996.





                                                                -12-
<PAGE>
                 CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                          NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

                                   (Unaudited)


4.   CONTINGENCIES

     In 1990, CRI, as Managing General Partner of the Partnership and various
other entities, subcontracted certain property-level asset management functions
for certain properties to Capital Management Strategies, Inc. (CMS).  Among
these properties were properties owned by some of the Local Partnerships in
which the Partnership invested.  CMS was formed by Martin C. Schwartzberg, a
nominal general partner of the Partnership and a former stockholder of CRI, when
he retired from CRI and its related businesses as of January 1, 1990.  Mr.
Schwartzberg agreed not to act as a general partner with respect to any of the
CRI-sponsored partnerships, including this Partnership, and has not done so
since that time.  In late 1995, a dispute arose between CRI and CMS over the
funding level of the 1996 contract for CMS.  On November 9, 1995, CRI filed a
complaint against CMS to determine the proper amount of fees to be paid in 1996
under the asset management agreement.  CMS answered on January 10, 1996, but
asserted no counterclaims.

     Thereafter, Mr. Schwartzberg launched a hostile consent solicitation to be
designated as managing general partner of approximately 125 private partnerships
sponsored by CRI.  On January 18, 1996, Mr. Schwartzberg and CMS filed a
complaint in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Maryland (the Circuit
Court), against CRI and Messrs. Dockser and Willoughby (who are general partners
of the Partnership) alleging, among other things, that CRI and Messrs. Dockser
and Willoughby breached the asset management agreement pursuant to which Mr.
Schwartzberg's company, CMS, agreed to perform limited functions related to
property-level issues for a portion of CRI's subsidized housing portfolio
(including some of the properties in which the Partnership invested), by
reducing the proposed budget for 1996.  The Partnership was not named as a
defendant in this action.  Messrs. Dockser and Willoughby entered an answer
denying all of Mr. Schwartzberg's claims.  On February 6, 1996, CRI terminated
the CMS contract for cause.  (CRI subsequently retained an independent asset
management company to perform functions previously performed by CMS.)  Mr.
Schwartzberg and CMS responded to the contract termination by filing a motion
for injunctive relief in the Circuit Court, asking the court to enjoin CRI from
terminating the contract.  In a ruling issued on February 12, 1996, the Circuit
Court, among other things, refused to grant the injunction requested by CMS.  On
February 12, 1996, the Circuit Court also issued a memorandum opinion and order
enjoining CMS and Mr. Schwartzberg from disclosing information made confidential
under the asset management agreement.

     Following subsequent litigation, none of which involved the Partnership, on
June 12, 1996, Mr. Schwartzberg, CRI and others entered an agreement (which
contemplates the execution of a subsequent definitive agreement) to resolve the
disputes between CRI and CMS.  The Partnership was not a signatory to the
agreement.  As part of the resolution, Mr. Schwartzberg withdrew any derogatory
statements he made about CRI and its principals.  Upon execution of the
definitive agreement, Mr. Schwartzberg shall withdraw as a General Partner of
this Partnership and his interest will become that of a Special Limited Partner.
As of July 17, 1997, CRI and Mr. Schwartzberg were unable to agree on the
language of various provisions of the definitive agreement and have agreed to
submit the open issues to arbitration.  The Partnership is not a party to the
arbitration proceeding.





                                      -13-
<PAGE>
PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
               -----------------------------------


     Capital Realty Investors-II Limited Partnership's (the Partnership)
Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations contains information that may be considered forward looking.  This
information contains a number of risks and uncertainties, as discussed herein
and in the Partnership's Annual Report filed on Form
10-K, that could cause actual results to differ materially.

                          Financial Condition/Liquidity
                          -----------------------------

     The Partnership's liquidity, with unrestricted cash resources of $6,258,934
(or approximately $121.42 per Additional Limited Partner unit) and $2,128,849
(or approximately $41.29 per Additional Limited Partner unit) as of June 30,
1997 and December 31, 1996, respectively, along with anticipated future cash
distributions from the Local Partnerships, is expected to meet its current and
anticipated operating cash needs.  As of July 17, 1997, there are no material
commitments for capital expenditures. 

