Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue
Gao ID: GAO-11-714T June 1, 2011This testimony discusses our first annual report to Congress responding to the statutory requirement that GAO identify federal programs, agencies, offices, and initiatives--either within departments or governmentwide--that have duplicative goals or activities. This work can help inform government policymakers as they address the rapidly building fiscal pressures facing our national government. Our simulations of the federal government's fiscal outlook show continually increasing levels of debt that are unsustainable over time, absent changes in the federal government's current fiscal policies. Since the end of the recent recession, the gross domestic product has grown slowly, and unemployment has remained at a high level. While the economy is still recovering and in need of careful attention, widespread agreement exists on the need to look not only at the near term but also at steps that begin to change the long-term fiscal path as soon as possible without slowing the recovery. With the passage of time, the window to address the fiscal challenge narrows and the magnitude of the required changes grows. This testimony today is based on our March 2011 report, which provided an overview of federal programs or functional areas where unnecessary duplication, overlap, or fragmentation exists and where there are other opportunities for potential cost savings or enhanced revenues. In that report, we identified 81 areas for consideration--34 areas of potential duplication, overlap, or fragmentation and 47 additional areas describing other opportunities for agencies or Congress to consider taking action that could either reduce the cost of government operations or enhance revenue collections for the Treasury. The 81 areas we identified span a range of federal government missions such as agriculture, defense, economic development, energy, general government, health, homeland security, international affairs, and social services. Within and across these missions, the report touches on hundreds of federal programs, affecting virtually all major federal departments and agencies. My testimony today highlights some key examples of overlap and duplication from our March report on the federal government's management of programs providing services in the areas of (1) domestic food assistance, (2) employment and training, (3) homelessness, and (4) transportation for disadvantaged populations. For each area, this statement will discuss some of the challenges related to overlap and duplication, as well as examples of how better information about each program could help policymakers in determining how to address this overlap and duplication.
The federal government spent more than $90 billion on domestic food and nutrition assistance programs in fiscal year 2010. This assistance is provided through a decentralized system of primarily 18 different federal programs that help ensure that millions of low-income individuals have consistent, dependable access to enough food for an active, healthy life. The Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Health and Human Services (HHS), and Homeland Security as well as multiple state and local government and nonprofit organizations work together to administer a complex network of programs and providers, ranging from agricultural commodities to prepared meals to vouchers or other targeted benefits used in commercial food retail locations. However, some of these programs provide comparable benefits to similar or overlapping populations. For example, individuals eligible for groceries through USDA's Commodity Supplemental Food Program are also generally eligible for groceries through USDA's Emergency Food Assistance Program and for targeted benefits that are redeemed in authorized stores through the largest program, USDA's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Federally funded employment and training programs play an important role in helping job seekers obtain employment. In fiscal year 2009, 47 programs spent about $18 billion to provide services, such as job search and job counseling, to program participants. Most of these programs are administered by the Departments of Labor, Education, and HHS. However, 44 of the 47 federal employment and training programs GAO identified, including those with broader missions such as multipurpose block grants, overlap with at least one other program in that they provide at least one similar service to a similar population. In some cases, these programs may have meaningful differences in their eligibility criteria or objectives, or they may provide similar types of services in different ways. Several federal agencies provide a range of programs that offer not only housing assistance but also supportive services to those experiencing homelessness and to those at risk of becoming homeless, yet coordination of these programs varies by program and agency. We previously reported that in 2009, federal agencies spent about $2.9 billion on over 20 programs targeted to address the various needs of persons experiencing homelessness. A number of federal programs are specifically targeted to address issues related to homelessness while other mainstream programs that are generally designed to help low-income individuals by providing housing assistance and services such as health care, job training, and food assistance may also serve those experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless. We found the potential for overlap because in some cases, different agencies may be offering similar types of services to similar populations. Federal agencies fund transportation services to millions of Americans who are unable to provide their own transportation--frequently because they are elderly, have disabilities, or have low incomes--through programs that provide similar services to similar client groups. The variety of federal programs providing funding for transportation services to the transportation disadvantaged has resulted in fragmented services that can be difficult for clients to navigate and narrowly focused programs that may result in service gaps. GAO previously identified 80 existing federal programs across eight departments that provided funding for transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged in fiscal year 2010. These programs may provide funding to service providers for bus tokens, transit passes, taxi vouchers, or mileage reimbursement, for example, to transportation-disadvantaged persons for trips to access government services (such as job-training programs), the grocery store, medical appointments, or for other purposes.
GAO-11-714T, Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-714T
entitled 'Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government
Programs Save Tax Dollars and Enhance Revenue' which was released on
June 1, 2011.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility.
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features,
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters,
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
Testimony:
Before the Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs, Stimulus Oversight and
Government Spending, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
House of Representatives:
For Release on Delivery:
Expected at 2:00 p.m. EDT:
Wednesday, June 1, 2011:
Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government Programs
Save Tax Dollars and Enhance Revenue:
Statement of Patricia A. Dalton:
Chief Operating Officer:
GAO-11-714T:
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Kucinich, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
We appreciate the opportunity to discuss our first annual report to
Congress responding to the statutory requirement that GAO identify
federal programs, agencies, offices, and initiatives-”either within
departments or governmentwide”that have duplicative goals or
activities.[Footnote 1] This work can help inform government
policymakers as they address the rapidly building fiscal pressures
facing our national government. Our simulations of the federal
government's fiscal outlook show continually increasing levels of debt
that are unsustainable over time, absent changes in the federal
government's current fiscal policies.[Footnote 2] Since the end of the
recent recession, the gross domestic product has grown slowly, and
unemployment has remained at a high level. While the economy is still
recovering and in need of careful attention, widespread agreement
exists on the need to look not only at the near term but also at steps
that begin to change the long-term fiscal path as soon as possible
without slowing the recovery. With the passage of time, the window to
address the fiscal challenge narrows and the magnitude of the required
changes grows.
My testimony today is based on our March 2011 report, which provided
an overview of federal programs or functional areas where unnecessary
duplication, overlap, or fragmentation exists and where there are
other opportunities for potential cost savings or enhanced revenues.
[Footnote 3] In that report, we identified 81 areas for consideration-
34 areas of potential duplication, overlap, or fragmentation (see app.
I of this statement) and 47 additional areas describing other
opportunities for agencies or Congress to consider taking action that
could either reduce the cost of government operations or enhance
revenue collections for the Treasury (see app. II of this statement).
The 81 areas we identified span a range of federal government missions
such as agriculture, defense, economic development, energy, general
government, health, homeland security, international affairs, and
social services. Within and across these missions, the report touches
on hundreds of federal programs, affecting virtually all major federal
departments and agencies. My testimony today highlights some key
examples of overlap and duplication from our March report on the
federal government's management of programs providing services in the
areas of (1) domestic food assistance, (2) employment and training,
(3) homelessness, and (4) transportation for disadvantaged
populations. For each area, this statement will discuss some of the
challenges related to overlap and duplication, as well as examples of
how better information about each program could help policymakers in
determining how to address this overlap and duplication.
The issues raised in the report were drawn from our prior and ongoing
work. This statement is based substantially upon our March report,
[Footnote 4] which was conducted in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards or with GAO's quality assurance
framework, as appropriate.
Overlap and fragmentation among government programs or activities can
be harbingers of unnecessary duplication. Reducing or eliminating
duplication, overlap, or fragmentation could potentially save billions
of tax dollars annually and help agencies provide more efficient and
effective services. These actions, however, will require some
difficult decisions and sustained attention by the Administration and
Congress. Many of the issues we identified concern activities that are
contained within single departments or agencies. In those cases,
agency officials can generally achieve cost savings or other benefits
by implementing existing GAO recommendations or by undertaking new
actions suggested in our March report. However, a number of issues we
have identified span multiple organizations and therefore may require
higher-level attention by the executive branch, enhanced congressional
oversight, or legislative action. Appendix III contains a list of
selected federal programs in the subject areas discussed in this
statement.
