Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/8107
Last Updated: July 16, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]

ID: K000389

Follow the money

The bill

Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act

HR. 8107, 119th Congress — read as touching Private Prisons & Immigration Detention.

The sponsor

Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$188,900 raised

21 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Housing and Urban Development" section, p. 545-547 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

June 8, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's title, "Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act," sounds like a noble endeavor. But don't be fooled – it's just a Potemkin village of accountability. The real purpose is to create the illusion of oversight while allowing the same old corruption and waste to continue unabated.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill requires the Comptroller General to submit an assessment of program areas and administrative practices that present the greatest risk to the integrity of Federal funds administered by State and local governments. Wow, what a groundbreaking concept – identifying potential problems! It's not like they've been ignoring these issues for decades already. The assessment will supposedly identify vulnerabilities, best practices, and recommendations for improvement. Yawn.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects are involved: Federal agencies, State and local governments, pass-through entities, and the Comptroller General. All of them will pretend to care about accountability while secretly rejoicing that this bill won't actually change anything.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a placebo – it might make voters feel better, but it won't cure the disease of corruption and waste. The assessment will likely be a whitewashed report that identifies a few token problems while ignoring the systemic issues. It's a classic case of "diagnosing" the symptoms without treating the underlying disease.

In medical terms, this bill is like prescribing a band-aid for a patient with terminal cancer. It might cover up the symptoms temporarily, but it won't address the root cause of the problem. The real disease here is the corrupting influence of money and power in politics, and this bill does nothing to treat that.

To summarize: HR 8107 is a farcical attempt at accountability, designed to appease voters while maintaining the status quo of corruption and waste. It's a legislative equivalent of a participation trophy – "Hey, we tried!" – without actually accomplishing anything meaningful. Bravo, Congress, bravo.

Related Topics

State & Local Government AffairsGovernment Operations & AccountabilityFederal Budget & Appropriations
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$188,900
17 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$3,300
Committees
$0
Individuals
$185,600

No PAC contributions found

1
1850 WILLIAMS INVESTORS LLC
1 transaction
$3,300

No committee contributions found

1
CLEMENS, NICOLE
2 transactions
$25,400
2
PAPIER, SUSAN
2 transactions
$23,100
3
PAPIER, JASON
2 transactions
$23,100
4
COGEN, JACK
2 transactions
$23,100
5
SIRHAN, MOTASIM
1 transaction
$13,200
6
YOUNIS, QASAR
1 transaction
$9,900
7
RAGHAVAN, SHUBA
1 transaction
$8,400
8
LEVY, ELLEN
1 transaction
$6,600
9
YEE, BENNET
1 transaction
$6,600
10
JADEJA, ASHA
1 transaction
$6,600
11
CYRUS, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$6,600
12
SLOME, IAN
1 transaction
$6,600
13
GHOLAMI, SHAHRAM
1 transaction
$6,600
14
NANDA, MARGARET E.
1 transaction
$6,600
15
PATEL, RAJIV
1 transaction
$6,600
16
SHAH, MONA
1 transaction
$6,600

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Burchett, Tim [R-TN-2]

ID: B001309

Top Contributors

10

1
KUHLMAN, RUTHIE
IndividualKNOXVILLE, TN
$3,300
Sep 4, 2023
2
KUHLMAN, RUTHIE
IndividualKNOXVILLE, TN
$3,300
Sep 4, 2023
3
FUHRMAN, LINDSEY
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualSOUTH MIAMI, FL
$3,300
Jul 26, 2023
4
FUHRMAN, SCOTT
BISCAYNE GLOBAL MANAGEMENT • CHAIRMAN
IndividualSOUTH MIAMI, FL
$3,300
Jul 26, 2023
5
KUHLMAN, RUTHIE
OLD GRAY CEMETERY • EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
IndividualKNOXVILLE, TN
$3,300
Jul 29, 2023
6
KUHLMAN, RUTHIE
OLD GRAY CEMETERY • EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
IndividualKNOXVILLE, TN
$3,300
Jul 29, 2023
7
STOWERS, HARRY
STOWERS MACHINERY CORPORATION • EXECUTIVE
IndividualKNOXVILLE, TN
$3,300
Jul 25, 2023
8
STOWERS, HARRY
STOWERS MACHINERY CORPORATION • EXECUTIVE
IndividualKNOXVILLE, TN
$3,300
Jul 25, 2023
9
HUFFAKER, RAY F
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualPOWELL, TN
$3,300
Oct 29, 2024
10
COOLEY, WILLIAM
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualWEST PALM BEACH, FL
$3,300
Oct 26, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 37 nodes and 24 connections (40 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $198,800

Top Donors - Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]

Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount

1 Org16 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 6 harmed.

  • Section 2(b)(1) requires identification of program areas and administrative practices susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments, which could lead to increased scrutiny and regulation of private prisons.