     The Partnership's obligations with respect to its investments in Local
Partnerships, in the form of purchase money notes having a principal balance of
$18,847,678 (exclusive of unamortized discount on purchase money notes of
$3,208,051) plus accrued interest of $29,628,185 as of June 30, 1997, are
payable in full upon the earliest of:  (i) sale or refinancing of the respective
Local Partnership's rental property; (ii) payment in full of the respective
Local Partnership's permanent loan; or (iii) maturity.  Purchase money notes in
an aggregate principal amount of $2,100,000 matured on December 31, 1996, as
discussed below.  Purchase money notes in an aggregate principal amount of
$1,900,000, $2,380,000 and $3,150,000 mature on December 31, 1997, January 1,
1998 and June 1, 1998, respectively, as discussed below.  The remaining purchase
money notes mature later in 1998 and 1999.  The purchase money notes are
generally secured by the Partnership's interest in the respective Local
Partnerships.  There is no assurance that the underlying properties will have
sufficient appreciation and equity to enable the Partnership to pay the purchase
money notes' principal and accrued interest when due.  If a purchase money note
is not paid in accordance with its terms, the Partnership will either have to
renegotiate the terms of repayment or risk losing its partnership interest in
the Local Partnership.  The Managing General Partner is continuing to
investigate possible alternatives to reduce the Partnership's long-term debt
obligations.  These alternatives include, among others, retaining the cash
available for distribution to meet the purchase money note requirements, buying
out certain purchase money notes at a discounted price, extending the due dates
of certain purchase money notes, or refinancing the respective properties'
underlying debt and using the Partnership's share of the proceeds to pay off or
buy down certain purchase money note obligations.

     Purchase money notes relating to Wexford Ridge Associates (Wexford Ridge)
in the principal amount of $1,900,000 mature on December 31, 1997.  The Managing
General Partner anticipates negotiating with the purchase money note holders for
a five year extension on the purchase money notes.  There is no assurance that
the Managing General Partner will reach an agreement of any kind with the
noteholders.  Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the Partnership will
be able to retain its interest in the Local Partnership.  The uncertainty about
the continued ownership of the Partnership's interest in the related Local
Partnership does not impact the Partnership's financial condition because the
related purchase money notes are nonrecourse and secured solely by the
Partnership's interest in the Local Partnership.  Therefore, should the

                                      -14-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

investment in Wexford Ridge not produce sufficient value to satisfy the purchase
money notes related to Wexford Ridge, the Partnership's exposure to loss is
limited since the amount of the nonrecourse indebtedness exceeds the carrying
amount of the investment in and advances to the Local Partnership.  Thus, even a
complete loss of this investment would not have a material impact on the
operations of the Partnership.

     The Partnership defaulted on its purchase money notes relating to Chevy
Chase Park, Limited (Chevy Chase) on December 31, 1996 when the notes matured
and were not paid.  The default amount included principal and accrued interest
of $2,100,000 and $3,553,912, respectively.  As of July 22, 1997, principal and
accrued interest totalling $2,100,000 and $3,715,645, respectively, were due. 
The Managing General Partner is currently negotiating a five year extension of
the purchase money notes with the noteholders.  The Managing General Partner is
also awaiting the potential future sale of the property under the Low Income
Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA) program. 
There is no assurance that a sale will take place under the LIHPRHA program, nor
is there any assurance that an agreement will be reached with the noteholders. 
As such, there is no assurance that the Partnership will be able to retain its
interest in Chevy Chase.  The uncertainty regarding the continued ownership of
the Partnership's interests in Chevy Chase does not impact the Partnership's
financial condition because the related purchase money notes are nonrecourse and
secured solely by the Partnership's interest in the related Local Partnership. 
Therefore, should the investment in Chevy Chase not produce sufficient value to
satisfy the related purchase money notes, the Partnership's exposure to loss is
limited since the amount of the nonrecourse indebtedness exceeds the carrying
amount of the investment in and advances to the Local Partnership.  Thus, even a
complete loss of this investment would not have a material impact on the
operations of the Partnership.