Actions Needed to Reduce Administrative Overlap among Domestic Food
Assistance Programs:
The federal government spent more than $90 billion on domestic food
and nutrition assistance programs in fiscal year 2010. This assistance
is provided through a decentralized system of primarily 18 different
federal programs that help ensure that millions of low-income
individuals have consistent, dependable access to enough food for an
active, healthy life. The Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Health
and Human Services (BHS), and Homeland Security as well as multiple
state and local government and nonprofit organizations work together
to administer a complex network of programs and providers, ranging
from agricultural commodities to prepared meals to vouchers or other
targeted benefits used in commercial food retail locations. However,
some of these programs provide comparable benefits to similar or
overlapping populations. For example, individuals eligible for
groceries through USDA's Commodity Supplemental Food Program are also
generally eligible for groceries through USDA's Emergency Food
Assistance Program and for targeted benefits that are redeemed in
authorized stores through the largest program, the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as the Food Stamp
Program), which is also administered by USDA.
The availability of multiple programs with similar benefits helps
ensure that those in need have access to nutritious food, but can also
increase administrative costs, which account for approximately a tenth
to more than a quarter of total costs among the largest of these
programs. Administrative inefficiencies can also result from program
rules related to determining eligibility, which often require the
collection of similar information by multiple entities. For example,
six USDA programs-”the National School Lunch Program, the School
Breakfast Program, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, the Summer
Food Service Program, the Special Milk Program, and the Child and
Adult Care Food Program-”all provide food to eligible children in
settings outside the home, such as at school, day care, or summer day
camps.
Most of the 18 programs have specific and often complex legal
requirements and administrative procedures that federal, state, and
local organizations follow to help manage each program's resources.
According to previous GAO work and state and local officials, rules
that govern these and other nutrition assistance programs often
require applicants who seek assistance from multiple programs to
submit separate applications for each program and provide similar
information verifying, for example, household income. This can create
unnecessary work for both providers and applicants and may result in
the use of more administrative resources than needed.
One of the possible methods for reducing program overlap and
inefficiencies would entail USDA broadening its efforts to simplify,
streamline, or better align eligibility procedures and criteria across
programs to the extent that it is permitted by law. USDA recently
stated that on an ongoing basis, the agency will continue efforts to
promote policy and operational changes that streamline the application
and certification process; enforce rules that prevent simultaneous
participation in programs with similar benefits or target audiences;
and review and monitor program operations to minimize waste and error.
While options such as consolidating or eliminating overlapping
programs also have the potential to reduce administrative costs, they
may not reduce spending on benefits unless fewer individuals are
served as a result.
In addition to challenges resulting from overlap, not enough is known
about the effectiveness of many of the domestic food assistance
programs. USDA tracks performance measures related to its food
assistance programs such as the number of people served by a program.
However, these performance measures are insufficient for determining a
program's effectiveness. Additional research that GAO consulted
suggests that participation in 7 USDA programs”including the Special
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC),
the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, and the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program”is associated with positive
health and nutrition outcomes consistent with programs' goals, such as
raising the level of nutrition among low-income households,
safeguarding the health and well-being of the nation's children, and
strengthening the agricultural economy. Yet little is known about the
effectiveness of the remaining 11 programs because they have not been
well studied. GAO has suggested that USDA consider which of the lesser-
studied programs need further research, and USDA agreed to consider
the value of examining potential inefficiencies and overlap among
smaller programs.
Information on Colocation, Administrative Consolidation, and
Performance Could Improve Efficiency of Federal Employment and
Training Programs:
Federally funded employment and training programs play an important
role in helping job seekers obtain employment. In fiscal year 2009, 47
programs spent about $18 billion to provide services, such as job
search and job counseling, to program participants. Most of these
programs are administered by the Departments of Labor, Education, and
BHS. However, 44 of the 47 federal employment and training programs
GAO identified, including those with broader missions such as
multipurpose block grants, overlap with at least one other program in
that they provide at least one similar service to a similar
population. Some of these overlapping programs serve multiple
population groups. Others target specific populations, most commonly
Native Americans, veterans, and youth. In some cases, these programs
may have meaningful differences in their eligibility criteria or
objectives, or they may provide similar types of services in different
ways.
GAO examined potential duplication among three selected large programs
that provide employment and training services”the Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families, Employment Service, and Workforce Investment Act
Adult programs.[Footnote 5] These programs maintain parallel
administrative structures to provide some of the same services, such
as job search assistance to low-income individuals (see fig. 1). At
the state level, the state human services or welfare agency typically
administers Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, while the state
workforce agency administers Employment Service and Workforce
Investment Act Adult programs through one-stop centers. In one-stop
centers, Employment Service staff provide job search and other
services to Employment Service customers, while Workforce Investment
Act staff provide job search and other services to Workforce
Investment Act Adult customers. Agency officials acknowledged that
greater efficiencies could be achieved in delivering services through
these programs, but said various factors could warrant having multiple
entities provide the same services, including the number of clients
that any one-stop center can serve and one-stop centers' proximity to
clients, particularly in rural areas.
Figure 1. Employment and Training Services Provided by the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families, Employment Service Fiscal Year 2009:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustrated table]
Program name: Employment Service/Wagner-Peyser Funded Activities (DOL)
Employment counseling and assessment: Secondary service;
General Equivalency Diploma assistance: [Empty];
Development of job opportunities: Primary service;
Job readiness skills training: Primary service;
Job referrals: Primary service;
Job retention training: [Empty];
Job search or job placement activities: Primary service;
Occupational or vocational training: [Empty];
On-the-job training: [Empty];
Remedial academic, English language skills, or basic adult literacy:
[Empty];
Work experience: [Empty];
Other: Primary service[A].
Program name: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (HHS)
Employment counseling and assessment: Secondary service;
General Equivalency Diploma assistance: Secondary service;
Development of job opportunities: Primary service;
Job readiness skills training: Secondary service;
Job referrals: Secondary service;
Job retention training: [Empty];
Job search or job placement activities:Secondary service;
Occupational or vocational training:Secondary service;
On-the-job training: Secondary service;
Remedial academic, English language skills, or basic adult literacy:
Secondary service;
Work experience: Secondary service;
Other: Primary service[B];
Program name: WIA Adult Program (DOL)
Employment counseling and assessment: Primary service;
General Equivalency Diploma assistance: Primary service;
Development of job opportunities: Primary service;
Job readiness skills training: Primary service;
Job referrals: Primary service;
Job retention training: Secondary service;
Job search or job placement activities: Primary service;
Occupational or vocational training: Primary service;
On-the-job training: Primary service;
Remedial academic, English language skills, or basic adult literacy:
Secondary service;
Work experience: Primary service;
Other: [Empty].
Source: GAO survey of agency officials.
[End of figure]
Colocating services and consolidating administrative structures may
increase efficiencies and reduce costs, but implementation can be
challenging. Some states have colocated Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families employment and training services in one-stop centers where
Employment Service and Workforce Investment Act Adult services are
provided. Three states”Florida, Texas, and Utah”have gone a step
further by consolidating the agencies that administer these programs,
and state officials said this has reduced costs and improved services,
but they could not provide a dollar figure for cost savings. States
and localities may face challenges to colocating services, such as
limited office space. In addition, consolidating administrative
structures may be time consuming and any cost savings may not be
immediately realized. An obstacle to further progress in achieving
greater administrative efficiencies across federal employment and
training programs is that limited information is available about the
strategies and results of such initiatives. In addition, little is
known about the incentives that states and localities have to
undertake such initiatives and whether additional incentives are
needed.
