Strengthening the Pro-Life Safety Net: Federal Housing Policy

By Christopher C. Hull, Ph.D. & John Bravacos, Esq.

This is Issue 30 of the American Reports Series. 

Executive Summary

• Pregnant and parenting women in need[1] face significant challenges with housing that make them a high priority for the allocation of existing federal aid.

• The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) alone now allocates about $70 billion in housing programs, providing an opportunity for a presidential administration to extend support to pregnant and parenting women in need who are concerned about their current living conditions.

• For instance, amending Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program definitions to include pregnant and parenting women in need, and to encourage placing them at the front of the line, would allow an administration to grant them priority access to HUD’s largest housing assistance program.

• Related options would include:

• • Adding those entities serving pregnant women in need to the “relevant organizations” from which to create HUD’s Continuums of Care (CoC);
  • Expanding CoC’s definition of “at risk of homelessness” to include pregnant and parenting women in need;
  • Modifying HUD’s Homeless Policy Priorities Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), which competitively allocates $4 billion, to include helping pregnant women in need; and
  • Adding a data requirement to CoC HUD homelessness programs to report interaction with U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) programs serving pregnant women in need would help measure that specific concern, allowing an administration to prioritize it more easily in the future.

• Finally, HUD programs like Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), the Youth Homeless Demonstration Program (YHDP), Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), and the Housing Trust Fund (HTF) also present opportunities for targeted support, where modifying grant criteria could prioritize assistance for pregnant and parenting women in need.

 

Introduction

The United States faces a significant challenge in providing adequate housing support for expecting mothers, particularly those who already have children and/or are at risk of homelessness or living in unstable conditions (“pregnant and parenting women in need”).  Housing instability can create a cascade of adverse effects for both the mother and the unborn child, increasing the risk of poverty,[2] health complications,[3]^,[4],[5] and adverse birth outcomes.[6]^,[7],[8]

Gravest of all, pregnant and parenting women in need with an unstable housing situation and their unborn children face the risk of abortion. Most generally, women who underwent abortions in the United States were most likely to say that they did so because they were not financially prepared (40%), according to a 2018 study.[9] More specifically, however, about one in 20 surveyed women who had abortions specifically said her living or housing context “was not suitable for a baby,” according to a 2013 study.[10] Thus, a lack of suitable housing can literally be fatal to the unborn.

On a related note, pregnant and parenting women in need frequently lack stable marital situations.  According to a Pew Research Center report, a majority of women who had abortions were unmarried (87%), with only 13% being married.[11] Only 8% of women having abortions said they wanted to be married first or did not want to be a single mom; others among the 31% who cited partner reasons for having an abortion said the relationship was not good or stable (9%), that the partner was not supportive (8%), is the “wrong guy” (6%), does not want the baby (3%), or was abusive (3%), according to a 2013 study.^[12] Similarly, according to the Guttmacher Institute, in 2014, “About 14% of abortion patients were married, and an additional 31% were cohabiting. A slight majority were not living with a partner in the month they became pregnant (46% had never married and 9% had been previously married).”[13] Additionally, according to Foster et al. (2018), those who presented for an abortion between 2008–2016 were less likely to live with a spouse or partner than either adult family members or especially alone.[14]  Finally, for four decades, the abortion rate among the married has remained approximately one tenth of that among the unmarried.[15]

While current federal housing policy generally focuses on youth pregnancy, pregnant and parenting women in need span the spectrum of childbearing years. In the states that reported age data on abortions in 2021, teens ages 13 to 19 accounted for only 8%, while the majority (57%) were in their 20s, about three-in-ten (31%) were in their 30s, and women ages 40 to 44 accounted for about 4%.[16]

Accordingly, this study aims to explore policy solutions that a presidential administration might implement to provide safe and stable housing for pregnant and parenting women in need of all ages, as part of a broader effort to help build a pro-life safety net.

In particular, the study reviews current federal housing programs, especially those HUD administers, identifying opportunities to improve services to pregnant and parenting women in need. Key housing programs an administration might leverage in this regard include HUD’s “Section 8” Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program,[17] Continuum of Care (CoC) Program,[18] Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program,[19] Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program (YHDP),[20] Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program,[21] and Housing Trust Fund (HTF),[22] as well as related Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) opportunities through the Runaway and Homeless Youth Program (RHY).[23]

Taken together, these housing programs offer significant openings for an administration to broaden its support for pregnant and parenting women in need, which could in turn strengthen the nation’s pro-life safety net.

II. Federal Housing Programs

On March 9, 2024, President Biden signed into law a fiscal year 2024 (FY24) spending package[24] providing HUD with approximately $70 billion, an $8.3 billion increase over FY23.[25]  HUD primarily distributes these funds to state, tribal, and local governments, as well as to nonprofits, to provide housing-related services. Those local entities in turn control the funds within broad guidelines from HUD. More specifically, public housing agencies (PHAs), cities, counties and states receive annual formula-based funds from HUD. These recipients file annual or five-year plans to HUD that describe the intended use of these funds, and report on those uses following the expenditures. The plan process for PHAs and the Consolidated Plans required of other governmental entities is generally consistent, and the two are laid out below. In addition, individual programs exist, providing housing assistance to eligible populations, and relevant programs are laid out below as well.

A. Public Housing Agencies (PHAs)

The PHA must provide notice and a public hearing for comment prior to the adoption of the agency plan. The agency’s housing waiting list processes, admission preferences, and housing priorities are set through the public hearing. The regulations controlling the public comment process for the plan are located at 24 CFR §903.17,[26] and the full plan regulations are located at 24 CFR Part 903.[27] The regulations are a codification of the statutory requirements contained in 42 U.S.C. §1437c-1.[28] “Qualified” PHAs, i.e. those serving no more than 550 families, not designated “troubled” under the Public Housing Assessment System (PHAS), and with a passing score under the Section 8 Management Assessment Program (SEMAP) during the prior 12 months, must only submit such a plan every five years.[29] Non-qualified PHAs must annually submit such a plan. [30]

The most significant component of the local plan is the local preferences for selecting applicants for the waiting list. This preference element controls who receives housing when vacancies occur. The regulation that authorizes the PHA to establish local preferences is located at 24 CFR §982.207.[31] The importance of this preference process and the decisions to which it leads is that these preferences impact all housing programs funded or administered by the PHA. This includes the voucher programs as well as the PHA’s properties containing traditional public housing. The PHA programs subject to this preference system are Housing Choice Vouchers, Project Based Rental Assistance, Project Based Vouchers, and Public Housing. Preferences must be consistent with civil rights laws, including the Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination based on, inter alia, familial status, which explicitly includes pregnant women.[32]

The primary entry points to effect policy change for the PHA preferences are:

1. Public Comment on PHA Plans: The local PHA’s plan public comment process, where each of the approximately 2,700 agencies present their individual plans and receive public comment to revise or amend those plans, is one way to effect policy change for PHA preferences to prefer pregnant and parenting women in need.

