RAFT in Half: Governor’s Budget Includes Major Cuts to Rental Assistance Program

By Kimberly Rau, MassLandlords, Inc.

Governor Maura Healey’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 includes a shocking blow to a major statewide rental assistance program: Participants who max out their RAFT benefit will have to wait twice as long to reapply for assistance.

Cutting RAFT in half takes an already shaky program and places help – and housing – out of reach for many families. (Image: CC BY SA 4.0 MassLandlords Inc.)

The budget, which totals a hefty $61.5 billion in state expenditures, includes $202 million for the Residential Assistance for Families in Transition (RAFT) program, a $5 million increase over FY 2025. Ostensibly, this is to ensure more families can access RAFT benefits, but even with additional funds, people looking to participate in the program will find their benefits won’t go nearly as far as they used to.

Currently, families who utilize the RAFT program may access up to $7,000 in aid over a rolling 12-month period. Funds may be used for rent arrears to avoid eviction, to pay owed utilities, or to help move into a new rental, among other uses. If approved, the FY 2026 budget states families may still receive up to $7,000, but in a rolling 24-month period, effectively slashing RAFT benefits in half.

RAFT: Death by 1,000 Budget Cuts

Though the state administration says it is focused on alleviating the housing crisis that plagues Massachusetts along with many other states, their commitment to the RAFT program seems dubious at best.

Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, RAFT benefits were capped at $4,000 in a rolling 12-month period. Families could use that money to avoid eviction by paying owed rent, or, if they were trying to move, for move-in expenses. During the pandemic, when the state had an extensive and unfunded eviction moratorium, the state used federal money to expand rental assistance statewide. Renters and landlords could receive up to 18 months’ rental and utilities assistance with no dollar cap. The RAFT program specifically expanded to allow up to $10,000 per family.

This increase was seen as overdue even without a global pandemic. In 2019, the average fair-market rent for a two-bedroom home in Massachusetts was $1,307. In the Boston area, the average rent for a two-bedroom home was $2,194. The $4,000 limit wouldn’t cover two months’ rent for a Boston family. The increase to $10,000 gave families in high cost of living areas a chance.

Then in 2023, Gov. Healey’s budget for FY 2024 cut RAFT benefits from $10,000 in a 12-month period to $7,000 in that same time frame. When the budget went into effect, a two-bedroom rental averaged $1,733 statewide, and $2,635 in the Boston metro area.

Though the decrease still kept RAFT limits above pre-pandemic levels, excessive delays in accessing RAFT benefits meant tenants were often several months in arrears by the time landlords received payment.

In an eviction scenario, RAFT is only approved if the applicant has already received a notice to quit and if the funds awarded will keep them in their home. If the tenant were evicted, they could theoretically apply their benefit toward a new rental, but $7,000 would be unlikely to cover first and last months’ rent, along with a security deposit, in the Boston metro area.

And if this proposed budget is approved, starting July 1, 2025, renters will have to make that assistance last over a rolling 24 months. The already tenuous safety net is getting stretched very thin indeed.

RAFT Needs an Overhaul, Not a Funding Cut

For years, we called for an expansion of the RAFT program. Numbers vary depending on how data is collected, but somewhere between 30% and 50% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Many of us do not have savings to make up lost wages. Greater funding would help more people, we argued.

However, unlike with rental voucher programs, where participants must pay a certain portion of their income toward rent, we realized there’s a major flaw with RAFT: Renters have no incentive to put any of their own money toward the rent. Applicants want to maximize their benefit (who wouldn’t?) and so pay nothing while they wait for RAFT approval. But that benefit could go much farther if applicants had to pay something while they waited. As it stands, paying nothing at all puts renters in a risky position if they are ultimately denied, and may mask the fact that their tenancy is unstable.

Landlords may not refuse to help their tenant with a RAFT application. However, the application process can take so long that once a tenant is approved, the maximum amount may no longer cover the owed rent. If RAFT is approved, landlords do not have to forgive rent the tenant still owes, and may still evict their tenant if they do not pay the portion they agreed to if RAFT does not cover everything.

Our 2024 article “RAFT Kiss of Death” showed that of 23 study households that received RAFT, only five were fully helped by their single RAFT payment, either remaining housed or ultimately moving out without owing their landlord money. This is a 22% success rate and shows the RAFT program needs to be improved.

Attempts to make RAFT applications part of the public record fall flat before an opaque legislature.

Back in 2021, MassLandlords started calling for a policy change that would have RAFT cover 12 months’ rent, either to be paid in arrears, going forward, or in some combination of the two. This would allow landlords to continue to receive rent, and give tenants a better sense of protection and stability during tough financial times.

