24 C.F.R. § 891.100

Purpose and policy

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

(a) Purpose. The Section 202 Program of Supportive Housing for the Elderly and the Section 811 Program of Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities provide Federal capital advances and project rental assistance under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) (section 202) and section 811 of the National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013) (section 811), respectively, for housing projects serving elderly households and persons with disabilities. Section 202 projects shall provide a range of services that are tailored to the needs of the residents. Owners of Section 811 projects shall ensure that the residents are provided with any necessary supportive services that address their individual needs.

(b) General policy—(1) Supportive Housing for the Elderly. A capital advance and contract for project rental assistance provided under this program shall be used for the purposes described in Section 202 (12 U.S.C. 1701q(b)).

(2) Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities. A capital advance and contract for project rental assistance provided under this program shall be used for the purposes described in Section 811 (42 U.S.C. 8013(b)).

(c) Use of capital advance funds. No part of the funds reserved may be transferred by the Sponsor, except to the Owner caused to be formed by the Sponsor. This action must be accomplished prior to issuance of a commitment for capital advance funding.

(d) Amendments. Subject to the availability of funds, HUD may amend the amount of an approved capital advance only after initial closing has occurred.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2002–2020 · leading case: United Am., Inc. v. N.B.C.-U.S.A. Hous., Inc. Twenty Seven, 400 F. Supp. 2d 59 (D.D.C. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United Am., Inc. v. N.B.C.-U.S.A. Hous., Inc. Twenty Seven, 400 F. Supp. 2d 59 (D.D.C. 2005). “; 24 C.F.R. §§ 891.100 , 891.170(a). In exercising its authority, HUD allocates a budget for all field offices to expend on projects within their jurisdictions.”

Ahepa 91, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 43 F. App'x 450 (2d Cir. 2002). “It appears that HUD controls the transfer itself in spite of the language of 24 CFR§ 891.100. See Handbook, p. 3-55. .”

Norris v. Murfreesboro Leased Hous. Assocs. (M.D. Tenn. 2020). “” 24 C.F.R. § 891.100 (a). Under this program, Section 811 project owners must “ensure that the residents are provided with any necessary supportive services that address their individual needs.”

Copeland v. United States, 622 F. Supp. 2d 1347 (S.D. Fla. 2008). “Further, "[i]n determining whether to deny or terminate assistance because of action or failure to act," when the *1354 applicant is a person with disabilities, the public housing authority decision "concerning such action is subject to consideration of reasonable accommodation…”

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.