  • −Health Insuranceconfidence 0.70

    Section 2(b)(1) mentions assessing practices that are more susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments, which could impact health insurance companies administering Federal funds.

  • Section 2(b)(3) assesses program areas that have demonstrated effectiveness in mitigating waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments, which could lead to increased regulatory oversight of long-term care facilities receiving Federal funds.

  • Section 2(b)(1) requires identification of program areas susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments, which could lead to increased scrutiny of hospitals and health systems administering Federal funds.

  • −Labor Unionsconfidence 0.50

    Section 2(b)(4) mentions Federal tools and resources available to State and local governments, which could impact labor unions representing public-sector workers.

  • −Commercial Banksconfidence 0.50

    Section 2(c)(1)(A) mentions findings of auditors and comptrollers, which could lead to increased regulatory oversight of commercial banks involved in administering Federal funds.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HARMS

  • from 14 contributions
    • FAROOQ, UMAR$4,800
    • TERRELL, FRED$3,300
    • SAGGURTI, PURNA$3,300
    • AASURI MARINGANTI, VIJAYA$1,000
    • AWAIS, MADIHA$1,000
  • from 9 contributions
    • SINGH, ROSHNI$6,600
    • DALVI, VRISHALI$3,300
    • SINGH, RAISHME$1,500
    • IANCU, LUIZA$1,000
    • MAHAJAN, KUNAL$300
  • from 1 contribution
    • TADROS, ISSA$250

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Strong
Vector: 67%
Pages: 545-547AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 8107 mandates GAO vulnerability assessments to identify and mitigate waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments in federally funded state-administered programs, directly supporting the Project 2025 HUD objective of closing the competence gap and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse through improved oversight and accountability."

Key themes:waste fraud abuseaccountabilityoversightprogram integrityfederal-state program oversight

