The Act (as amended)  prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin,  sex, handicap, and familial status. These certified state and local  agencies could be civil rights agencies like the Michigan Department of  Civil Rights. HUD’s Fair Housing Enforcement Process Provides the Framework for Handling Complaints

The fair housing enforcement process consists of three stages: (1) intake,  during which FHEO or FHAP agencies receive inquiries from individuals  with housing discrimination concerns and determine whether those  concerns involve a potential violation of the Act; (2) investigation, during  which FHEO or FHAP agency investigators collect evidence to determine if  reasonable cause exists to believe that a discriminatory housing practice  has occurred or is about to occur; and (3) adjudication, during which an  independent fact finder determines whether the person charged with  discrimination (the respondent) did in fact violate the Act. FHEO may also close  complaints administratively for several reasons—for example, if the  complainant withdraws the complaint. For example, some FHEO offices and FHAP agencies  used experienced investigators during the intake stage, while others did  not. Some officials at locations that used experienced investigators said  that this practice had improved the quality of intake and decreased the  overall length of the enforcement process. While FHEO’s Handbook contains  significant guidance, policies, and procedures, FHAP agencies have not  been required to follow them. Some of  the improvement in the number of FHEO investigations completed in 100  days may have been the result of an initiative aimed at reducing the number  of aged cases in FHEO’s inventory. It is too soon to determine what effect this  initiative might have on the timeliness of investigations. Third, hub directors and  other officials pointed to human capital issues as potentially increasing the  length and decreasing the thoroughness of investigations, including staff  shortages, low skill levels, lack of training and guidance, and inadequate  travel resources. However, persons who  have experienced alleged discrimination in housing can sometimes face a  lengthy wait before their complaint is resolved. Recommendations

To improve the management and oversight of the fair housing enforcement  process, we recommend that the HUD Secretary direct the Assistant  Secretary of FHEO to take the following 4 actions:  establish a way to identify and share information on effective practices  among its regional fair housing offices and FHAP agencies;  ensure that the automated case-tracking system includes complete,  reliable data on key dates in the intake stage of the fair housing  enforcement process for FHAP agencies;   ensure that the automated case-tracking system includes complete,  reliable data on key dates in the adjudication stage of the fair housing  enforcement process for both FHEO and FHAP agencies;  ensure that the automated case-tracking system includes complete,  reliable data on the outcomes of the adjudication stage of the fair  housing enforcement process for FHEO and FHAP agencies; and  ensure that hubs enter cause dates into the automated case-tracking  system in a consistent manner. Specifically, we obtained TEAPOTS data on complaint investigations  completed from 1996 through 2003 by FHEO and FHAP agencies and  attempted to measure (1) the time elapsed between a complainants’ first  contact with either the FHEO or a FHAP agency and the date that the  complaint was filed; (2) the time elapsed between filing a complaint and  completing an investigation; and (3) the time elapsed between completing  an investigation and the final disposition, the end of the adjudication  process.
Why GAO Did This Study

Discrimination in housing on the basis of race, sex, family status, and other grounds is illegal in the United States. Each year, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) and related agencies carry out enforcement activities for several thousand complaints of housing discrimination. The timeliness and effectiveness of the enforcement process have been continuing concerns. GAO describes the stages and practices of the fair housing enforcement process, looks at recent trends, and identifies factors that may influence the length and thoroughness of the process.

What GAO Found

The current fair housing enforcement process provides a framework for addressing housing discrimination complaints. Both FHEO and Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) agencies located around the country take inquiries about potential incidences of discrimination and conduct investigations to determine whether discrimination did in fact occur. The practices used during intake and investigation differ among FHEO and the FHAP agencies, as the state and local agencies have some discretion in determining which practices work best for them. As a result, some agencies have developed procedures that they said improved the quality of intake and made investigations easier. For example, some FHAP agencies use experienced investigators during the intake process to help clients develop formal complaints. To date, FHEO has not looked at such practices to determine if they should be disseminated for potential use at other locales. Further, individuals alleging discrimination in housing sometimes face a lengthy wait to have their complaints investigated and decided. Although the law sets a benchmark of 100 days to complete investigations into complaints of discrimination, FHEO and the FHAP agencies often do not meet that deadline. The typical time to complete an investigation in 1996 through 2003 was more than 200 days, with some investigations taking much longer. However, a lack of data makes it impossible to assess the full length and outcomes of fair housing enforcement activities. For example, because FHAP agencies are not required to report intake data to FHEO, complete information is not available on the number of initial contacts individuals alleging discrimination make with FHAP agencies. A lack of data on the ultimate outcomes of some investigations conducted by both FHEO and FHAP agencies may also prevent FHEO from fully measuring the time that complaints face before cases are ultimately decided. Human capital management challenges, such as ensuring adequate numbers of trained staff, further affect FHEO's ability to carry out its mission in a timely manner.