     The Partnership defaulted on its purchase money notes relating to Beech
Hill Development Co. (Beech Hill I) and Beech Hill Development Co. II (Beech
Hill II) on August 1, 1995 when the notes matured and were not paid.  On March
29, 1996, the noteholders agreed to extend the purchase money note due dates to
January 1, 1998.  Under the agreement, the Partnership will pay the purchase
money noteholders of Beech Hill I and Beech Hill II all annual cash flow
distributions received from the related Local Partnerships in excess of $5,000
and $2,500, respectively.  There were no annual cash flow distributions made to
the Partnership from the related Local Partnerships during the six months ended
June 30, 1997 and 1996.  Also under the agreement, documents transferring the
Partnership's interests in the related Local Partnerships to the noteholders
have been placed in escrow and would be released to the noteholders upon a
future default by the Partnership on the respective purchase money notes.

     The Partnership defaulted on its purchase money note relating to Rock Glen
Limited Partnership (Rock Glen) on August 1, 1995 when the note matured and was
not paid.  The noteholder signed a standstill agreement which expired on October
31, 1995.  The Managing General Partner made an offer to the noteholder to
extend the purchase money note due date to August 2000.  This offer was rejected
by the noteholder.  On January 11, 1996, the Partnership paid off the purchase
money note at a discount, resulting in a gain on extinguishment of debt of
approximately $1.8 million.

     On May 23, 1994, the local general partner of Tanglewood Apartments
Associates II Limited Partnership (Tanglewood II) filed a notice of intent to

                                      -15-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

participate under LIHPRHA.  On July 11, 1996, the local managing general
partner's plan of action regarding the sale of Tanglewood II under the LIHPRHA
program was approved by HUD.  On February 19, 1997, Tanglewood II sold the
property, a 192-unit apartment complex located in Westwego, Louisiana, under the
LIHPRHA program.  The sale of the property generated net cash proceeds to the
Partnership of $933,987.  The proceeds were net of $1,385,154 used to retire, at
a discount, the Partnership's purchase money note obligation with respect to the
property.  The sale provided proceeds to the Partnership in excess of its
investment in the Local Partnership, and resulted in a net financial statement
gain of approximately $3.2 million, of which approximately $1.7 million resulted
from the retirement of the purchase money note obligation with respect to the
property.  The federal tax gain is estimated to be approximately $4.9 million.

     On January 31, 1996, the local managing general partner of Palatine-
Barrington Associates Limited Partnership (Deer Grove) received an offer to sell
the property to an unaffiliated entity.  This offer was rejected by the local
managing general partner.  On September 13, 1996, the local  managing general
partner of Deer Grove received another offer to sell the property.  The local
managing general partner accepted the offer and on March 18, 1997, Deer Grove
sold the property, a 448-unit apartment complex located in Palatine, Illinois. 
The sale of the property generated cash proceeds to the Partnership of $3.4
million at closing.  On June 30, 1997, the Partnership received additional
proceeds of $50,000 representing the final release of the property's reserves. 
The proceeds received during and subsequent to closing were in excess of the
Partnership's investment in the Local Partnership and resulted in a net
financial statement gain of approximately $3.4 million.  The federal tax gain is
estimated to be approximately $17.8 million.

     On May 1, 1996, CRHC, Inc. (CRHC), an affiliate of the Managing General
Partner, notified the local managing general partner of Arrowhead Apartments
Associates Limited Partnership (Arrowhead) and Moorings Apartments Associates
Limited Partnership (Moorings) that he was in default under the Partnership
Agreements and threatened to remove him as managing general partner of the Local
Partnerships.  The managing agent of Arrowhead and Moorings, which is an
affiliate of the local managing general partner, filed arbitration against CRHC
seeking, among other things, a declaration that the allegations set forth in
CRHC's notice did not constitute grounds for removal of the local managing
general partner.  CRHC subsequently filed for arbitration against the local
managing general partner seeking his removal.  On September 3, 1996, CRHC filed
an emergency petition in the arbitration to have a trustee appointed to serve as
local managing general partner and managing agent of the Local Partnerships
until the arbitration hearings are held.  The emergency petition was denied.  On
May 7, 1997, the parties reached a settlement whereby the property management
agent was changed and the local managing general partner was removed from the
Local Partnership in exchange for $210,000.  The settlement was paid by the
Partnership and is included as legal fees in the accompanying financial
statements.

