For example, the Interagency Council must develop and annually update a federal strategic plan to end  review all federal activities and programs to assist homeless  individuals;  take actions that may be necessary to reduce duplication among  federal homelessness programs and activities; monitor, evaluate, and recommend improvements in programs and  activities to assist homeless individuals conducted by federal agencies,  state and local governments, and private voluntary organizations; provide professional and technical assistance to states, local  governments, and other public and private nonprofit organizations; encourage the creation of State Interagency Councils on  Homelessness and the formulation of jurisdictional 10-year plans to  end homelessness at state, city, and county levels; obtain from federal agencies resources for which persons  experiencing homelessness may be eligible and improvements to  ensure access and develop mechanisms to ensure access by persons  experiencing homelessness to programs for which they are eligible,  and verify collaboration among entities within communities;  conduct research and evaluation related to its functions; develop joint federal agency and other initiatives to fulfill the goals of  the agency and collect and disseminate information relating to  homeless individuals; prepare annual reports; develop constructive alternatives to criminalizing homelessness; and  convene a meeting of experts to discuss all issues relevant to the  definitions of “homeless” and the extent to which the differences in  such definitions create barriers for individuals in accessing services  and issue transcripts and recommendations. Homelessness Programs Address a Variety of Needs, but Result in Fragmentation and Overlap of Services

Eight agencies—HHS, HUD, the Departments of Education (Education),  Labor (Labor), Justice (Justice), Veterans Affairs (VA), the Federal  Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the General Services  Administration (GSA)—administered 26 targeted homelessness programs  in fiscal year 2011. However, three agencies—HHS, HUD, and VA—were responsible  for the majority of these programs (22 of 26). Fragmentation and overlap in some programs have been  caused in part by their legislative creation as separate programs under  the jurisdiction of several agencies. 2). For example, while HUD has taken steps to manage  most of its homelessness programs under the same administrative unit  and limit the amount of supportive services it provides, HHS and VA  separately manage programs that provide similar services under different  units. During  our site visits, several local providers told us that managing multiple  applications and reporting requirements was burdensome, difficult, and  costly. Moreover, according to providers, persons experiencing homelessness  have difficulties navigating services that are fragmented across agencies. According to our questionnaire results, 2 of 26  targeted programs reported having a program evaluation to assess  efficiency or effectiveness within the last 5 years. While performance information can be helpful for monitoring whether  programs were achieving desired results, program evaluations allow for  comprehensive assessments. Thus, the limited evaluations of recent  years make it difficult to fully assess what is working and how  improvements can be made in programs addressing homelessness. Understanding program performance and  effectiveness is key to determining in which programs and interventions to  strategically invest limited federal funds. While Federal Coordination Efforts Have Increased, Strategic Plan Could Be Improved

		Interagency Council Has Taken Steps to Enhance Coordination

The Interagency Council has taken several actions to enhance  coordination and promote initiatives across government agencies. Coordinated at the state and local levels. Took steps to develop a common vocabulary. Opportunities Exist to Further Improve the National Strategy

The federal strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness has served  as a useful and necessary first step in increasing agency coordination  and focusing attention on ending homelessness, but lacks some key  characteristics desirable in a national strategy. For each of the objectives, the plan identifies  federal leadership, but does not include priorities for each agency and  does not provide actions or activities that the agencies should take to  help achieve the goals and objectives. Specifically, we found  that HUD, HHS, Labor, and VA have multiple programs that offer similar  services to similar beneficiaries. Recommendations for Executive Action

Based on our review, we are making two recommendations:  The Interagency Council and the Office of Management and Budget––in  conjunction with the Secretaries of HHS, HUD, Labor, and VA––should  consider examining inefficiencies that may result from overlap and  fragmentation in their programs for persons experiencing homelessness. As a starting point, the agencies could use the program information from  this report to further analyze the degree and effects of overlap and  fragmentation. To help prioritize, clarify, and refine efforts to improve coordination across  agencies, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of federal  homelessness programs, the Interagency Council, in consultation with its  member agencies, should incorporate additional elements into updates to  the national strategic plan or other planning and implementation  documents to help set priorities, measure results, and ensure  accountability. HHS, HUD, and Labor did not explicitly agree or disagree with  this recommendation. However, the council was unable to provide us with documentation that  these activities were occurring. Therefore, we did not revise our second  recommendation because these additional implementation efforts must  also be transparent to help ensure accountability and measure the plan’s  progress. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of our report were to determine (1) the number of and  funding levels for federal homelessness programs and the extent to which  fragmentation, overlap, and duplication exists; (2) whether the programs  have been evaluated; and (3) actions of the U.S. Interagency Council on  Homelessness (Interagency Council) and federal agencies to coordinate  federal efforts and the extent to which the federal strategic plan to prevent  and end homelessness is an effective strategy.
Why GAO Did This Study

