United StaWs General Accounting Office Report to the Congress HOMELESSNESS McKinney Act Programs and Funding for Fiscal Year 1989 (;AO,/K(::I’,I)-!)O-52 United States GAO General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20648 Comptroller General of the United States B-229004 February 16,199O To the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives The Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 100-77, July 1987) and its subsequent amendments (P.L. 100-628, Nov. 1988) were enacted to respond to a crisis facing a growing number of individuals and families in the United States-the lack of shelter and other support- ive services. The McKinney Act represented Congress’effort to establish a comprehensive program of assistance for these individuals. Section 102(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amend- ments Act of 1988 directed that we report annually to the Congress on the status of programs authorized under the act. This report provides a legislative history of the McKinney Act; a description of each McKinney Act program; and the amount of money provided under each program, by state, for fiscal year 1989, While this report focuses on the current status of the McKinney Act programs, our future work will report on the effectiveness of these programs in meeting the needs of the homeless. The McKinney Act authorized 20 homeless assistance programs that Reqults in Brief were to provide funds for direct services to the homeless, although two of these programs were later removed from the McKinney Act’s authori- zation and reauthorized under the Hunger Prevention Act of 1988. In addition, the act (1) contained a requirement for jurisdictions to develop and submit a Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan (CHAP)--8 docu- ment that outlines a strategy for using federal, state, and local resources to assist the homeless; (2) authorized the Surplus Property Program, which makes underutilized federal property available to assist the homeless; and (3) created the Interagency Council on the Homeless to coordinate the federal programs. For fiscal years 1987-89, the Congress authorized about $1.7 billion and appropriated about $1.1 billion for the McKinney Act programs. The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Emergency Food and Shelter Program, which provides food and shelter services on an emer- gency basis to needy individuals, received the most funding of any of the homeless assistance programs for this time period-around $365 million. The amount of funding received by the remaining 17 programs for fiscal years 1987-89 ranged from a total of $3.8 million to $114.5 million. Page 1 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds R.229994 Of the 18 McKinney Act programs, 6 provided funds through a formula or block grant-type process; 10 used a competitive process; and 2 had received no funding through fiscal year 1989. abuse treatment, education, and job training. The McKinney Act also (1) contained a requirement for jurisdictions-applying for homeless assis- tance programs administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-to develop and submit a CHAP;(2) authorized the Surplus Property Program, which establishes procedures by which agencies identify suitable underutilized and unused property that may be used to assist the homeless; and (3) created the Interagency Council on the Homeless, an independent organization within the executive branch that is responsible for coordinating homeless assistance pro- grams at the various federal agencies. The McKinney Act programs are administered by several agencies including HUD and the Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor, Education, and Veterans Affairs (VA); FEMA; and the General Services Administration (GSA). the Congress has authorized about $1.7 billion and appropriated about $1.1 billion for the McKinney Act programs since July 1987. As figure 1 shows, about $800 million of the appropriated funds-about 70 per- cent-have gone to provide food and shelter assistance. (Shelter assis- tance includes funds for emergency shelter programs as well as for HUD'S transitional and permanent housing programs.) The remaining amount is divided between health (25 percent), education (3 percent), and job- training (2 percent) aid. FEMA'SEmergency Food and Shelter Program has received more funding than any other homeless assistance program over the last 3 years- about $365 million. (App. I shows the breakdown of the amount of funds authorized and appropriated to each program for fiscal years 1987-89.) Page 2 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds B229004 Figure 1: Funding for Homeless Asslstcince Programs by Category of 409 MIllIonsof Oollam Assisthze, 1987-89 Food and Health Educallon Job Tminlng Shelter I I 1988 1989 Sixteen of the McKinney Act programs received appropriations between fiscal years 1987-89 and, in turn, provided funds to organizations that assisted the homeless. Of the 16,6 programs provided funds by a formula or block grant-type process, while the remaining 10 used a com- petitive process. This report does not provide information on four McKinney Act pro- grams. Two of these programs, the Temporary Emergency Food Assis- tance Program and the Food Stamp Outreach Program, were amended under the original McKinney Act but subsequently extended under the Hunger Prevention Act of 1988 (P.L. lOO-435), and thus, were not encompassed by our reporting mandate. The