NAHASDA authorized two HUD-administered programs—IHBG and Title VI—that aim to provide affordable housing assistance to Native Americans living on or near Indian tribal lands or areas, including assistance for housing-related infrastructure. NAHASDA was first funded in fiscal year 1998 and was most recently reauthorized in 2008. Prior to NAHASDA, Native Americans received assistance for affordable housing under various programs aimed at providing housing assistance to low-income families. For example, several of the programs were authorized by the 1937 Act, including housing development and modernization grants, operating subsidies, and Section 8 rental assistance. Prior to NAHASDA, there were no specific provisions relating to the unique circumstances of Native Americans living on or near tribal lands, such as the federal government’s obligations to Native Americans through treaties and legislation, the relationships between sovereign governments (federal and tribal) with different laws, and the challenges with development on trust lands. When NAHASDA was enacted in 1996, it incorporated the major programs that served Native Americans into a single block grant program (the IHBG program). NAHASDA also created the Title VI program. The IHBG program is a formula grant program that provides funding for affordable housing activities to Native American tribes or tribally designated housing entities (TDHE). The purpose of the Title VI program is to assist IHBG recipients that are unable to obtain financing for eligible affordable housing activities without a federal guarantee. Through the IHBG and Title VI programs, NAHASDA aims to accomplish the following statutory objectives: assist and promote affordable housing activities to develop, maintain, and operate affordable housing in safe and healthy environments on Indian reservations and in other Indian areas for occupancy by low-income Indian families; ensure better access to private mortgage markets for Indian tribes and their members and promote self-sufficiency of Indian tribes and their members; coordinate activities to provide housing for Indian tribes and their members with federal, state, and local activities to further economic and community development for Indian tribes and their members; plan for and integrate infrastructure resources with housing development for Indian tribes; and promote the development of private capital markets in Indian country for the benefit of Indian communities. NAHASDA, as described in the statute, is “o provide federal assistance for Indian tribes in a manner that recognizes the right of tribal self- governance, and for other purposes.” Under NAHASDA, tribes practice self-governance or self-determination through (1) negotiated rulemaking, (2) receiving funding directly rather than through Indian Housing Authorities, and (3) determining the details of their housing programs. Negotiated rulemaking is the process whereby an agency considering drafting a rule brings together representatives of that agency and affected parties for negotiations, consistent with the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990. ONAP consults with tribes on various matters. One important element of these discussions is negotiated rulemaking, which allows Native Americans to participate in developing regulations, including those pertaining to the IHBG allocation formula. Before NAHASDA, HUD provided most of its assistance to Native Americans through Indian Housing Authorities in the same manner as public housing. With the enactment of NAHASDA, tribes may choose to receive housing funds directly or they may designate a TDHE to administer the housing program on their behalf. Tribes and TDHEs can use IHBG funds for any eligible NAHASDA activity. Finally, under NAHASDA, tribes are able to determine (1) whom they serve (for example, giving preference to members of the participating tribe); (2) what types of eligible activities they offer; and (3) how they deliver their programs and projects. Entities eligible for NAHASDA programs are federally recognized Indian tribes or their TDHEs and a limited number of state recognized tribes that were funded under the 1937 Act. Families that are eligible for NAHASDA- funded assistance are low-income Indian families—defined as Indian families whose income does not exceed 80 percent of the area median income—residing on a reservation or in an Indian area. Further, NAHASDA requires that dwelling units be occupied, owned, leased, purchased, or constructed by low-income families and that the dwelling units remain affordable for the remaining useful life of the property. According to HUD’s 2009 IHBG formula allocation data, 282,111 American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) households residing in NAHASDA formula areas were low-income. Under NAHASDA, there are seven eligible activities: 1. Indian housing assistance, i.e. modernization or operating assistance for 1937 Act units; 2. housing development, including the acquisition, new construction, and reconstruction or rehabilitation of affordable housing; 3. housing services, including housing counseling and assistance to owners, tenants, and contractors involved in eligible housing activities; 4. housing management services for affordable