It reduced the regulatory strictures that burdened tribes and essentially provided for block grants so that they could apply funds to building or renovating housing as they saw fit.

NAHASDA was one result of the broader historic campaign in the 20th century for Native American self-determination and the tribes regaining sovereignty.

[4] Roger Biles describes how "The clustered housing prescribed for rental units clashed with the traditional living patterns of many Indians and, according to some IHA officials, resulted in the creation or exacerbation of problems previously rare in Native American populations such as gangs, violence, and drug and alcohol abuse.

[7] As these issues were studied, tribal leaders, advocates, and elected officials such as Rep. Bill Richardson (D-NM), began calling for the promotion of "a creative new approach that encourages tribes to take control of their own futures [that] would also get them out from under the [Bureau of Indian Affairs].

Providing the maximum amount of flexibility in the use of housing dollars, within strict accountability standards, is not only a further affirmation of the self-determination of tribes, it allows for innovation and local problem-solving capabilities that are crucial to the success of any community-based strategy.

[13] NAHASDA was designed to recognize the unique relationship and history of the United States and the sovereign American Indian nations.

NAHASDA created a transition from funding and regulation under the Housing Act of 1937, so that all grants awarded under the previous legislation were renewable only if in compliance with the new law.

Once funds have been awarded, grantees must meet a standard of wages, comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, keep rents at or below 30% of the resident's monthly adjusted income, set eligibility requirements for admission, and secure a management group that efficiently maintains and operates the units.

An amendment to the act in 2000 added Title VIII, which authorizes loans for housing and infrastructure purposes by Native Hawaiians.

The plaintiffs claimed that the authorization of HUD grant money for sole use of indigenous people was in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

[23] In keeping with the related goal of self-determination, tribes were permitted to use Indian Housing Block Grants for a wide range of purposes.

A GAO survey found that the act and its implementation were well regarded among Native Americans: 89.7% of respondents held positive views toward the effectiveness of NAHASDA, while less than 10% felt it was not an improvement over the previous Indian housing programs.

The act recognized that the policies HUD applied to providing public housing in poor urban neighborhoods might not be effective on rural Native American reservations.

[28] Indian Country Today reported on the program in 2016: The money is allocated to tribes based on a formula, and goes to their tribally-designated housing entities (TDHEs).