Common use of PHA Policy Clause in Contracts

PHA Policy. If a family indicates that the behavior of a family member with a disability is the reason for a proposed termination of lease, the PHA will determine whether the behavior is related to the disability. If so, upon the family’s request, the PHA will determine whether alternative measures are appropriate as a reasonable accommodation. The PHA will only consider accommodations that can reasonably be expected to address the behavior that is the basis of the proposed lease termination. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of reasonable accommodation. Nondiscrimination Limitation [24 CFR 966.4(l)(5)(vii)(F)] The PHA’s eviction actions must be consistent with fair housing and equal opportunity provisions of 24 CFR 5.105. 13-III.F. TERMINATIONS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR STALKING This section addresses the protections against termination of tenancy that the Violence against Women Act of 2013 (VAWA) provides for public housing residents who are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. For general VAWA requirements and PHA policies pertaining to notification, documentation, and confidentiality, see section 16-VII of this ACOP, where definitions of key VAWA terms are also located. VAWA Protections against Termination [24 CFR 5.2005(c)] VAWA provides that no person may deny assistance, tenancy, or occupancy rights to public housing to a tenant on the basis or as a direct result of criminal activity directly relating to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking that is engaged in by a member of the household of the tenant or any guest or other person under the control of the tenant, if the tenant or affiliated individual is the victim or threatened victim of such domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking [FR Notice 8/6/13]. VAWA further provides that incidents of actual or threatened domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking may not be construed either as serious or repeated violations of the lease by the victim or threatened victim of such violence or as good cause for terminating the tenancy or occupancy rights of the victim of such violence [24 CFR 5.2005(c)(1), FR Notice 8/6/13]. Limits on VAWA Protections [24 CFR 5.2005(d) and (e), FR Notice 8/6/13] While VAWA prohibits a PHA from using domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking as the cause for a termination or eviction action against a public housing tenant who is the victim of the abuse, the protections it provides are not absolute. Specifically: • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s otherwise available authority to terminate assistance to or evict a victim for lease violations not premised on an act of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking providing that the PHA does not subject the victim to a more demanding standard than the standard to which it holds other tenants. • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s authority to terminate the tenancy of any public housing tenant if the PHA can demonstrate an actual and imminent threat to other tenants or those employed at or providing service to the property if that tenant’s tenancy is not terminated. HUD regulations define actual and imminent threat to mean words, gestures, actions, or other indicators of a physical threat that (a) is real, (b) would occur within an immediate time frame, and (c) could result in death or serious bodily harm [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(2) and (e)]. In determining whether an individual would pose an actual and imminent threat, the factors to be considered include: • The duration of the risk • The nature and severity of the potential harm • The likelihood that the potential harm will occur • The length of time before the potential harm would occur [24 CFR 5.2005(e)] In order to demonstrate an actual and imminent threat, the PHA must have objective evidence of words, gestures, actions, or other indicators. Even when a victim poses an actual and imminent threat, however, HUD regulations authorize a PHA to terminate the victim’s assistance “only when there are no other actions that could be taken to reduce or eliminate the threat, including but not limited to transferring the victim to a different unit, barring the perpetrator from the property, contacting law enforcement to increase police presence or develop other plans to keep the property safe, or seeking other legal remedies to prevent the perpetrator from acting on a threat” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)]. Additionally, HUD regulations state that restrictions “predicated on public safety cannot be based on stereotypes, but must be tailored to particularized concerns about individual residents” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)].

