C.F.R. » Title 24 » CHAPTER IX—OFFICE OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT › PART 1000—NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ACTIVITIES › Subpart C—Indian Housing Plan (IHP)

24 C.F.R. § 1000.220

What are the requirements for the IHP?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The IHP requirements are set forth in section 102(b) of NAHASDA. In addition, §§ 1000.56, 1000.108, 1000.120, 1000.134, 1000.142, 1000.238, 1000.302, and 1000.328 require or permit additional items to be set forth in the IHP for HUD determinations required by those sections. Recipients are only required to provide IHPs that contain these elements in a form prescribed by HUD. If a TDHE is submitting a single IHP that covers two or more Indian tribes, the IHP must contain a separate certification in accordance with section 102(d) of NAHASDA and IHP Tables for each Indian tribe when requested by such Indian tribes. However, Indian tribes are encouraged to perform comprehensive housing needs assessments and develop comprehensive IHPs and not limit their planning process to only those housing efforts funded by NAHASDA. An IHP should be locally driven.

[77 FR 71526, Dec. 3, 2012]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 2008–2012 · leading case: Marceau v. Blackfeet Housing Authority
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Marceau v. Blackfeet Housing Authority (2008) ca9 · cites it 2× “" 24 C.F.R. § 1000.220 . And HUD's statutorily prescribed role—in addition, of course, to providing the block grants themselves— is generally confined to "a limited review of each Indian housing plan," and even then "only to the extent that [HUD] considers review is necessary.”
Marceau v. Blackfeet Housing Authority (2008) ca9 · cites it 2× “" 24 C.F.R. § 1000.220 . And HUD's statutorily prescribed role — in addition, of course, to providing the block grants themselves — is generally confined to "a limited review of each Indian housing plan," and even then "only to the extent that [HUD] considers review is necessary.”
Garreaux v. United States (2008) sdd “” 24 C.F.R. § 1000.220 . “And HUD’s statutorily prescribed role-in addition, of course, to providing the block grants themselves-is generally confined to a limited review of each Indian housing plan, and even then only to the extent that [HUD] considers review is necessary.”
Blackfeet Housing v. United States (2012) uscfc “Generally, however, the housing plan is to be “locally driven,” 24 C.F.R. § 1000.220 (2012), and it is the responsibility of the recipient of those funds to provide for the maintenance and operation of the housing, 25 U.”
Marceau v. Blackfeet Housing (2008) ca9 “” 24 C.F.R. § 1000.220 . And HUD’s statutorily prescribed role—in addition, of course, to provid- ing the block grants themselves—is generally confined to “a limited review of each Indian housing plan,” and even then “only to the extent that [HUD] considers review is necessary.”
Marceau v. Blackfeet Housing (2008) ca9 “” 24 C.F.R. § 1000.220 . And HUD’s statutorily prescribed role—in addition, of course, to provid- ing the block grants themselves—is generally confined to “a limited review of each Indian housing plan,” and even then “only to the extent that [HUD] considers review is necessary.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.