— 513 — Department of Housing and Urban Development ENDNOTES 1. At a 1998 Senate hearing, then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo acknowledged that the department “faced a competence gap” and had “the dubious distinction of being the only federal agency designated as ‘high risk’ by the General Accounting [now Government Accountability] Office (GAO),” even referencing the Section 8 rental subsidy as “on the brink of becoming the next savings and loan scandal,” and explained how the department was stepping up enforcement efforts “focused on closing the competence gap by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.” See “Testimony of Secretary Andrew Cuomo before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies,” March 25, 1998, https://archives.hud.gov/ testimony/1998/tst32598.cfm (accessed March 4, 2023). 2. H.R. 7984, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, Public Law No. 89-117, 89th Congress, August 10, 1965, https://www.congress.gov/89/statute/STATUTE-79/STATUTE-79-Pg451.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Budget in Brief, pp. 2 and 7, https://www.hud.gov/ sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/2023_BudgetInBriefFINAL.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 4. For example, the Special Applications Center (SAC) located in Chicago, Illinois, was established in 1998 as a division of the Office of Public and Indian Housing to accept, review, and approve all nonfunded, noncompetitive applications and plans for demolition, disposition, and conversion of land subject to an annual contributions contract (ACC) in public housing. 5. The Secretary has delegated full authority for the Administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act to the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity but also has delegated limited assignment and decision-making authority to the General Counsel. 6. Effectively the HUD Chief Operating Officer and appointed by the President with Senate advice and consent. 7. The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) is an independent adjudicatory office within the Office of the Secretary. Led by a Director who is appointed by the Secretary, it supervises the Administrative Judges of the Office of Appeals, the administrative law judges of the Office of Administrative Law Judges, and the OHA support staff. The HUD Secretary appoints administrative judges and administrative law judges in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/ chapter-5 (accessed March 4, 2023). 8. HUD currently has a Departmental Equity Assessment Working Group, supported with five FTEs funded by the OSDBU, “as part of the President’s Executive Order 13985, Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-15, https://www.hud.gov/sites/ dfiles/CFO/documents/2023HUDCongressionalJustificationsFINALelectronicversion.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023), and President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” January 20, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 14 (January 25, 2021), pp. 7009–7013, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-25/pdf/2021- 01753.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 9. Interestingly, “[t]he 2023 President’s Budget requests $748 thousand for CFBNP, which is $436 thousand less than the 2022 Annualized CR level. The Budget reflects total funding (carryover and new authority) of $1.2 million, $448 thousand less than 2022 total funding.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-16. 10. See H.R. 558, Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Public Law No. 100-77, 100th Congress, July 22, 1987, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-101/pdf/STATUTE-101-Pg482.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). Later renamed the McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 11. Established under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5301 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 12. S. 566, Cranston–Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, Public Law No. 101-625, 101st Congress, November 28, 1990, Title II, https://www.congress.gov/101/statute/STATUTE-104/STATUTE-104-Pg4079.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 13. S. 1, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law No. 91-646, 91st Congress, January 2, 1971, https://www.congress.gov/91/statute/STATUTE-84/STATUTE-84-Pg1894.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). “The URA establishes the minimum Federal requirements for the acquisition of real property for Federally-funded programs and projects, and for the relocation of persons who must move from — 514 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise their homes, businesses, or farms as a direct result of acquisition, rehabilitation, or demolition for a Federally- funded program or project.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD Exchange, “49 CFR Part 24–URA Regulations,” published February 2005, https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/804/ura-and- real-property-acquisition-policies-act-49-cfr-part-24/ (accessed March 4, 2023). HUD is one of the 18 federal departments and agencies that “are subject to the Uniform Act.” U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs,” Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 243 (December 18, 2019), pp. 69466–69521, esp. p. 69484, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-12-18/pdf/2019-25558.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 14. H.R. 3219, Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-330, 104th Congress, October 26, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ330/PLAW-104publ330.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 15. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 6-1. The U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (Wagner–Steagall Act) established the origins of locally chartered housing agencies that administer federal funding for various rental assistance programs—a quintessentially progressive New Deal–era policy that expanded the administrative state’s powers to the housing market—with the primary legislative intent of eradicating slum housing in urban areas, boosting jobs, and providing housing for the working poor. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1437 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). A decade later, the Housing Act of 1949 codified federal standards for housing livability—a rationale that HUD and federal legislators have continued to use to justify federal intervention in housing—establishing as a national policy objective the provision of a minimum standard of housing quality for all Americans. This legislation also statutorily established many of the rural housing programs that are administered at USDA and expanded programs facilitating the removal of slum housing in urban areas. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1441 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 16. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, pp. 1-2 and 2-2. 17. The National Housing Act of 1934 established the FHA and the statutory authority for the secondary market. The main stated premise was to stimulate jobs and facilitate the housing and construction sector during the Great Depression. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12 (accessed March 4, 2023). 18. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 19. 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29 (accessed March 4, 2023). 20. HUD’s Departmental Enforcement Center (DEC) is led by a Director. It was established in 1998 as part of a broader effort to streamline and consolidate functions at HUD and was later merged with the Office of General Counsel. The DEC “is comprised of the Office of the Director, the Compliance Division, the Operations Division and five Satellite Offices” and describes its mission as “assuring the highest standards of ethics, management and accountability in the resolution of HUD's troubled properties.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Departmental Enforcement Center, “Program Offices: Departmental Enforcement Center,” https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/enforcement (accessed March 4, 2023). 21. H.R. 5334, Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Public Law No. 102-1017, 102nd Congress, October 28, 1992, Title X, https://www.congress.gov/102/statute/STATUTE-106/STATUTE-106-Pg3672.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 22. H.R. 8588, Inspector General Act of 1978, Public Law No. 95-452, 95th Congress, October 12, 1978, https://www. congress.gov/95/statute/STATUTE-92/STATUTE-92-Pg1101.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 23. Guiding questions: What immediate administrative reforms of HUD and its programs can be made with high probability of success? What short-term legislative reforms can be proposed that, in tandem with administrative reforms, would achieve the HUD vision/mission objective? What HUD offices should be eliminated and/or realigned to reduce any redundancy that may persist in programmatic functions? 24. Wholly aside from reforms that would require legislation, the next Administration must ensure that key political appointees are able to acquit themselves as change agents to execute administrative reforms. Otherwise, whether because of a sheer lack of skill and expertise or simply a lack of will and philosophical alignment with reforms, staff may frustrate the efforts of committed political appointee staff and leadership to execute substantive administrative reforms. To achieve the policy and regulatory reforms outlined in this chapter, political appointees must be carefully placed in positions that reflect not only technical, market/ industry, and operational expertise, but also a shared will and commitment.