     The Partnership closely monitors its cash flow and liquidity position in an
effort to ensure that sufficient cash is available for operating requirements. 
For the six months ended June 30, 1997, the receipt of distributions from Local
Partnerships and distributions from the sales of Tanglewood II and Deer Grove
were adequate to support operating cash requirements and the pay-off of the



                                      -16-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

Tanglewood II purchase money notes.  Cash and cash equivalents increased during
the three months ended June 30, 1997 as a result of the receipt of net proceeds
from the sales of Tanglewood II and Deer Grove, as discussed above.

                              Results of Operations
                              ---------------------

     The Partnership's net loss for the three months ended June 30, 1997
increased from the comparable period during 1996 primarily due to increased
professional fees due to legal fees incurred in connection with the Arrowhead
and Moorings litigation, as discussed below.  Contributing to the increase in
the Partnership's net loss was an increase in interest expense due to the
amortization of imputed interest and an increase in general and administrative
expenses primarily due to increased payroll costs.  Partially offsetting the
increase in the Partnership's net loss was an increase in share of income from
partnerships primarily due to decreased operating costs at two properties during
1997 and an increase in interest income due to higher cash and cash equivalent
balances during 1997.

     The Partnership's net income for the six months ended June 30, 1997
increased from the comparable period in 1996 primarily due to the gain on
disposition of investments related to the sales of Tanglewood II and Deer Grove.
Also contributing to the increase in the Partnership's net income was an
increase in share of income from partnerships primarily due to decreased
maintenance costs at one property and losses at one property which were
unallowable in 1997 due to the reduction of the Partnership's basis in the Local
Partnership during 1996.  Also contributing to the increase in the Partnership's
net income was an increase in interest income as discussed above.  Partially
offsetting the increase in the Partnership's net income was a decrease in
extraordinary gain from extinguishment of debt due to a higher discounted pay-
off of the Rock Glen purchase money note versus the pay-off for the Tanglewood
II purchase money notes.  Also partially offsetting the increase in the
Partnership's net income was an increase in professional fees, an increase in
interest expense and an increase in general and administrative expenses, as
discussed above.

     For financial reporting purposes, the Partnership, as a limited partner in
the Local Partnerships, does not record losses from the Local Partnerships in
excess of its investment to the extent that the Partnership has no further
obligation to advance funds or provide financing to the Local Partnerships.  As
a result, the Partnership's recognized losses for the three and six months ended
June 30, 1997 did not include losses of $668,950 and $1,594,333, respectively,
compared to excluded losses of $889,855 and $1,772,571 for the three and six
months ended June 30, 1996, respectively.

     The local general partner of Lake Properties Limited Partnership
(Frenchman's Wharf II), in conjunction with the Managing General Partner,
engaged in extensive negotiations with the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), holder of the mortgage on the property, to extend the
previous workout arrangement related to the mortgage loan on the property, which
expired in December 1993.  On April 30, 1996, the local general partner received
approval from HUD for a four-year workout.  Under the workout agreement,
Frenchman's Wharf II makes minimum monthly payments, consisting of a service
charge and tax escrow.  Additionally, Frenchman's Wharf II makes monthly
interest payments representing approximately 50%, 65%, 85% and 100% of the

                                      -17-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

interest due on the outstanding principal balance of the note for the periods
July 1 through June 30 during the years 1996 through 2000, respectively.  As of
July 17, 1997, Frenchman's Wharf II made all monthly payments in accordance with
the workout arrangement.  There is, however, no assurance that the Local
Partnership, upon expiration of the workout, will be able to repay the loan in
accordance with the terms.