remaining two programs were reauthorized by the McKinney Act Amendments of 1988, but one has never received an appropriation through fiscal year 1989 and the other was not authorized until fiscal year 1990. These two programs are, respectively, the Exemplary Education Grants Program, administered by the Department of Education; and the Emergency Assistance Demon- stration Program, administered by HHS.Because, at the time of our Page 3 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds R-229004 review, the two departments had not developed guidance pertaining to either program, we have not included a description of how they work in this report. Appendix II provides the legislative history of the McKinney Act. Appendixes III through X explain how each program works and provide funding data for fiscal year 1989, by state. Appendix XI presents each state’s total amount of funds received from all McKinney Act programs for fiscal year 1989. Appendix XII is a map illustrating the regional dis- tribution of fiscal year 1989 McKinney Act funds. We conducted our review from May to October 1989 at the responsible agencies’headquarters in Washington, DC. On the basis of our discus- sions with the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the House Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs, we agreed to provide a legislative history of the McKinney Act, a summary of how each McKinney Act program works, and the amount of funds provided under them. To gather program and funding informa- tion, we talked with program managers and budget officials, and ana- lyzed relevant program guidance, documents, and studies, However, in that our mandate was to provide a general overview of the programs, we did not independently determine agencies’compliance with their pro- gram guidance and regulations nor did we independently verify the funding data provided to us. We discussed the information presented in this report with the agency officials responsible for each program and incorporated their comments and suggestions where appropriate. We did not obtain written comments. Copies of this report are being sent to interested congressional commit- tees; the Secretaries of HUD, HHS,Labor, VA, and Education; the Directors of FEMA and the Office of Management and Budget; and the Administra- tor of General Services, This work was performed under the direction of John M. Ols, Jr., Director of Housing and Community Development Page 4 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds R-229004 Issues, Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division (202) 276-5525. Other major contributors are listed in appendix XIII. Charles A. Bowsher Comptroller General , of the United States Page 6 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Contents Letter Ap endix I AukPhorizations and Ap ropriations for MCk inney Act Programs, Fiscal Years 198749 Adpendix II Le$islative History of Early Efforts Focus on Emergency Food and Shelter Assistance the Stewart B. Legislation Goes Beyond Emergency Needs of the 16 M&innev Homeless Homeless 100th Congress Expands Homeless Assistance Programs, 16 Assistanie Act Enacts the McKinney Act (P.L. 100-77) The McKinney Act Is Reauthorized (P.L. 100-628) 17 1 Appendix III 19 HomelessAssistance Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan Emergency Shelter Grants Program 19 20 Programs of the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program for Single- 23 Department of Room Occupancy Dwellings for Homeless Individuals Supportive Housing Demonstration Program 26 Housing and Urban Supplemental Assistance for Facilities to Assist the 31 Development Homeless Appendix IV 36 HomelessAssistance Emergency Food and Shelter Program 35 Programs of the Federal Emergency Management Agency Page 6 GAO/RCED-9042 Status of McRinney Act Funds Contents Appendix V 39 eless Assistance Community Demonstration Grant Projects for Alcohol and Drug Abuse Treatment of Homeless Individuals 39 of the Community Mental Health Services Demonstration 42 artment of Health Projects for Homeless Individuals Who Are Human Services Chronically Mentally Ill Community Mental Health Services for the Homeless 44 Block Grant Emergency Community Services Homeless Grant Program 47 Health Care for the Homeless 60 Apbendix VI 64 HomelessAssistance Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans 54 56 Programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs Appendix VII 60 Hoheless Assistance Appropriation Cycle for Education Programs Differs From Other McKinney Act Programs 60 Programs of the Adult Education for the Homeless 60 De!partmentof Education for Homeless Children and Youth 63 Education Appendix VIII 67 HomelessAssistance Homeless Veterans Reintegration Projects Job Training for the Homeless Demonstration Program 67 70 Programs of the Department of Labor Appendix IX 73 Information on the Interagency Council on the Homeless 73 Interagency Council on the Homeless 0 Page 7 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Contents Appendix V 39 HomelessAssistance Community Demonstration Grant Projects for Alcohol and 39 Drug Abuse Treatment of Homeless Individuals Programs of the Community Mental Health Services Demonstration 42 Department of Health Projects for Homeless Individuals Who Are and Human Services Chronically Mentally 111 Community Mental Health Services for the Homeless 44 Block Grant Emergency Community Services Homeless Grant Program 47 Health Care for the Homeless 50 