2. Regulatory Changes to the PHA:

a. Waiting List Process: Modifying regulations with respect to how the PHA sets its local admission preferences through the rule-making process controlled by the Administrative Procedures Act likewise might affect pregnant and parenting women in need’s access to housing.

b. Family Definition: Currently under the definition of “family” contained in the Section 8 and public housing regulations at 24 CFR §5.403, a single parent with a child is considered a family, but a pregnant woman is not. By contrast, according to 24 CFR §100.20, in keeping with the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. §3602(k)(2)), “familial status” includes any person who is pregnant. Thus, harmonizing the two by expanding the definition at 24 CFR §5.403 of “family” to include pregnant and parenting women in need could have an impact, as well.

c. Particular Owner Preferences: PHA regulations regarding Section 8 project-based assistance programs’ “particular owner preferences” – that is, requirements concerning Section 8 owners’ selection of residents to occupy a project or unit[33] – could be modified in § 5.655(c) to clarify that the owner may adopt a preference for admission of women who are pregnant or parenting young children.

Thus, in addition to facilitating local input PHAs receive during their planning process, an administration could leverage existing federal programs and resources to meet the needs of pregnant and parenting women by pursuing regulatory changes to the PHA waiting list and/or family definition in particular.

B. Consolidated Planning

In 1995, HUD crafted the Consolidated Plan as the state or local grantee governments’ comprehensive housing affordability and community development strategy to support their applications for funding under any of the Community Planning and Development formula grant programs.[34] HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD)[35] monitors the recipients’ Consolidated Plan process to ensure states and localities assess affordable housing and community development needs and market conditions, and make data-driven, localized resource allocation decisions.[36] The extensive and detailed regulations of that process[37] codify the statutory requirement provided in 42 U.S.C. §5304, which lays out a community development statement of activities and review intended to advance public health and welfare.[38] Consolidated Planning is a process similar to the PHA’s annual plan – and the PHA plan must include a consideration of the relevant jurisdiction’s Consolidated Plan[39] – but involves a much more comprehensive evaluation of the community and its needs. Within this process, the special needs for local homeless populations are a critical concern.[40]

For the Consolidated Plan, the identification and priority of specific homeless populations and those at risk of homelessness affects the programs and funding of those elements within the jurisdiction. These programs include CoC as listed above,[41] as well as CPD programs including HOME Investment Partnerships,[42] Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG),[43] and HUD’s CDBG block grant program,[44] all mentioned above. At the state level, Housing Trust Fund (HTF)[45] use, also mentioned above, must likewise be consistent with that state’s Consolidated Plan. Finally, as with the PHA plans, Consolidated Plans must be consistent with civil rights laws, including the Fair Housing Act, which as noted above prohibits discrimination based on familial status including pregnant women, inter alia.[46] 

The primary entry points to effect policy change through Consolidated Plans are:

1. Consolidated Plan Public Comment. The Consolidated Plan process includes public comment, where each of the approximately 1,300 jurisdictions must present their individual plans and receive input to revise or amend those plans. Accordingly, in a slightly more centralized way than in the PHA planning process, those seeking to improve housing access for pregnant and parenting women might advocate for doing so during Consolidated Plan public comment periods in any or all of those jurisdictions.

2. Consolidated Plan Submission Process Regulations. As with PHA waiting list and family definition regulations, the definitions, certifications, and requirements sections of the regulations for the Consolidated Plan submission process[47]may be modified according to the process laid out in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), including issuing a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM), and gathering feedback during the subsequent comment period. Thus, an administration seeking to add pregnant and parenting women in need as additional populations whose needs should be considered in Consolidated Plans might do so using this process. Such changes might include adjusting the Consolidated Plan regulations’:

a. Submission process regulations definitions, certifications, and requirements sections[48] to add pregnant and parenting women in need as additional populations whose needs should be considered in Consolidated Plans;

b. Definition of “at risk of homelessness” (at 24 CFR 91.5[49]) to add “pregnant or parenting a young child”;

c. List of public and private agencies with which a local jurisdiction (at 24 CFR 91.100(a)(1)[50]) or state (at 24 CFR 91.110(b)(2)[51]) must consult when preparing a Consolidated Plan to include those that provide assisted housing, health services, and/or social services to pregnant and parenting women in need;

d. List of matters on which the jurisdiction (at 24 CFR 91.100(c)(1)[52]) or state (at 24 CFR 91.110(b)[53]) must consult with local PHAs to include strategies for assisting pregnant and parenting women in need;

e. Citizen participation plans for localities (in 24 CFR 91.105(a)(1)[54]) or states (in 24 CFR 91.110(a)[55]) by requiring that plan to address housing and community development needs that include those of pregnant and parenting women in need; and,

f. Requirement for estimating the number and type of families in need of housing assistance in the locality (at 24 CFR 91.205(b)(1)(i)[56]) or state (at 24 CFR 91.305(b)(1)(i)[57] to include pregnant and parenting women.

3. Regulations for Individual Programs Subject to Consolidated Planning. The regulations of individual programs that require a Consolidated Plan, including their definitions, distributions of assistance, required planning activities, necessary participants and eligible costs, may be modified through the APA process as well. Thus, generally speaking, each of those may provide opportunities to include support for pregnant and parenting women in need, as well as the organizations that provide services to them.

Thus, as with HUD’s public housing program, an administration seeking to meet the housing needs of pregnant and parenting women could help facilitate local input to Consolidated Plans, adjust the Consolidated Plan submission process[58] regulations’ definitions, certifications, and requirements sections to add pregnant and parenting women in need as additional populations whose needs should be considered in Consolidated Plans, and/or modify the specific housing programs governed according to that planning process, as laid out in detail below.

C. Individual Programs

Federal housing aid comes through a set of specific programs aimed at different challenges eligible populations face. Such programs fall generally into the categories of rental assistance, public housing, and capital assistance, and are described in detail below.

1. Rental Assistance: The most substantial of individual programs falls under the category of rental assistance. Those programs include the HCV Program mentioned above, public housing, the HOME Investment Partnership, CoC, the emergency ESG program also mentioned above, and the youth-oriented YHDP. Each of those programs is described below.

A. Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program (Section 8)[59]: The HCV program (also known as “tenant-based assistance,”[60] or simply “Section 8”[61]) is the largest source of rental assistance in the U.S.,[62] and “the federal government’s primary program for assisting very low-income families, the elderly, and persons with disabilities” within the private market.[63] Participants are responsible for finding their own housing, including single family homes, apartments, or townhouses, provided that the unit meets the minimum standards of health and safety of the program.[64]

Section 8 participants generally must pay 30% of their monthly gross income for rent and utilities, and additional amounts if the unit rent is greater than the payment standard set by HUD[65] (though the family may not pay more than 40% of its adjustment monthly income for rent when moving into a new unit with monthly rent above the payment standard[66]^,[67]). A housing subsidy is paid directly by the public housing agency on behalf of the participating family to the landlord.[68] The family is then responsible for paying the difference between what the landlord charges for rent and the amount subsidized by the program.[69]

If authorized by the PHA, certain families may use their vouchers to purchase a modest home.[70] PHAs administer HCVs locally.[71] PHAs receive HUD funds to administer the program.[72]

Both Section 8 project-based rental assistance and Section 8 tenant-based vouchers are authorized through Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).[73]

Since PHAs administer HCVs, the PHA assistance preferences described above apply to the HCV program. Therefore, as also noted above, an administration seeking to improve housing access for pregnant and parenting women in need might:

• Encourage local input to the local PHA plan’s public comment process, calling for a higher priority for that demographic, which would apply to Section 8 vouchers;
• Modify regulations with respect to how the PHA sets its local admission preferences to increase pregnant and parenting women in need’s access to housing, which would also apply to Section 8 vouchers; and/or
• Directly expand Section 8’s definition of “family” to include pregnant and parenting women in need (24 CFR §5.403).[74]

