This data, maintained by the Mayor’s Office of Housing (MOH), is an inventory of all income-restricted units in the city. This data includes public housing owned by the Boston Housing Authority (BHA), privately- owned housing built with funding from DND and/or on land that was formerly City-owned, and privately-owned housing built without any City subsidy, e.g., created using Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) or as part of the Inclusionary Development Policy (IDP). Information is gathered from a variety of sources, including the City's IDP list, permitting and completion data from the Inspectional Services Department (ISD), newspaper advertisements for affordable units, Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation’s (CEDAC) Expiring Use list, and project lists from the BHA, the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), MassHousing, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), among others. The data is meant to be as exhaustive and up-to-date as possible, but since many units are not required to report data to the City of Boston, MOH is constantly working to verify and update it. See the data dictionary for more information on the structure of the data and important notes. The database only includes units that have a deed-restriction. It does not include tenant-based (also known as mobile) vouchers, which subsidize rent, but move with the tenant and are not attached to a particular unit. There are over 22,000 tenant-based vouchers in the city of Boston which provide additional affordability to low- and moderate-income households not accounted for here. The Income-Restricted Housing report can be directly accessed here:
https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/file/2023/04/Income%20Restricted%20Housing%202022_0.pdf

Learn more about income-restricted housing (as well as other types of affordable housing) here: https://www.boston.gov/affordable-housing-boston#income-restricted

Petition subject: Racial discrimination Original: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL:25455108 Date of creation: (unknown) Petition location: Massachusetts Legislator, committee, or address that the petition was sent to: Katharine D. Kane, Boston; committee on urban affairs Selected signatures:Massachusetts Committee on Discrimination in HousingKatharine D. KaneMartin A. Linsky Actions taken on dates: 1968-01-03,1968-01-04,1968-03-27 Legislative action: Received in the House on January 3, 1968 and referred to the committee on urban affairs and sent for concurrence and received in the Senate on January 4, 1968 and concurred and received in the House on March 27, 1968 and recommitted Total signatures: 7 Legislative action summary: Received, referred, sent, received, concurred, received, recommitted Legal voter signatures (males not identified as non-legal): 1 Female signatures: 1 Unidentified signatures: 5 Female only signatures: No Identifications of signatories: Massachusetts Committee on Discrimination in Housing, Massachusetts Chapter Americans for Democratic Action, Massachusetts Federation for Fair Housing and Equal Rights, American Friends Service Committee, United Church of Christ, [females], ["others"] Prayer format was printed vs. manuscript: Printed Signatory column format: not column separated Additional non-petition or unrelated documents available at archive: additional documents available Additional archivist notes: amendment of the housing authority law, includes addresses, towns next to names including Boston, West Concord, Roxbury, Norfolk county Location of the petition at the Massachusetts Archives of the Commonwealth: St. 1968, c.249, passed May 8, 1968 Acknowledgements: Supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities (PW-5105612), Massachusetts Archives of the Commonwealth, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University, Center for American Political Studies at Harvard University, Institutional Development Initiative at Harvard University, and Harvard University Library.

There are several forms, regulations and data associated with the Emergency Assistance (EA) Family Shelter Program for our business partners and constituents.

United States Massachusetts: Gen Exp: Housing & Community Development data was reported at 2,596,221.000 USD th in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 2,769,214.000 USD th for 2014. United States Massachusetts: Gen Exp: Housing & Community Development data is updated yearly, averaging 948,715.000 USD th from Jun 1977 (Median) to 2015, with 37 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2,936,705.000 USD th in 2012 and a record low of 173,079.000 USD th in 1978. United States Massachusetts: Gen Exp: Housing & Community Development data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by US Census Bureau. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.F030: Revenue & Expenditure: State and Local Government: Massachusetts.

United States Massachusetts: GR: OS: CM: Charges: Housing & Community Development data was reported at 391,872.000 USD th in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 366,824.000 USD th for 2014. United States Massachusetts: GR: OS: CM: Charges: Housing & Community Development data is updated yearly, averaging 216,501.000 USD th from Jun 1977 (Median) to 2015, with 37 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 391,872.000 USD th in 2015 and a record low of 46,057.000 USD th in 1978. United States Massachusetts: GR: OS: CM: Charges: Housing & Community Development data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by US Census Bureau. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.F030: Revenue & Expenditure: State and Local Government: Massachusetts.

