Draft planning tool — estimates only, not engineering or legal advice.
Public spending
Los Angeles County
Housing and homelessness figures that name Los Angeles County, or a Continuum of Care that covers it. Shared counts are shown in full and are not split.
Snapshot retrieved 2026-10-17.
All counties
HHAP Round 7 preliminary allocation
Awarded (preliminary) FY 2026-27. Not final.
Los Angeles County: $92,163,999.73***
Glendale CoC: $269,408.60. This allocation covers: Glendale CoC. This city CoC is separate from the Los Angeles City & County CoC and is not added to that count.
Long Beach CoC: $4,994,315.85. This allocation covers: Long Beach CoC. This city CoC is separate from the Los Angeles City & County CoC and is not added to that count.
Los Angeles City & County CoC: $92,688,867.86. This allocation covers: Los Angeles City & County CoC.
Pasadena CoC: $794,550.25. This allocation covers: Pasadena CoC. This city CoC is separate from the Los Angeles City & County CoC and is not added to that count.
Long Beach: $9,561,712.30. Large-city preliminary allocation. Continuum: CA-606. Not added to the county allocation.
Los Angeles: $156,747,150**. Large-city preliminary allocation. Continuum: CA-600. Not added to the county allocation.
County, Continuum of Care, and large-city rows are different grantees. They are not added together on this page.
Source states: "THESE HHAP 7 ALLOCATIONS ARE PRELIMINARY AND NOT FINAL." Calculated using 2025 Point-In-Time count data; final allocations to include reallocations of unexpended HHAP 2 and 3 funds and "will be available in September 2026" (per the PDF). Final allocations were not found on the HHAP page as of retrieval.
Footnote markers from the source: * = funds split equally between Large Cities in same CoC PIT area (city table); ** = 45% Large City cap applied; *** = 40% County cap applied; **** = allocation adjusted pursuant to HSC 50239(i).
Regional allocation total per amended HHAP 6 NOFA (incorporating HHAP 7): $829,350,000 of the $900M appropriation (less $45M administration and $25.65M Tribal HHAP 5). Sum of the rows below computed by MicroHom = $829,350,000.00.
Preliminary allocation PDF. HCD HHAP page.
HHAP rounds 1–6 by grantee
Activity through 2026-06-30 (monthly reports due 2026-07-31), per the file. award = HHAP allocation awarded to the grantee (type: award). obligated / expended = actual, self-reported by grantees in monthly fiscal reports to HCD (type: actual_spending, self-reported). Sums below are computed by MicroHom from the grantee rows in the HCD file. Percent expended is computed by MicroHom from the cited award and expended amounts on that row.
HCD grantee fiscal file
People
CA-600 Los Angeles City & County CoC
This count covers: Los Angeles City & County CoC.
System performance, CA-600
CA-606 Long Beach CoC
This count covers: Long Beach CoC. This city CoC is separate from the Los Angeles City & County CoC and is not added to that count.
System performance, CA-606
CA-607 Pasadena CoC
This count covers: Pasadena CoC. This city CoC is separate from the Los Angeles City & County CoC and is not added to that count.
System performance, CA-607
CA-612 Glendale CoC
This count covers: Glendale CoC. This city CoC is separate from the Los Angeles City & County CoC and is not added to that count.
System performance, CA-612
count_type is as reported by HUD (e.g., sheltered-only counts in some non-count years for unsheltered). Statewide sums are computed by MicroHom from CoC rows.
Measures except 1b are generated from the state's Homelessness Data Integration System (HDIS), meaning people who touch HMIS-participating services; they are not a census. Measure 1b and PIT Count are not shown for 2021 because of irregularities in that year's counts (data.ca.gov dataset description). Values are calendar years (Jan–Dec), not state fiscal years.
HUD point-in-time estimates. California system performance data.
Local audits
Court order · settlement-compliance ruling2025-06-24
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs' Motions for Settlement Agreement Compliance, LA Alliance for Human Rights v. City of Los Angeles, No. 2:20-cv-02291 (Dkt. 991)
U.S. District Court, Central District of California (Judge David O. Carter). City of Los Angeles.
a review of the record reveals missed milestones, neglected obligations, and a troubling lack of oversight.