B. Project Based Rental Assistance (PBRA): PBRA provides rental assistance directly to property owners who, in turn, offer reduced rent to eligible tenants. Specifically, while HUD provides Section 8 project-based housing assistance payments (HAP) by contract to these owners of multifamily rental housing, PBRA makes up the difference between what an extremely low-, low-, or very low-income household can afford and the approved rent for an adequate housing unit in a multifamily project.[75] Eligible tenants must pay the highest of 30% of monthly adjusted income, 10% of monthly gross income, or the portion of welfare assistance designated for housing.[76]

Currently, HUD regulations require public housing project owners to develop tenant selection plans and maintain waiting lists,[77] but provide little guidance beyond income eligibility and fair housing requirements, which presents a potential opportunity for policy change to support pregnant and parenting women in need. Project owners typically follow the preference provisions of the local PHA, but it is not mandatory, nor even suggested, under current regulation. Therefore, Housing Handbook 4350.3, which governs occupancy requirements for subsidized multifamily housing,[78] could be amended to include explicit guidelines to encourage or require project owners to include pregnant and parenting women in need in tenant selection plans and/or to increase those women’s priority on project waiting lists. In particular, the Handbook’s Chapter 4 provides waiting list and tenant selection requirements, which are the proper locations to include pregnant and parenting women in need in tenant selection plans and/or to increase those women’s priority on project waiting lists on a sub-regulatory (and therefore expedited) basis.[79]

More specifically still, PBRA, which is authorized in statute through 42 U.S.C. 1437f,[80] operates on a regulatory basis under 24 CFR parts 401[81] and 402, which could be amended through the regulatory process to advantage pregnant and parenting women in need.[82]

C. Public Housing: HUD provides formula funding – that is, resources allocated based on set statutory criteria – to PHAs to cover operating and management costs of public housing projects.[83] These agencies in turn provide the public housing through the PHA’s facilities and through the voucher programs identified above, with discretion in setting payment standards, following different inspection schedules, and offering special purpose vouchers, prioritizing which applying families receive vouchers – including potentially advantaging pregnant and parenting women in need.[84] Each PHA’s annual plan determines such specifics, as well as its waiting list preferences as applicable,[85] so those plans are one potential venue for helping expecting mothers.

A large body of public housing sub-regulatory guidance in the form of notices published to the HUD website, [86] as opposed to the Federal Register, addresses the operational issues within the PHA, and often goes beyond the statutes or regulations that affect the annual plans or the priorities of the waiting lists. Attempting policy adjustments at this non-authoritative guidance level, without statutory change, Presidential direction, or regulatory notice, would most likely result in short-lived policy change, but may also provide rapid change to expand access to pregnant and parenting women in need because it would not require notice and comment under the APA.

D. HOME Investment Partnerships Program: The HOME program provides formula grants to states and local governments to create affordable housing for low-income households. The funds can be used for a variety of purposes, most often construction of new rental housing and rehabilitation of existing housing. However, they may also be used for homebuyer assistance and tenant-based rental assistance.[87]

When used for tenant-based rental assistance, the HOME funds must be used as provided in the written tenant selection policies and criteria that are based on local housing needs and priorities established in the participating jurisdiction’s Consolidated Plan.[88] Therefore, any adjustment to prioritize pregnant and parenting women in need within the HOME program would require changes to the local Consolidated Plans.

This could involve working with jurisdictions to include pregnant and parenting women in need as a priority population, thereby channeling HOME funds to support this demographic through affordable housing projects and other related initiatives. Thus, in a slightly more centralized way than in the PHA annual planning process, those seeking to improve housing access for pregnant and parenting women in need might advocate for doing so during Consolidated Plan public comment periods in any or all of those jurisdictions.

In addition, the definitions, certifications, and requirements sections of the Consolidated Plan submission guidelines^[89] may be modified according to the process laid out in the APA. Accordingly, an administration seeking to increase the HOME program’s priority for pregnant and parenting women in need might do so using this process.

Specifically, the implementing regulation for HOME’s tenant-based rental assistance eligible costs and requirements (at 24 CFR §92.209^[90]) identifies certain types of targeted assistance that a jurisdiction can select and could be amended to include pregnant and parenting women in need as a higher priority.

Finally, the individual regulations of programs that like HOME require a Consolidated Plan, including their definitions, distribution of assistance, required planning activities, necessary participants and eligible costs, may be modified through the APA process as well. Thus, the HOME program may provide opportunities to include support for pregnant and parenting women in need, as well as the organizations that provide services to them.

E. Continuum of Care (CoC): The CoC program is the primary HUD-funded homeless program providing funding tasked with providing shelter to homeless individuals and families, while minimizing trauma and dislocation. Its goal is to promote access to and effective utilization of other federal programs, while optimizing self-sufficiency among homeless individuals and families.[91]

In particular, the CoC program provides rental assistance[92] and capital support for building and maintaining housing[93] for low-income individuals.[94] These funds, however, generally cannot also be used for direct services (as opposed to so-called “supportive services only” (SSO) funds, which a recipient may only use to assist those for whom the recipient or subrecipient is not providing housing or housing assistance).[95] Several housing programs including such services, however, do come from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). [96]^, [97] Incorporating HHS programs that offer such services, such as Maternity Group Homes (MGH),[98] the RHY program for runaway and homeless youth,[99] and the Transitional Living Program (TLP),[100] as specific priorities within CoC guidelines could direct more funding and support towards pregnant and parenting women in need. This modification would help create a more integrated approach between housing support and essential services, thereby improving outcomes for mothers and their children, both born and unborn.

The CoC competitively awards grants for permanent housing,[101] transitional housing,[102] supportive services (SSO as described above),[103] the federal government’s Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS),[104] and, for CoCs designated as “high-performing communities,” homelessness prevention.[105] Generally, project applications for each CoC are rated and ranked by the so-called “Collaborative Applicant” (or Lead Agency), the CoC applicant designated to collect and submit the CoC’s consolidated materials to HUD for all applicants.[106]

Congress authorized the CoC program under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act,[107] as amended by the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009[108] (42 U.S.C. § 11381 et seq.),[109] with regulations at 24 CFR Part 578.[110] These regulations govern how Continuum of Care funds are administered. They include provisions for prioritizing assistance for the most vulnerable populations, including chronically homeless individuals, persons with disabilities, and veterans. Local CoCs have discretion to establish specific prioritization criteria consistent with HUD’s guidance.

As a result, the CoC program provides rich opportunities for policy change. First of all, the CoC is required to certify its compliance with the jurisdiction’s Consolidated Plan, so that any changes or adjustments to the Consolidated Planning process would carry through into the CoC’s priorities as well.[111]

The CoC’s regulations themselves offer multiple ways to expand housing services to pregnant and parenting women in need.  For example, in 24 CFR §578.5(a), organizations serving pregnant and parenting women in need could be included among the “relevant organizations” identified from which to create the CoC. In addition, the definition of “at risk of homelessness” in 24 CFR §578.3 could be modified to include pregnant and parenting women in need.  Finally, the CoC requirement to record the “at risk of homelessness” status of each individual or family who receives the program’s homelessness prevention assistance (at 24 CFR 578.103(a)(5)[112]) could be expanded to separately indicate whether the recipients are pregnant and parenting women of young children.