PHA Policy. If a family indicates that the behavior of a family member with a disability is the reason for a proposed termination of lease, the PHA will determine whether the behavior is related to the disability. If so, upon the family’s request, the PHA will determine whether alternative measures are appropriate as a reasonable accommodation. The PHA will only consider accommodations that can reasonably be expected to address the behavior that is the basis of the proposed lease termination. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of reasonable accommodation. Nondiscrimination Limitation [24 CFR 966.4(l)(5)(vii)(F)] The PHA’s eviction actions must be consistent with fair housing and equal opportunity provisions of 24 CFR 5.105. 13-III.F. TERMINATIONS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, STALKING, OR STALKING HUMAN TRAFFICKING This section addresses the protections against termination of tenancy that the Violence against Women Act of 2013 (VAWA) provides for public housing residents who are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or stalkinghuman trafficking. For general VAWA requirements and PHA policies pertaining to notification, documentation, and confidentiality, see section 16-VII of this ACOP, where definitions of key VAWA terms are also located. VAWA Protections against Termination [24 CFR 5.2005(c)] VAWA provides that no person may deny assistance, tenancy, or occupancy rights to public housing to a tenant on the basis or as a direct result of criminal activity directly relating to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking that is engaged in by a member of the household of the tenant or any guest or other person under the control of the tenant, if the tenant or affiliated individual is the victim or threatened victim of such domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking [FR Notice 8/6/13]. VAWA further provides that incidents of actual or threatened domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking may not be construed either as serious or repeated violations of the lease by the victim or threatened victim of such violence or as good cause for terminating the tenancy or occupancy rights of the victim of such violence [24 CFR 5.2005(c)(1), FR Notice 8/6/13] • Although the VAWA 2022 statute does not specifically include human trafficking in the list of victims protected under VAWA, in 2022 HUD began including human trafficking as part of the list of victims protected under VAWA (as seen in Notices PIH 2022- 06, PIH 2022-22, and PIH 2022-24). In the absence of a final rule implementing VAWA 2022 and to mirror HUD’s recent usage, this policy includes human trafficking in addition to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking anywhere such a list appears. PHAs and owners may not coerce, intimidate, threaten, interfere with, or retaliate against any person who exercises or assists or encourages a person to exercise any rights or protections under VAWA [FR Notice 1/4/23]. Limits on VAWA Protections [24 CFR 5.2005(d) and (e), FR Notice 8/6/13] While VAWA prohibits a PHA from using domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or stalking human trafficking as the cause for a termination or eviction action against a public housing tenant who is the victim of the abuse, the protections it provides are not absolute. Specifically: • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s otherwise available authority to terminate assistance to or evict a victim for lease violations not premised on an act of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or stalking human trafficking providing that the PHA does not subject the victim to a more demanding standard than the standard to which it holds other tenants. • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s authority to terminate the tenancy of any public housing tenant if the PHA can demonstrate an actual and imminent threat to other tenants or those employed at or providing service to the property if that tenant’s tenancy is not terminated. HUD regulations define actual and imminent threat to mean words, gestures, actions, or other indicators of a physical threat that (a) is real, (b) would occur within an immediate time frame, and (c) could result in death or serious bodily harm [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(2) and (e)]. In determining whether an individual would pose an actual and imminent threat, the factors to be considered include: • The duration of the risk • The nature and severity of the potential harm • The likelihood that the potential harm will occur • The length of time before the potential harm would occur [24 CFR 5.2005(e)] In order to demonstrate an actual and imminent threat, the PHA must have objective evidence of words, gestures, actions, or other indicators. Even when a victim poses an actual and imminent threat, however, HUD regulations authorize a PHA to terminate the victim’s assistance “only when there are no other actions that could be taken to reduce or eliminate the threat, including but not limited to transferring the victim to a different unit, barring the perpetrator from the property, contacting law enforcement to increase police presence or develop other plans to keep the property safe, or seeking other legal remedies to prevent the perpetrator from acting on a threat” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)]. Additionally, HUD regulations state that restrictions “predicated on public safety cannot be based on stereotypes, but must be tailored to particularized concerns about individual residents” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)].

PHA Policy. If a family indicates that the behavior of a family member with a disability is the reason for a proposed termination of lease, the PHA will determine whether the behavior is related to the disability. If so, upon the family’s request, the PHA will determine whether alternative measures are appropriate as a reasonable accommodation. The PHA will only consider accommodations that can reasonably be expected to address the behavior that is the basis of the proposed lease termination. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of reasonable accommodation. Nondiscrimination Limitation [24 CFR 966.4(l)(5)(vii)(F)] The PHA’s eviction actions must be consistent with fair housing and equal opportunity provisions of 24 CFR 5.105. 13-III.F. TERMINATIONS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR STALKING This section addresses the protections against termination of tenancy that the Violence against Women Act of 2013 (VAWA) provides for public housing residents who are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. For general VAWA requirements and PHA policies pertaining to notification, documentation, and confidentiality, see section 16-VII of this ACOP, where definitions of key VAWA terms are also located. VAWA Protections against Termination [24 CFR 5.2005(c)] VAWA provides that no person may deny assistance, tenancy, or occupancy rights to public housing to a tenant on the basis or as a direct result of “criminal activity directly relating related to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking that is stalking, engaged in by a member of the a tenant’s household of the tenant or any guest or other person under the control tenant’s control, shall not be cause for termination of tenancy of, occupancy rights of, or assistance to the tenantvictim, if the tenant or affiliated individual of the tenant is the victim or threatened victim of such domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking victim” [FR Notice 8/6/1324 CFR 5.2005(c)(2)]. VAWA further provides that incidents of actual or threatened domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking