The Actual Number of Section 202 Properties Having Service Coordinators Is Unknown because HUD’s Data Are Incomplete

While limitations in HUD’s data make an accurate assessment difficult,  we estimate that roughly half of Section 202 properties have HUD-funded  service coordinators. However, HUD’s data likely underestimate  the number of properties with service coordinators. Federal internal control standards note that it is important for  management to obtain relevant data from reliable internal and external  sources in a timely manner based on identified information  requirements. If HUD does not have complete and accurate information about the  presence and funding source of service coordinators in Section 202  properties, it risks not taking all required steps to monitor all of these  properties to help ensure they are connecting residents with the  supportive services needed to age in place successfully. For  example, several of these stakeholders told us that property managers  are well-positioned to know their residents, and have some insight into  their needs. Some Section 202 property managers told us that Area  Agencies on Aging can coordinate services for residents. HUD Lacks Guidance on Monitoring Supportive Services Requirements and Does Not Analyze Performance Data

HUD requires its staff to monitor Section 202 properties’ adherence to  program requirements but does not have written guidance for staff with  monitoring responsibilities on the level and type of activity a Section 202  property must perform to demonstrate meeting the program’s requirement  to help residents obtain supportive services. Federal internal control standards note the importance of documenting  responsibilities through policies. Without written policies and procedures  that specifically delineate the roles and responsibilities of HUD staff in  monitoring Section 202 properties’ compliance with the program’s  supportive services requirements, HUD cannot be assured that the  elderly residents of these properties are receiving the assistance with  obtaining supportive services that the program is intended to provide. Further, federal internal  control standards note the importance of evaluating data for reliability. Until HUD develops and implements  policies and procedures for analyzing the performance information that it  requires from Section 202 properties with service coordinators, its ability  to use that information to monitor whether service coordinators are  performing effectively and helping to fulfill the goals of the Section 202  program will likely be limited. For example,  the plans note that the guidance will focus on Section 202 properties with  grant-based service coordinators. By taking steps to verify the accuracy of performance information and  analyze the information collected, HUD could increase its understanding  of the extent to which service coordinators help elderly residents of  Section 202 properties age in place, a goal of both the Section 202 and  service coordinator programs. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to examine (1) the extent to which Section 202  Supportive Housing for the Elderly (Section 202) properties have service  coordinators, (2) how properties without service coordinators make  services available to residents and reasons why some properties do not  have service coordinators, (3) the Department of Housing and Urban  Development’s (HUD) monitoring of Section 202 properties’ efforts to  make services available to residents, and (4) HUD’s efforts to preserve  Section 202 properties given recent trends in annual funding. Use of Section 202 Data to Determine Number of Service Coordinators

To determine the number of Section 202 properties that have a service  coordinator and the characteristics of such properties and their residents,  we obtained and analyzed HUD data on Section 202 properties, service  coordinators, and tenant characteristics as of the end of fiscal year 2014,  the most recent year for which data were available at the time of our  review. We also compared HUD’s  data with results from GAO’s survey of a generalizable sample of Section  202 property managers (described below). Use of Survey to Learn More about Properties Not Identifiable in HUD Data as Having Service Coordinators

We conducted a self-administered, web-based questionnaire survey of a  sample of managers of Section 202 properties to determine how well  HUD’s data captured the presence of HUD-funded service coordinators in  Section 202 properties, to identify steps that properties that do not have a  HUD-funded service coordinator take to connect their residents with  services, and to learn about Section 202 properties’ experiences with  HUD monitoring and oversight. We conducted pretests by telephone  with five Section 202 property managers (one in each of HUD’s five  Multifamily Housing regions). HUD’s Monitoring of Section 202 Properties’ Efforts to Link Residents to Services

To assess HUD’s monitoring of Section 202 properties’ efforts to connect  residents to services, we obtained and reviewed available documentation  of monitoring-related policies and procedures.
Why GAO Did This Study

The U.S. population of persons age 65 and older is expected to grow to 73 million by 2030. With age, people are increasingly likely to face physical and cognitive limitations. HUD's Section 202 program funds supportive rental housing for very low-income elderly households. Section 202 property owners are expected to coordinate the provision of services to help residents live independently and age in place.
GAO was asked to review how Section 202 properties connect residents to services and HUD's related monitoring efforts. This report examines (1) the extent to which Section 202 properties have service coordinators, (2) how properties without coordinators connect residents with services and why they may not use coordinators and (3) HUD's monitoring of Section 202 properties' efforts to connect residents with supportive services, among other objectives. GAO analyzed HUD's fiscal year 2014 data (the latest available) on Section 202 properties and service coordinators; surveyed a generalizable sample of Section 202 properties not identifiable in HUD data as having service coordinators; reviewed monitoring policies, program descriptions, and agency notices; and interviewed HUD officials from each of HUD's five Multifamily Housing regions and stakeholders.

What GAO Found

While limitations in the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) data make an accurate assessment difficult, GAO estimates that roughly half of the 7,229 Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly (Section 202) properties have HUD-funded service coordinators—staff who link residents to supportive services such as transportation assistance or meals. HUD's data indicate that 38 percent of Section 202 properties have a HUD-funded service coordinator, but these data likely underestimate the true number. GAO surveyed a generalizable sample of Section 202 properties not identifiable in HUD's data as having a service coordinator and, on this basis, estimates that an additional 12 percent of Section 202 properties actually had one—bringing the actual total of Section 202 properties with service coordinators to about 50 percent. Federal internal control standards note that it is important for management to obtain relevant data from reliable sources. Properties with service coordinators are subject to additional monitoring, but without accurate information, HUD risks not taking steps to monitor Section 202 properties with service coordinators to help ensure they are connecting residents to supportive services.
Properties without service coordinators connect residents to services in a variety of ways—for example, property managers may serve this function themselves, or they may utilize other local organizations. Several stakeholders told GAO that property managers are well-positioned to know their residents, and have some insight into their needs. Others noted that property managers generally lack the time and expertise to effectively manage this responsibility, and that the manager's role can conflict with that of the service coordinator. Through GAO's survey and site visits, managers of Section 202 properties without service coordinators cited a variety of reasons for not employing them, including lack of funding and having too few units to justify hiring someone to focus on supportive services for the elderly residents.
HUD requires its staff to monitor Section 202 properties' adherence to program requirements. However, HUD lacks written policies and procedures that describe how its staff should monitor the requirement for Section 202 property managers to coordinate the provision of supportive services. Available guidance describes general monitoring procedures for multifamily properties but does not address Section 202 specifically. HUD officials told GAO they plan to develop guidance on monitoring Section 202 properties with service coordinator grants by December 2016. Federal internal control standards note the importance of documenting responsibilities through policies. Without written policies and procedures, HUD cannot be assured that elderly residents are receiving assistance obtaining services. In addition, HUD collects performance data, such as the number of services provided, from Section 202 properties that have service coordinators but does not have policies or procedures in place to verify the accuracy of the data or for analyzing the data collected. Federal internal control standards also note the importance of evaluating data for reliability and processing data into quality information to evaluate performance. Until HUD takes steps to assess service coordinator performance data for reliability and analyze the data reported, its ability to use that information to monitor whether service coordinators are performing effectively and helping to fulfill the goals of the Section 202 program will likely be limited.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that HUD (1) improve the accuracy of its data on Section 202 properties with service coordinators, (2) develop written guidance on assessing compliance with supportive services requirements, and (3) develop procedures for verifying and analyzing performance data. HUD concurred with GAO's recommendations.