Public Housing

Partnerships Can Result in Cost Savings and Other Benefits Gao ID: RCED-97-11 October 17, 1996

Congress is considering legislation that would give the nation's 3,300 public housing authorities greater flexibility in managing their properties and in operating public and assisted housing for more than 4 million households. This greater discretion is expected to strengthen the long-term viability of public and assisted housing and allow the public housing authorities to better meet the needs of local communities. Before the pending housing reform legislation was introduced, public housing authorities had begun establishing partnerships with public and private sector groups to help stretch limited financial resources. Some partnerships have generated quantifiable cost savings, while others have produced nonmonetary benefits, such as improved social services, that would not have been possible without the partnership. This report describes four types of arrangements that public housing authorities have established and provides the views of public housing authority officials on the advantages of these arrangements.

GAO found that: (1) in its discussions with housing authorities, GAO found that to leverage their resources, enhance their ability to deliver services, and reduce their costs, they have established four basic types of partnerships or arrangements; (2) the authorities partnered and worked with: (a) other housing authorities to take advantage of economies of scale in purchasing items such as large appliances or in consolidating their management activities; (b) their residents and various community and nonprofit groups to provide social services such as health and child care, job training, and employment for residents; (c) state, local, and commercial entities to develop and finance affordable housing for low-income families; and (d) state and local governments to acquire goods and services such as insurance at lower costs; and (3) although about one-third of the officials at the housing authorities that GAO contacted could quantify the cost savings that have resulted from their partnerships, in general PHA officials who GAO contacted agreed that the nonmonetary benefits--including training, an improved quality of life, and certain social services--were significant and would not have been obtained without the shared experience of the partnership.



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.