An additional way to implement policy change would be through the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) that identifies HUD’s Homeless Policy Priorities.[113] This section can be modified by specific direction of the Secretary for the Office of Community Planning and Development or those to whom the power is delegated, such as the Assistant Secretary, to adjust the priorities as needed.

For instance, the current NOFO lists as a priority partnering with housing, health, and service agencies, which could be adjusted to identify HHS’ MGH, RHY, and TLP programs as specific priorities, calling out pregnant and parenting women in need, which in turn would focus more funds in that direction. Given that this NOFO competitively allocates over $3 billion, a change along these lines could substantially increase housing and other support for pregnant and parenting women in need.

The CoC program’s Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)[114] presents a final area of opportunity to increase support for pregnant and parenting women in need. This system is the data collection and reporting system that HUD, state and local planners, and policymakers use to better inform homeless policy and decision making at the federal, state, and local levels. Therefore, a future administration might increase data requirements for HUD homelessness programs to report more about interactions with pregnant and parenting women in need, including potentially:

• Requiring reporting about interactions with expecting mothers through HHS’s transitional living[115] and maternity group home programs[116] (known as TLP and MGH, respectively, as noted above);
• Expanding the reporting that HMIS already has on pregnancy with respect to HHS’s program oriented to runaway and homeless youth (RHY);[117]
• Enlarging data elements beyond pregnancy status to capture more information; and/or
• Applying those enlarged data elements across all CoC grantees.

Taking any of these steps could help better measure pregnant and parenting women in need’s housing challenges empirically, potentially making it easier to make them a priority, and ultimately engaging more effort in serving them.

F. Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)[118]: The ESG grants provide emergency assistance to people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness with the goal of helping them quickly regain stability in permanent housing. Like the CoC program, Congress authorized the ESG program under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act,[119] as amended by the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act of 2009[120] (42 U.S.C. § 11381 et seq.).[121]

The ESG program provides formula grants to states, metropolitan cities, urban counties, and U.S. territories for a variety of emergency housing needs.[122] The program prioritizes individuals and families experiencing homelessness, victims of domestic violence, youth aging out of foster care, and veterans, but not yet pregnant and parenting women in need.

The regulations for ESG (at 24 CFR Part 576[123]) require that the allocation priorities, method of distributing funds, activities to fund, and the purpose, scope, location, and beneficiaries of an activity funded through ESG be described in the Consolidated Plan for that jurisdiction (24 CFR §576.200).[124] Additionally, ESG regulations require that the services provided are coordinated with targeted homeless services, the local continuum of care services, and mainstream resources in the community (24 CFR §576.400).[125]

As with the Continuum of Care regulations, the ESG regulations provide significant opportunities for policy change to increase housing opportunities for pregnant and parenting women in need. For instance, an administration seeking to do so could modify the definition of “at risk of homelessness” in 24 CFR §576.2[126] to include pregnant and parenting women in need, in particular, as with the mirroring definition in the CoC regulation. Likewise, such an administration could modify the ESG-eligible costs section allowing services for special populations in 24 CFR §576.101(a)(6)[127] to include pregnant and parenting women in need among those populations.[128]

G. Youth Homelessness Demonstration Program (YHDP)[129]: YHDP supports selected communities through a competitive NOFO to develop and implement a coordinated approach aimed at preventing and ending youth homelessness. The current Fiscal Year’s NOFO defines the population to be served by this demonstration program as those age 24 and under experiencing homelessness, including unaccompanied youth, transition-age youth (those ages 18 to 24), and “Pregnant or Parenting Youth”[130] who are experiencing homelessness.[131]

In FY 2024, Congress appropriated $107 million of the CoC funds to implement projects to demonstrate the degree to which a comprehensive approach to serving homeless youth, age 24 and under, in up to 25 communities with a priority for communities with substantial rural populations in up to eight locations, could dramatically reduce youth homelessness in particular.[132]

Because this is a Demonstration Program funded through the CoC program, the CoC regulations are applicable. Therefore, if an administration chose to increase the priority of pregnant and parenting women in need in CoC regulations as described above, those changes would apply to YHDP as well.  To recap, those changes might include adding organizations serving pregnant and parenting women in need to the “relevant organizations” identified from which to create the CoC (24 CFR §578.5(a))[133], modifying the definition of individuals “at risk of homelessness” to include pregnant and parenting women in need (24 CFR §578.3).[134]

Similarly, given that YHDP is funded through the CoC, which in turn is required to certify its compliance with the jurisdiction’s Consolidated Plan, any changes or adjustments to that process would carry through into the CoC’s priorities, and thereby into the YHDP. Again, such changes might include adjusting the Consolidated Plan submission process[135] regulations’ definitions, certifications, and requirements sections to add pregnant and parenting women in need as additional populations whose needs should be considered in Consolidated Plans.

Finally, since awards of the YHDP funds are made through a competitive NOFO, as with the CoC, the terms and elements of that NOFO could be leveraged to further support pregnant and parenting women in need.

H. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG): The CDBG program provides annual funds on a formula basis to local communities to carry out a wide range of community development activities directed toward neighborhood revitalization, economic development, and improved community housing, infrastructure, facilities, and services, particularly in low- and moderate-income areas.[136] Congress authorized the program in 1974 as part of the Housing and Community Development Act[137] (42 U.S.C. 5301, et seq.).[138]

The CDBG program has two primary funding streams: entitlement grants and non-entitlement grants, each targeting different types of communities. The CDBG Entitlement Program specifically allocates funding to “entitlement communities,” which include principal cities in Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), cities with populations of at least 50,000, and qualified urban counties with populations of at least 200,000 (excluding the population of entitled cities).[139]  Non-entitlement areas (primarily smaller or rural communities that don’t meet the population or designation criteria) do not receive direct funding from HUD, but via the CDBG State Program, which lets states determine funding priorities for non-entitlement communities within their jurisdictions.[140]

This distinction subtly affects how best to expand services to pregnant and parenting women in need leveraging each of the two streams of CDBG resources. As noted above, generally speaking the Consolidated Plan process governs the use of CDBG funds, to obtain “citizen input” for the use of these funds and other HUD programs. That said, the Consolidated Plan process varies between the CDBG Entitlement Program and the CDBG State Program.

Specifically, CDBG entitlement communities are generally required to submit a Consolidated Plan every five years[141] with annual updates called Action Plans.[142] Non-entitlement communities, by contrast, may in certain circumstances submit abbreviated Consolidated Plans,[143] but are typically submitted on a shorter timeframe, often every three years, just based on common practice.[144] Action Plans provide detailed proposals for how the jurisdiction will use CDBG funds in the coming year. HUD requires entitlement communities to conduct a needs assessment and market analysis to understand housing and community needs; establish priorities and specific goals, especially for benefiting low- and moderate-income residents; and engage in a public participation process to gather input from community members and stakeholders, with a goal of ensuring transparency and local support.

By contrast, for states administering CDBG funds for non-entitlement areas, the Consolidated Plan process also applies but with some distinctions. States prepare a single, state-level Consolidated Plan every five years, with annual Action Plans that outline fund distribution to non-entitlement communities. States also determine priorities for distributing CDBG funds to smaller or rural communities, often focusing on projects that address statewide issues (e.g., rural infrastructure or housing shortages). That said, like entitlement communities, states must involve public participation in the planning process, and they can also establish additional priorities or eligibility criteria based on state-specific goals.