may not be construed either as serious or repeated violations of the lease by the victim or threatened victim of such violence or as good cause for terminating the tenancy or occupancy rights of the victim of such violence [24 CFR 5.2005(c)(1), FR Notice 8/6/13]. Limits on VAWA Protections [24 CFR 5.2005(d) and (e), FR Notice 8/6/13] While VAWA prohibits a PHA from using domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking as the cause for a termination or eviction action against a public housing tenant who is the victim of the abuse, the protections it provides are not absolute. Specifically: •  VAWA does not limit a PHA’s otherwise available authority to terminate assistance to or evict a victim for lease violations not premised on an act of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking providing that the PHA does not subject the victim to a more demanding standard than the standard to which it holds other tenants. •  VAWA does not limit a PHA’s authority to terminate the tenancy of any public housing tenant if the PHA can demonstrate an actual and imminent threat to other tenants or those employed at or providing service to the property if that tenant’s tenancy is not terminated. HUD regulations define actual and imminent threat to mean words, gestures, actions, or other indicators of a physical threat that (a) is real, (b) would occur within an immediate time frame, and (c) could result in death or serious bodily harm [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(2) and (e)]. In determining whether an individual would pose an actual and imminent threat, the factors to be considered include: •  The duration of the risk •  The nature and severity of the potential harm •  The likelihood that the potential harm will occur •  The length of time before the potential harm would occur [24 CFR 5.2005(e)] In order to demonstrate an actual and imminent threat, the PHA must have objective evidence of words, gestures, actions, or other indicators. Even when a victim poses an actual and imminent threat, however, HUD regulations authorize a PHA to terminate the victim’s assistance “only when there are no other actions that could be taken to reduce or eliminate the threat, including but not limited to transferring the victim to a different unit, barring the perpetrator from the property, contacting law enforcement to increase police presence or develop other plans to keep the property safe, or seeking other legal remedies to prevent the perpetrator from acting on a threat” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)]. Additionally, HUD regulations state that restrictions “predicated on public safety cannot be based on stereotypes, but must be tailored to particularized concerns about individual residents” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)].

PHA Policy. If a family indicates that the behavior of a family member with a disability is the reason for a proposed termination of lease, the PHA will determine whether the behavior is related to the disability. If so, upon the family’s request, the PHA will determine whether alternative measures are appropriate as a reasonable accommodation. The PHA will only consider accommodations that can reasonably be expected to address the behavior that is the basis of the proposed lease termination. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of reasonable accommodation. Nondiscrimination Limitation [24 CFR 966.4(l)(5)(vii)(F)] The PHA’s eviction actions must be consistent with fair housing and equal opportunity provisions of 24 CFR 5.105. 13-III.F. TERMINATIONS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, ASSAULT OR STALKING This section addresses the protections against termination of tenancy that the Violence against Women Act of 2013 (VAWA) provides for public housing residents who are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, assault or stalking. For general VAWA requirements and PHA policies pertaining to notification, documentation, and confidentiality, see section 16-VII of this ACOP, where definitions of key VAWA terms are also located. VAWA Protections against Termination [24 CFR 5.2005(c)] VAWA provides that no person may deny assistance, tenancy, or occupancy rights to public housing to a tenant on the basis or as a direct result of criminal activity directly relating to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking that is engaged in by a member of the household of the tenant or any guest or other person under the control of the tenant., if the tenant or affiliated individual is the victim or threatened victim of such domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, assault or stalking [FR Notice 8/6/13]. VAWA further provides that incidents of actual or threatened domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, assault or stalking may not be construed either as serious or repeated violations of the lease by the victim or threatened victim of such violence or as good cause for terminating the tenancy or occupancy rights of the victim of such violence [24 CFR 5.2005(c)(1), FR Notice 8/6/13]. Limits on VAWA Protections [24 CFR 5.2005(d) and (e), FR Notice 8/6/13] While VAWA prohibits a PHA from using domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, assault or stalking as the cause for a termination or eviction action against a public housing tenant who is the victim of the abuse, the protections it provides are not absolute. Specifically: • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s otherwise available authority to terminate assistance to or evict a victim for lease violations not premised on an act of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, assault or stalking providing that the PHA does not subject the victim to a more demanding standard than the standard to which it holds other tenants. • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s authority to terminate the tenancy of any public housing tenant if the PHA can demonstrate an actual and imminent threat to other tenants or those employed at or providing service to the property if that tenant’s tenancy is not terminated. HUD regulations define actual and imminent threat to mean words, gestures, actions, or other indicators of a physical threat that (a) is real, (b) would occur within an immediate time frame, and (c) could result in death or serious bodily harm [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(2) and (e)]. In determining whether an individual would pose an actual and imminent threat, the factors to be considered include: • ▪ The duration of the risk • ▪ The nature and severity of the potential harm • ▪ The likelihood that the potential harm will occur • ▪ The length of time before the potential harm would occur [24 CFR 5.2005(e)] In order to demonstrate an actual and or imminent threat, the PHA must have an objective evidence of words, gestures, actions, or other indicators. Even when a victim poses an actual and imminent threat, however, HUD regulations authorize a PHA to terminate the victim’s assistance “only when there are no other actions that could be taken to reduce or eliminate the threat, including but not limited to transferring the victim to a different unit, barring the perpetrator from the property, contacting law enforcement to increase police presence or develop other plans to keep the property safe, or seeking other legal remedies to prevent the perpetrator from acting on a threat” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)]. Additionally, HUD regulations state that restrictions “predicated on public safety cannot be based on stereotypes, but must be tailored to particularized concerns about individual residents” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)].

