Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The Subcommittee on Human Resources and Intergovernmental Relations, House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, asked GAO to assess (1) the reasons why experts advocate a comprehensive approach to community revitalization, (2) the challenges to implementing these efforts, and (3) the ways the federal government might support comprehensive approaches. Researchers said that such an approach is feasible because community organizations and an infrastructure to support them have evolved over the last several decades. Comprehensive Efforts Are Community-Based

Community-based efforts focus on a specific neighborhood and involve those affected by the problems in shaping strategies to improve conditions in the neighborhood. Conclusions

In response to the interrelated problems in distressed communities and out of dissatisfaction with the results of community development efforts over the past several decades, community development experts, foundations, government agencies, and community development organizations are turning to the comprehensive approach. They emphasize that the conditions in these neighborhoods cannot be quickly reversed. Comprehensive Approaches Are Difficult to Implement

Many challenges confronted the four organizations we studied as they attempted to improve conditions in their neighborhoods. They also faced the daunting task of concurrently managing a diverse set of programs to address housing, economic development, and social service needs. Leaders of these organizations said that, to sustain their organization, they have concentrated on building support among diverse groups of residents, gaining access to multiple funding sources, collaborating with other organizations, and developing a cadre of experienced staff. Recent Federal Initiatives May Aid Communities Taking a Comprehensive Approach

Historically, coordination has been limited across and within the federal departments and agencies that have responsibility for programs intended to assist distressed communities. Agencies have tended not to collaborate with each other for a variety of reasons, including concerns about losing control over program resources. If fully implemented, these efforts could help the federal government become more supportive of comprehensive revitalization efforts.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the multifaceted approaches that community-based nonprofit organizations in Boston, Detroit, Pasadena, and the District of Columbia have taken to improve conditions in their distressed urban neighborhoods, focusing on the: (1) reasons development experts and practitioners advocate a comprehensive approach; (2) challenges community organizations will face implementing a comprehensive approach; and (3) difficulties the federal government may have in supporting comprehensive approaches.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) community development experts advocate a comprehensive approach to address the complex and interrelated problems of distressed neighborhoods; (2) practitioners in the four locations reviewed believe that a comprehensive approach is feasible because community organizations and supporting networks are already present; (3) conditions in distressed neighborhoods cannot be quickly reversed and evaluating the results of community outreach efforts will be difficult because these efforts are not easily quantifiable; (4) community-based nonprofit organizations must overcome community skepticism, inadequate resident participation, a complex funding system, and the difficulties in managing a diverse set of concurrent housing, economic development, and social service programs to improve conditions in their neighborhoods; (5) organization leaders believe that to sustain their efforts they need to concentrate on building residents' support, gain access to multiple funding sources, and develop an experienced staff; (6) federal departments and agencies have not coordinated their efforts to assist distressed communities because they have separate missions and concerns about losing control over their resources; and (7) recent federal initiatives to consolidate programs could help the federal government become more supportive of comprehensive community development efforts.