Regardless, the Consolidated Plan is crucial in both funding streams because it directly informs the types of projects and initiatives that are eligible for entitlement communities and states to fund with CDBG allocations.

CDBG funds can be used for rental assistance, but only under certain conditions. While CDBG funds are often used for housing rehabilitation and public infrastructure, rental assistance is an eligible use in only a few specific circumstances.

i. Short Term Emergency Assistance: These are short-term or emergency rental assistance to prevent homelessness or address housing instability. This was significant during COVID, when HUD allowed CDBG funds to be used more flexibly for emergency needs, including rental assistance. Under the CDBG-CV program (CDBG funds appropriated by the CARES Act in response to COVID-19), rental assistance was allowed for up to six months to prevent eviction and assist households affected by the pandemic.[145] This was specific statutory authority and requires funds to be expended within six (6) years for mitigating the impact of COVID 19.

ii. Disaster Relief: In situations where a community is responding to a natural disaster or other emergencies, CDBG funds can be used to provide temporary rental assistance to displaced or impacted residents. HUD allows this flexibility under disaster-related CDBG funding, such as CDBG-DR (Disaster Recovery) grants,[146] which are often allocated after major disasters like hurricanes or floods.

iii. Public Services: CDBG funds can be used for public services that include housing-related services, which may involve short-term rental assistance. Public services are capped at 15% of the total CDBG allocation for a jurisdiction, but within this limit, rental assistance may qualify if it is provided as part of services to prevent homelessness, support housing stability, or assist low- and moderate-income households in crisis.[147]

Certain limitations exist with respect to rental assistance with CDBG funds. For instance, CDBG ineligible activities include rent or mortgage payments, except, “emergency grant payments made over a period of up to three consecutive months to the provider of such items or services on behalf of an individual or family” (24 CFR §570.207(b)(4)).[148] In addition, recipients of rental assistance funded by CDBG must meet the income eligibility requirements so that the funds primarily benefit low- and moderate-income households (households earning 80% or less of the area median income).[149]

Within these restrictions, given that the CDBG program operates in compliance with a Consolidated Plan, rental assistance may be included as a priority in the local plan, especially during times of crisis or housing instability. In addition, pro-life safety net reforms to the Consolidated Planning process would affect CDBG as well.

Specifically, again, the state and local participating jurisdictions in the Consolidated Plan process includes public comment, so in a slightly more centralized way than in the PHA planning process, those seeking to improve housing access for pregnant and parenting women might, in the use of CDBG program funds for rental assistance in particular, advocate for doing so during Consolidated Plan public comment periods in any or all of those jurisdictions.

Similarly, as noted above the Consolidated Plan submission process[150] regulations’ definitions, certifications and requirements sections at 24 CFR part 91[151] may be modified to add pregnant and parenting women in need as additional populations whose needs should be considered in the planning process.

By contrast, it is a statutory requirement that recipients of rental assistance funded by CDBG must meet the income eligibility requirements so that the funds primarily benefit low- and moderate-income households (households earning 80% or less of the area median income), so that could not be modified by the regulatory process alone.[152]

That said, an administration would be free to add pregnant and parenting women in need to the capped public services provided to prevent homelessness, support housing stability, or assist low- and moderate-income households in crisis, for instance expanding the definition of that final category explicitly to include such women, through the regulatory process.[153]

Finally, the CDBG equal opportunity and fair housing review criteria with respect to discriminatory motivation (at 24 CFR 570.904(a)(1)(i)[154]) and disparate impact (at 24 CFR 570.904(a)(1)(ii)[155]) may be expanded to include “familial status.”

2. Capital Assistance

In addition to programs providing individual assistance, HUD provides resources for capital assistance as well, to increase the availability and affordability of communities’ housing stock.  Within the category of capital assistance, three specific HUD programs hold out promise in particular for enhancing housing opportunities for pregnant and parenting women in need. Those three programs – viz. the capital rather than rental assistance aspects of CDBG, HUD’s HTF trust fund program, and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) – and the particular opportunities each offers to assist expecting moms, are laid out in detail below.

A. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)[156]: In addition to CDBG’s individual rental assistance as described above, the program provides annual grants on a formula basis to eligible communities and/or states to carry out a wide range of community development activities directed toward neighborhood revitalization, economic development, and improved community facilities and services. The funds would generally be used for infrastructure to support a facility, rather than the facility itself.

All CDBG activities must meet at least one of the following national objectives: benefiting low- and moderate-income persons; aiding in the prevention or elimination of slums and blight; or meeting certain urgent community development needs. The program is a significant source of funds to cities and counties for infrastructure to support housing development.

As described above, CDBG funds are tied to the jurisdiction’s Consolidated Plan.  As a result, those seeking to improve housing access for pregnant and parenting women might participate in the comment process for states and local participating jurisdictions planning for CDBG program funds, advocating for local capital assistance needs that would benefit facilities helping to house expecting moms, in addition to rental assistance needs already laid out in Section II(1)(H).

Similarly, as also noted above with respect to rental assistance, the Consolidated Plan submission process[157] regulations’ definitions, certifications and requirements sections may be modified to add pregnant and parenting women in need as additional populations whose needs should be considered in the planning process, this time with a focus on capital assistance.

Finally, as far as the CDBG program itself goes, the change described above in the definition of “individual or family”[158] to include pregnant and parenting women in need would affect not just rental assistance but capital assistance as well.

B. HOME Investment Partnership[159]: Participating jurisdictions may use HOME funds for a variety of housing activities, depending on local housing needs. Capital assistance eligible uses of funds include housing rehabilitation and acquisition and new construction of affordable housing. In new construction and rehabilitation projects, HOME funds may pay for necessary and reasonable costs related to the development of non-luxury housing, including site improvements, demolition, relocation, and costs to meet accessibility requirements.[160]^, [161] In particular, HOME funds can be used to create facilities to serve homeless individuals and families, including potentially pregnant and parenting women in need.

Participating jurisdictions must provide a 25 percent match of their HOME funds, and must also set aside at least 15 percent of their annual allocations for housing to be owned, developed, or sponsored by eligible community-based nonprofit organizations designated as Community Housing Development Organizations.[162]

HOME funds are allocated using a formula designed to reflect relative housing need. After applying the statutory set-asides for insular areas, 40 percent of each appropriation is allocated to states, and 60 percent of the funds are allocated to units of general local government such as metropolitan cities.[163]

As noted above, the HOME program must be administered within the jurisdiction consistent with the Consolidated Plan. Accordingly, to seek local changes in HOME and other HUD programs subject to Consolidated Plans to improve housing access for pregnant and parenting women in need, one might participate in the comment process in those localities. Similarly, as noted above, to expand HOME fund use along with other Consolidated Plan-governed HUD programs to provide additional housing opportunities to pregnant and parenting women in need, the plan submission process[164] may be modified to stress this population’s urgent needs.

The HOME program was created by Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12721, et seq.). Regulations are at 24 CFR part 92 and Consolidated Plan Regulations are at 24 CFR part 91.