Conclusion, p. 61
Weighing all of the options, this is not the time for a receivership over the City’s homelessness response system.
p. 60
The Court institutes a monitor to oversee compliance and ask the hard questions on behalf of Angelenos. It mandates quarterly, in-court hearings, beginning November 12, 2025, and continuing as needed, to ensure these commitments are honored.
pp. 61–62
Full report
Court-ordered assessment (not an audit)2025-05-14
Independent Assessment of City-Funded Homelessness Assistance Programs (LA Alliance for Human Rights v. City of Los Angeles, No. 2:20-cv-02291, Dkt. 905)
Alvarez & Marsal, independent assessor retained by U.S. District Judge David O. Carter. City of Los Angeles (Roadmap, Alliance and Inside Safe programs), LAHSA.
A&M identified approximately $2.3 billion of funding, including appropriations, commitments, or spending, related to the City Programs across the Lookback Period.
Executive Summary, p. 4 (Lookback Period June 1, 2020 – June 30, 2024)
Insufficient financial accountability led to an inability to trace substantial funds allocated to the City Programs while fragmented data systems across LAHSA, the City, and the County, in combination with inconsistent reporting formats, made it difficult to confirm reported bed counts, track participant outcomes, and align financial data with performance metrics.
Executive Summary, p. 4
since the City and LAHSA were unable to identify and calculate the relevant expenses for all City Programs, A&M was unable to quantify the total amount of money spent to establish the beds and provide associated supportive services.
pp. 4–5
Response / corrective action
A&M states it received written responses to its March 6, 2025 draft from the County (March 21, 2025) and LAHSA (March 24, 2025) and that 'no material changes have been made to A&M’s initial findings and recommendations.'
Full report
County Auditor-Controller2024-11-19
Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) – Finance, Contracts, Risk Management, and Grants Management Review (Board presentation summary)
Los Angeles County Department of Auditor-Controller. LAHSA (City/County of Los Angeles joint authority).
LAHSA awarded $50.8 million in Measure H working capital (multi-year) cash advances to various subrecipients beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18, and did not establish formal agreements to determine how and when the funds would be repaid.
Summary of Key Findings
LAHSA only recovered approximately $2.5 million (5%) as of July 8, 2024.
Summary of Key Findings
as of July 2024, had approximately $8 million in outstanding advances issued to subrecipients that were carried over from FYs 2016-17 through 2022-23.
Annual Cash Advances
Response / corrective action
Per the Auditor-Controller's issue table, LAHSA's formal written response (Nov 7, 2024) agreed with 6 of 16 issues, partially disagreed with 6, and disagreed with 4 (Issue 1 'Did Not Establish Agreements for Working Capital Advances' – Disagree; Issue 5 'Inappropriate Use of Funds' – Disagree; Issue 8 'Retroactive Contracts' – Disagree; Issue 9 'Inadequate Contract Monitoring Plan' – Disagree). The A-C also states: 'No material disagreements or factual errors were raised by LAHSA during the exit.'
Full report
City Controller2024
Pathways to Permanent Housing (performance audit of LAHSA and the City of Los Angeles, interim to permanent housing, FY 2019–2023)
Los Angeles City Controller. City of Los Angeles / LAHSA.
1 in 4 City-funded interim housing beds went unused costing taxpayers an estimated $218 million between FY 2019–FY 2023.
Key Findings
Nearly 1 in 3 people who expressed interest in a shelter bed were unable to secure one during FY22 and FY23. (16,000 people were removed from the shelter bed waiting list after an average of six months.)
Key Findings
More than 50% of people exiting City-funded interim housing returned to homelessness or unknown destinations.
Key Findings
Response / corrective action
Recommendations listed on the page include a formal bed-reservation policy, data quality standards, performance-based incentives, and a formal corrective action policy. Department responses were not extracted.
Full report
Federal OIG2022-01-20
The Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Administer Its Continuum of Care Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General. LAHSA (federal CoC program).
The Authority did not fully meet the goals and objectives of the program and did not always follow program requirements. Specifically, it (1) did not use $3.5 million in CoC grant awards and left the funds to expire, (2) did not support Homeless Management Information System and planning grant costs, and (3) did not submit timely annual performance reports (APR).
Summary
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) does not have assurance $879,847 in salary and rent costs were for the CoC grants
Summary
Response / corrective action
OIG recommended HUD require LAHSA to (1) adopt procedures for timely grant execution and monitoring, (2) support payroll and rent costs or repay $879,847 from non-Federal funds, and (3) adopt procedures for timely APRs. Closure status of these recommendations was not verified.
Full report
Not available by county
County-level state award totals (MHP, LIHTC, Homekey by county): County drill-down currently uses HHAP grantee data, HHAP 7 preliminary allocations, PIT and SPM only.
MicroHom does not receive, hold, or distribute public funds. This page does not compute a cost per person.
See something missing or wrong? Join and help us track it.