To facilitate further progress by states and localities in increasing
administrative efficiencies in employment and training programs, GAO
recommended in 2011 that the Secretaries of Labor and HHS work
together to develop and disseminate information that could inform such
efforts. This should include information about state initiatives to
consolidate program administrative structures and state and local
efforts to colocate new partners, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families, at one-stop centers. Information on these topics could
address challenges faced, strategies employed, results achieved, and
remaining issues. As part of this effort, Labor and BHS should examine
the incentives for states and localities to undertake such
initiatives, and, as warranted, identify options for increasing such
incentives. Labor and BHS agreed they should develop and disseminate
this information. BHS noted that it lacks legal authority to mandate
increased Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Workforce
Investment Act coordination or create incentives for such efforts. In
terms of achieving efficiencies through program consolidation, the
Administration's budget request for fiscal year 2012 proposes
consolidating nine programs into three as part of its proposed changes
to the Workforce Investment Act.[Footnote 6] The Administration also
proposed consolidating Education's Career and Technical Education -
Basic Grants to States and Tech Prep Education programs, at the same
time reducing program funding. In addition, to improve coordination
among similar programs, the budget proposal would transfer the Senior
Community Service Employment Program from Labor to BHS.
Consolidating or colocating employment and training programs is
further complicated by the lack of comprehensive information on the
results of these programs. For example, nearly all 47 programs GAO
identified track multiple outcomes measures, but only 5 programs have
completed an impact study since 2004 to assess whether outcomes
resulted from the program and not some other cause. Based on our
survey of agency officials, we determined that only 5 of the 47
programs have had impact studies that assess whether the program is
responsible for improved employment outcomes. The five impact studies
generally found that the effects of participation were not consistent
across programs, with only some demonstrating positive impacts that
tended to be small, inconclusive, or restricted to short-term impacts.
Officials from the remaining 42 programs cited other types of studies
or no studies at all. And among the three programs GAO reviewed for
potential duplication”-the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families,
Employment Service, and Workforce Investment Act Adult”-the extent to
which individuals receive the same services from these programs is
unknown due to limited data.
Better Coordination of Federal Homelessness Programs May Minimize
Overlap and Fragmentation As Well As Improve Usefulness of Program
Data Collected:
Several federal agencies provide a range of programs that offer not
only housing assistance but also supportive services to those
experiencing homelessness and to those at risk of becoming homeless,
yet coordination of these programs varies by program and agency. We
previously reported that in 2009, federal agencies spent about $2.9
billion on over 20 programs targeted to address the various needs of
persons experiencing homelessness. A number of federal programs are
specifically targeted to address issues related to homelessness while
other mainstream programs that are generally designed to help low-
income individuals by providing housing assistance and services such
as health care, job training, and food assistance may also serve those
experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless.
We found the potential for overlap because in some cases, different
agencies may be offering similar types of services to similar
populations. For example, we reported in July 2010 that at least seven
federal agencies administered programs that provide some type of
shelter or housing assistance to persons experiencing homelessness.
[Footnote 7] Similarly, five agencies administered programs that
deliver food and nutrition services, and four agencies administered
programs that provide health services including mental health services
and substance abuse treatment. In addition to similar services, this
range of programs has resulted in a fragmented service system.
Overlap and fragmentation in some of these programs may be due in part
to their legislative creation as separate programs under the
jurisdiction of several agencies.[Footnote 8] Moreover, additional
programs have since developed incrementally over time to address the
specific needs of certain segments of the population. Nevertheless,
this fragmentation can create difficulties for people in accessing
services as well as administrative burdens for providers who must
navigate various application requirements, selection criteria, and
reporting requirements. For example, as we reported in July
2010, providers in rural areas told us they have limited resources and
therefore must apply to and assemble multiple funding sources from
both state and federal programs. As a result, the time consumed in
grant writing and meeting the various compliance and review
requirements set by statute represented an administrative and workload
burden, according to these providers.
Coordination of targeted homelessness programs with other mainstream
programs that support individuals or families experiencing
homelessness includes agencies working together on program guidance
and prevention strategies. In July 2010, GAO reported that agencies
had taken some steps toward improved coordination. For instance, the
U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) has provided a
renewed focus on such coordination and has developed a strategic plan
for federal agencies to end homelessness.[Footnote 9] However, the
lack of federal coordination was still viewed by some local service
providers as an important barrier to the effective delivery of
services to those experiencing homelessness. Without more formal
coordination of federal programs to specifically include the linking
of supportive services and housing, federal efforts to address
homelessness may remain fragmented and not be as effective as they
could be. In June 2010, GAO recommended that the Departments of
Education, BHS, and Housing and Urban Development develop a common
vocabulary to facilitate federal efforts to determine the extent and
nature of homelessness and develop effective programs to address
homelessness. We also recommended in July 2010 that BHS and Housing
and Urban Development consider more formally linking their housing and
supportive services programs.
Fragmentation of programs across federal agencies has also resulted in
differing methods for collecting data on those experiencing
homelessness. In part because of the lack of comprehensive data
collection requirements, the data have limited usefulness. Complete
and accurate data are essential for understanding and meeting the
needs of those who are experiencing homelessness and preventing
homelessness from occurring. USICH has made the development of a
common data standard for federal homelessness programs a priority.
USICH recognizes that collection, analysis, and reporting of quality,
timely data on homelessness are essential for targeting interventions,
tracking results, strategic planning, and resource allocation.
Currently each federal program noted above generally has distinct and
different data requirements. USICH acknowledges that a common data
standard and uniform performance measures across all federal programs
that are targeted at homelessness would facilitate greater
understanding and simplify local data management. USICH
representatives noted that agencies are taking steps to improve and
coordinate data collection and reporting, specifically citing the
December 2010 announcement by the Department of Veterans Affairs of
its plan to utilize the Homeless Information Management System over
the next 12 months.[Footnote 10]
Greater Coordination Needed to Minimize Fragmentation, Enhance
Services, and Improve Information about Federal Programs for
Transportation-Disadvantaged Persons:
Federal agencies fund transportation services to millions of Americans
who are unable to provide their own transportation”frequently because
they are elderly, have disabilities, or have low incomes”through
programs that provide similar services to similar client groups. The
variety of federal programs providing funding for transportation
services to the transportation disadvantaged has resulted in
fragmented services that can be difficult for clients to navigate and
narrowly focused programs that may result in service gaps. GAO
previously identified 80 existing federal programs across eight
departments that provided funding for transportation services for the
transportation disadvantaged in fiscal year 2010 (see appendix III).
These programs may provide funding to service providers for bus
tokens, transit passes, taxi vouchers, or mileage reimbursement, for
example, to transportation-disadvantaged persons for trips to access
government services (such as job-training programs), the grocery
store, medical appointments, or for other purposes. For example, the
Departments of Agriculture and Labor both provide funding for programs
that could provide bus fare for low-income youths seeking employment
or job training. Further, these services can be costly because of
inconsistent, duplicative, and often restrictive program rules and
regulations. For example, GAO has previously reported that a
transportation provider in one state explained that complicated fee
structures or paperwork requirements for services funded under
different programs may result in overlapping service such as two
vehicles on the same route at the same time.
