PHAs have partnered or entered into business-like arrangements with other PHAs to share resources or to consolidate management in which one PHA manages several others; residents, social service agencies, and community groups to provide employment and other services to residents; nonprofit organizations and state governments to develop low-income housing and affordable housing; and state and local governments to obtain lower cost goods and services. These four types of partnerships or arrangements are summarized below. In this way, the board would still have policymaking authority for its PHA. Social service partners have expertise in areas such as providing counseling or health care that PHA employees may not have. Descriptions of Partnerships in Public Housing

We contacted 29 public housing authorities (PHA) about their use of partnerships and other business-like arrangements with state and local governments and entities. We found that the partnerships and arrangements could be grouped according to four purposes, which were to (1) share resources or consolidate management among public housing authorities; (2) provide services, training, and employment to residents; (3) develop affordable housing by leveraging staff and financial resources; and (4) obtain goods and services at lower costs by taking greater advantage of state and local programs. As a result of the program, the union obtains the benefit of increasing its membership, the housing authority has provided a resident with a job, and the resident gains a salary along with medical and health insurance benefits. In addition, he explained that the cost of vandalism at the housing authority has been reduced from $89,000 per year to $5,000 per year.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on partnerships and other business-like arrangements that public housing authorities (PHA) have made with public and private-sector groups to provide residents with needed services and to supplement traditional PHA funding sources, focusing on: (1) four types of such arrangements; and (2) PHA officials' views on the benefits of these arrangements.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) in its discussions with housing authorities, GAO found that to leverage their resources, enhance their ability to deliver services, and reduce their costs, they have established four basic types of partnerships or arrangements; (2) the authorities partnered and worked with: (a) other housing authorities to take advantage of economies of scale in purchasing items such as large appliances or in consolidating their management activities; (b) their residents and various community and nonprofit groups to provide social services such as health and child care, job training, and employment for residents; (c) state, local, and commercial entities to develop and finance affordable housing for low-income families; and (d) state and local governments to acquire goods and services such as insurance at lower costs; and (3) although about one-third of the officials at the housing authorities that GAO contacted could quantify the cost savings that have resulted from their partnerships, in general PHA officials who GAO contacted agreed that the nonmonetary benefits--including training, an improved quality of life, and certain social services--were significant and would not have been obtained without the shared experience of the partnership.