Department of Health and Human Services

Strong
Vector: 65%
Pages: 500-502AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 8107 aligns strongly with Project 2025's Medicaid integrity goals by mandating vulnerability assessments to identify waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments in federally funded state-administered programs, directly supporting efforts to strengthen program integrity and accountability."

Key themes:program integritywaste fraud abuseimproper paymentsstate accountabilityoversight and assessment

— 467 — Department of Health and Human Services l Direct dollars to beneficiaries more effectively and responsibly. The current funding structure for the Medicaid program rewards expansions, lacks transparency, and promotes financing gimmicks. CMS should: 1. End state financing loopholes. 2. Reform payments to hospitals for uncompensated care. 3. Replace the enhanced match rate with a fairer and more rational match rate. 4. Restructure basic financing and put the program on a more fiscally predictable budget (which should include reform of Disproportionate Share Hospital payments to hospitals).31 l Strengthen program integrity. Make program integrity a top priority and the responsibility of the states. To protect the taxpayers’ investment: 1. Incentivize states. An enhanced contingency fee should be paid to states that successfully increase their efforts to decrease waste, fraud, and abuse. The current system’s IT development 90/10 matching rate should be allowed for improvements in states’ current fraud and abuse and eligibility systems. Innovative programs that show a positive return on investment for both the state and federal governments should be allowed without the onerous waiver process. 2. Improve Medicaid eligibility standards to protect those in need. As Medicaid enrollment continues to climb, it is imperative that there are appropriate and accurate eligibility standards to ensure that the program remains focused on serving those who are in need. To this end, CMS should: a. Hold states accountable for improper eligibility determinations. b. Require more robust eligibility determinations. c. Strengthen asset test determinations within Medicaid.32 3. Conduct oversight and reform of managed care.33 l Incentivize personal responsibility. CMS should allow states to ensure that Medicaid recipients have a stake in their personal health care and a say in decisions related to the Medicaid program. Personal responsibility

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Strong
Vector: 64%
Pages: 545-547AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both HR 8107 and the Project 2025 HUD section emphasize strengthening financial accountability, reducing waste/fraud/abuse, and improving oversight of federal funds administered by state and local entities. The bill’s mandated vulnerability assessments directly support the Project 2025 goal of ensuring reliable financial reporting and effective program management at HUD."

Key themes:accountabilityaudit/oversightwaste/fraud/abuse reductionfinancial managementstate/local program administration

