Homelessness

HUD's Interpretation of Homeless Excludes Previously Served Groups Gao ID: RCED-92-226 August 12, 1992

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), under new criteria established in 1991, began limiting its funds to programs that serve people who are literally homeless, the only exception being people threatened with immediate homelessness. Although HUD has revised its guidance, some of the terms and definitions that govern the HUD field offices and assistance providers remain vague. Terms describing individuals as "imminently" homeless or "in the later stages" of eviction have been interpreted differently by various HUD offices, leading to inconsistency and confusion concerning program eligibility. HUD's new eligibility criteria have made the following groups ineligible for funding: institutionalized mentally ill or retarded persons; persons doubled up with families or friends or living in substandard housing; and the rural homeless, who are often "hidden" in overcrowded or substandard housing.

GAO found that: (1) HUD accepted applications for assistance from families, individuals, and handicapped persons living on the street or in a shelter, facing eviction without a subsequent residence, or leaving an institution without a subsequent residence or the resources needed to obtain housing; (2) HUD clarified its interpretation of homeless for its programs, but there was still confusion about who was eligible to receive benefits; and (3) the recent HUD targeting policy eliminates some previously eligible groups, including the institutionalized mentally ill, persons who are living with friends or family or in substandard housing, and the rural homeless.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone:


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.