	A Multiplicity of Programs Exist to Meet the Needs of Individuals and families

A range of programs and tax expenditures assist individuals and families. Programs under the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on Human  Resources can roughly be grouped under three missions for children and  working-age adults: providing income support, providing child care, and  providing child welfare services. In addition, a wide array of tax expenditures assist  individuals and families in these areas. Figure 1 shows an illustrative set  of programs and tax expenditures. In addition, while the  federal government is involved in some aspects of the design and funding  of each of these supports, state governments are sometimes responsible  for directly administering the benefits and services. With this array of human services programs, a family and its members may  receive benefits or services from one or more of these programs. For example, a low-income family may be eligible  for and receive income support through TANF, EITC, and Child Support  Enforcement, as well as subsidized child care assistance. Today, our work has shown this patchwork  of programs to be too fragmented and overly complex—for clients to  navigate, for program operators to administer efficiently, and for program  managers and policymakers to assess program performance. People Face Difficulties in Accessing Aid

People seeking aid often must visit multiple offices and provide the same  information numerous times. Low-income  individuals and families often receive aid from multiple programs to meet  their income support, health, nutrition, employment and training, and  housing needs. Myriad Program Rules Foster Duplicate Administrative Processes and Inefficiencies

The complexity and variation in eligibility and other rules and  requirements among the programs have contributed to time-consuming  and duplicative administrative processes that are inefficient and add to  overall costs. Providing similar services through separate programs can lead to  additional inefficiencies. We recently reported on the potential overlap  and duplication in employment and training programs. Specifically, we  found that TANF, Workforce Investment Act Adult (WIA Adult), and  Employment Service (ES) programs often maintain separate  administrative structures to provide some of the same services, such as  job search assistance, to low-income individuals. Simplifying policies and processes  Simplifying policies and processes—especially those related to eligibility  determination processes and various federal funding sources—could  potentially save resources, improve productivity, and help staff focus more  time on performing essential program activities, such as providing quality  services and accurate benefits to recipients. 2. Our previous work indicates that the federal  government can help simplify processes and potentially reduce long-term  costs by facilitating technology enhancements across programs and in  states. Technology plays a central role in the management of human  service programs and keeping up with technological advancements offers  opportunities for streamlining eligibility processes, providing timely  services, and improving program integrity. 3. Fostering state innovation and evaluation for evidence-based  decisionmaking  In our complex, decentralized intergovernmental system, states and  localities have frequently served as laboratories that foster innovation and  test approaches that can benefit the nation. The information from these evaluations would help the federal  government determine which strategies are most effective without  investing time and resources in unproven strategies. Achieving meaningful results in many policy and program areas  requires some combination of coordinated efforts among various actors  across federal agencies, with other governments at state and local levels,  nongovernmental organizations, for-profit and not-for-profit contractors,  and the private sector. In addition to collaboration, caution is urged in addressing any duplication  and resulting inefficiencies in these programs that many individuals and  families rely on. Because of the array of services provided to meet  households’ various needs, it is not surprising to see various entities  involved, with some fragmentation of administration, some overlap in  populations served, and some duplication of services offered. These  features may be warranted, for example, to ensure quality services are  provided and certain populations are served. However, our work indicates  that further exploration of the extent of fragmentation, overlap, and  duplication is warranted to better identify ways to streamline and improve  programs.
Why GAO Did This Study

The federal government, often in concert with states, provides assistance to millions of individuals and families each year through a multiplicity of programs. These programs play a key role in supporting workers who have lost their jobs, families with low-incomes, and vulnerable children who have experienced abuse and neglect. However, given the fiscal pressures facing the federal government and the continued demands placed on assistance programs, it is critical that programs designed to serve those most in need provide benefits and services as effectively and efficiently as possible. In light of concerns about fragmentation, duplication, and overlap in government programs, this testimony addresses: (1) the key characteristics of some programs and tax expenditures that provide assistance to individuals and families; (2) problems in administering and providing services through multiple programs; and (3) actions that may help address these problems. We focused on programs under the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee of Human Resources and some related programs and tax expenditures for children and working-age adults; we developed an illustrative but not all-inclusive list of these programs. We relied on work conducted between 2001 and 2011, which employed an array of methodologies. These included surveys of federal and state officials; site visits to states and local areas; interviews with local, state, and federal officials; and analysis of agency data and documents.

What GAO Found

Various federal programs and tax expenditures exist to assist individuals and families by providing income support, child care, and child welfare services. Other programs help meet these households' needs in other areas, such as health and nutrition. Overall, several congressional committees as well as six federal agencies oversee these programs at the federal level, while federal agencies, state and local agencies, as well as for-profit and nonprofit agencies directly provide services at the local level. Families can receive benefits from one or more of these programs. For example, a low-income family may be eligible for and receive income support through Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), and Child Support Enforcement, as well as subsidized child care assistance. This array of programs plays a key role in supporting those in need, but our work has shown it to be too fragmented and overly complex--for clients to navigate, for program operators to administer efficiently, and for program managers and policymakers to assess program performance. Individuals often must visit multiple offices to apply for aid and provide the same information and documentation each time--a process that is cumbersome and inefficient. The complexity and variation in eligibility rules and other requirements among programs contribute to time-consuming and duplicative administrative processes that add to overall costs. Some programs provide similar services through separate programs, resulting in additional inefficiencies. For example, we recently reported that TANF, Workforce Investment Act Adult (WIA Adult), and Employment Service (ES) programs often maintain separate administrative structures to provide some of the same services and activities, such as job search assistance, to low-income individuals. In addition, gaps in information can hamper program oversight. Approaches such as simplifying policies, improving technology, and fostering innovation and evaluation can improve services and reduce costs. Simplifying policies can improve productivity and help staff focus more time on activities such as ensuring the accuracy of benefits. Facilitating technology enhancements can streamline eligibility processes and improve program integrity. In addition, fostering state innovation and evaluation can help the federal government and policymakers determine which approaches are the most cost-effective and limit investment in unproven strategies. Because federal programs have evolved over time to meet various needs, it is not surprising to see multiple programs with some fragmentation of administration, some overlap in populations served, and some duplication of services offered. These features may be warranted, for example, to ensure quality services are provided and certain populations are served. However, our work indicates that further exploration of the extent of fragmentation, overlap, and duplication could help better identify ways to streamline and improve programs and to reduce inefficiencies.