C. The Housing Trust Fund (HTF): The HTF provides grants to states to increase and preserve the supply of affordable housing for extremely low- and very low-income households, with a particular focus on rental housing. It is one of the few federal programs that specifically targets housing for the lowest-income families. The HTF was established under Title I of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), amending the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992.[165]

The HTF funds can be used for new construction of rental housing, rehabilitation of existing affordable rental housing, acquisition of real property for affordable rental housing development, and operating cost assistance or reserves for rental housing for extremely low-income households. Supportive housing for the homeless is a frequent activity funded through the HTF.

In particular, the HTF targets extremely low-income households (those earning 30% or less of Average Median Income (AMI)).[166] The states (and in some cases, state-designated entities) are responsible for administering the HTF within their jurisdictions. Each year, HUD allocates HTF funds to states based on a formula that considers factors such as the state’s shortage of affordable housing for extremely low- and very low-income renters. States then distribute funds to eligible recipients, such as nonprofit and for-profit developers, PHAs, or other organizations capable of developing affordable housing.

There is significant flexibility in designing HTF programs, but the state must submit an HTF Allocation Plan to HUD, outlining how they will use their funds. This plan is typically part of that state’s Consolidated Plan. Further, states can prioritize funding for specific populations or housing types depending on their local housing needs, as long as the use of funds aligns with the income targeting requirements.

While HTF specifically targets housing for the lowest-income families, it does not currently prioritize pregnant women in need. Amending HTF regulations to include such a preference could direct funds to housing projects that explicitly support pregnant women. This change could have a significant impact, given HTF’s focus on addressing housing shortages for the most vulnerable populations.

HTF Regulations are at 24 CFR part 93,[167] but the adjustments to the regulatory framework needed to benefit single pregnant and parenting women in need would be minor. The regulations already define a single parent inter alia as “an individual who: is unmarried or legally separated from a spouse; and … is pregnant” (24 CFR §93.2).[168] That said, given that 13% of women who have abortions are married as noted above,[169] some regulatory adjustment might be necessary.

Regardless, the individual state’s assessment of its priority housing needs, which is part of its Consolidated Plan, and can be adjusted through additions to the planning process for the states as described above.

III. Potential Barriers to Policy Change

Overall, pregnant and parenting women in need of any description do not necessarily appear among priorities and specific definitions of individuals to be served by all housing programs. As noted in detail above, current housing-related statutes, regulations, notices of funding opportunities (NOFOs), and other sub-regulatory policy statements may make no mention of expecting mothers and their children born or unborn, define them in a way not consonant with defending innocent life, or outright prohibit the use of funds for such purposes.  This failure allows funds to be directed to other priorities, within the scope of current law, as modified from time to time by legislation, regulatory change or new policy pronouncements.

On the legislative front, appropriations acts constitute one example of the legislative challenges a future administration might face to leveraging existing programs to meet pregnant and parenting women’s housing needs. For example, the FY2024 HUD appropriation, which is likely to be extended by continuing resolution, includes language intended to eliminate students from being able to access Section 8 housing and vouchers funded through that stream, without specifying pregnant women in need among the exceptions, though the exceptions include those with dependent children.[170] The same language appears in prior years, as well as in both the House (H.R. 9028)[171] and Senate (S. 4796)[172] housing appropriations bills for FY2025. Addressing this challenge is outside the scope of this study.

On the regulatory and sub-regulatory front, PHA plans and Consolidated Plans for instance are required to conduct housing needs assessments for the relevant location, but HUD does not yet require that eligible jurisdictions specifically address pregnant and parenting women’s acute or chronic housing needs. Similarly, CoC regulations do not address the NOFO that controls the prioritization for the grant awards. More specifically, while the HUD Reform Act implementing regulations (24 CFR Part 4)[173] provide the basics of how any grant must be conducted, the CoC regulations fail to address a range of items that would provide incentives for greater support. Likewise, while the homelessness programs of HUD are often layered with HHS programs, there is limited program support and no specific regulatory framework for integration with HHS’ Maternity Group Home (MGH) program.[174] While pregnant and parenting women in need are identified in the YHDP program, its NOFO continues to require specific entry paths into transitional housing in order to reach permanent supportive housing.[175] This may limit expecting mothers’ access to housing at their most vulnerable time.

On the other hand, such regulatory and sub-regulatory challenges, by their very nature, fall within the authority of an administration to solve. For instance, a single White House Executive Order (EO) might set the priority of addressing pregnant and parenting women’s housing needs, inter alia. Such an EO might require a “whole of government approach” to providing support to expecting moms through regulatory and grant processes across the federal government, which would engage many of those administering housing programs to find the most effective changes. The current administration has set ample precedent for such an approach, given for example, its order “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government” (E.O. 13985).[176]

In addition, a future administration might move immediately to direct specific adjustments to sub-regulatory documents such as NOFOs providing grants for funding for homeless services that prioritize pregnant and parenting women in need. Such a process, by definition, does not require notice and comment procedures, and so could take place relatively quickly.

Finally, as noted repeatedly and in detail above, though it requires full notice and comment procedures, regulatory modifications to housing program details such as the PHA and Consolidated Plan processes could require program participants to leverage existing resources to meet the needs of pregnant and parenting women.

In sum, leaving aside legislative and statutory challenges with which this study does not deal, an administration focused on the task would have an array of tools for overcoming difficulties in current federal policy restricting housing services to pregnant and parenting women in need.

IV. Conclusion

Whether through public housing authorities’ planning process, the Consolidated Plan process, or individual programs, HUD’s existing resources provide a rich panoply of opportunities to help pregnant and parenting women in need.  Such help includes tweaks to rental assistance programs like Section 8 vouchers and PBRA, identifying HHS’ youth-oriented runaway and homeless programs frequently serving expecting moms in need as priorities to coordinate with as part of HUD’s Homeless Policy Priorities, and requiring reporting of interactions with pregnant and parenting women in need in HUD’s HMIS homelessness database to better measure their needs. On the capital assistance front, that help includes potential improvements to the CDBG program, the HOME program, and the HTF. Taken together, such changes could make a meaningful difference in federal policy toward strengthening the pro-life safety net.

 

Christopher C. Hull, Ph.D., is the President of Issue Management Inc., a full-service public affairs firm focused on achieving policy results. Dr. Hull holds a Ph.D. with distinction in American Government from Georgetown University, and an undergraduate degree magna cum laude in Comparative Government from Harvard University. He has served as Chief of Staff in the U.S. House of Representatives; the Majority Caucus Staff Director of a State Senate; Executive Vice President of a major national think tank; and Legislative Assistant/Legislative Correspondent in the U.S. Senate. He is the author of Grassroots Rules (Stanford Press, 2007), as well as more than 100 book chapters, peer-reviewed articles, conference papers, and op-eds.

John G. Bravacos, J.D., has over 35 years of experience in public and private sector law, housing policy, and government administration. As the Mid-Atlantic Regional Director for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) from 2007 to 2009, Mr. Bravacos oversaw the deployment of $9.2 billion in federal funds across six jurisdictions and spearheaded initiatives to address housing challenges and promote historic preservation. During his tenure, he served as Senior Advisor to the Secretary and to multiple HUD Program Offices, managing high-stakes negotiations such as the New York City Housing Authority settlement and leading rule revisions like Section 3 economic opportunity policies. Mr. Bravacos’ legal career includes representing clients in complex real estate and civil litigation matters, providing strategic counsel to municipal entities, and facilitating multifaceted development projects. His advisory roles within HUD included crafting disaster response strategies for Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands and serving on HUD’s Performance Review Board and OPM’s Qualification Review Board. In local government, Mr. Bravacos chaired the Board of Supervisors for Tredyffrin Township, Pennsylvania, where he managed a $22 million municipal budget and implemented community development projects. Mr. Bravacos earned his Juris Doctor from Villanova University School of Law and his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Pennsylvania State University. He is a licensed attorney in Pennsylvania, admitted to practice in federal district and appellate courts.

