Ledger Copilot
Sign in
Housing Authority Watch

PHAs losing money to bloated staffing

HUD's benchmark for well-run PHAs is ~55 units managed per employee. PHAs running 25 or fewer units/employee are carrying overhead that doesn't translate into voucher service — and the difference comes straight out of their HUD admin fees + operating fund. We've flagged the ones running 2x+ above benchmark.

Modeled combined AI-bookkeeping savings across the 11 PHAs below: $305.0M/year

Dollar figures on this page are forward-looking modeling estimates derived from public HUD data and the methodology below — not realized results or a guarantee. See methodology for assumptions.

New York, NY
NYCHA
New York City Housing Authority
$188.2M
projected annual AI savings (modeled)
Total units
268K
Employees
11,400
Units / staff
24
Admin / unit
$16029/yr
Annual budget
$4.3B
Efficiency: 26Severely overstaffed
Philadelphia, PA
PHA
Philadelphia Housing Authority
$21.4M
projected annual AI savings (modeled)
Total units
36K
Employees
1,300
Units / staff
28
Admin / unit
$13403/yr
Annual budget
$480.0M
Efficiency: 30Severely overstaffed
Los Angeles, CA
HACLA
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles
$20.5M
projected annual AI savings (modeled)
Total units
59K
Employees
1,080
Units / staff
54
Admin / unit
$16239/yr
Annual budget
$950.0M
Efficiency: 54Bloated

⚠ Severely overstaffed

4 PHAs are running <38 units per employee

That's below 70% of HUD's 55-units-per-employee operational benchmark. Means more admin payroll than required to actually serve the housing portfolio. Our model assumes AI bookkeeping can absorb ~25% of that overhead (projected, see methodology), before any other operational changes.

NYCHA · 24 units/staffPHA · 28 units/staffHABC · 29 units/staffNHA · 33 units/staff

Full PHA analysis

Sorted by projected annual savings (modeling estimate). PHAS designation from HUD assessment.

PHALocationUnits totalStaffUnits/staffCost/unitPHASEfficiencyEst. AI Savings/yr
NYCHA
New York City Housing Authority
New York, NY268K11,40024$16029Troubled26$188.2M
PHA
Philadelphia Housing Authority
Philadelphia, PA36K1,30028$13403Substandard30$21.4M
HACLA
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles
Los Angeles, CA59K1,08054$16239Standard54$20.5M
CHA
Chicago Housing Authority
Chicago, IL73K77095$15000Standard91$16.8M
HABC
Housing Authority of Baltimore City
Baltimore, MD27K92029$14027Troubled32$15.4M
HACoLA
Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles
Alhambra, CA27K51052$15339Standard52$9.5M
NHA
Newark Housing Authority
Newark, NJ17K51033$12884Substandard36$8.6M
SDHC
San Diego Housing Commission
San Diego, CA19K36551$29248Standard49$8.1M
SHRA
Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency
Sacramento, CA16K38043$17378Standard43$7.0M
OHA
Oakland Housing Authority
Oakland, CA18K29060$15714Standard59$5.6M
SFHA
San Francisco Housing Authority
San Francisco, CA11K21552$15625Substandard52$4.0M

California PHAs

6 of the 11 PHAs analyzed are California-based.

HACLA
Los Angeles, CA
54
$20.5M
projected annual savings (modeled)
59K units · 1,080 staff · 54 per
HACoLA
Alhambra, CA
52
$9.5M
projected annual savings (modeled)
27K units · 510 staff · 52 per
SDHC
San Diego, CA
49
$8.1M
projected annual savings (modeled)
19K units · 365 staff · 51 per
SHRA
Sacramento, CA
43
$7.0M
projected annual savings (modeled)
16K units · 380 staff · 43 per
OHA
Oakland, CA
59
$5.6M
projected annual savings (modeled)
18K units · 290 staff · 60 per
SFHA
San Francisco, CA
52
$4.0M
projected annual savings (modeled)
11K units · 215 staff · 52 per

HUD Troubled / Substandard

PHAs with PHAS or SEMAP score below 60% — most actionable sales targets.

New York City Housing Authority
New York, NY · Troubled
$188.2M
Federal monitor since 2019. ~$78B capital backlog. Repeated leadership turnover. Largest target opportunity in the US.
Philadelphia Housing Authority
Philadelphia, PA · Substandard
$21.4M
Recurring HUD findings on PHAS indicators. High admin overhead per unit relative to peer PHAs.
Housing Authority of Baltimore City
Baltimore, MD · Troubled
$15.4M
Federal lawsuit settlements + capital backlog. Recurring REAC inspection issues.
Newark Housing Authority
Newark, NJ · Substandard
$8.6M
PHAS score below threshold last 3 years. Workforce reduction discussions ongoing.
San Francisco Housing Authority
San Francisco, CA · Substandard
$4.0M
Most public housing portfolio converted under RAD program. Lingering admin overhead from pre-conversion structure.
Methodology
  • Unit + employee counts: HUD-published PHA data, NAHRO directories, individual PHA annual plans (HUD-50075-ST).
  • Efficiency benchmark: 55 units managed per employee — HUD-derived operational benchmark for well-run PHAs.
  • Cost/unit benchmark: $1,400/year combined operating fund + admin fee per managed unit.
  • AI savings (modeled): assumes 25% of total payroll is bookkeeping-mechanical work (AP, voucher payments, journal entries) and AI automates ~75% of that. Projected, not a guaranteed result.
  • Penalty avoidance (modeled): assumes 0.5% of annual budget as typical exposure from FDS late filings, single audit findings, IG referrals, SEMAP deductions. The engine computes and validates filings to flag issues in-period; it does not file to HUD. Projected, not a guaranteed result.
  • Designation: Latest publicly-available PHAS or SEMAP designation. "Troubled" = score <60%.
← Public companies analysisRun the simulation