     To cover operating deficits incurred in prior years for Frenchman's Wharf
II, the Partnership advanced funds totalling $324,410 as of both June 30, 1997
and December 31, 1996.  The last advance was made to Frenchman's Wharf II in
March 1987.  The Partnership does not expect to advance any additional funds in
connection with Frenchman's Wharf II's loan workout with HUD.  These loans,
together with accrued interest of $187,372 as of both June 30, 1997 and December
31, 1996, are payable from cash flow of Frenchman's Wharf II after payment of
first-mortgage debt service and after satisfaction by the Partnership of certain
other interest obligations on the purchase money notes relating to the Local
Partnership.  There is no assurance that the Local Partnership, upon expiration
of the workout, will be able to repay the loan in accordance with the terms.

     The purchase money notes related to Frenchman's Wharf II in the principal
amount of $3,150,000 which were initially due to mature on June 1, 1988 have
been extended to mature on June 1, 1998.  In conjunction with the four-year
workout agreement, the Partnership is currently negotiating with the purchase
money note holders to reach an extension agreement which would be coterminous
with the expiration of the HUD workout arrangement.  There is no assurance that
the noteholders will consent to an extension agreement.  As of July 17, 1997,
the noteholders had not consented to an extension agreement.  There is no
assurance that any agreement will be reached with the noteholders.  As such,
there is no assurance that the Partnership will be able to retain its interest
in Frenchman's Wharf II.  The uncertainty regarding the continued ownership of
the Partnership's interest in Frenchman's Wharf II does not impact the
Partnership's financial condition because the related purchase money notes are
nonrecourse and secured solely by the Partnership's interest in the related
Local Partnership.  Therefore, should the investment in Frenchman's Wharf II not
produce sufficient value to satisfy the related purchase money notes, the
Partnership's exposure to loss is limited since the amount of the nonrecourse
indebtedness exceeds the carrying amount of the investment in and advances to
the Local Partnership.  Thus, even a complete loss of this investment would not
have a material impact on the operations of the Partnership.

     The report of the auditors on the financial statements of Frenchman's Wharf
II for the year ended December 31, 1996 indicated that substantial doubt exists
about the ability of the Local Partnership to continue as a going concern due to
the Local Partnership's default on its mortgage loan and the expiration of its
Section 8 Rental Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contract with HUD on November
30, 1997.  The uncertainty about the Local Partnerships' continued ownership of
the property does not impact the Partnership's financial condition because the
amount of the Partnership's nonrecourse indebtedness related to this property
exceeds the carrying value of the investment in and advances to the Local
Partnership, as discussed above.

     Posada Associates Limited Partnership (Posada Vallarta Apartments) was
operating under an extension of a three-year workout agreement with HUD, the
holder of the mortgage.  The workout provided for, among other things, a minimum
monthly debt service payment, with excess cash, if any, being applied to

                                      -18-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

delinquent interest.  All debt service payments were made in accordance with the
workout.  In June 1995, the three-year workout which originally expired on
October 1, 1995 was extended to October 1, 1996.  In June 1996, HUD sold the
mortgage loan to a third party.  The new mortgagee issued a notice of default
and acceleration of the loan to Posada Vallarta Apartments.  The notice was
determined to be in error, and on July 8, 1996 the notice of default and
acceleration was withdrawn by the new mortgagee.  The workout agreement related
to Posada Vallarta Apartments provided that upon cancellation of the workout
agreement, the loan would be recast at an annual interest rate of 7.5%, if
certain conditions are satisfied.  As of October 1, 1996, the expiration date of
the workout agreement, the local managing general partner and the new mortgagee
were disputing whether or not those conditions had been satisfied.  On October
1, 1996, the Local Partnership made a monthly payment on the debt, and has
continued to make such monthly payments, in the amount which would be due if the
loan is recast at a 7.5% annual interest rate.  The new mortgagee made an offer
to extend the workout agreement for two years.  The local managing general
partner made a counter-offer to extend the workout agreement for ten years.  On
February 6, 1997, the local managing general partner and the new mortgagee
reached an agreement in principle to recast the loan at a 7.5% annual interest
rate with a ten-year call provision, as stated in the workout agreement.  As of
July 17, 1997, the parties are negotiating revised loan documents implementing
their agreement.  There is no assurance that a final agreement will be reached
on these documents.  Should the mortgagee begin foreclosure proceedings, the
Partnership intends to vigorously defend such action.