We also suggested RAFT assistance should be part of the public record, after we filed a lawsuit against the Department of Housing and Community Development (now known as the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities) when they refused to produce records surrounding pandemic-related RAFT requests. Many applications were denied or timed out, seemingly without communication or reason. We were denied because the state claimed providing records would be a breach of renters’ privacy, though we asked for no names in our records request, only addresses. Those addresses would show whether denials were focused in one geographic area. This should be public record, but we’re not surprised a state that puts such little value on transparency would disagree.

Around this time, we tried to join the Massachusetts Coalition for Housing as they advocated for the RAFT program, but were informed that their partners would not support our argument to make RAFT awards public record for the purpose of studying efficacy.

Instead of improvements, what we are now seeing is yet another cut to a program that is already difficult to navigate and hard to see as a safety net for anyone anymore. On paper, the state is committing $202 million to RAFT over the next fiscal year. In practice, it’s going to mean fewer renters will be able to rely on it as they might need. Ultimately, there will be more evictions, and more people unhoused.

Evictions remain on hold until any RAFT assistance is approved or denied. Expect things to move even slower now that benefits are cut in half. (Image License: Unsplash)

Contest RAFT Delays in Court Every Time

In 2023, Gov. Healey’s FY 2024 budget amended MGL Ch. 239, Section 15 to state that eviction proceedings will be placed on hold if a renter has a pending application for rental assistance.

This may seem logical, but the RAFT program has been plagued by delays, even after a new online portal was created in an attempt to streamline the process. As of 2023, landlords were reporting mixed experiences with the new system, many of them negative. One landlord, who said her renter was the perfect candidate for RAFT assistance, still waited six months for her tenant’s application to be approved.

This means that if a renter is ultimately rejected for RAFT, little ground will have been covered in the lengthy eviction process. You will need to wait even longer to regain possession of your rental, and your renter will be even further in arrears.

With RAFT essentially cut in half, but the law remaining unchanged, it will be even more important for you to contest RAFT-related stays in the eviction process. Check with your attorney for further guidance.

Redirecting RAFT funds to the MRVP could help many more families get into housing…and stay there. (License: CC by SA 4.0 MassLandlords, Inc.)

An Alternative: Redirect RAFT Funds Toward Mass. Rental Voucher Program

Another option would be to take the $202 million dedicated to the RAFT program and instead use it to more fully fund the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program. The MRVP is a more sustainable form of rental assistance that functions like Section 8, but has an incredibly long waiting list. A document of frequently asked questions states the wait is “years long.” Anecdotal evidence suggests it may be up to a decade.

Under the MRVP, renters have to pay one-third of their income toward rent. To qualify for MRVP, applicants must make no more than 80% of the area median income, though people who get approved are likely to make much less than that.

Let’s look at a hypothetical situation. The Green household has one parent earning the average Massachusetts individual income of  $56,284 a year, and two children. This is more than minimum wage, but still well under the 80% AMI cap for their household size no matter where they live. Their monthly household income is approximately $4,690.

If the Greens are approved for MRVP, their contribution toward the rent would be one-third of their household income. If the average two-bedroom in Massachusetts is $1,733 per month, the Greens would pay $1,563, and the program would cover the remaining $170.

Now let’s get back to that $202 million for RAFT. Each family can get $7,000, so that $202 million will help 28,857 households, assuming everyone maximizes their benefits (and with RAFT application delays, that will almost certainly happen).

What if we funneled that into MRVP? If every family had to pay a third of their income, and MRVP covered a remaining $200 a month (rounding up from our $170 the Greens received), that’s $2,400 a year per family. Take that $202 million and divide it out – more than 84,000 households could receive stable rental assistance that covered the entire year.

Is it time for RAFT to go away entirely, in favor of a more stable program?

Conclusion

The FY 2026 budget is not a foregone conclusion. The House and Senate still need to submit their own FY 26 budget proposals, after which the legislature will begin negotiating between the three plans to create a final budget. This process takes months. The final budget should go in effect on July 1, 2025, but may be delayed depending on how those negotiations are going. Once the legislature votes and approves a final budget, they will send it to Gov. Healey for her signature.

We can only hope that other spending bills will take a more realistic look at RAFT. Perhaps it should be canceled entirely, in favor of providing better funding to the more stable MRVP program. If that money were funneled from RAFT, MRVP could be expanded to include emergency funding upon application, to help those who are eligible for the program while they are on the waiting list (though proper expansion of the program could cut wait time down as well).

If lawmakers are dead set on keeping RAFT, then changes must be made. Applicants should have to pay what they can afford toward the program, which would help stretch RAFT dollars. Simply cutting the program in half does no one any favors and stands to worsen the housing crisis.