Finally, many households faced challenges in finding full-time employment  to support a return to permanent housing. FEMA Reports Basic Activities in Closing Group Sites, but Efforts to Measure Results Are Limited

FEMA’s overall effectiveness in measuring its performance in closing  group sites and transitioning households into permanent housing was  limited. Previously,  we have reported that for performance measures to be useful, they should  be linked or aligned with program goals, cover the activities that an entity  is expected to perform to support the program’s purpose, and have a  measurable target. These measures describe program outputs—that is, information on the  number of sites established, current number of sites, number of  households that lived in group sites, and current number of households— but do not provide information on results, such as successfully moving  households to permanent housing, or on qualitative factors, such as the  timeliness or efficiency of the assistance FEMA provided at group sites. Having such information can  help identify potential problems in meeting program goals and could be  used to make management decisions about resources needed and steps to  be taken. In earlier work, we identified certain key characteristics of  effective national strategies and plans. Furthermore, the annex does not reflect some of  the experience that FEMA gained in responding to Hurricanes Katrina and  Rita regarding coordinating with other agencies. Nonetheless, the National Disaster Housing Strategy does not specify  HUD’s role in transitioning households out of group sites and into  permanent housing. The absence of  detailed information in the housing strategy and its Disaster Housing  Community Site Operations Annex on the partnerships that FEMA needs  to form, the resources it needs, and the mechanisms that FEMA is to use  to address the challenges specific to a catastrophic disaster when closing  group sites and transitioning households to permanent housing can lead to  delays in helping disaster victims return to more stable and conventional  living arrangements. FEMA’s Disaster Housing Strategy Neither Assesses Alternatives to Trailers Nor Provides Clear Guidance on What Options States Can Use Instead of Trailers

FEMA’s National Disaster Housing Strategy does not assess alternatives  to trailers because evaluations are ongoing, nor does it provide clear  guidance on what other temporary housing options states should use  instead of trailers while FEMA completes these assessments. In describing these programs in the strategy, FEMA  identified currently available options for providing temporary housing  after a major disaster under the housing assistance provision of FEMA’s  section 408 program, such as rental assistance to disaster victims in  existing privately owned rental properties and temporary housing units,  such as mobile homes;    described a number of factors that were relevant in selecting and  deploying temporary housing options, including relative costs,  implementation time, and program funding levels; and   provided a broad framework of how states were to consider these factors  in selecting specific temporary housing options—for example, FEMA  characterized the section 408 rental assistance provision as more efficient  as long as rental housing was available and the direct assistance provision  as less efficient due to the time needed to activate units, such as mobile  homes. For example, because the strategy and the annex do not  address the roles and responsibilities of other federal and state agencies in  closing group sites and transitioning households into permanent housing,  stakeholders and the public may not have a full understanding of their role  and responsibilities. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

The objectives of this report were to examine (1) challenges that  households living in group sites faced in transitioning to permanent  housing; (2) the extent to which the Federal Emergency Management  Agency (FEMA) effectively measured its performance in closing group  sites and assisting households with transitioning into permanent housing;  (3) the National Disaster Housing Strategy’s effectiveness in defining  FEMA’s roles and responsibilities for closing group sites and assisting  households with transitioning to permanent housing; and (4) the  alternatives to travel trailers in group sites when providing temporary  housing after major disasters, how they compare with respect to identified  policy factors, and how well FEMA’s National Disaster Housing Strategy  assessed these alternatives. In addition, we interviewed officials from FEMA, state  housing agencies in the Gulf Coast region, and selected nonprofit and  housing research groups.
Why GAO Did This Study

Concerns over the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) provision of temporary housing assistance, including travel trailers at group sites, after the 2005 hurricanes led to the development of the National Disaster Housing Strategy. GAO was asked to assess (1) the challenges households faced in transitioning to permanent housing, (2) the extent to which FEMA measured its performance in closing and transitioning households in group sites, (3) the strategy's effectiveness in defining FEMA's roles and responsibilities for closing and transitioning households in group sites, and (4) the alternatives to travel trailers in group sites and how well the strategy assessed them. GAO reviewed the strategy and interviewed officials from FEMA, state agencies, and selected nonprofit and housing research groups.

What GAO Found

Households living in FEMA group sites encountered various challenges in transitioning to permanent housing. A significant challenge cited by several reports and officials GAO contacted was the availability of affordable rental housing. Other challenges that were cited included insufficient financing to fund repairs of homes, significantly higher insurance premiums, and the availability of full-time employment to support disaster victims' return to permanent housing. FEMA's overall effectiveness in measuring its performance in closing and transitioning households in group sites was limited because the agency's measures do not provide information on program results that would be helpful in gauging whether the program is achieving its goal. Previously, GAO reported that performance measures should be aligned with program goals and cover the activities that an entity is expected to perform to support the purpose of the program. However, FEMA's performance measures for Katrina and Rita group sites primarily describe program outputs and do not provide information on results, such as the timeliness or efficiency of closing group sites and transitioning households into permanent housing. Having such information could help identify potential problems in meeting goals and could be used to make decisions about resources needed and steps to be taken. The National Disaster Housing Strategy broadly defines FEMA's roles and responsibilities for closing group sites and assisting households with the transition into permanent housing. Although the strategy states that FEMA is responsible for closing group sites and assisting households find permanent housing, the strategy does not reflect the key characteristics of effective national strategies and plans that GAO identified in prior work. For example, the strategy does not explain how FEMA will work with other agencies in closing these sites and transitioning households into permanent housing. A lack of a detailed plan that includes information on the steps FEMA needs to take to assist households with transitioning into permanent housing could lead to delays in the future in helping disaster victims return to more stable and conventional living arrangements. Officials contacted and reports reviewed by GAO identified a number of housing options that could serve as alternatives to travel trailers in group sites--for example, providing rental assistance for existing housing and repairing damaged rental housing. However, FEMA's strategy does not assess alternatives, in part, because evaluations are ongoing. Also, it does not provide clear guidance on the specific temporary housing options that states can use instead of travel trailers while FEMA completes these evaluations. Without more specific information on what these temporary housing options are, including alternatives to travel trailers, state officials will not have the information needed to expedite the selection of temporary housing options. As a result, FEMA and the states may not be fully prepared to quickly respond to the temporary housing needs of those displaced by major disasters.