     Wexford Ridge, its local general partner, and its management agent were
named in eight sexual harassment and discrimination complaints filed with HUD. 
The complaints were reviewed by the HUD Fair Housing Council and during April
1997, the council determined that no basis had been found to pursue further
action and dismissed the complaints.

     The Managing General Partner and trustees representing the purchase money
note holders related to Roberts Fall River Associates (Rolling Green at Fall
River) and Roberts Amherst Associates (Rolling Green at Amherst) have reached an
agreement in principle to extend the purchase money notes related to these Local
Partnerships for ten years.  This agreement in principle is subject to the
consent of the purchase money note holders.  The purchase money notes, which
aggregate a principle amount of $4,600,000 and $1,927,500 for Rolling Green at
Fall River and Rolling Green at Amherst, respectively, are currently due to
mature August 31, 1998.  In connection with the proposed extension of the
purchase money notes, the Managing General Partner, the local managing general
partner and the purchase money note holders are jointly exploring various
options to refinance the MHFA and HUD Section 236 interest rate subsidized
mortgage loans related to the Local Partnerships.  There is no assurance that
the purchase money note holders will agree to a ten year extension on the
purchase money notes, or that a refinancing of these mortgage loans will be
obtained.

     The local managing general partner of Blackburn Limited Partnership
(Country Place I) and Second Blackburn Limited Partnership (Country Place II)
and the Managing General Partner have submitted an application to refinance the
first mortgages of the Local Partnerships.  On April 7, 1997, the Partnership
advanced funds totalling $14,000 and $14,000 to Country Place I and Country
Place II, respectively, to fund costs associated with the refinancing
application.  On July 18, 1997, the Partnership and the lender signed a loan

                                      -19-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

commitment and the Partnership paid a $74,250 and $45,000 loan commitment fee
for Country Place I and Country Place II, respectively.  The Managing General
Partner anticipates that closing on the refinancing of the mortgages will occur
on August 1, 1997.  There is, however, no assurance that a refinancing of the
mortgages on these Local Partnerships will be obtained.

     Some of the rental properties owned by the Local Partnerships have
mortgages which are federally insured under Section 236 or Section 221(d)(3)of
the National Housing Act, as amended.  LIHPRHA, which provided property owners
with restricted opportunities to sell low income housing, ended effective
September 30, 1996.  However, HUD received approximately $175 million to fund
sales of qualifying properties under the LIHPRHA program during the federal
government's fiscal year 1997, which began October 1, 1996.  Continued funding
of the LIHPRHA program after fiscal year 1997 is uncertain.  There is no
assurance that a sale of any properties that previously qualified under the
LIHPRHA program will occur.

     Some of the rental properties owned by the Local Partnerships are financed
by state housing agencies.  The Managing General Partner has been working to
develop strategies to sell or refinance certain properties pursuant to programs
developed by these agencies or other potential buyers.  These programs may
include opportunities to sell the property to a qualifying purchaser who would
agree to maintain the property as low to moderate income housing in perpetuity,
or to refinance the property, or to obtain supplemental financing.  The Managing
General Partner continues to monitor certain state housing agency programs
and/or programs provided by certain lenders, to ascertain whether the properties
would qualify within the parameters of a given program and whether these
programs would provide an appropriate economic benefit to the limited partners
of the Partnership.

     Some of the rental properties owned by the Local Partnerships are dependent
on the receipt of project-based rental housing assistance payments provided by
HUD pursuant to Section 8 HAP contracts.  In 1995 and 1996, HUD released its
Reinvention Blueprint and a revision to its Reinvention Blueprint which
contained proposals that have come to be known as "Mark-to-Market".  Congress,
HUD and the Clinton Administration continue to struggle with the Mark-to-Market
initiative.  This initiative was intended to deal with HUD's increasing burden
of funding HAP contracts.  Under the initiative, HUD would eliminate the
project-based subsidy and provide the residents with "sticky vouchers" which
would allow residents to move to other developments should they so choose.  The
initiative will impact those properties that have HAP contracts with shorter
terms than that of the underlying property mortgage.  For instance, some
properties may have a 20-year HAP contract while the underlying mortgage has a
40-year term.  In the interim, Congress has authorized one-year extensions for
properties with HAP contracts expiring during the government's fiscal year 1997,
which began October 1, 1996.  In light of recent political scrutiny of
appropriations for HUD programs, a one year extension of Section 8 HAP contracts
expiring during the government's fiscal year 1998 is possible however, such an
extension as well as continued funding of annual renewals for Section 8 HAP
contracts expiring after fiscal year 1998 is uncertain.  The Section 8 HAP
contracts for the following properties expire during the government's fiscal
year 1998:




                                      -20-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                              Units Authorized for
                          Number of          Rental Assistance Under            Expiration of Section 8
Property                 Rental Units             Section 8                      HAP Contract
--------                 ------------        -----------------------            -----------------------
<S>                      <C>                 <C>                                <C>
Beech Hill I                 200                        39                           08/31/98 (1)
Beech Hill II                120                        24                           08/31/98 (1)
Chevy Chase                  232                       228                           09/23/98
Four Winds West               62                        62                           10/17/97
Frenchman's Wharf II         324                        31                           11/30/97
Princeton                    239                        26                           01/01/98
Wexford Ridge                246                       242                           09/30/98

</TABLE>

(1)  As discussed previously, the Partnership's interests in these Local
     Partnerships are held in escrow and will be automatically transferred to
     the purchase money note holders on January 1, 1998 if the related purchase
     money notes are not paid off in full at such time.

     With the potential elimination of the HAP contracts, there is no assurance
that these rental properties would be able to maintain the rental income and
occupancy levels necessary to pay operating costs and debt service.  

     With the ending of the LIHPRHA program and with the uncertainty surrounding
renewals of expiring Section 8 HAP contracts, the Managing General Partner is
developing new strategies to deal with the ever changing environment of
affordable housing policy.  Section 236 and Section 221(d)(3) properties that
are in the 18th year of their mortgage may be eligible for pre-payment of the
mortgage.  Properties with expiring Section 8 HAP contracts may become
convertible to market-rate apartment properties.  Currently, there are a few
lenders that will provide financing either to prepay the existing mortgage or
provide additional funds to allow the property to convert to market rate units. 
Where opportunities exist, the Managing General Partner will continue to work
with the Local Partnerships to develop a strategy that makes economic sense for
all parties involved.

     No other significant changes in the Partnership's operations have taken
place during this period.

                                     General
                                    --------

     In 1990, CRI, as Managing General Partner of the Partnership and various
other entities, subcontracted certain property-level asset management functions
for certain properties to Capital Management Strategies, Inc. (CMS).  Among
these properties were properties owned by some of the Local Partnerships in
which the Partnership invested.  CMS was formed by Martin C. Schwartzberg, a
nominal general partner of the Partnership and a former stockholder of CRI, when
he retired from CRI and its related businesses as of January 1, 1990.  Mr.
Schwartzberg agreed not to act as a general partner with respect to any of the
CRI-sponsored partnerships, including this Partnership, and has not done so

                                                                -21-
<PAGE>

PART I.   FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          ---------------------
ITEM 2.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
          -------------------------------------------------
               CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued
               -----------------------------------

since that time.  In late 1995, a dispute arose between CRI and CMS over the
funding level of the 1996 contract for CMS.  On November 9, 1995, CRI filed a
complaint against CMS to determine the proper amount of fees to be paid in 1996
under the asset management agreement.  CMS answered on January 10, 1996, but
asserted no counterclaims.