PHA Policy. If a family indicates that the behavior of a family member with a disability is the reason for a proposed termination of lease, the PHA will determine whether the behavior is related to the disability. If so, upon the family’s request, the PHA will determine whether alternative measures are appropriate as a reasonable accommodation. The PHA will only consider accommodations that can reasonably be expected to address the behavior that is the basis of the proposed lease termination. See Chapter 2 for a discussion of reasonable accommodation. Nondiscrimination Limitation [24 CFR 966.4(l)(5)(vii)(F)] The PHA’s eviction actions must be consistent with fair housing and equal opportunity provisions of 24 CFR 5.105. 13-III.F. TERMINATIONS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DATING VIOLENCE, SEXUAL ASSAULT, OR STALKING This section addresses the protections against termination of tenancy that the Violence against Women Act of 2013 (VAWA) provides for public housing residents who are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking. For general VAWA requirements and PHA policies pertaining to notification, documentation, and confidentiality, see section 16-VII of this ACOP, where definitions of key VAWA terms are also located. VAWA Protections against Termination [24 CFR 5.2005(c)] VAWA provides that no person may deny assistance, tenancy, or occupancy rights to public housing to a tenant solely on the basis or as a direct result of criminal activity directly relating to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking that is engaged in by a member of the household of the tenant or any guest or other person under the control of the tenant, if the tenant or affiliated individual is the victim or threatened victim of such domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking [FR Notice 8/6/13]. .. VAWA further provides that incidents of actual or threatened domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking may not be construed either as serious or repeated violations of the lease by the victim or threatened victim of such violence or as good cause for terminating the tenancy or occupancy rights of the victim of such violence [24 CFR 5.2005(c)(1), FR Notice 8/6/13]. Limits on VAWA Protections [24 CFR 5.2005(d) and (e), FR Notice 8/6/13] While VAWA prohibits a PHA from using domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking as the cause for a termination or eviction action against a public housing tenant who is the victim of the abuse, the protections it provides are not absolute. Specifically: • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s otherwise available authority to terminate assistance to or evict a victim for lease violations not premised on an act of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking providing that the PHA does not subject the victim to a more demanding standard than the standard to which it holds other tenants. • VAWA does not limit a PHA’s authority to terminate the tenancy of any public housing tenant if the PHA can demonstrate an actual and imminent threat to other tenants or those employed at or providing service to the property if that tenant’s tenancy is not terminated. HUD regulations define actual and imminent threat to mean words, gestures, actions, or other indicators of a physical threat that (a) is real, (b) would occur within an immediate time frame, and (c) could result in death or serious bodily harm [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(2) and (e)]. In determining whether an individual would pose an actual and imminent threat, the factors to be considered include: • The duration of the risk • The nature and severity of the potential harm • The likelihood that the potential harm will occur • The length of time before the potential harm would occur [24 CFR 5.2005(e)] In order to demonstrate an actual and imminent threat, the PHA must have objective evidence of words, gestures, actions, or other indicators. Even when a victim poses an actual and imminent threat, however, HUD regulations authorize a PHA to terminate the victim’s assistance “only when there are no other actions that could be taken to reduce or eliminate the threat, including but not limited to transferring the victim to a different unit, barring the perpetrator from the property, contacting law enforcement to increase police presence or develop other plans to keep the property safe, or seeking other legal remedies to prevent the perpetrator from acting on a threat” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)]. Additionally, HUD regulations state that restrictions “predicated on public safety cannot be based on stereotypes, but must be tailored to particularized concerns about individual residents” [24 CFR 5.2005(d)(3)].