Based on survey responses from public housing directors—  covering 66 housing developments with indications of potential distress  and occupied primarily by the elderly or persons with disabilities—we  found that 11 developments exhibited signs of severe physical distress; 12  had signs of severe social distress; and an additional 5 developments had  signs of both severe physical and social distress. The factors they most frequently cited were (1) aging buildings  and systems, including inadequate air-conditioning; (2) lack of accessibility  for residents with disabilities; (3) small studio apartments; (4) tension  between elderly residents and non-elderly residents with disabilities; (5)  lack of supportive services; and (6) security and crime issues. Even If Not Severely Distressed, Public Housing Developments May Pose Problematic Living Conditions for the Elderly and Non-Elderly Persons with Disabilities

Responses to our survey of public housing directors indicated that some of  the 76 public housing developments occupied primarily by elderly persons  and non-elderly persons with disabilities were severely distressed and that,  among those that were not, certain characteristics nevertheless adversely  affected the quality of life for their residents. 2). Indicators of severe social distress that the directors reported  include inadequate supportive services, such as transportation, assistance  with meals, and problems with crime. 3). Various Strategies Could Improve Physical and Social Conditions at Public Housing for the Elderly and Non-Elderly Persons with Disabilities

According to officials whom we surveyed and interviewed, various  strategies have been used to improve both physical and social conditions to  better address the special needs of the elderly and non-elderly persons with  disabilities. Methods to deal with physical distress included capital  improvements such as renovating or modernizing buildings, systems, and  units or, in extreme cases, demolishing or selling a development. Methods  to reduce the level of social distress include a range of actions to address  the needs of the elderly and non-elderly persons with disabilities, such as  designating developments as “elderly only” for reasons of safety, converting  developments into assisted living facilities, and working with other  agencies, such as nonprofit and religious organizations, to provide in-home  supportive services to residents. We  received oral comments from officials in HUD’s Office of Public and Indian  Housing indicating general agreement with the report. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of this report were to examine (1) the extent to which public  housing developments occupied primarily by the elderly and non-elderly  persons with disabilities were severely distressed and (2) the ways in  which the stock of severely distressed public housing for the elderly and  non-elderly persons with disabilities could be improved. We determined  that 3,537 of these developments met our criteria as “primarily occupied by  elderly persons or non-elderly persons with disabilities.” Of these 3,537  developments, we identified 76 developments (administered by 46 public  housing agencies) that were potentially severely distressed. We had 43 housing  agencies return the survey, providing a response rate of 93 percent, and  representing 66 of the 76 developments. For  example, one of the survey questions asked about the extent to which the  physical structures at the development were deteriorated.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2003, Congress reauthorized HOPE VI, a program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and designed to improve the nation's worst public housing. In doing so, Congress required GAO to report on the extent of severely distressed public housing for the elderly and non-elderly persons with disabilities. "Severely distressed" is described in the statute as developments that, among other things, are a significant contributing factor to the physical decline of, and disinvestment in, the surrounding neighborhood; occupied predominantly by very low-income families, the unemployed, and those dependent on public assistance; have high rates of vandalism and criminal activity; and/or lack critical services, resulting in severe social distress. In response to this mandate, GAO examined (1) the extent to which public housing developments occupied primarily by elderly persons and non-elderly persons with disabilities are severely distressed and (2) the ways in which such housing can be improved. HUD officials provided oral comments indicating general agreement with the report.

What GAO Found

Available data on the physical and social conditions of public housing are insufficient to determine the extent to which developments occupied primarily by elderly persons and non-elderly persons with disabilities are severely distressed. Using HUD's data on public housing developments--buildings or groups of buildings--and their tenants, GAO identified 3,537 developments primarily occupied by elderly residents and persons with disabilities. Data from HUD and other sources indicated that 76 (2 percent) of these 3,537 developments were potentially severely distressed. To gather more information on the 76 developments that were potentially distressed, GAO surveyed public housing agency directors responsible for these developments. GAO received responses covering 66 of the 76 developments (the survey and aggregated results are available in GAO-06-205SP). These responses indicated the following: (1) eleven developments had signs of severe physical distress, such as deterioration of aging buildings and a lack of accessible features for persons with disabilities; (2) another twelve developments had signs of severe social distress, which included a lack of appropriate supportive services such as transportation or assistance with meals; and (3) an additional five developments had characteristics of both severe physical and social distress. Nevertheless, many of the directors GAO surveyed reported that numerous factors adversely affected the quality of life of elderly persons and non-elderly persons with disabilities residing in their developments. The factors cited most frequently were (1) aging buildings and systems, including inadequate air conditioning; (2) lack of accessibility for persons with disabilities; (3) small size of apartments; (4) the mixing of elderly and non-elderly residents; (5) inadequate supportive services; and (6) crime. To better address the special needs of the elderly and non-elderly persons with disabilities, public housing agency officials GAO surveyed or contacted have used various strategies to improve both physical and social conditions at their developments. Strategies to reduce physical distress include capital improvements such as renovating buildings, systems, and units or, in extreme cases, relocating residents and demolishing or selling a development. Methods to reduce the level of social distress include a range of actions, such as designating developments as "elderly only," converting developments into assisted living facilities, and working with other governmental agencies and nonprofit organizations to provide supportive services to residents.