CalMatters and other outlets have raised questions about Homekey: billions in funding moved quickly to convert motels into housing, but many projects sit unfinished or delayed years later. This page answers the key questions readers are likely to search for, breaking down what’s happening, why it’s happening, and what lessons come from comparisons beyond California.
Yes. Critics say funds were deployed quickly to start projects, but actual construction and occupancy lag behind. The rapid funding aimed to address homelessness fast, while the slower build-out reflects regulatory, logistical, and local implementation challenges that can delay turning funds into usable housing.
Conversion rates vary by locality and project. Some sites quickly opened as housing, while others stalled or faced extended delays. The variation depends on permits, financing permutations, site readiness, and ongoing oversight. Current reporting shows a mix: some completed units, some in progress, and others not moving forward as originally planned.
Common slowdowns include procurement and contractor availability, financing gaps for long-term operations, regulatory approvals, local permitting timelines, and changes in project scope. Oversight and documentation requirements can add steps, while inflation and supply chain issues have also played a role in delaying construction and occupancy.
Other states have pursued similar rapid-housing strategies with varying results. Lessons often point to stronger project-by-project oversight, standardized procurement, clearer transition plans from funding to construction, and ongoing accountability for timelines and outcomes. California can look to these examples to tighten schedules and improve completion rates while maintaining rapid response to homelessness.
For applicants and communities, delays can extend uncertainty about when new housing becomes available. While some projects deliver units and services quickly, others face delays that push back timelines. Understanding the factors behind delays can help communities advocate for faster, more transparent progress and better coordination with local agencies.
Potential improvements include clearer project milestones, streamlined permitting, standardized reporting on progress, better funding-to-construction handoffs, and stronger accountability measures. Policy tweaks that reduce red tape while protecting oversight can help convert funding into completed housing more reliably.
Around 3,000 homes have not been finished, according to dozens of records requests. That’s one in five projects that were promised by the $3.8 billion initiative.