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 676700.

676
CEDC
3 projects · 2 JVs
43% JV
115
units
677
New Directions Sepulveda LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
115
units
678
WORKS
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
115
units
679
Sunrise Partners
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
115
units
680
RAC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
113
units
681
Acts Community Development Corporation
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
112
units
682
Acts Community Development Organization
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
112
units
683
KDI Cottonwood, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
112
units
684
Santa Barbara Housing Asssitance Corporation
2 projects · 1 JVs
35% JV
112
units
685
Rancho Belago Developers, Inc.
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
112
units
686
MAAC Worthington Del Sol Family Apartments MGP LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
112
units
687
Kingdom AH I, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
112
units
688
Squier Properties, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
111
units
689
Madera Opportunities for Resident Enrichment & Ser
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
111
units
690
Great Valley Housing Development Corp.
2 projects · 1 JVs
50% JV
110
units
691
Chico Homes, Inc.
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
110
units
692
Investment Concepts, Inc.
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
110
units
693
Pacific Asian Consortium in Employment
2 projects
0% JV
109
units
694
Global Premier Dev., Inc.
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
108
units
695
PAHC Sheridan Apartments, Inc.
2 projects · 1 JVs
48% JV
108
units
696
Rise Urban Partners, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV+77 pipeline
107
units
697
Housing Auhtority of the County
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
107
units
698
Pacific Union Apartments, Inc.
2 projects · 1 JVs
78% JV
106
units
699
Ashwood Construction
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
106
units
700
C
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
105
units

Development model breakdown

Share of units built as sole sponsor vs. joint venture — developers 676700.

CEDC
57% sole sponsor43% JV
New Directions Sepulveda LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
WORKS
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Sunrise Partners
0% sole sponsor100% JV
RAC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Acts Community Development Corporation
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Acts Community Development Organization
0% sole sponsor100% JV
KDI Cottonwood, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Santa Barbara Housing Asssitance Corporation
65% sole sponsor35% JV
Rancho Belago Developers, Inc.
0% sole sponsor100% JV
MAAC Worthington Del Sol Family Apartments MGP LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Kingdom AH I, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Squier Properties, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Madera Opportunities for Resident Enrichment & Ser
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Great Valley Housing Development Corp.
50% sole sponsor50% JV
Chico Homes, Inc.
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Investment Concepts, Inc.
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Pacific Asian Consortium in Employment
100% sole sponsor0% JV
Global Premier Dev., Inc.
0% sole sponsor100% JV
PAHC Sheridan Apartments, Inc.
52% sole sponsor48% JV
Rise Urban Partners, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Housing Auhtority of the County
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Pacific Union Apartments, Inc.
22% sole sponsor78% JV
Ashwood Construction
0% sole sponsor100% JV
C
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.