     Thereafter, Mr. Schwartzberg launched a hostile consent solicitation to be
designated as managing general partner of approximately 125 private partnerships
sponsored by CRI.  On January 18, 1996, Mr. Schwartzberg and CMS filed a
complaint in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Maryland (the Circuit
Court), against CRI and Messrs. Dockser and Willoughby (who are general partners
of the Partnership) alleging, among other things, that CRI and Messrs. Dockser
and Willoughby breached the asset management agreement pursuant to which Mr.
Schwartzberg's company, CMS, agreed to perform limited functions related to
property-level issues for a portion of CRI's subsidized housing portfolio
(including some of the properties in which the Partnership invested), by
reducing the proposed budget for 1996.  The Partnership was not named as a
defendant in this action.  Messrs. Dockser and Willoughby entered an answer
denying all of Mr. Schwartzberg's claims.  On February 6, 1996, CRI terminated
the CMS contract for cause.  (CRI subsequently retained an independent asset
management company to perform functions previously performed by CMS.)  Mr.
Schwartzberg and CMS responded to the contract termination by filing a motion
for injunctive relief in the Circuit Court, asking the court to enjoin CRI from
terminating the contract.  In a ruling issued on February 12, 1996, the Circuit
Court, among other things, refused to grant the injunction requested by CMS.  On
February 12, 1996, the Circuit Court also issued a memorandum opinion and order
enjoining CMS and Mr. Schwartzberg from disclosing information made confidential
under the asset management agreement.

     Following subsequent litigation, none of which involved the Partnership, on
June 12, 1996, Mr. Schwartzberg, CRI and others entered an agreement (which
contemplates the execution of a subsequent definitive agreement) to resolve the
disputes between CRI and CMS.  The Partnership was not a signatory to the
agreement.  As part of the resolution, Mr. Schwartzberg withdrew any derogatory
statements he made about CRI and its principals.  Upon execution of the
definitive agreement, Mr. Schwartzberg shall withdraw as a General Partner of
this Partnership and his interest will become that of a Special Limited Partner.
As of July 17, 1997, CRI and Mr. Schwartzberg were unable to agree on the
language of various provisions of the definitive agreement and have agreed to
submit the open issues to arbitration.  The Partnership is not a party to the
arbitration proceeding.















                                      -22-
<PAGE>
PART II.  OTHER INFORMATION
          -----------------
ITEM 3.   DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
          -------------------------------

     The Partnership defaulted on its purchase money notes relating to Chevy
Chase Park, Limited (Chevy Chase) on December 31, 1996 when the notes matured
and were not paid.  The default amount included principal and accrued interest
of $2,100,000 and $3,553,912, respectively.  As of July 22, 1997, principal and
accrued interest totalling $2,100,000 and $3,715,645, respectively, were due. 
The Managing General Partner is currently negotiating a five year extension of
the purchase money notes with the noteholders.  The Managing General Partner is
also awaiting the potential future sale of the property under the Low Income
Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA) program. 
There is no assurance that a sale will take place under the LIHPRHA program, nor
is there any assurance that any agreement will be reached with the noteholders. 
As such, there is no assurance that the Partnership will be able to retain its
interest in Chevy Chase.  The uncertainty regarding the continued ownership of
the Partnership's interests in Chevy Chase does not impact the Partnership's
financial condition because the related purchase money notes are nonrecourse and
secured solely by the Partnership's interest in the related Local Partnership. 
Therefore, should the investment in Chevy Chase not produce sufficient value to
satisfy the related purchase money notes, the Partnership's exposure to loss is
limited since the amount of the nonrecourse indebtedness exceeds the carrying
amount of the investment in and advances to the Local Partnership.  Thus, even a
complete loss of this investment would not have a material impact on the
operations of the Partnership.


PART II.  OTHER INFORMATION
          -----------------
ITEM 6.   EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
          --------------------------------

     No Reports on Form 8-K were filed with the Commission during the quarter
ended June 30, 1997.

     All other items are not applicable.


























                                      -23-
<PAGE>

                                    SIGNATURE


     Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

                              CAPITAL REALTY INVESTORS-II
                                   LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                                       (Registrant)


                              By:  C.R.I., Inc.
                                   Managing General Partner



July 22, 1997                 By:  /s/ Susan R. Campbell
---------------------              ------------------------------------
Date                               Susan R. Campbell
                                   Executive Vice President and Chief
                                     Operating Officer


                                   Signing on behalf of the
                                     Registrant and as Acting Chief
                                     Accounting Officer, Principal
                                     Financial and Principal
                                     Accounting Officer


































                                      -24-
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT INDEX
                                  -------------


Exhibit                                         Method of Filing
-------                                   -----------------------------

27        Financial Data Schedule         Filed herewith electronically






















































                                      -25-