Directors Generally Consider the Reorganization a Success

The majority of field directors we surveyed considered the September 1995 field office reorganization successful and believed that it achieved most of HUD’s intended goals. 1 and 2.) As noted in figure 2, opinions differed by program area. Directors Believed That Staffs’ Skills and Training Have Improved, but Problems Remain

Most directors said they were satisfied with the skills of their staffs. Overall, more than a third of the directors said they consider the quality of HUD’s current training only fair. Consistent with the fact that most directors said that they had fewer staff members than they needed, most also reported that their workloads had increased over the last 2 years. The directors’ overall satisfaction with HUD’s information systems varied by program area. In contrast, the single-family and multifamily housing directors were least satisfied with their systems. 4.) When asked whether or not their systems had changed over the past 2 years, most directors said that the accuracy of the data had improved, while about one-half said that the ease of reporting, the usefulness of information systems for monitoring and other job duties, and the ability to share data with other HUD systems had stayed about the same. Directors Had Mixed Views on the Adequacy of Internal Controls

Although most directors believed HUD’s overall system of internal controls was good or excellent, a significant percentage said some specific internal controls were only fair or poor. 5). However, their responses varied by program area and type of control. Ninety-two percent of the single-family housing and 89 percent of the multifamily housing directors rated these activities as good or excellent. The public housing directors were somewhat less satisfied than the other directors with the internal controls in place to ensure compliance with laws and regulations. Scope and Methodology

We obtained information for this report from a telephone survey of directors of HUD’s major programs in the field.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO surveyed Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) field directors in four of HUD's major program areas to obtain the directors' perspectives on the corrective actions HUD has undertaken over the past 2 years.

What GAO Found

GAO found that its survey showed: (1) most field directors considered HUD's field office reorganization, completed in September 1995, an overall success, but there were differences of opinion among the directors and program areas concerning HUD's success in meeting certain reorganization goals; (2) a majority of the directors said that: (a) they were satisfied with the skills of their staffs and that staff training had increased over the last 2 years; (b) training needed to be further increased in all areas; and (c) they did not have enough staff members to effectively administer their programs; (3) the satisfaction with information and financial management systems differed by program area; (4) almost three-quarters of the community planning and development and public housing directors were satisfied with their systems, whereas only one-third of the multifamily housing directors were satisfied; and (5) although a majority of the directors rated HUD's overall internal control system as good or excellent, a substantial number said that their systems were only fair or poor for certain activities, such as ensuring data reliability and compliance with laws and regulations, and HUD's programs have not received adequate monitoring.