Federal programs for those experiencing or at risk for homelessness generally are designed to provide housing assistance and other services such as health care, job training, or food assistance. This report responds to the statutory requirement that GAO identify federal programs, agencies, offices, and initiatives that have duplicative goals or activities and addresses (1) the number of and funding levels for federal homelessness programs and the extent to which fragmentation, overlap, and duplication exists; (2) whether the programs have been evaluated; and (3) actions of the Interagency Council and federal agencies to coordinate efforts and the extent to which the federal strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness is an effective strategy. To address these objectives, GAO sent questionnaires to10 federal agencies and obtained and analyzed data for a range of programs.

What GAO Found

Homelessness programs are fragmented across multiple agencies and some show evidence of overlap. In fiscal year 2010, eight federal agencies obligated roughly $2.8 billion to administer 26 homelessness programs. Three agenciesthe Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and Veterans Affairs (VA)are responsible for the majority of programs and dollars, 22 of 26 programs, and 89 percent of total funds. GAO found that these agencies and the Department of Labor (Labor) have multiple programs that offer similar services to similar beneficiaries. Fragmentation of services and overlap in some programs is partly due to their legislative creation and partly due to programs evolving to offer services that meet the variety of needs of persons experiencing homelessness. Fragmentation and overlap can lead to inefficient use of resources. For example, both HHS and VA have programs that provide similar services, but each agency separately manages its programs under different administrative units. In addition, some local service providers told us that managing multiple applications and reporting requirements was burdensome, difficult, and costly. Moreover, according to providers, persons experiencing homelessness have difficulties navigating services that are fragmented across agencies.
While almost all targeted programs maintain performance information (including data on the number of homeless served), few targeted programs have conducted evaluations to assess how effectively the programs are achieving their objectives. While performance information can be helpful for monitoring whether programs were achieving desired results, evaluations allow for comprehensive assessments. According to GAOs questionnaire, 2 of the 26 programs reported they had a program evaluation within the last 5 years. Information from program evaluations can help agencies fully assess what is working and how improvements can be made. Moreover, understanding program performance and effectiveness is key to determining in which programs and interventions to strategically invest limited federal funds.
The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (Interagency Council) is required to coordinate the federal response to homelessness and has taken several steps to coordinate efforts and promote initiatives across federal agencies. Federal coordination efforts have increased in recent years and included issuing the first federal strategic plan, increasing coordination at the state and local levels by focusing on the creation of state interagency councils on homelessness, and taking steps to develop a common vocabulary for discussing homelessness and related terms. The strategic plan serves as a useful and necessary step in increasing agency coordination and incorporates some elements of an effective strategy, but lacks key characteristics desirable in a national strategy. For example, the plan does not list priorities or milestones and does not discuss resource needs or assign clear roles and responsibilities to federal partners. In order for the Interagency Council and its members to effectively translate the goals and objectives of the plan into actions and measure their own progress in implementing them, these elements must be made transparent to help ensure accountability and measure the plans progress.

What GAO Recommends

The Interagency Council and the Office of Management and Budgetin conjunction with HHS, HUD, Labor, and VA, should further analyze the degree and effects of overlap and fragmentation. VA agreed with this recommendation. HHS, HUD, Labor, and the Council did not explicitly agree or disagree. We also recommended that the Council incorporate additional elements into updates to the federal strategic plan or in implementation and planning documents. The Council stated it has been setting priorities and measuring progress, but was unable to provide documentation. GAO maintains its position and that the implementation of the federal strategic plan be made more transparent.