Of the 130 programs, 69 were wholly targeted (targeted exclusively) to people with disabilities; the others were partially targeted—that is, they provided services to a wider clientele but nonetheless gave some priority or preference to people with disabilities. Employment-focused programs in 1994 provided between $2.5 billion and $6.1 billion in services targeted to people with disabilities. Indirect - Government Agencies Only (Nonfederal)

		Variety of Program Funding Mechanisms Influences the Distribution of Funds to States

Although many federal programs have decentralized the provision of services to state governments, the programs have adopted a variety of funding mechanisms to do so, including funding formulas based on different criteria as well as varying procedures for awarding grants. Limited Communication Exists Among Agencies Serving People With Disabilities

Although federal assistance to people with disabilities is dispersed among many programs and service delivery agencies at the state and local level, limited informational coordination exists among agencies about these programs and how they fit together. Federal and State Agencies Apply a Wide Range of Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility coordination is similarly limited among federal programs and agencies. For example, in California, one rural county we visited appeared to be improving services and reducing program costs. Many of the agencies administering these 26 employment-focused programs did not require or collect data on program outcomes—specifically, data on whether participants got jobs and kept them, what wages they received, and whether they received employee benefits such as health insurance. In 1994, the federal government provided a broad range of services to people with disabilities through 130 different programs, 19 federal agencies, and a multitude of public and private agencies at the state and local levels. (2) To what extent are information, eligibility, and services coordinated under these programs? To analyze in more detail those programs that affect employment issues, we divided these federal programs into three groups: (1) employment- focused programs that provide services such as job training, supported employment, job placement, and employment counseling; (2) employment-related programs that provide services that could reduce barriers to employment—such as transportation, health care, or assistive technology; (3) programs unrelated to employment that provide services that are unconnected (or could have only a remote connection) to employment—such as services to infants and toddlers. In fiscal year 1994, this program funded 11 new grants and 87 continuation projects in supported employment. Social Security: Disability: SSA Needs to Improve Continuing Disability Review Program (GAO/HRD-93-109, July 8, 1993).
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed federal programs targeted to disabled persons, focusing on: (1) how many of the programs provide employment-related services; (2) coordination of information, eligibility criteria, and services among various programs; and (3) the programs' effectiveness in promoting employment among disabled persons.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) 130 federal programs provide services to disabled persons; (2) in fiscal year 1994, federal agencies spent over $60 billion on 69 programs exclusively targeted to disabled persons and between $81 billion and $184 billion on 61 other programs targeted to a wider clientele that gave special consideration to disabled persons; (3) most program expenditures supported income maintenance and health care programs; (4) employment-oriented programs constituted only 26 of the 130 programs and received only 2.5 to 4 percent of total federal funding for such programs in 1994; (5) 57 other programs provided indirect employment assistance; (6) most programs provide services through states and local governments, and nonprofit and private organizations; (7) various program funding mechanisms affect the distribution of program funds among states; (8) the federal government funds a wide range of services to address major employment barriers; (9) disabled persons who need services from more than one program find the programs' differing eligibility criteria and numerous service providers burdensome; (10) the lack of program coordination and information sharing leads to service duplication and gaps, and past efforts to improve service coordination have only been marginally successful; (11) some state and local agencies have improved service delivery to disabled persons and reduced program costs; and (12) few programs have been evaluated for their effectiveness, since many agencies do not require or collect data on program outcomes.