2020 NAHMA Affordable 100

How many housing units receive at least one form of federal subsidy in the United States today? The annual NAHMA Affordable 100 list provides this important data!

The NAHMA Affordable 100 comprises the largest affordable multifamily property management companies, ranked by affordable unit counts. The NAHMA Affordable 100 list contributes vital data to the ongoing national dialogue on the future of federal funding for affordable housing. In an effort to accurately determine the portfolio of affordable units receiving federal subsidy in the United States, NAHMA publishes this annual listing of affordable units containing at least one of the following federal subsidies: HUD Project-based Assistance, Section 42 LIHTC, HOME funds, USDA Section 515, or Bonds.

Companies in bold provided data for NAHMA’s Affordable 100 survey. All others are based on industry estimates.

NAHMA also presents two specialty lists – the 25 largest housing credit (LIHTC) property management companies, and the 25 largest Rural Development program property management companies (see the link below for more details). The specialty lists include only companies that provided data for NAHMA’s Affordable 100 survey, and does not include industry estimates.

<1-40> <41-80> <81-120> <121-140> <Specialty Lists – LIHTC and RD>

Rank Management Company
(2019 rank shown in parentheses)
Headquarters Total Number of Units
Subsidized* Residential**
41. UAH-Mayfair Management Group (39) Dallas, TX 11,635 30,000
42. Woda Cooper Companies Inc. (42) Columbus, OH 11,629 11,698
43. Maco Management Co. Inc. (38) Malden, MO 11,562 11,654
44. The Hallmark Companies Inc. (53) Atlanta, GA 11,502 13,226
45. Lincoln Property Company (44) Dallas, TX 11,500 191,669
46. NDC Asset Management (45) Pittsburgh, PA 11,345 11,457
47.^ SPM LLC (41) Birmingham, AL 11,183 17,709
48. Bloomington, IN 11,078 12,979
49.^ SHP Management Corp. (78) Cumberland Foreside, ME 11,000 11,000
50.^ Partnership Property Management (52) Greensboro, NC 10,471 10,570
51. USA Properties Fund Inc. (47) Roseville, CA 10,466 11,031
52.^ Preservation Management Inc. (77) South Portland, ME 10,041 10,164
53. Barker Management Inc. (54) Anaheim, CA 10,000 10,000
54.^ Peabody Properties Inc. (49) Braintree, MA 9,980 13,614
55.^ Reliant Realty Services LLC (34) New York, NY 9,956 9,956
56.^ Winterwood Incorporated (55) Lexington, KY 9,876 10,460
57. United Apartment Group (56) San Antonio, TX 9,771 36,043
58.^ Maloney Properties Inc. (63) Wellesley, MA 9,698 10,595
59. Irvine, CA 9,616 11,380
60. Pennrose (86) Philadelphia, PA 9,602 10,366
61. Fairfield Residential (116) San Diego, CA 9,427 35,486
62. Fairway Management Inc. (57) Columbia, MO 9,349 9,529
63. Continental Management (58) Bingham Farms, MI 9,306 9,798
64. Picerne Real Estate Group (60) Phoenix, AZ 9,205 25,000
65. AWI Management Corp. (68) Auburn, CA 9,022 9,022
66. Elmington Property Management (70) Nashville, TN 9,000 26,814
67.^ Newton, MA 8,989 14,000
68.^ Residential One LLC (81) Columbia, MD 8,939 9,209
69. Yarco Company Inc. (61) Kansas City, MO 8,831 9,542
70.^ Seldin Company (72) Omaha, NE 8,802 16,390
71. EAH Housing (67) San Rafael, CA 8,679 8,679
72.^ Habitat America LLC (83) Annapolis, MD 8,581 8,913
73. Eden Housing (65) Hayward, CA 8,526 8,526
74. MidPen Housing (92) Foster City, CA 8,500 8,500
75.^ Vesta Corporation (95) Weatogue, CT 8,467 9,356
76. J & A Inc. (71) Corinth, MS 8,390 8,390
77.^ Community Realty Management (89) Pleasantville, NJ 8,315 8,539
78.^ National Community Renaissance (73) Rancho Cucamonga, CA 8,292 8,292
79.^ Solari Enterprises Inc.  (82) Orange, CA 8,262 8,305
80. TRG Management Company LLP (74) Weston, FL 8,259 20,000


<1-40> <41-80> <81-120> <121-140> <Specialty Lists – LIHTC and RD>

^ A NAHMA Communities of Quality National Recognition Program Participant

* and ** All unit data represent only units directly managed (not owned) that were rented or available to rent on Dec. 31, 2019. Down units, abated units, units under construction or rehabbing units not available for rent are not included.

* Total affordable units managed. Federal programs only, including HUD, LIHTC, USDA, HOME and Bond programs. Data do not include state or local subsidy, public housing, tenant-based vouchers (Section 8 or RD tenant-protection vouchers), or federal mortgage insurance or loan guarantee programs. If a unit has more than one subsidy, it is counted only once.

** Total residential units managed (including market or affordable).

NAHMA would like to extend its sincere thanks to the NAHMA Affordable 100 Task Force, without whose hard work and support this survey would not be possible. In particular, sincere appreciation goes to task force chair Mike Coco, Choice Property Resources Inc. and vice chair Amber Day, TrashPro; Evelyn Arias, RealPage Inc.; Boone Atkins, Yardi; John Broderick, US Housing Consultants; Eric Cole, Converged Services Inc.; Dori Garmeiser, Hessel Aluise & O’Leary PC; Mike Jhagroo, Converged Services Inc.; Jennifer Kelly, MRI Software; Greg Proctor, RealPage Inc.; Jeffrey Promnitz, Zeffert & Associates, Inc.; and John Yang, RentalHousingDeals.com Inc.

If you believe your company should be included in next year’s survey, please contact Jennifer Jones, jjones@nahma.org.