The Interagency Transportation Coordinating Council on Access and
Mobility, a federal entity charged with promoting interagency
coordination, has taken steps to encourage and facilitate coordination
across agencies, but action by federal departments will be necessary
to better coordinate and eliminate duplication and fragmentation. The
Coordinating Council's "United We Ride" initiative and the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) have also encouraged state and local
coordination. However, there has been limited interagency coordination
and direction at the federal level. Additionally, while certain FTA
transit programs require that projects selected for grant funding be
derived from locally developed, coordinated public transit, human
service transportation plans, participation by non-FTA grantees-”which
is optional-”has varied, limiting these efforts.[Footnote 11]
As GAO and others have reported, improved coordination could not only
help to reduce duplication and fragmentation at the federal level, but
could also lead to economic benefits, such as funding flexibility,
reduced costs or greater efficiency, and increased productivity, as
well as improved customer service and enhanced mobility. A 2009 report
by the National Resource Center for Human Service Transportation
Coordination found that three federal departments providing
transportation services”-the Departments of Health and Human Services,
Labor, and Education”-had yet to coordinate their planning with the
Department of Transportation (DOT).[Footnote 12]
To reduce fragmentation and to realize these benefits, federal
agencies on the Coordinating Council should identify and assess their
transportation programs and related expenditures and work with other
departments to identify potential opportunities for additional
coordination. For example, neither the Coordinating Council nor most
federal departments have an inventory of existing programs providing
transportation services or their expenditures and they lack the
information to identify opportunities to improve the efficiency and
service of their programs through coordination. The Coordinating
Council should develop the means for collecting and sharing this
information. In 2003, GAO discussed three potential options to
overcome obstacles to the coordination of transportation for the
transportation disadvantaged, two of which would require substantial
statutory or regulatory changes and include potential costs: making
federal program standards more uniform or creating some type of
requirement or financial incentive for coordination.[Footnote 13] We
recommended expanding the Coordinating Council and better
disseminating guidance. Subsequently, the Coordinating Council was
expanded and several coordination initiatives were launched, and
progress has been made in coordination efforts, particularly at the
state and local levels. Furthermore, we reported in March 2011 that,
to assure that coordination benefits are realized, Congress may want
to consider requiring key programs to participate in coordinated
planning.[Footnote 14] The Administration, DOT, transportation
interest groups, and legislators have issued proposals to revise DOT
programs in the next surface transportation reauthorization.
For example, the President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2012
proposes combining three FTA programs that provide services to
transportation-disadvantaged populations”the Job Access and Reverse
Commute program, the New Freedom program, and the Elderly
Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities Program.
In conclusion, as I have outlined in my testimony, opportunities exist
to streamline and more efficiently carry out programs in the areas of
domestic food assistance, employment and training, homelessness, and
transportation for disadvantaged populations. Specifically, addressing
duplication, overlap, and fragmentation in these areas could help to
minimize the administrative burdens faced by those entities”including
states and localities as well as nonprofits”that are delivering these
programs' services. Such administrative burdens range from eligibility
requirements and the application process to costs associated with
carrying out the program and reporting requirements. Improving
consistency among these various requirements and processes as well as
considering how multiple agencies could better coordinate their
delivery of programs could result in benefits both for those providing
and those receiving the services. We have previously reported on the
challenges federal grantees face in navigating differences among
programs across agencies.[Footnote 15] Additionally, reducing
duplication might also help improve agencies' ability to track and
monitor their programs which, as described earlier, is needed to
better assess coordination as well as performance. As we are
completing our governmentwide examination on this topic, we will
continue to look closely at these specific administrative burden and
assessment issues.
As the nation rises to meet the current fiscal challenges, we will
continue to assist Congress and federal agencies in identifying
actions needed to reduce duplication, overlap, and fragmentation;
achieve cost savings; and enhance revenues. As part of current
planning for our future annual reports, we are continuing to look at
additional federal programs and activities to identify further
instances of duplication, overlap, and fragmentation as well as other
opportunities to reduce the cost of government operations and increase
revenues to the government. We will be using an approach to ensure
governmentwide coverage through our efforts by the time we issue our
third report in fiscal year 2013. We plan to expand our work to more
comprehensively examine areas where a mix of federal approaches is
used, such as tax expenditures, direct spending, and federal loan
programs. Likewise, we will continue to monitor developments in the
areas we have already identified. Issues of duplication, overlap, and
fragmentation will also be addressed in our routine audit work during
the year as appropriate and summarized in our annual reports.
Careful, thoughtful actions will be needed to address many of the
issues discussed in our March report, particularly those involving
potential duplication, overlap, and fragmentation among federal
programs and activities. These are difficult issues to address because
they may require agencies and Congress to re-examine within and across
various mission areas the fundamental structure, operation, funding,
and performance of a number of long-standing federal programs or
activities with entrenched constituencies. Continued oversight by the
Office of Management and Budget and Congress will be critical to
ensuring that unnecessary duplication, overlap, and fragmentation are
addressed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Kucinich, and Members of the
Subcommittee. This concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased
to answer any questions you may have.
For further information on this testimony or our March report, please
contact Janet St. Laurent, Managing Director, Defense Capabilities and
Management, who may be reached at (202) 512-4300, or
StLaurentJ@gao.gov; and Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, Physical
Infrastructure, who may be reached at (202) 512-2834, or
SiggerudK@gao.gov. Specific questions about domestic food assistance
as well as employment and training issues may be directed to Barbara
Bovbjerg, Managing Director, Education, Workforce, and Income
Security, who may be reached at (202) 512-7215, or BovbjergB@gao.gov.
Specific questions about homelessness issues may be directed to Orice
Williams Brown, Managing Director, Financial Markets and Community
Investment, who may be reached at (202) 512-5837, or
WilliamsO@gao.gov. Specific questions about transportation-
disadvantaged issues may be directed to
Katherine Siggerud. Contact points for our Congressional Relations and
Public Affairs offices may be found on the last page of this statement.
[End of section]
Appendix I: Duplication, Overlap, or Fragmentation Areas Identified:
Mission: Agriculture:
Areas identified: 1. Fragmented food safety
system has caused inconsistent oversight, ineffective coordination, and
inefficient use of resources;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: The Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food
Safety and Inspection Service and the Food and Drug Administration are
the primary food safety agencies, but 15 agencies are involved in some
way.
Mission: Defense:
Areas identified: 2. Realigning DOD's military medical command
structures and consolidating common functions could increase
efficiency and result in projected savings ranging from $281 million
to $460 million annually;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Department of Defense (DOD), including the
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, the Army, the
Navy, and the Air Force.
Areas identified: 3. Opportunities exist for consolidation and
increased efficiencies to maximize response to warfighter urgent needs;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: At least 31 entities within DOD.
Areas identified: 4. Opportunities exist to avoid unnecessary
redundancies and improve the coordination of counter-improvised
explosive device efforts;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: The services and other components within DOD.
Areas identified: 5. Opportunities exist to avoid unnecessary
redundancies and maximize the efficient use of intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Multiple intelligence organizations within
DOD.
Areas identified: 6. A departmentwide acquisition strategy could reduce
DOD's risk of costly duplication in purchasing Tactical Wheeled
Vehicles;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD, including Army and Marine Corps.
Areas identified: 7. Improved joint oversight of DOD's prepositioning
programs for equipment and supplies may reduce unnecessary duplication;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD including Air Force, Army, and Marine
Corps.
Areas identified: 8. DOD business systems modernization:
opportunities exist for optimizing business operations and systems;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: About 2,300 investments across DOD.
Mission: Economic development:
Areas identified: 9. The efficiency and effectiveness of fragmented
economic development programs are unclear;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: USDA, Department of Commerce (Commerce),
Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the Small Business
Administration (SBA); 80 programs involved.
Areas identified: 10. The federal approach to surface transportation is
fragmented, lacks clear goals, and is not accountable for results;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Five agencies within the Department of
Transportation (DOT); over 100 programs involved.
Areas identified: 11. Fragmented federal efforts to meet water needs in
the U.S.-Mexico border region have resulted in an administrative
burden, redundant activities, and an overall inefficient use of
resources;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: USDA, Commerce's Economic Development
Administration, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of
Health and Human Services' (HHS) Indian Health Service, Department of
the Interior's (Interior) Bureau of Reclamation, HUD, and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
Mission: Energy:
Areas identified: 12. Resolving conflicting requirements could more
effectively achieve
federal fleet energy goals;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: A number of agencies, including the
Department of Energy (Energy) and the General Services Administration
(GSA) play a role overseeing the governmentwide requirements.
