On Sept. 25, the administration of President Donald Trump proposed eliminating $56.1 million from the Housing Counseling Assistance Program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The proposal was part of a broader effort to rescind nearly $1 billion in federal funding that had previously been approved by the House and Senate and signed into law by the president.

The program funds counseling services that help individuals and families make housing-related decisions, from purchasing a first home and understanding a mortgage to preventing foreclosure and finding alternative housing options.

The proposal sparked strong bipartisan opposition in Congress, where it was widely viewed as an unlawful maneuver. On Sept. 30, 2026, a coalition of organizations led by the National Urban League filed an emergency lawsuit. The following day, U.S. District Judge Jia M. Cobb temporarily blocked the funding cut and froze the expiration date of the funds to prevent them from being returned to the Treasury while the case proceeds through the courts. For now, the future of the funding remains subject to ongoing litigation.

UnidosUS, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization and the nation’s largest Hispanic civil rights and advocacy group, also filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the plaintiffs and the families who rely on housing counseling services.

The National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC), a national organization that advocates for affordable housing policies, has urged housing advocates to contact their members of Congress and ask them to protect federal housing resources. With Congress in recess until its expected return on Nov. 9, October presents an opportunity for organizations and residents to express their concerns to lawmakers.

In addition, temporary federal government funding has been extended through Dec. 11, a key date for budget negotiations. While that deadline does not, by itself, determine the outcome of the litigation over housing counseling funds, it does increase pressure surrounding federal spending priorities.

Housing affordability remains a national concern. High home prices, elevated mortgage interest rates and rising rental costs continue to place financial strain on families. Nonprofit organizations warn that funding cuts would force them to reduce counseling services that help families avoid foreclosure, gain access to affordable housing and achieve homeownership.

Such reductions could limit the availability of housing counseling services, though they would not necessarily result in direct cuts to affordable housing construction programs, nor would they affect all agencies equally.

In Philadelphia, one question remains: What would the loss of these resources mean for families who depend on housing counseling services?