Who's building affordable housing in California?

Track records for leading LIHTC developers — sourced from TCAC award data and enriched with HCD Annual Progress Reports. SPV-unwound sponsor attribution.

Also see: Property manager rankings →

536,991
LI units built
6,631
TCAC projects
100,246
Units in pipeline
801
Developers tracked
248
Cities represented

Developer leaderboard

801 developers tracked — ranked by total low-income units built. Showing 626650.

626
Century Affordable Development, Inc. (CADI)
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV+336 pipeline
135
units
627
CHBA Affordable III, LLC
3 projects · 3 JVs
100% JV
135
units
628
The Salvation Army, a California corporation
2 projects · 1 JVs
48% JV
135
units
629
Neighborhood Effort
5 projects · 2 JVs
49% JV
135
units
630
IH CDP Partnership, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
135
units
631
Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino
2 projects · 1 JVs
62% JV
135
units
632
Housing Authority of the City of Oxnard
2 projects · 1 JVs
53% JV
134
units
633
RSCCAG
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
133
units
634
Townspeople
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
133
units
635
Calexico Community Action Council
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
133
units
636
The Michaels Development Company I, LP
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV+80 pipeline
132
units
637
Highland Property Dev
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
132
units
638
JHC-Stonegate Housing, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
132
units
639
The Richman Group
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
132
units
640
El Camino Property LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
132
units
641
GTM Holdings, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
131
units
642
The People Concern
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
131
units
643
West LA Veterans Collective, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV+118 pipeline
131
units
644
Fallbrook Renaissance LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
130
units
645
Community Housing of North County
3 projects
0% JV
130
units
646
PSHHC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
129
units
647
DL Horn
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV+48 pipeline
128
units
648
Butte County Housing Authority
2 projects · 1 JVs
56% JV
128
units
649
Holland Development
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
126
units
650
HCHC General Partner, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
126
units

Development model breakdown

Share of units built as sole sponsor vs. joint venture — developers 626650.

Century Affordable Development, Inc. (CADI)
0% sole sponsor100% JV
CHBA Affordable III, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
The Salvation Army, a California corporation
52% sole sponsor48% JV
Neighborhood Effort
51% sole sponsor49% JV
IH CDP Partnership, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino
38% sole sponsor62% JV
Housing Authority of the City of Oxnard
47% sole sponsor53% JV
RSCCAG
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Townspeople
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Calexico Community Action Council
0% sole sponsor100% JV
The Michaels Development Company I, LP
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Highland Property Dev
0% sole sponsor100% JV
JHC-Stonegate Housing, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
The Richman Group
0% sole sponsor100% JV
El Camino Property LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
GTM Holdings, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
The People Concern
0% sole sponsor100% JV
West LA Veterans Collective, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Fallbrook Renaissance LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Community Housing of North County
100% sole sponsor0% JV
PSHHC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
DL Horn
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Butte County Housing Authority
44% sole sponsor56% JV
Holland Development
0% sole sponsor100% JV
HCHC General Partner, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV

Top cities by affordable units built

Concentrated production across these California cities by the tracked developers.

#1Los Angeles
225 projects
15,017 units
#2San Jose
38 projects
4,917 units
#3San Diego
42 projects
3,793 units
#4San Francisco
37 projects
3,603 units
#5Sacramento
28 projects
2,650 units
#6Oakland
24 projects
1,943 units
#7Santa Rosa
28 projects
1,870 units
#8Chico
14 projects
1,122 units
#9San Marcos
12 projects
1,097 units
#10Fresno
16 projects
1,092 units
#11Fremont
12 projects
891 units
#12Palmdale
7 projects
797 units

Units in pipeline

Preliminary Reservation projects (awarded but not yet placed in service).

Pacific West Communities, Inc.
8,474
TPC Holdings IX, LLC
8,474
Central Valley Coalition for Affordable Housing
7,306
Riverside Charitable Corporation
2,984
Meta Housing Corporation
2,854
USA Multi-Family Development, Inc.
2,328
Community Revitalization and Development Corporation
2,276
Affirmed Housing Group, Inc.
2,143
PacH San Jose Holdings, LLC
2,104
CFAH Housing, LLC
1,906
Pacific Southwest Community Development Corporation
1,690
National Community Renaissance of California
1,673
Eden Housing, Inc.
1,582
Chelsea Investment Corporation
1,513
Las Palmas Foundation
1,464
Pacific Housing, Inc.
1,403
ROEM Development Corporation
1,265
CRP Affordable Housing
1,253
Mercy Housing California
1,187
MRK Partners, Inc.
1,167
JEMCOR Development Partners, LLC
1,146
BRIDGE Housing Corporation
1,140
Danco Communities
1,108
Community Development Partners
1,052
Corporation for Better Housing
985

About this data

Stats are derived from TCAC (California Tax Credit Allocation Committee) Low-Income Housing Tax Credit award records, enriched with HCD Annual Progress Reports (APR) joined on Assessor Parcel Numbers. Attribution uses SPV-unwinding — project-specific LLCs are collapsed into their controlling parent sponsors. "APR confirmed" units reflect buildings with a certificate of occupancy recorded in the HCD APR. Data covers 801 developers with 2+ built projects through 2025. "Pipeline" = Preliminary Reservation stage (TCAC award issued, project not yet placed in service). JV = joint venture where two or more independent sponsors share the tax credit project.

Scope: Primary source is TCAC LIHTC award data. It does not include affordable housing financed solely through HUD HOME loans, Section 8 project-based contracts, USDA Rural Development, local redevelopment funds, or bond financing without a tax credit award. Developers can submit non-TCAC projects via their dashboard; those verified by our team are included and marked self-reported in the leaderboard. Developers whose portfolios include a significant share of non-LIHTC affordable housing may still show lower counts than their own websites until those projects are submitted and approved.