Areas identified: 13. Addressing duplicative federal efforts directed
at increasing domestic ethanol production could reduce revenue losses
by up to $5.7 billion annually;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: EPA and the Department of the Treasury.
Mission: General government:
Areas identified: 14. Enterprise architectures: key mechanisms for
identifying potential overlap and duplication;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide.
Areas identified: 15. Consolidating federal data centers provides
opportunity to improve government efficiency and achieve significant
cost savings;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Twenty-four federal agencies.
Areas identified: 16. Collecting improved data on interagency
contracting to
minimize duplication could help the government leverage its vast buying
power;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide.
Areas identified: 17. Periodic reviews could help identify ineffective
tax expenditures and redundancies in related tax and spending programs,
potentially reducing revenue losses by billions of dollars;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide.
Mission: Health:
Areas identified: 18. Opportunities exist for DOD and VA to jointly
modernize their electronic health record systems;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD and the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA).
Areas identified: 19. VA and DOD need to control drug costs and
increase joint contracting whenever it is cost-effective;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD and VA.
Areas identified: 20. HHS needs an overall strategy to better
integrate nationwide public health information systems;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Multiple agencies, led by HHS.
Mission: Homeland security/Law enforcement:
Areas identified: 21. Strategic oversight mechanisms could help
integrate fragmented interagency efforts to defend against biological
threats;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: USDA, DOD, Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), HHS, Interior, and others; more than two dozen presidentially
appointed individuals with responsibility for biodefense.
Areas identified: 22. DHS oversight could help eliminate potential
duplicating efforts of interagency forums in securing the northern
border;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DHS and other federal law enforcement
partners.
Areas identified: 23. The Department of Justice plans actions to
reduce overlap in explosives investigations, but monitoring is needed
to ensure successful implementation;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Department of Justice's Federal Bureau of
Investigation and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Areas identified: 24. TSA's security assessments on commercial
trucking companies overlap with those of another agency, but efforts
are under way to address the overlap;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DHS's Transportation Security Administration
(TSA) and DOT.
Areas identified: 25. DHS could streamline mechanisms for sharing
security-related information with public transit agencies to help
address overlapping information;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Three information-sharing mechanisms funded
by DHS and TSA.
Areas identified: 26. FEMA needs to improve its oversight of grants
and establish a framework for assessing capabilities to identify gaps
and prioritize investments;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DHS's Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA); 17 programs
involved.
Mission: International affairs:
Areas identified: 27. Lack of information sharing could create the
potential for duplication of efforts between U.S. agencies involved in
development efforts in Afghanistan;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Principally DOD and the U.S. Agency for
International Development.
Areas identified: 28. Despite restructuring, overlapping roles and
functions still exist at State's Arms Control and Nonproliferation
Bureaus;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Two bureaus within the Department of State.
Mission: Social services:
Areas identified: 29. Actions needed to reduce administrative overlap
among domestic food assistance programs;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: USDA, DHS, and HHS; 18 programs involved.
Areas identified: 30. Better coordination of federal homelessness
programs may minimize fragmentation and overlap;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Seven federal agencies, including Department
of Education (Education), HHS, and HUD; over 20 programs involved.
Areas identified: 31. Further steps needed to improve cost-
effectiveness and enhance services for transportation-disadvantaged
persons;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: USDA, DOT, Education, Interior, HHS, HUD,
Department of Labor (Labor), and VA; 80 programs involved.
Mission: Training, employment, and education:
Areas identified: 32. Multiple employment and training programs:
providing information on colocating services and consolidating
administrative structures could promote efficiencies;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Education, HHS, and Labor, among others; 44
programs involved.
Areas identified: 33. Teacher quality: proliferation of programs
complicates federal efforts to invest dollars effectively;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Ten agencies including DOD, Education,
Energy, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the
National Science Foundation; 82 programs involved.
Areas identified: 34. Fragmentation of financial literacy efforts makes
coordination essential;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: More than 20 different agencies; about 56
programs involved.
Source: GAO-11-318SP.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix II: Federal Agencies and Programs Where Cost-Saving or Revenue-
Enhancement Opportunities May Exist:
Mission: Agriculture:
Areas identified: 1. Reducing some farm program payments could
result in savings from $800 million over 10 years to up to $5 billion
annually;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: USDA.
Mission: Defense:
Areas identified: 2. DOD should assess costs and benefits of
overseas military presence options before committing to costly
personnel realignments and construction plans, thereby possibly saving
billions of dollars;
DOD.
Areas identified: 3. Total compensation approach is needed to manage
significant growth in military personnel costs;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD.
Areas identified: 4. Employing best management practices could help DOD
save money on its weapon systems acquisition programs;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD.
Areas identified: 5. More efficient management could limit future
costs of DOD's spare parts inventory;
DOD, including the military services and Defense Logistics Agency.
Areas identified: 6. More comprehensive and complete cost data can
help DOD improve the cost-effectiveness of sustaining weapon systems;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD.
Areas identified: 7. Improved corrosion prevention and control
practices could help DOD avoid billions in unnecessary costs over time;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DOD's Office of Corrosion Policy and
Oversight.
Mission: Economic development:
Areas identified: 8. Revising the essential air service program could
improve efficiency and save over $20 million annually;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Department of Transportation.
Areas identified: 9. Improved design and management of the universal
service fund as it expands to support broadband could help avoid cost
increases for consumers;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Federal Communications Commission; four
programs involved.
Areas identified: 10. The Corps of Engineers should provide Congress
with project-level information on unobligated balances;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Mission: Energy:
Areas identified: 11. Improved management of federal oil and gas
resources could result in approximately $1.75 billion over 10 years;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land
Management, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and
Enforcement, and Office of Natural Resources Revenue.
Mission: General government:
Areas identified: 12. Efforts to address governmentwide improper
payments could result in significant cost savings;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: About 20 federal agencies; over 70 programs
involved.
Areas identified: 13. Promoting competition for the over $500 billion
in federal contracts can potentially save billions of dollars over
time;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide.
Areas identified: 14. Applying strategic sourcing best practices
throughout the federal procurement system could save billions of
dollars annually;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide.
Areas identified: 15. Adherence to new guidance on award fee contracts
could improve agencies' use of award fees and produce savings;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Several agencies, including DOD and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Areas identified: 16. Agencies could realize cost savings of at least
$3 billion by continued disposal of unneeded federal real property;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide, including DOD, General
Services Administration (GSA), and Department of Veterans Affairs.
Areas identified: 17. Improved cost analyses used for making federal
facility ownership and leasing decisions could save tens of millions
of dollars;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Primarily GSA, the central leasing agent for
most agencies.
Areas identified: 18. The Office of Management and Budget's IT
Dashboard reportedly has already resulted in $3 billion in savings and
can further help identify opportunities to invest more efficiently in
information technology;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide.
