Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did the Biden administration directly fund hotel stays for migrants in 2021 2022?
Executive Summary
The evidence shows the Biden administration did fund migrant hotel stays in 2021–2022, but not typically by cutting a check directly to hotels as a single federal line-item; instead funding flowed through programs and reimbursements administered by FEMA and DHS and through contracts and grants to cities, states, and service providers. Coverage and context vary: an initial 2021 contract and subsequent FEMA Shelter and Services reimbursements document federal money for temporary lodging, while disputes over per-night costs and who authorized payments have fueled partisan claims and some mischaracterizations [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. Why the story split: federal contracts versus reimbursements—what actually happened
A March 2021 federal contract shows the Biden administration awarded funds to secure hotel rooms and related services for migrants at the southern border, providing 1,239 beds under an $86–$86.9 million award to address an influx of families [1] [2]. That contract included lodging but also covered services beyond room nights, and independent fact-checking found calculations that derived a $395 per-night figure were misleading because they used incomplete denominators and ignored ancillary costs in the contract [2]. Separately, the Shelter and Services Program—administered by FEMA—reimbursed state and local governments and nonprofits for emergency sheltering costs, which in practice funded hotel stays when localities contracted rooms; those FEMA reimbursements were not direct payments to migrants and often required local administration and documentation before funds flowed [3] [6]. This distinction is critical because claiming ‘direct federal payments to hotels’ flattens a more complex funding chain involving DHS, FEMA, municipalities, and private vendors [3] [7].
2. Where the money went: examples from cities and program appropriations
Multiple analyses show real-world examples where federal funds supported hotel lodging for migrants after localities arranged accommodations. New York City received roughly $80–$81 million in FEMA-related funds tied to immigration-related services, with New York reporting average hotel rates around $156 per night, and roughly $19 million categorized for hotel stays in one accounting [4] [5]. Congress in 2024 appropriated $650 million for the Shelter and Services Program to backstop communities facing migrant sheltering costs, reinforcing that federal appropriations empowered FEMA to reimburse localities for hotel lodging and related services—though the bulk of shelter spending across major cities came from state and city budgets prior to and apart from these federal reimbursements [8] [5].
3. Political attacks and disputed math: why figures like “$395 a night” spread
Political opponents seized on the existence of federal contracts and reimbursements to argue that the administration was lavishly housing migrants, producing viral claims such as $395 per night. Fact-checking of the original contract showed that the $86.9 million award included multiple services and covered a time span and bed capacity that make simple per-night assertions misleading; the $395 number resulted from dividing the total contract by an inaccurately small number of nights or persons [2]. Similarly, disputes over FEMA reimbursements in 2025—such as the Trump administration’s reported clawback claim regarding New York—reflect partisan incentives to portray federal funding as wasteful, even where municipal accounting shows lower nightly averages and complex funding mixes [4] [5].
4. The federal role: program design, administration, and limits
FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program and Emergency Food and Shelter mechanisms were designed to reimburse jurisdictions and nonprofits for emergency sheltering, not to issue direct payments to migrants or to operate hotel contracts nationwide from Washington. Documentation indicates FEMA administered grants and reimbursements for lodging, but required local entities to provide services and documentation to receive funds; FEMA’s role was one of reimbursement and coordination, not unilateral direct hotel payments [7] [6] [3]. Congress’s later appropriations formalized and expanded this support, but the program’s operation depends on local procurement and contract management, and the federal contribution often supplemented substantial local spending rather than replacing it [8] [6].
5. Bottom line: accurate framing and what’s omitted from many claims
The accurate frame is that the Biden administration funded hotel lodging for migrants in 2021–2022 through a mix of federal contracts and FEMA-administered reimbursements to local governments and nonprofits; that funding pathway is real but more diffuse than ‘direct hotel payments’ suggests [1] [3]. Many viral claims omit the contract’s bundled services, the reimbursement mechanism, municipal cost-sharing, and later congressional appropriations, which creates misleading optics about per-night costs and administrative intent [2] [8]. Readers should treat headline dollar-per-night claims skeptically and focus on contract language, FEMA reimbursement rules, and municipal accounting to understand how federal funds translated into hotel stays on the ground [2] [5].