Petition subject: Racial discrimination Original: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:FHCL:25455070 Date of creation: (unknown) Petition location: Massachusetts Legislator, committee, or address that the petition was sent to: Joseph G. Bradley, Newton; Michael S. Dukakis, Brookline; committee on state administration Selected signatures:Joseph G. BradleyMichael E. HaynesMichael S. DukakisKatharine D. KaneSamuel Harmon Actions taken on dates: 1967-01-04,1967-01-12 Legislative action: Received in the House on January 4, 1967 and referred to the committee on state administration and sent for concurrence and received in the Senate on January 12, 1967 and concurred Total signatures: 11 Legislative action summary: Received, referred, sent, received, concurred Legal voter signatures (males not identified as non-legal): 5 Female signatures: 1 Unidentified signatures: 5 Female only signatures: No Identifications of signatories: Rep. [representative], Massachusetts Chapter Americans for Democratic Action, American Friends Service Committee, New England Region American Jewish Congress, Massachusetts Federation for Fair Housing and Equal Rights, Boston Branch National Association for the Advancement of the Colored People, Massachusetts Committee on Discrimination in Housing, Senator, [females], ["others"] Prayer format was printed vs. manuscript: Printed Signatory column format: not column separated Additional non-petition or unrelated documents available at archive: additional documents available Additional archivist notes: to penalize certain discriminatory practices by real estate brokers and salesmen, includes addresses, towns next to names including Newton, Boston, Lexington, Brookline, Suffolk Location of the petition at the Massachusetts Archives of the Commonwealth: St. 1967, c.148, passed April 18, 1967 Acknowledgements: Supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities (PW-5105612), Massachusetts Archives of the Commonwealth, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University, Center for American Political Studies at Harvard University, Institutional Development Initiative at Harvard University, and Harvard University Library.

Reaffirming Mass Housing as a Centerpiece Program in the Poverty Alleviation efforts of the Government and further strengthening the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (2001)

Saudi Arabia Manufactured Homes Market size was valued at USD 260 Million in 2024 and is projected to reach USD 355.83 Million by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 4% from 2026 to 2032.

Saudi Arabia Manufactured Homes Market Drivers

Government Initiatives for Affordable Housing: The Saudi Arabian government, under its Vision 2030 plan, has a strong focus on increasing homeownership among its citizens through various affordable housing programs and initiatives. Manufactured homes offer a potentially cost-effective solution to meet this demand. Rapid Urbanization and Population Growth: Saudi Arabia continues to experience rapid urbanization and a growing population, leading to increased demand for housing units, particularly in urban centers. Manufactured homes can be deployed relatively quickly to address housing shortages. Faster Construction and Deployment: The off-site construction of manufactured homes allows for quicker assembly and deployment on the final site, significantly reducing construction timelines compared to conventional methods. This is particularly advantageous for large-scale housing projects. Focus on Industrialized Building and Prefabrication: The Saudi government is promoting industrialized building and prefabrication technologies to improve efficiency, quality, and speed in the construction sector. Manufactured homes align well with this strategic direction. Potential for Mass Housing Projects: Manufactured homes are well-suited for large-scale housing developments and government-led affordable housing projects due to their standardized design and efficient production processes.

Turkey Central Govt: EP: EI: CT: SH: Others: Mass Housing Fund data was reported at 9,160.000 TRY th in Jun 2018. This records an increase from the previous number of 8,174.000 TRY th for May 2018. Turkey Central Govt: EP: EI: CT: SH: Others: Mass Housing Fund data is updated monthly, averaging 6,905.000 TRY th from Jan 2006 (Median) to Jun 2018, with 150 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 15,582.000 TRY th in Jun 2011 and a record low of 0.000 TRY th in Jan 2014. Turkey Central Govt: EP: EI: CT: SH: Others: Mass Housing Fund data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by General Directorate of Public Accounts. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Turkey – Table TR.F004: Central Government Budget: Expenditure: Ministry of Finance.

Calculation of embodied GHG emissions for construction technologies contained within the third edition of the Compendium of Prospective Emerging Technologies for Mass Housing by the Building Materials & Technology Promotion Council, Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs, Government of India

Turkey Prefabricated Buildings Market size was valued at USD 3.8 Billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD 6.9 Billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 7.8% from 2025 to 2032.

Key Market Drivers:Affordable Housing Initiatives: Turkey affordable housing initiatives are propelling the prefabricated building sector, with the Turkish Mass Housing Administration (TOKI) leading the way. TOKI wants to complete 500,000 social housing units by 2028, with 30% of them prefabricated, which will cut construction time by 40% compared to traditional methods. This change to prefabricated construction not only speeds up housing deliveries but also helps satisfy the growing demand for cheap housing, making prefabricated buildings an important option in Turkey's urbanization and housing efforts.

Infrastructure Development Projects: Turkey's infrastructure development projects are propelling the prefabricated structures market due to its efficiency and rapidity.