Areas identified: 19. Increasing electronic filing of individual
income tax returns could reduce IRS's processing costs and increase
revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Department of the Treasury's (Treasury)
Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
Areas identified: 20. Using return on investment information to better
target IRS enforcement could reduce the tax gap; for example, a 1
percent reduction would increase tax revenues by $3 billion;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 21. Better management of tax debt collection may
resolve cases faster with lower IRS costs and increase debt collected;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 22. Broadening IRS‘s authority to correct simple tax
return errors could facilitate correct tax payments and help IRS
avoid costly, burdensome audits;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 23. Enhancing mortgage interest information
reporting could improve tax compliance;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 24. More information on the types and uses of
canceled debt could help IRS limit revenue losses on forgiven mortgage
debt;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 25. Better information and outreach could help
increase revenues by tens or hundreds of millions of dollars annually
by addressing overstated real estate tax deductions;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 26. Revisions to content and use of Form 1098-T
could help IRS enforce higher education requirements and increase
revenues;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 27. Many options could improve the tax compliance of
sole proprietors and begin to reduce their $68 billion portion of the
tax gap;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 28. IRS could find additional businesses not filing
tax returns by using third-party data, which show such businesses have
billions of dollars in sales;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 29. Congress and IRS can help S corporations and
their shareholders be more tax compliant, potentially increasing tax
revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars each year;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 30. IRS needs an agencywide approach for addressing
tax evasion among the at least 1 million networks of businesses and
related entities;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 31. Opportunities exist to improve the targeting of
the $6 billion research tax credit and reduce forgone revenue;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Treasury and IRS.
Areas identified: 32. Converting the new markets tax credit to a grant
program may increase program efficiency and significantly reduce the
$3.8 billion 5-year revenue cost of the program;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Treasury.
Areas identified: 33. Limiting the tax-exempt status of certain
governmental bonds could yield revenue;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Treasury.
Areas identified: 34. Adjusting civil tax penalties for inflation
potentially could increase revenues by tens of millions of dollars per
year, not counting any revenues that may result from maintaining the
penalties‘ deterrent effect;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 35. IRS may be able to systematically identify
nonresident aliens reporting unallowed tax deductions or credits;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: IRS.
Areas identified: 36. Tracking undisbursed balances in expired grant
accounts could facilitate the reallocation of scarce resources or the
return of funding to the Treasury;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Governmentwide.
Mission: Health:
Areas identified: 37. Preventing billions in Medicaid improper
payments requires sustained attention and action by CMS;
Department of Health and Human Services‘ Centers for Medicare &
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Medicaid Services (CMS).
Areas identified: 38. Federal oversight over Medicaid supplemental
payments needs improvement, which could lead to substantial cost
savings;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: CMS.
Areas identified: 39. Better targeting of Medicare‘s claims review
could reduce improper payments;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: CMS.
Areas identified: 40. Potential savings in Medicare‘s payments for
health care;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: CMS.
Mission: Homeland security/Law Enforcement:
Areas identified: 41. DHS‘s management of acquisitions could be
strengthened to reduce cost overruns and schedule and performance
shortfalls;
Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Areas identified: 42. Improvements in managing research and
development could help reduce inefficiencies and costs for homeland
security;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DHS.
Areas identified: 43. Validation of TSA‘s behavior-based screening
program is needed to justify funding or expansion;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
Areas identified: 44. More efficient baggage screening systems could
result in about $470 million in reduced TSA personnel costs over the
next 5 years;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: TSA.
Areas identified: 45. Clarifying availability of certain customs fee
collections could produce a one-time savings of $640 million;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: DHS‘s Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Mission: Income security:
Areas identified: 46. Social Security needs data on pensions from
noncovered earnings to better enforce offsets and ensure benefit
fairness, resulting in estimated $2.4-$2.9 billion savings over 10
years;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: Social Security Administration.
Mission: International affairs:
Areas identified: 47. Congress could pursue several options to improve
collection of antidumping and countervailing duties;
Federal agencies and programs where duplication, overlap, or
fragmentation may occur: CBP.
Source: GAO-11-318SP.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix III: Federal Programs Cited in This Review:
Domestic Food Assistance Programs:
The federal government spent more than $62.5 billion on the following
18 domestic food nutrition and assistance programs in fiscal year 2008.
Table 1: Selected Federal Food and Nutrition Assistance Programs, by
Agency:
USDA:
Item number: 1;
Program name: Child and Adult Care Food Program.
Item number: 2;
Program name: Commodity Supplemental Food Program.
Item number: 3;
Program name: Community Food Projects Competitive Grant
Program.
Item number: 4;
Program name: Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations.
Item number: 5;
Program name: Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program.
Item number: 6;
Program name: National School Lunch Program.
Item number: 7;
Program name: Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico.
Item number: 8;
Program name: School Breakfast Program.
Item number: 9;
Program name: Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.
Item number: 10;
Program name: Special Milk Program.
Item number: 11;
Program name: Summer Food Service Program.
Item number: 12;
Program name: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP).
Item number: 13;
Program name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program.
Item number: 14;
Program name: WIC.
Item number: 15;
Program name: WIC Farmers' Market Nutrition Program.
DHS Federal Emergency Management Agency:
Item number: 16;
Program name: Emergency Food and Shelter National Board
Program.
HHS Administration on Aging:
Item number: 17;
Program name: Elderly Nutrition Program: Home-Delivered
and Congregate Nutrition Services.
Item number: 18;
Program name: Grants to American Indian, Alaska Native,
and Native Hawaiian Organizations for Nutrition and Supportive
Services.
Source: GAO, Domestic Food Assistance: Complex System Benefits
Millions, but Additional Efforts Could Address Potential Inefficiency
and Overlap among Smaller Programs, GAO-10-346 (Washington, D.C.: Apr.
15, 2010).
[A] The Community Food Projects Competitive Grants Program is
administered by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture
(formerly the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension
Service, CSREES) of USDA. All other USDA programs listed above are
administered by the Food and Nutrition Service. Community Food Projects
Competitive Grants Program participation information is from CSREES
Update: September 17, 2009, Office of the Administrator, CSREES, USDA.
[End of table]
Homelessness Programs:
Table 2 lists selected federal programs that provide shelter or housing
assistance.
Table 2: List of Selected Federal Programs That Provide Shelter or
Housing Assistance:
Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Item number: 1;
Program name: Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8).
Item number: 2;
Program name: Public Housing.
Item number: 3;
Program name: Homeless Assistance Programs: Single Room Occupancy.
Item number: 4;
Program name: Homeless Assistance Programs: Shelter Plus Care.
Item number: 5;
Program name: Homeless Assistance Programs: Supportive Housing Program.
Item number: 6;
Program name: Homeless Assistance Programs: Emergency Shelter Grant.
Item number: 7;
Program name: HUD-VA Supportive Housing.
Item number: 8;
Program name: Native American Housing Assistance and Self
Determination Act.
Item number: 9;
Program name: Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program.
Item number: 10;
Program name: HOME Investment Partnerships.
Item number: 11;
Program name: Community Development Block Grant.
Department of Health and Human Services:
Item number: 12;
Program name: Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness.
Item number: 13;
Program name: Runaway and Homeless Youth.
Item number: 14;
Program name: Federal Surplus Real Property.
Department of Veterans Affairs:
Item number: 15;
Program name: Homeless Providers Grants & Per Diem.
Item number: 16;
Program name: HUD-VA Supportive Housing.
Department of Justice:
Item number: 17;
Program name: Transitional Housing Assistance for Victims of Domestic
Violence, Stalking, or Sexual Assault.
Department of Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency:
Item number: 18;
Program name: Emergency Food and Shelter.
Department of Agriculture:
Item number: 19;
Program name: Housing programs such as Single-Family Housing and Multi-
family housing.
Item number: 20;
Program name: Community Facilities Loan.
Department of the Interior/Bureau of Indian Affairs:
Item number: 21;
Program name: Human services programs, such as Housing Improvement
Program.
Sources: GAO, Homelessness: A Common Vocabulary Could Help Agencies
Collaborate and Collect More Consistent Data, GAO-10-702 (Washington,
D.C.: June 30, 2010); and Rural Homelessness: Better Collaboration by
HHS and HUD Could Improve Delivery of Services in Rural Areas,
GAO-10-724 (Washington, D.C.: July 10, 2010).
[End of table]
Employment and Training Programs:
Forty-four of the 47 federal employment and training programs GAO
identified (see table 3), including those with broader missions such as
multipurpose block grants, overlap with at least one other program in
that they provide at least one similar service to a similar population.