housing, including loan processing, inspections, and tenant selection; 5. crime prevention and safety; 6. model activities that provide creative approaches to solving affordable 7. reserve accounts for administrative and planning activities related to affordable housing. Under NAHASDA, grantees can use a range of approaches to provide homeownership and rental assistance. These include providing homeownership units for purchase or lease-purchase through new construction, acquisition (for example, purchase of existing units), rehabilitation, or acquisition and rehabilitation; rental units through new construction, acquisition (for example, purchase of existing units), rehabilitation, or acquisition and rehabilitation; rental units through conversion of existing structures or demolition and replacement of existing structures; homeownership assistance through acquisition (for example, downpayment or closing cost assistance to the homebuyer) or acquisition and rehabilitation; and tenant-based rental assistance (residents pay up to 30 percent of their adjusted income). Grantees also can leverage NAHASDA funds by combining them with funds from other federal, state, local, and private sources to support eligible program activities. According to HUD, leveraging was not common under the 1937 Act. Since the enactment of NAHASDA, several legislative and regulatory changes have occurred (see fig. 1). Those changes include the creation of the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program in 2000 and the use of grant funds for housing-related community development activities. Funding for the IHBG program has remained steady. NAHASDA’s first appropriation in fiscal year 1998 was $592 million, and average funding was approximately $633 million between 1998 and 2009. The highest level of funding was $691 million in 2002, and the lowest was $577 million in 1999. For fiscal year 2009, the program’s appropriation was $621 million. However, when accounting for inflation, constant dollars have generally decreased since the enactment of NAHASDA. The highest level of funding in constant dollars was $779 million in 1998, and the lowest was $621 million in 2009. Amounts cited above and in figure 1 are for the IHBG program and exclude NAHASDA set-asides such as technical assistance and Title VI funding. ONAP, which administers NAHASDA, is part of HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing and administers the Indian Community Development Block Grant and the Section 184 Indian Home Loan Guarantee programs. ONAP’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. and its Denver office direct the administration of the IHBG program on the national level, while six regional offices administer grants on the local level. Each regional office contains two divisions: Grants Management, which provides funding, technical assistance, and project support to grantees; and Grants Evaluation, which reviews grantees’ performance and initiates enforcement procedures when necessary. NAHASDA changed HUD’s role and involvement in Native American housing. Prior to NAHASDA, HUD had greater involvement in the development of housing projects while also managing multiple programs that served Native Americans. Several of the programs were competitive, and HUD reviewed and scored project proposals for those programs and awarded grants to the highest-ranked projects, in addition to distributing funds through the other noncompetitive (formula-based) programs. Under the competitive programs, HUD had greater influence over how funds were spent. Under NAHASDA, HUD plays a more administrative role in delivering housing benefits to Native Americans, providing funding through a single, tribally negotiated grant allocation formula. HUD’s role is (1) to provide grants, loan guarantees, and technical assistance to Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages for the development and operation of low-income housing in Indian areas; (2) to conduct oversight by ensuring that reporting requirements are met and by monitoring grant recipients onsite; and (3) to enforce remedies for noncompliant grant recipients. Prior to NAHASDA, HUD distributed grants from multiple programs to 217 Indian Housing Authorities. Under NAHASDA, in fiscal year 2008, 535 tribes benefited from more than 350 IHBG grants. The amount of funding is based on an allocation formula that has two components: (1) the costs of operating and modernizing pre-NAHASDA HUD-funded units and (2) the need for providing affordable housing activities. Need is calculated based on seven different factors that include the grantee’s AI/AN population and the number of households within that population that fall in certain low-income categories (see fig. 2). Allocation amounts are adjusted by local area costs for construction and rents. Because population impacts all need factors in the grant allocation, larger grantees (larger tribes operating their own housing programs or the TDHEs representing those tribes) receive larger grants. Additionally, grantees that own and operate pre-NAHASDA units receive both portions of the grant while those without the pre-NAHASDA units receive only the need portion. Since their inception, NAHASDA’s regulations have included a provision for minimum funding.