West Virginia and Kansas had the lowest cost of living across all U.S. states, with composite costs being half of those found in Hawaii. This was according to a composite index that compares prices for various goods and services on a state-by-state basis. In West Virginia, the cost of living index amounted to **** — well below the national benchmark of 100. Virginia— which had an index value of ***** — was only slightly above that benchmark. Expensive places to live included Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Housing costs in the U.S. Housing is usually the highest expense in a household’s budget. In 2023, the average house sold for approximately ******* U.S. dollars, but house prices in the Northeast and West regions were significantly higher. Conversely, the South had some of the least expensive housing. In West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the median price of the typical single-family home was less than ******* U.S. dollars. That makes living expenses in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much pricier. What other expenses affect the cost of living? Utility costs such as electricity, natural gas, water, and internet also influence the cost of living. In Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut, the average monthly utility cost exceeded *** U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.

Explore borrowing and mortgage trends in Hampshire County, including conventional vs. government loan performance, average loan sizes, and market share shifts. Data sourced from HMDA regulatory filings shows how local lending patterns evolve through changing market conditions.

Environmental and housing condition of households in mass drug administration graduated and non-graduated district, Central Gondar, Ethiopia, December 2019.

Prefabricated housing has been in existence for over a century, but their recent rise in popularity can be attributed to advancements in technology and sustainable practices. The main aim of this study is to develop a model that can satisfy Economically weaker section (EWS) and can be used for government program such as Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana using eco-friendly and prefabricated materials which are suitable for Indian climate. Space optimization techniques, modular furniture’s and minimum functional space design concepts were used to design the housing unit and achieved compact carpet area compared to average space of these houses. Cost-effective materials such as Aerocon wall panels and Calcium Silicate wall panels, and Eco-friendly materials such as Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) panels were selected. By incorporating these materials, the cost analysis was carried out by collecting rates from suppliers and contractors. The comparison of the cost shows even through initial investment is more for the energy efficient material, it proves cheaper to lifecycle cost. By using the proposed design, it has been observed that using these materials can reduce construction cost, reduce energy consumption. This provides opportunities for the government to provide mass housing schemes and efficient houses, but it contains certain disadvantages such as high initial cost and thermal bridging or cracking of sandwich panels. Finally, as per the study it encourages further research focused on Implementation of Energy-Efficient systems and advancements in sustainable materials to further enhance the environmental performance and sustainability of Prefabricated houses.

HAZUS is an abbreviation for Hazards United States, and was developed by FEMA. The HAZUS dataset was designed to estimate the potential physical, economic and social losses during hazardous events such as flooding or earthquakes. To Measure the social impact of these events HAZUS includes detailed demographic data for the United States. This dataset pulls out the housing and real estate data from the demographic files, at the census block level for the New Hampshire section of the Boston, MA Metropolitan Statistic Area (MSA). Data attributes for housing include owner occupied single family units, owner occupied multi-family units, renter occupied single family units, vacant single family units along with others. Demographics data was recent as of May 2006. Source: http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/hazus/index.shtm

Prefabricated housing has been in existence for over a century, but their recent rise in popularity can be attributed to advancements in technology and sustainable practices. The main aim of this study is to develop a model that can satisfy Economically weaker section (EWS) and can be used for government program such as Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana using eco-friendly and prefabricated materials which are suitable for Indian climate. Space optimization techniques, modular furniture’s and minimum functional space design concepts were used to design the housing unit and achieved compact carpet area compared to average space of these houses. Cost-effective materials such as Aerocon wall panels and Calcium Silicate wall panels, and Eco-friendly materials such as Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) panels were selected. By incorporating these materials, the cost analysis was carried out by collecting rates from suppliers and contractors. The comparison of the cost shows even through initial investment is more for the energy efficient material, it proves cheaper to lifecycle cost. By using the proposed design, it has been observed that using these materials can reduce construction cost, reduce energy consumption. This provides opportunities for the government to provide mass housing schemes and efficient houses, but it contains certain disadvantages such as high initial cost and thermal bridging or cracking of sandwich panels. Finally, as per the study it encourages further research focused on Implementation of Energy-Efficient systems and advancements in sustainable materials to further enhance the environmental performance and sustainability of Prefabricated houses.

This dataset shows housing tenure. The information is mapped according to place of residence. The data is part of the Census Transportation Planning Package (CTPP), and is the result of a cooperative effort between various groups including the State Departments of Transportation, U.S. Census Bureau, and the Federal Highway Administration. The data is a special tabulation of responses from households completing the decennial census long form. The data was collected in 2000 and is shown at tract level. This data can be found at http://www.transtats.bts.gov/Fields.asp?Table_ID=1347

Explore borrowing and mortgage trends in Hampden County, including conventional vs. government loan performance, average loan sizes, and market share shifts. Data sourced from HMDA regulatory filings shows how local lending patterns evolve through changing market conditions.