 

The authors wish to thank the Charlotte Lozier Institute staff for their contributions, especially Deputy Editor Ben Cook for his extraordinary attention to detail in his review of this study. 

---

[1] Note that this terminology is selected based on its descriptive nature of the target population, not because of its presence in statute or regulation.  Current Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness materials often refer to “pregnant and parenting youth,” terminology that raises inter alia the issue of excluding pregnant and parenting women who do not qualify under state and federal law as “youth.”

[2] https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mdesmond/files/desmondkimbro.evictions.fallout.sf2015_2.pdf

[3] https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/8d5e4472-ea8f-41f1-a6e8-3df3cd4637ab/content

[4] https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/7/3331/pdf

[5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7525583/

[6] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2776776

[7] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4338127/

[8] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8037986/

[9] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5957082/

[10] https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/1472-6874-13-29.pdf

[11] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/25/what-the-data-says-about-abortion-in-the-us/#what-are-the-demographics-of-women-who-have-had-abortions

[12] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/1472-6874-13-29

[13] https://www.guttmacher.org/report/characteristics-us-abortion-patients-2014

[14] https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304247

[15] https://www.statista.com/statistics/185325/number-of-legal-abortions-by-marital-status-in-the-us-since-1973/

[16] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/25/what-the-data-says-about-abortion-in-the-us/#what-are-the-demographics-of-women-who-have-had-abortions

[17] https://www.hud.gov/topics/housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8

[18] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/coc

[19] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/esg/

[20] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/yhdp/

[21] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/cdbg

[22] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/htf

[23] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth

[24] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/4366

[25] https://nlihc.org/resource/final-fy24-spending-bill-hud-programs-enacted-house-republicans-turn-attention-slashing

[26] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/section-903.17

[27] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-IX/part-903

[28] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2022-title42/html/USCODE-2022-title42-chap8-subchapI-sec1437c-1.htm

[29] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/pha

[30] Ibid.

[31] 24 CFR § 982.207 Waiting list: Local preferences in admission to program.

[32] Under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C §§ 3601-3619 and 3631, “Familial status” includes any person who is pregnant. 42 U.S.C. §3602(k)(2).

[33] 24 CFR § 5.655 – Section 8 project-based assistance programs: Owner preferences in selection for a project or unit, available at https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/24/5.655.

[34] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/consolidated-plan/consolidated-plan-regulations-and-federal-register-notices/

[35] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning

[36] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/conplan

[37] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-91

[38] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2022-title42/html/USCODE-2022-title42-chap69-sec5304.htm

[39] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/pha

[40] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_17247.PDF

[41] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/coc

[42] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/home

[43] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/esg/

[44] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/cdbg

[45] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/htf

[46] Under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C §§ 3601-3619 and 3631, “Familial status” includes any person who is pregnant. 42 U.S.C. §3602(k)(2)

[47] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[48] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[49] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.5#p-91.5

[50] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.100#p-91.100

[51] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-91/subpart-B/section-91.110

[52] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-91/subpart-B/section-91.100

[53] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.110#p-91.110

[54] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.105#p-91.105

[55] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.110#p-91.110

[56] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.205#p-91.205

[57] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.305#p-91.305

[58] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[59] https://www.hud.gov/topics/housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8

[60] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2018-title24-vol4/pdf/CFR-2018-title24-vol4-part982.pdf

[61] https://www.hud.gov/hcv/tenants

[62] https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/the-housing-choice-voucher-program

[63] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/PIH/documents/HCV_Fact_Sheet_Landlords.pdf

[64] https://www.hud.gov/topics/housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8

[65] A payment standard is determined according to “the amount generally needed to rent a moderately-priced dwelling unit in the local housing market.” See https://www.hud.gov/topics/housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8.

[66] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_35616.PDF

[67]https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:42%20section:1437f%20edition:prelim)%20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section1437f)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true

[68] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/State/documents/BlueBook_electronic_2020.pdf

[69] https://www.hud.gov/topics/housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8

[70] Ibid.

[71] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/PIH/documents/HCV_Fact_Sheet_Landlords.pdf

[72] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/State/documents/BlueBook_electronic_2020.pdf

[73] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:42%20section:1437f%20edition:prelim)%20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section1437f)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true

[74] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-5/subpart-D/section-5.403

[75] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/RAD_PBVPBRA_COMPAREGUIDE.PDF

[76] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/PIH/documents/HCV_Guidebook_Calculating_Rent_and_HAP_Payments.pdf

[77] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/PIH/documents/PHOG_Waiting_List_Chapter.pdf

[78] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/43503HSGH.PDF

[79] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/43503c4HSGH.PDF

[80] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:42%20section:1437f%20edition:prelim)%20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section1437f)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true

[81] https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f4955ed1a01e8df5a4b0c655eefe5af7&mc=true&node=pt24.2.401&rgn=div5

[82] https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f4955ed1a01e8df5a4b0c655eefe5af7&mc=true&node=pt24.2.402&rgn=div5

[83] https://www.hudexchange.info/trainings/operating-funds/

[84] https://files.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/PIH-HCV-Landlord-The-PHA-Role-in-the-Housing-Choice-Voucher-Program.pdf

[85] https://files.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/ACOP-Guide-Chapter-2-Waiting-List-Management-and-Tenant-Selection.pdf

[86] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/publications/notices

[87] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/home

[88] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-92/subpart-E/subject-group-ECFRf448ea7bbdfb69a/section-92.209

[89] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[90] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-92/subpart-E/subject-group-ECFRf448ea7bbdfb69a/section-92.209

[91] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/coc

[92] https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance/coc-esg-virtual-binders/coc-eligible-activities/coc-rental-assistance/

[93] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/coc/coc-program-eligibility-requirements/

[94] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-578

[95] https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance/coc-esg-virtual-binders/coc-program-components/supportive-services-only/

[96] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs/transitional-living

[97] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs

[98] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs/maternity-group-homes

[99] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs

[100] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs/transitional-living

[101] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/coc/coc-program-eligibility-requirements/

[102] https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance/coc-esg-virtual-binders/coc-program-components/transitional-housing/

[103] https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance/coc-esg-virtual-binders/coc-program-components/supportive-services-only/

[104] https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance/coc-esg-virtual-binders/coc-program-components/hmis/

[105] https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance/coc-esg-virtual-binders/coc-program-components/homelessness-prevention-hp/

[106] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/State/documents/Collaborative_Applicant_Responsibilities_and_Best_Practices_Presentation.pdf

[107] https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/house-bill/5417/text