However, our review of 3 of the largest programs showed that the extent
to which individuals receive the same services from these programs is
unknown due to program data limitations.
Table 3: Federally Funded Employment and Training Programs by Agency,
Fiscal Year 2009:
Department of Labor:
Item number: 1;
Program name: Community-Based Job Training Grants.
Item number: 2;
Program name: Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program.
Item number: 3;
Program name: Employment Service/Wagner-Peyser Funded
Activities.
Item number: 4;
Program name: H-1B Job Training Grants.
Item number: 5;
Program name: Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Project.
Item number: 6;
Program name: Job Corps.
Item number: 7;
Program name: Local Veterans' Employment Representative
Program.
Item number: 8;
Program name: National Farmworker Jobs Program.
Item number: 9;
Program name: Native American Employment and Training.
Item number: 10;
Program name: Registered Apprenticeship and Other Training.
Item number: 11;
Program name: Reintegration of Ex-Offenders.
Item number: 12;
Program name: Senior Community Service Employment Program.
Item number: 13;
Program name: Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Item number: 14;
Program name: Transition Assistance Program.
Item number: 15;
Program name: Veterans' Workforce Investment Program.
Item number: 16;
Program name: WIA Adult Program.
Item number: 17;
Program name: WIA Youth Activities.
Item number: 18;
Program name: WIA Dislocated Workers.
Item number: 19;
Program name: WIA National Emergency Grants.
Item number: 20;
Program name: WANTO.
Item number: 21;
Program name: Department of Education: YouthBuild.
Department of Education:
Item number: 22;
Program name: American Indian Vocational Rehabilitation
Services.
Item number: 23;
Program name: Career and Technical Education--Basic Grants to
States.
Item number: 24;
Program name: Career and Technical Education--Indian Set-
aside.
Item number: 25;
Program name: Grants to States for Workplace and Community
Transition Training for Incarcerated Individuals.
Item number: 26;
Program name: Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers Program.
Item number: 27;
Program name: Native Hawaiian Career and Technical Education.
Item number: 28;
Program name: Projects with Industry.
Item number: 29;
Program name: Rehabilitation Services--Vocational
Rehabilitation Grants to States.
Item number: 30;
Program name: State-Supported Employment Services Program.
Item number: 31;
Program name: Tech-Prep Education.
Item number: 32;
Program name: Department of Health and Human Services: Tribally
Controlled Postsecondary Career and Technical Institutions.
Department of Health and Human Services:
Item number: 33;
Program name: Community Services Block Grant.
Item number: 34;
Program name: Refugee and Entrant Assistance--Voluntary
Agency Matching Grant Program.
Item number: 35;
Program name: Refugee and Entrant Assistance--Targeted
Assistance Grants.
Item number: 36;
Program name: Refugee and Entrant Assistance--Social Services
Program.
Item number: 37;
Program name: Refugee and Entrant Assistance--Targeted
Assistance Discretionary Program.
Item number: 38;
Program name: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
Item number: 39;
Program name: Tribal Work Grants[A].
Department of the Interior:
Item number: 40;
Program name: Conservation Activities by Youth Service
Organizations[B].
Item number: 41;
Program name: Indian Employment Assistance.
Item number: 42;
Program name: Department of Agriculture: Indian Vocational
Training--United Tribes Technical College.
Department of Agriculture:
Item number: 43;
Program name: Department of Defense: SNAP Employment and
Training Program.
Department of Defense:
Item number: 44;
Program name: Environmental Protection Agency: National Guard
Youth Challenge Program.
Environmental Protection Agency:
Item number: 45;
Program name: Department of Justice: Brownfield Job Training
Cooperative Agreements.
Department of Justice:
Item number: 46;
Program name: Department of Veterans Affairs: Second Chance Act
Prisoner Reentry Initiative.
Department of Veterans Affairs:
Item number: 47;
Program name: Vocational Rehabilitation for Disabled Veterans[C].
Source: GAO, Multiple Employment and Training Programs: Providing
Information on Colocating Services and Consolidating Administrative
Structures Could Promote Efficiencies, GAO-11-92 (Washington, D.C.:
Jan. 13, 2011).
[A] Also known as the Native Employment Works program.
[B] For the purposes of our study, this program includes several
programs administered by Interior's National Park Service: Public Lands
Corps, Youth Conservation Corps, Youth Intern Program, and Youth
Partnership Program.
[C] Also known as the VetSuccess program.
[End of table]
Federal Programs Providing Transportation Services for Transportation-
Disadvantaged Persons, As of October 2010:
This list contains programs that GAO identified as providing
transportation services to transportation-disadvantaged persons, with
limited information available on funding. Transportation is not the
primary purpose of many of these programs, but rather access to
services, such as medical appointments. In many cases, funding data
were not available as funds are embedded in broader program spending.
However, GAO obtained fiscal year 2009 funding information for 23
programs (see table 4), which spent an estimated total of $1.7 billion
on transportation services that year.
Table 4: Federal Programs Providing Transportation Services for
Transportation-Disadvantaged Persons:
Department of Agriculture:
Item number: 1;
Program name[A]: Food Stamp Employment and Training Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 2;
Program name[A]: Department of Education: Community Facilities
Loans and Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: Item
no.Department of Education: no estimate available.
Department of Education:
Item number: 3;
Program name[A]: 21st-Century Community Learning Centers;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 4;
Program name[A]: Voluntary Public School Choice;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 5;
Program name[A]: Special Education Grants to States;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 6;
Program name[A]: Special Education Preschool Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 7;
Program name[A]: Special Education Grants for Infants and
Families;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 8;
Program name[A]: Centers for Independent Living;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 9;
Program name[A]: Independent Living Services for Older
Individuals Who Are Blind;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 10;
Program name[A]: Independent Living State Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 11;
Program name[A]: Supported Employment Services for Individuals with
Most Significant Disabilities;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 12;
Program name[A]: Vocational Rehabilitation Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $79,356,746.
Item number: 13;
Program name[A]: Department of Health and Human Services:
Rehabilitation Services American Indians with Disabilities;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Department of Health and Human Services:
Item number: 14;
Program name[A]: Child Care and Development Fund;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 15;
Program name[A]: Community Services Block Grant Programs;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no
estimate available.
Item number: 16;
Program name[A]: Developmental Disabilities Projects of
National Significance;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 17;
Program name[A]: Head Start;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 18;
Program name[A]: Refugee and Entrant Assistance Discretionary
Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 19;
Program name[A]: Refugee and Entrant Assistance State
Administered Programs;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 20;
Program name[A]: Refugee and Entrant Assistance Targeted
Assistance;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 21;
Program name[A]: Refugee and Entrant Assistance Voluntary
Agency Programs;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 22;
Program name[A]: Social Services Block Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 23;
Program name[A]: State Councils on Developmental Disabilities
and Protection and Advocacy Systems;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 24;
Program name[A]: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: Item no.:
$355,322,883.
Item number: 25;
Program name[A]: Transitional Living for Homeless Youth;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: Item no.: no
estimate available.
Item number: 26;
Program name[A]: Native American Programs;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 27;
Program name[A]: Tribal Work Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 28;
Program name[A]: Chafee Foster Care Independence Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 29;
Program name[A]: Grants for Supportive Services and Senior
Centers;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $72,282,657.
Item number: 30;
Program name[A]: Program for American Indian, Alaskan Native,
and Native Hawaiian Elders;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 31;
Program name[A]: Medicaid;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available[B].
Item number: 32;
Program name[A]: State Children's Health Insurance Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $4,518,297.
Item number: 33;
Program name[A]: Community Health Centers;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $24,340,787.
Item number: 34;
Program name[A]: Healthy Start Initiative;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 35;
Program name[A]: HIV Care Formula Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 36;
Program name[A]: Maternal and Child Services Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 37;
Program name[A]: Rural Health Care, Rural Health Network, and
Small Health Care Provider Programs;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $187,500.
