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 326350.

326
No.CA Presbyterian Homes Services
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
398
units
327
Ajax Development Services, LLC
5 projects · 5 JVs
100% JV
396
units
328
Affordable Housing Alliance II, Inc. dba Integrity
7 projects · 7 JVs
100% JV+404 pipeline
390
units
329
Garden Court, Inc.
9 projects · 9 JVs
100% JV+47 pipeline
390
units
330
Terrex Development Corp.
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
390
units
331
American Senior Living
5 projects · 5 JVs
100% JV
386
units
332
Project GO, Inc.
5 projects · 2 JVs
51% JV
380
units
333
Community Development L
4 projects · 4 JVs
100% JV+936 pipeline
377
units
334
SADI, LLC
7 projects · 7 JVs
100% JV
377
units
335
Mission Housing Develop
4 projects · 3 JVs
77% JV
376
units
336
LOMOD PDS, LLC
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
375
units
337
La Cienaga LOMOD
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
375
units
338
NFAHS Development LLC
4 projects · 4 JVs
100% JV
369
units
339
Daedalus Development Company
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
368
units
340
WCH Affordable VII, LLC
6 projects · 6 JVs
100% JV
367
units
341
DeRose HDC, Inc.
3 projects
0% JV
366
units
342
Villa Garcia, Inc.
2 projects · 1 JVs
32% JV+89 pipeline
359
units
343
AHA Los Angeles II MGP, LLC
3 projects · 3 JVs
100% JV
357
units
344
Norwood Phoenix Park, LLC
2 projects
0% JV
356
units
345
Monterey County Housing Authority Development Corp
6 projects · 1 JVs
22% JV
356
units
346
Assoc. Dev., Inc.
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
354
units
347
Housing Assistance Corporation
5 projects · 5 JVs
100% JV
350
units
348
Cecilia Place Homes, Inc
5 projects · 5 JVs
100% JV
349
units
349
Santa Clarita Valley Committee on Aging Corporatio
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
347
units
350
Santa Clarita Valley Committee on Aging Group
2 projects · 2 JVs
100% JV
347
units

Development model breakdown

Share of units built as sole sponsor vs. joint venture — developers 326350.

No.CA Presbyterian Homes Services
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Ajax Development Services, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Affordable Housing Alliance II, Inc. dba Integrity
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Garden Court, Inc.
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Terrex Development Corp.
0% sole sponsor100% JV
American Senior Living
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Project GO, Inc.
49% sole sponsor51% JV
Community Development L
0% sole sponsor100% JV
SADI, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Mission Housing Develop
23% sole sponsor77% JV
LOMOD PDS, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
La Cienaga LOMOD
0% sole sponsor100% JV
NFAHS Development LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Daedalus Development Company
0% sole sponsor100% JV
WCH Affordable VII, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
DeRose HDC, Inc.
100% sole sponsor0% JV
Villa Garcia, Inc.
68% sole sponsor32% JV
AHA Los Angeles II MGP, LLC
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Norwood Phoenix Park, LLC
100% sole sponsor0% JV
Monterey County Housing Authority Development Corp
78% sole sponsor22% JV
Assoc. Dev., Inc.
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Housing Assistance Corporation
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Cecilia Place Homes, Inc
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Santa Clarita Valley Committee on Aging Corporatio
0% sole sponsor100% JV
Santa Clarita Valley Committee on Aging Group
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.