— 512 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise housing model. At best, any new public investments will provide maintenance funds to bring substandard housing units and properties up to livability standards but will still fail to address larger aims of upward mobility and dynamism for local housing markets where land can be sold by PHAs and put to greater economic use, thereby benefiting entire local economies through greater private investment, productivity and employment opportunities, and increased tax revenue. Any long-term view of HUD’s future must include maintaining the strong financial operations and reliable reporting that are needed to run a $50 billion- per-year agency. Before the Trump Administration, HUD effectively did not have a Chief Financial Officer (CFO) for eight years, and HUD’s financial infrastructure inevitably deteriorated. The department’s auditors were unable to conclude that HUD’s internal operations were producing accurate financial reporting. The audi- tors had identified multiple material weaknesses and significant deficiencies in the department’s internal financial controls. Overall, the deterioration of HUD’s financial infrastructure led to a lack of accountability with respect to the use of taxpayer funds as well as to pervasive difficulties with operations and program implementation. However, by hiring a new CFO from the private sector with a proven track record of visionary leadership, HUD was able to implement an agencywide governance structure that improved its financial processes and internal controls and harnessed the power of innovative new technologies to bring a modernized business mindset to the agency’s financial infrastructure. By the end of the Trump Administration, for the first time in nearly a decade, HUD was able to address all of its previously identified material weaknesses, and the auditors were able to issue their first clean audit report on HUD’s financial statements and internal controls. Finally, and more fundamentally, Congress could consider a wholesale overhaul of HUD that contemplates devolving many HUD functions to states and localities with any remaining federal functions consolidated to other federal agencies (for example, by transferring loan guarantee programs to SBA; moving Indian housing programs to the Department of the Interior; moving rental assistance, mortgage insurance programs, and GNMA to a redesignated Housing and Home Finance Agency). Generally, this reform path could consolidate some programs, elimi- nate others that have failed to produce meaningful long-run results, and narrow the scope of many programs so that they are closer to what they were when they were created. — 513 — Department of Housing and Urban Development ENDNOTES 1. At a 1998 Senate hearing, then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo acknowledged that the department “faced a competence gap” and had “the dubious distinction of being the only federal agency designated as ‘high risk’ by the General Accounting [now Government Accountability] Office (GAO),” even referencing the Section 8 rental subsidy as “on the brink of becoming the next savings and loan scandal,” and explained how the department was stepping up enforcement efforts “focused on closing the competence gap by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse.” See “Testimony of Secretary Andrew Cuomo before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies,” March 25, 1998, https://archives.hud.gov/ testimony/1998/tst32598.cfm (accessed March 4, 2023). 2. H.R. 7984, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, Public Law No. 89-117, 89th Congress, August 10, 1965, https://www.congress.gov/89/statute/STATUTE-79/STATUTE-79-Pg451.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 3. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Budget in Brief, pp. 2 and 7, https://www.hud.gov/ sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/2023_BudgetInBriefFINAL.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 4. For example, the Special Applications Center (SAC) located in Chicago, Illinois, was established in 1998 as a division of the Office of Public and Indian Housing to accept, review, and approve all nonfunded, noncompetitive applications and plans for demolition, disposition, and conversion of land subject to an annual contributions contract (ACC) in public housing. 5. The Secretary has delegated full authority for the Administration and enforcement of the Fair Housing Act to the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity but also has delegated limited assignment and decision-making authority to the General Counsel. 6. Effectively the HUD Chief Operating Officer and appointed by the President with Senate advice and consent. 7. The Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) is an independent adjudicatory office within the Office of the Secretary. Led by a Director who is appointed by the Secretary, it supervises the Administrative Judges of the Office of Appeals, the administrative law judges of the Office of Administrative Law Judges, and the OHA support staff. The HUD Secretary appoints administrative judges and administrative law judges in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/ chapter-5 (accessed March 4, 2023). 8. HUD currently has a Departmental Equity Assessment Working Group, supported with five FTEs funded by the OSDBU, “as part of the President’s Executive Order 13985, Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-15, https://www.hud.gov/sites/ dfiles/CFO/documents/2023HUDCongressionalJustificationsFINALelectronicversion.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023), and President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” January 20, 2021, in Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 14 (January 25, 2021), pp. 7009–7013, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-25/pdf/2021- 01753.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). 9. Interestingly, “[t]he 2023 President’s Budget requests $748 thousand for CFBNP, which is $436 thousand less than the 2022 Annualized CR level. The Budget reflects total funding (carryover and new authority) of $1.2 million, $448 thousand less than 2022 total funding.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2023 Congressional Justifications, p. 35-16. 10. See H.R. 558, Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Public Law No. 100-77, 100th Congress, July 22, 1987, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-101/pdf/STATUTE-101-Pg482.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). Later renamed the McKinney–Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 11. Established under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5301 et seq., https:// www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42 (accessed March 4, 2023). 12. S. 566, Cranston–Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, Public Law No. 101-625, 101st Congress, November 28, 1990, Title II, https://www.congress.gov/101/statute/STATUTE-104/STATUTE-104-Pg4079.pdf (accessed March 5, 2023). 13. S. 1, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law No. 91-646, 91st Congress, January 2, 1971, https://www.congress.gov/91/statute/STATUTE-84/STATUTE-84-Pg1894.pdf (accessed March 4, 2023). “The URA establishes the minimum Federal requirements for the acquisition of real property for Federally-funded programs and projects, and for the relocation of persons who must move from

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills