Federal Reentry Grant Programs Are Fragmented but Minimally Overlapping, Reducing the Risk for Duplication

		Nine Reentry Grant Programs Are Fragmented across Three Federal Agencies

DOJ, Labor, and HHS separately provided new or continuation grant  funding to support direct services to the adult reentry population through  nine grant programs in fiscal year 2011. Since more than one federal  agency is involved in this same broad area of national interest, these  programs are fragmented. Grant Program Overlap Is Minimal and the Risk of Duplication Is Low

When considering, collectively, which applicants are eligible for the grant  programs, the extent to which the reentry population is the sole target of  the grant programs’ services, and the primary services these grant  programs fund, we found that overlap across the nine programs was  minimal. Therefore, the risk of duplication—when two or more agencies or  programs are engaged in the same activities, provide the same services  to the same beneficiaries, or provide funding for the same purpose—is  low. However, one allowed only state and  local government applicants, and another allowed only private, nonprofit,  or community-based applicants. For example, Labor’s reentry program limits  eligibility to private, nonprofit organizations that will use the funds  primarily to assist current or former inmates—residing in or released from  any facility—with their employment needs. In contrast, one of DOJ’s  reentry programs limits eligibility to governmental entities that will use the  funds primarily to assist current or former inmates—residing in or  released from state, local, or tribal facilities—with their substance abuse  treatment needs. Another grantee received a HHS Healthy Marriage Promotion and  Responsible Fatherhood Grant in fiscal year 2011, and also received a  RExO grant in 2012. Agencies Have Taken Steps to Coordinate Their Reentry Programs and Further Reduce the Potential for Unnecessary Duplication in Funding

		Agencies Have Acknowledged Where Overlap Exists and Have Taken Steps to Coordinate Efforts

With acknowledgment of some overlap, DOJ, Labor, and HHS have taken  a variety of steps to coordinate their reentry efforts as a means to prevent  unnecessary duplication and share promising practices. For example, officials from all three agencies said  they are sharing some draft grant solicitations with one another to obtain  feedback before issuing them. Other efforts to share promising practices across agencies. Agencies Have Taken Action, or Have Actions Under Way, to Further Reduce the Risk of Unnecessary Duplication

In addition to the steps that DOJ, Labor, and HHS have taken— independently and through the Federal Interagency Reentry Council—to  coordinate reentry efforts, they have also taken, or plan to take, further  action to reduce the potential that grantees are using funds from different  agencies or programs for the same purpose. Instead, officials  stated that they compare the results individual grantees report in reducing  recidivism with the average across all SCA grantees. Agencies Analyze Grantee Performance Data to Improve Operations but Additional Information Sharing Could Be Beneficial

DOJ, Labor, and HHS analyze recidivism data to improve grant program  operations in a variety of ways, but agencies could enhance information  sharing about the methods they use to collect and analyze data to  determine and report on overall program effectiveness. However, DOJ, Labor, and HHS  officials have not formally shared information on the relative strengths and  limitations of the respective grant management systems and their unique  approaches to monitoring outcomes. Recommendations for Executive Action

To better utilize the performance information they collect from grantees,  enhance the capacity of their respective grant management systems, and  improve overall management of reentry programs designed to reduce  recidivism, we recommend that the Attorney General, the Secretary of  Labor, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services maximize  existing information-sharing forums, such as the Federal Interagency  Reentry Council, to (1) share details on how agencies collect and analyze  their data, as well as how they determine program effectiveness, and (2)  consider the feasibility of adapting any promising practices in the future. Labor and HHS  did not specifically state whether they concurred with our  recommendation. At that meeting, the council  adopted a mission statement to (1) make communities safer by reducing  recidivism and victimization, (2) assist those returning from prison and jail  in becoming productive citizens, and (3) save taxpayer dollars by lowering  the direct and collateral costs of incarceration.
Why GAO Did This Study

About 700,000 inmates are released from federal and state custody each year, and another 9 million are booked into and released from local jails. Former inmates face challenges as they transition into, or reenter, society, such as finding housing and employment. According to the most recent data available, more than two-thirds of state prisoners are rearrested for a new offense within 3 years of release, and about half are reincarcerated. Federal reentry grants are available for state and local providers, as successful reentry reduces rearrest or reincarceration, known as recidivism. GAO was asked to review (1) the extent to which there is fragmentation, overlap, and duplication across federal reentry grant programs; (2) the coordination efforts federal grant-making agencies have taken to prevent unnecessary duplication and share promising practices; and (3) the extent to which federal grant-making agencies measure grantees effectiveness in reducing recidivism. GAO identified and analyzed the grant programs and agencies that supported reentry efforts in fiscal year 2011; analyzed agency documents, such as grant solicitations; and interviewed agency officials.

What GAO Found

In fiscal year 2011, the Departments of Justice (DOJ), Labor (Labor), and Health and Human Services (HHS) separately administered nine fragmented but minimally overlapping reentry grant programs with low risk of duplication. Specifically, GAO found that these grant programs are fragmented since more than one federal agency is involved in administering the programs. Further, GAO found that overlap across the nine programs was minimal because the programs varied in (1) their applicant eligibility criteria, (2) the extent to which their funds solely benefit the reentry population, and (3) their primary services funded. For example, Labor's reentry program limits eligibility to private, nonprofit organizations that will use the funds primarily to assist current or former inmates--residing in or released from any facility--with their employment needs. In contrast, one of DOJ's reentry programs limits eligibility to governmental entities that will use the funds primarily to assist current or former inmates--residing in or released from state, local, or tribal facilities--with their substance abuse treatment needs. Given the variance across eligible applicants, beneficiaries, and primary services, the overlap across the nine programs is minimal and the risk of duplication--when two or more agencies or programs are engaged in the same activities, provide the same services to the same beneficiaries, or provide funding for the same purpose--is low.
DOJ, Labor, and HHS have acknowledged where some overlap exists and therefore have taken steps to coordinate their reentry efforts to further prevent unnecessary duplication and share promising practices. For example, in 2011, the U.S. Attorney General convened the Federal Interagency Reentry Council--a group of federal agencies whose mission is to make communities safer; assist those returning from prison and jail in becoming productive, taxpaying citizens; and save taxpayer dollars by lowering the direct and collateral costs of incarceration. Further, agency officials from all three agencies reported that they share grant solicitations with one another before issuing them, and in 2009, DOJ and HHS established a memorandum of agreement to formally coordinate funding activities related to reentry. In addition, all three agencies have taken action, or have actions under way, to require their grant applicants to report other federal funds they are receiving, or plan to receive, and consider this information before they will make new award decisions.
DOJ, Labor, and HHS are measuring grantee performance and conducting program evaluations, but they could enhance information sharing about the methods they use to collect and analyze data to determine how effectively grantees reduce recidivism. To monitor grantee performance, DOJ, Labor, and HHS collect different performance information, such as rearrest, reincarceration, and employment rates, through several web-based grant management systems, each with varying strengths and limitations. However, the agencies have not formally discussed these systems with one another, or how they analyze the data they collect, despite engaging in collaborations during which such discussions would be practical and useful. Consistent with effective interagency coordination practices, sharing information like this could help the agencies better leverage existing practices and improve their approaches to determining and reporting on grantee effectiveness.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOJ, Labor, and HHS enhance their information sharing on approaches for determining how effectively grantees reduce recidivism. In response, DOJ, Labor, and HHS reported that they would take actions to address our recommendation.