Which HUD programs are funded through annual appropriations versus mandatory funding in 2025?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
In FY2025 most HUD housing programs relied on annual (discretionary) appropriations set by Congress — including major voucher renewal and CPD formula block grants — while certain programs operate with mandatory or multi-year budget authority noted in HUD notices and appropriations actions (e.g., some voucher carryover and project-based contract protections) [1] [2]. The enacted FY2025 appropriations package set specific dollar amounts for Housing Choice Voucher renewals ($31.938 billion) and CPD formula programs (CDBG, HOME, ESG, HOPWA, HTF) as annual allocations [1] [2].
1. Annual appropriations fund the big-ticket, recurring HUD programs
Congress funds most of HUD’s core programs through annual discretionary appropriations that are enacted in an appropriations bill or temporarily continued through a continuing resolution (CR); those annual allocations finance the Housing Choice Voucher program renewals, CPD formula block grants (CDBG, HOME, ESG, HOPWA, Housing Trust Fund), and other HUD affordable housing accounts for FY2025 [1] [2]. Reporting and HUD notices make clear FY2025 dollar allocations for voucher HAP renewals ($31.938 billion) and line items for voucher set-asides and administrative fees were determined by the FY2025 appropriations measure that HUD implemented [1].
2. Continuing resolutions matter; they temporarily extend annual funding levels
When Congress delayed full FY2025 appropriations, advocates and observers warned a CR would keep “annually appropriated programs” — including many HUD affordable housing programs — funded at FY2024 levels until the CR’s expiration (LeadingAge explained a year‑long CR would fund HUD programs at FY2024 levels through December 20 in that discussion) [3]. That dynamic explains why program operators track both enacted appropriations and CRs: annual programs don’t have ongoing statutory automatic funding beyond what Congress provides each year [3].
3. Some voucher-related funding actions look like mandatory or multi-year authority in practice
HUD guidance implementing FY2025 voucher funding allowed use of carryover and other accounts to cover shortfalls and protected certain program contract payments (for example, protections for Project-Based Rental Assistance and Section 202 PRACs under a CR were highlighted by LeadingAge). HUD’s implementation notices and program guidance therefore create administrative room to treat some funds operationally like multi-year resources even though underlying authority is tied to the annual appropriations process [1] [3].
4. The Continuum of Care (CoC) NOFO illustrates program-by-program differences and political friction
The CoC program — the largest federal homelessness assistance competition — is administered through Notices of Funding Opportunity rather than an automatic entitlement; its priorities and allocations flow from annual appropriations and departmental NOFOs. In 2025, HUD issued a CoC NOFO that prompted intense controversy and subsequent administrative changes, with groups reporting significant programmatic shifts and HUD later withdrawing or revising NOFO language [4] [5]. These developments show annual funding plus departmental policy choices together determine how money is targeted each year [4] [5].
5. Where the reporting is silent: mandatory entitlement programs not detailed in these sources
Available sources do not provide a comprehensive catalog in 2025 separating every HUD program into “annual appropriations” versus “mandatory” buckets; they focus instead on key programs (vouchers, CPD formula grants, CoC) and funding actions around FY2025 appropriations, CRs, and NOFO changes (not found in current reporting). HUD’s Budget in Brief and archived justifications contain program-by-program budget authority listings, but the supplied snippets do not enumerate mandatory statutory entitlement programs versus discretionary line items in full [6].
6. Competing perspectives: advocates warn of shortfalls, administration documents propose changes
Advocacy groups argued a CR or flat funding would leave programs underfunded to meet rising costs and renewals (LeadingAge’s analysis) [3]. HUD’s own budget documents and implementation notices, by contrast, lay out enacted line items and internal guidance on how to allocate FY2025 money, including administrative flexibility and carryover rules to address shortfalls [7] [1]. The tension between advocates’ calls for increased appropriations and HUD’s administrative implementation is central to 2025 debate [3] [1].
7. Why this distinction matters for providers and people served
Whether a program is funded annually or via some mandatory authority affects predictability: annual appropriations require Congress to act each year (or pass CRs), creating timing risk; administrative guidance and carryover can soften but not eliminate that risk [3] [1]. The CoC NOFO controversy in 2025 demonstrates how annual funding plus policy decisions can rapidly alter services for hundreds of thousands of people [4] [8].
Limitations: this analysis uses the provided 2025-focused materials and summaries; the sources do not present a line-by-line statutory classification of every HUD program into “mandatory” versus “annual appropriations” categories, so I rely on HUD’s FY2025 appropriations reporting, implementation notices, and advocacy summaries cited above [2] [1] [3] [4].