[108] https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/1877

[109] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/11381

[110] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-578

[111] Specifically, as noted above in Section II(B)(2)(a-f), such changes might include adjusting the Consolidated Plan regulations’ submission process regulations definitions, certifications, and requirements sections to add pregnant and parenting women in need as additional populations whose needs should be considered in Consolidated Plans. In addition, the Consolidated Plan regulations’ definition of “at risk of homelessness” (at 24 CFR 91.5) could be expanded to add “pregnant or parenting a young child.” Likewise, the list of public and private agencies with which a local jurisdiction (at 24 CFR 91.100(a)(1)) or state (at 24 CFR 91.110(b)(2)) must consult when preparing a Consolidated Plan could be enlarged to include those that provide assisted housing, health services, and/or social services to pregnant and parenting women in need. Similarly, the list of matters on which the jurisdiction (at 24 CFR 91.100(c)(1)) or state (at 24 CFR 91.110(b)) must consult with local PHAs could include strategies for assisting pregnant and parenting women in need.  Moreover, citizen participation plans for localities (in 24 CFR 91.105(a)(1)) or states (in 24 CFR 91.110(a)) might be improved to require addressing housing and community development needs that include those of pregnant and parenting women in need. Finally, Consolidated Plans’ requirement for estimating the number and type of families in need of housing assistance in the locality (at 24 CFR 91.205(b)(1)(i)) or state (at 24 CFR 91.305(b)(1)(i)) could be expanded to include pregnant and parenting women. Such changes to the Consolidated Plan process would flow through to the CoC program as well, improving its protections of pregnant and parenting women in need.

[112] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-578/subpart-G/section-578.103

[113] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/CPD/do0063uments/FY2024_FY2025_CoC_and_YHDP_NOFO_FR-6800-N-25.pdf

[114] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/hmis/

[115] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs/transitional-living

[116] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs/maternity-group-homes

[117] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/hmis/hmis-data-standards/standards/rhy/r10-pregnancy-status/

[118] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/esg/

[119] https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/house-bill/5417/text

[120] https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/1877

[121] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/11381

[122] Specifically, those needs are essential services related to emergency shelter and street outreach; rehabilitation and conversion of buildings to be used as emergency shelters; operation of emergency shelters; short-term and medium-term rental assistance for individuals and families who are homeless or at risk of homelessness; housing relocation and stabilization services for individuals and families who are homeless or at risk of homelessness; and certain administrative costs. See https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/esg.

[123] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-576

[124] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-576/subpart-C/section-576.200

[125] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-576/subpart-E/section-576.400

[126] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-576/subpart-A/section-576.2

[127] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-576/section-576.101#p-576.101(a)(6)

[128] Currently, that language reads, “ESG funds may be used to provide services for homeless youth, victim services, and services for people living with HIV/AIDS, so long as the costs of providing these services are eligible under paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this section. The term victim services means services that assist program participants who are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, including services offered by rape crisis centers and domestic violence shelters, and other organizations with a documented history of effective work concerning domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.”

[129] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/yhdp/

[130] The Biden-Harris Administration’s HUD FY 2024 YDHP NOFO defines “Pregnant or Parenting Youth” as “Individual heads of households who are age 24 or younger who are pregnant or who are the parents or legal guardians of one or more children who are present with or sleeping in the same place as that youth parent.” (p. 13) https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/FR-6800-N-35_NOFO.pdf

[131] https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/CFO/documents/FR-6800-N-35_NOFO.pdf

[132] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/4366/text

[133] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-578/section-578.5#p-578.5(a)

[134] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-578/subpart-A/section-578.3

[135] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[136] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/cdbg

[137] https://www.congress.gov/93/statute/STATUTE-88/STATUTE-88-Pg633-2.pdf

[138] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:42%20section:5301%20edition:prelim)%20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section5301)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true

[139] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-entitlement/cdbg-entitlement-program-eligibility-requirements/

[140] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-state/state-cdbg-program-eligibility-requirements/

[141] More specifically, the housing and homeless needs assessment, market analysis, and strategic plan must be submitted at least once every five years, or as such time agreed upon by HUD and the jurisdiction in order to facilitate orderly program management, as well as to coordinate consolidated plans with time periods used for cooperation agreements, other plans, or the availability of data. See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.15#p-91.15(b)(2).

[142] More specifically, the summary of the citizen participation and consultation process, the action plan, and the certifications must be submitted on an annual basis. See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-91/section-91.15#p-91.15(b)(1).

[143] More specifically, a jurisdiction that is not a CDBG entitlement community, and is not expected to participate in the HOME program, as well as an Insular Area that is a HOME or CDBG grantee, may submit an abbreviated consolidated plan. See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-1/subpart-C/section-91.235)

[144] For instance, Notice CPD-24-01: Guidance on Submitting Consolidated Plans and Annual Action Plans for FY 2024 mentions in passing “grantees’ three- to five-year Consolidated Plans.” See https://www.hudexchange.info/news/notice-cpd-24-01-guidance-on-submitting-consolidated-plans-and-annual-action-plans-for-fy-2024/.

[145] https://files.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/Using-CDBG-Emergency-Payments-for-Rental-Assistance-in-Coronavirus-Responses.pdf

[146] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-dr/

[147] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_16476.PDF

[148] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-570/subpart-C/section-570.207

[149] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_16470.PDF

[150] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[151] https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=ccd1a50768ed101d9bcc27036a13b728&mc=true&node=pt24.1.91&rgn=div5

[152] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_16470.PDF

[153] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_16476.PDF

[154] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/part-570/section-570.904

[155] Ibid.

[156] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/cdbg

[157] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[158] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-B/chapter-V/subchapter-C/part-570/subpart-C/section-570.207

[159] https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/home

[160] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-92/subpart-E/subject-group-ECFRf448ea7bbdfb69a

[161] https://www.hud.gov/hudprograms

[162] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/home/home-overview/

[163] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_8404.PDF

[164] https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/20516_CH3_ATT1.PDF

[165] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:12%20section:4568%20edition:prelim)%20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title12-section4568)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true

[166] https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html

[167] https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=c2f701ff3a922130b1dfc0952859e6e6&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt24.1.93

[168] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/section-93.2

[169] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/25/what-the-data-says-about-abortion-in-the-us/#what-are-the-demographics-of-women-who-have-had-abortions

[170] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/4366/text  SEC. 210. (a) No assistance shall be provided under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) to any individual who—

(1) is enrolled as a student at an institution of higher education (as defined under section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002));

(2) is under 24 years of age;

(3) is not a veteran;

(4) is unmarried;

(5) does not have a dependent child;

(6) is not a person with disabilities, as such term is defined in section 3(b)(3)(E) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(3)(E)) and was not receiving assistance under such section 8 as of November 30, 2005;

(7) is not a youth who left foster care at age 14 or older and is at risk of becoming homeless; and

(8) is not otherwise individually eligible, or has parents who, individually or jointly, are not eligible, to receive assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).

(b) For purposes of determining the eligibility of a person to receive assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), any financial assistance (in excess of amounts received for tuition and any other required fees and charges) that an individual receives under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), from private sources, or from an institution of higher education (as defined under section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002)), shall be considered income to that individual, except for a person over the age of 23 with dependent children.

[171] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/9028?s=1&r=1&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22hud+appropriations+2025%22%7D

[172] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/4796?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22S..+4796%22%7D&s=2&r=1

[173] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-24/subtitle-A/part-4

[174] https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/programs/runaway-homeless-youth/programs/maternity-group-homes

[175] https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/354732

[176] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government