Item number: 38;
Program name[A]: Urban Indian Health Services;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $26,664.
Item number: 39;
Program name[A]: Special Diabetes Program for Indians
Diabetes Prevention and Treatment Projects;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $359,323.
Item number: 40;
Program name[A]: Community Mental Health Services Block
Grant;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 41;
Program name[A]: Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment
Block Grant;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 42;
Program name[A]: Comprehensive Community Mental Health
Services for Children with Serious Emotional Disturbances;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 43;
Program name[A]: Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Access to Recovery;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $3,000,000.
Department of Housing and Urban Development:
Item number: 44;
Program name[A]: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $4,006,326.
Item number: 45;
Program name[A]: Community Development Block Grants/Special
Purpose Grants/Insular Areas;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 46;
Program name[A]: Community Development Block Grants/State's
program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 47;
Program name[A]: Emergency Shelter Grants Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 48;
Program name[A]: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $2,581,945.
Item number: 49;
Program name[A]: Supportive Housing Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $12,970,863.
Item number: 50;
Program name[A]: Demolition and Revitalization of Severely
Distressed Public Housing;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 51;
Program name[A]: Public and Indian Housing;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 52;
Program name[A]: Resident Opportunity and Supportive
Services--Service Coordinators;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 53;
Program name[A]: Supportive Housing for the Elderly;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 54;
Program name[A]: Department of the Interior: Congregate Housing
Services Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Department of the Interior:
Item number: 55;
Program name[A]: Indian Employment Assistance;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 56;
Program name[A]: Indian Schools Student Transportation;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $50,544,867.
Item number: 57;
Program name[A]: Indian Child and Family Education;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 58;
Program name[A]: Assistance for Indian Children with Severe
Disabilities;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 59;
Program name[A]: Administrative Cost Grants for Indian
Schools;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 60;
Program name[A]: Indian Education Assistance to Schools;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no
estimate available.
Item number: 61;
Program name[A]: Item no.Department of Labor: Indian Social Services
Welfare Assistance;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Department of Labor:
Item number: 62;
Program name[A]: Native American Employment and Training;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 63;
Program name[A]: Senior Community Service Employment Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 64;
Program name[A]: Trade Adjustment Assistance--Workers;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 65;
Program name[A]: Workforce Investment Act Adult Services
Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 66;
Program name[A]: Workforce Investment Act Youth Activities;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 67;
Program name[A]: Youthbuild;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 68;
Program name[A]: National Farmworker Jobs Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 69;
Program name[A]: Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Project;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Item number: 70;
Program name[A]: Item no.Department of Transportation: Veterans'
Employment Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: no estimate
available.
Department of Transportation:
Item number: 71;
Program name[A]: Capital and Training Assistance Program for
Over-the-Road Bus Accessibility;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $14,006,307.
Item number: 72;
Program name[A]: Capital Assistance Program for Elderly
Persons and Persons with Disabilities;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $90,003,703.
Item number: 73;
Program name[A]: Capital Investment Grants;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $9,096,277.
Item number: 74;
Program name[A]: Job Access and Reverse Commute;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $61,304,518.
Item number: 75;
Program name[A]: Nonurbanized Area Formula Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $419,924,875.
Item number: 76;
Program name[A]: Urbanized Area Formula Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $95,750,785.
Item number: 77;
Program name[A]: Item no.Department of Veterans Affairs: New Freedom
Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $27,062,736.
Department of Veterans Affairs:
Item number: 78;
Program name[A]: Automobiles and Adaptive Equipment for
Certain Disabled Veterans and Members of the Armed Forces;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $61,600,000.
Item number: 79;
Program name[A]: VA Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem
Program;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $282,619.
Item number: 80;
Program name[A]: Veterans Medical Care Benefits;
Fiscal year 2009 federal spending on transportation: $314,754,000.
Source: Federal departments and GAO analysis of the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (October 2010).
Note: The Corporation for National and Community Service--an
independent federal agency--also funds three programs that provide
transportation services: Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, Foster
Grandparent Program, and Senior Companion Program.
[A] Two new programs in the Departments of Agriculture (Hunger Free
Communities) and Housing and Urban Development (Choice Neighborhoods)
have not yet awarded grants, but will have transportation as an
eligible use of funds. These have not been included in the count of
programs.
[B] While no estimates were available for fiscal year 2009, the
Medicaid program in the Department of Health and Human Services spent
$704 million in fiscal year 2010 for transportation services--the first
year for which such information was available.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] Pub. L. No. 111-139, § 21, 124 Stat. 29 (2010), 31 U.S.C. § 712
Note.
[2] GAO, The Federal Government's Long-Term Fiscal Outlook: January
2011 Update, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-451SP]
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 18, 2011). Additional information on the
federal fiscal outlook, federal debt, and the outlook for the state
and local government sector is available at [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.govispecial.pubs/longterm].
[3] GAO, Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication in Government
Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance Revenue, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-318SP] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 1,
2011). An interactive, Web-based version of the report is available at
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ereport/gao-11-318SP].
[4] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-318SP]. Other
reports contributing to this statement were Information Technology:
Continued Improvements in Investment Oversight and Management Can
Yield Billions in Savings, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-511T] (Washington, D.C.: Apr.12,
2011); and Information Technology: OMB Has Made Improvements to Its
Dashboard, but Further Work Is Needed by Agencies and OMB to Ensure
Data Accuracy, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-262]
(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2011).
[5] Employment is only one aspect of the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families program, which has broad social service goals related
to the well-being of children and families and provides a wide range
of services, including cash assistance.
[6] Some of these programs do not meet our definition of an employment
and training program.
[7] GAO, Rural Homelessness: Better Collaboration by HHS and HUD Could
Improve Delivery of Services in Rural Areas, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GA0-10-724] (Washington, D.C.: July 20,
2010).
[8] Many federal programs providing services to persons experiencing
homelessness were created by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance
Act, Pub. L. No. 100-77 (1987). The act, enacted originally as the
Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, was renamed in 2000. Pub.
L. No. 106-400. The act originally consisted of 15 programs in seven
agencies providing a range of services to persons experiencing
homelessness, including emergency shelter, transitional housing, job
training, primary health care, education, and some permanent housing.
[9] The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness was authorized by
federal law in 1987 and its main functions include using public
resources and programs in a more coordinated manner to meet the needs
of those persons experiencing homelessness. USICH has 19 member
agencies and is mandated to identify duplication in federal programs.
[10] The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) is a software
application designed to record and store information on the
characteristics and service needs of those experiencing homelessness.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development and other planners and
policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels can use aggregate
HMIS data to obtain information about the extent and nature of
homelessness over time. Specifically, HMIS can be used to produce an
unduplicated count of homeless persons, understand patterns of service
use, and measure the effectiveness of homelessness programs.
[11] See formula grants for special needs of elderly individuals and
individuals with disabilities, 49 U.S.C. § 310(d)(2)(B); Job Access
and Reverse Commute formula grants, 49 U.S.C. § 5316(g)(3); New
Freedom Program, 49 U.S.C. § 5317(0(3).
[12] See Report to the Secretary of Transportation, National Resource
Center for Human Service Transportation Coordination (March 2009).
[13] See GAO, Transportation-Disadvantaged Populations: Some
Coordination Efforts Among Programs Providing Transportation Services,
but Obstacles Persist, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-697] (Washington, D.C.: June 30,
2003).
[14] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GA0-11-318SP].
[15] See GAO, Grants Management: Grantees' Concerns with Efforts to
Streamline and Simplify Processes, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-566] (Washington, D.C.: July 28,
2006); and Grants Management: Additional Actions Needed to Streamline
and Simplify Processes, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-335] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 18,
2005).
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