Apbendix VI HomelessAssistance Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program 54 Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans 56 Programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs Appendix VII HomelessAssistance Appropriation Cycle for Education Programs Differs ii: From Other McKinney Act Programs Programs of the Adult Education for the Homeless Department of Education for Homeless Children and Youth Education Appendix VIII 67 HomelessAssistance Homeless Veterans Reintegration Projects Job Training for the Homeless Demonstration Program 67 70 Programs of the Department of Labor Appendix IX 73 Information on the Interagency Council on the Homeless 73 Interagency Council on the Homeless Page 7 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Contents Table 111.4:Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program for 25 Single-Room Occupancy Dwellings for Homeless Individuals-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table 111.6:Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 29 Supportive Housing Demonstration Program Table 111.6:Supportive Housing Demonstration 29 Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State for Transitional Housing Table 111.7:Supportive Housing Demonstration 31 Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State for Permanent Housing Table 111.8:Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 33 Supplemental Assistance for Facilities to Assist the Homeless Program Table IV.1: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 37 Emergency Food and Shelter Program Table IV.2: Emergency Food and Shelter Program-Funds 37 Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State/Territory Table V. 1: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 41 Community Demonstration Grants Program for Alcohol and Drug Abuse Treatment for Homeless Individuals Table V-2: Community Demonstration Grants Program for 41 Alcohol and Drug Abuse Treatment for Homeless Individuals-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table V.3: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 44 Mental Health Services Demonstration Projects for Homeless Individuals Who Are Chronically Mentally 111 Table V.4: Community Mental Health Services 44 Demonstration Projects for Homeless Individuals Who Are Chronically Mentally Ill-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table V.6: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 46 Community Mental Health Services for the Homeless Block Grant Table V-6: Community Mental Health Services for the 47 Homeless Block Grant-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State/Territory Page 9 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Contmta Table V.7: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 48 Emergency Community Services Homeless Grant Program Table V.8: Emergency Community Services Homeless 49 Grant Program- Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State/Territory Table V.9: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 52 Health Care for the Homeless Program Table V. 10: Health Care for the Homeless Program- 52 Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table VI. 1: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 55 Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program Table VI.2: Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans 56 Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table VI.3: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 59 Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans Program Table VI.4: Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans 59 Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table VII.l: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 61 Adult Education for the Homeless Program Table VII.2: Adult Education for the Homeless Program- 62 Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1988 by State/ Territory Table VII.3: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 64 Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program Table VII.4 Education for Homeless Children and Youth 65 Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1988 by State/Territory Table VIII. 1: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 69 Homeless Veterans Reintegration Projects Table VIII.2: Homeless Veterans Reintegration Projects- 69 Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table VIII.3: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 71 Job Training for the Homeless Demonstration Program Table VIII.4: Job Training for the Homeless 72 Demonstration Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Table IX. 1: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the 74 Interagency Council on the Homeless Page 10 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds . Contents Figixre Figure 1: Funding for Homeless Assistance Programs by Category of Assistance, 1987-89 Abbreviations ADAMHA Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration AFDC Aid to Families With Dependent Children AIDS/HIV Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/Human Immunodeficiency Virus CCNV Community for Creative Non-Violence CDBG Community Development Block Grant CHAP Comprehensive Housing Assistance Plan CSBG Community Services Block Grant DCHV Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans EFS Emergency Food and Shelter (Program) EHP Emergency Community Services Homeless Grant Program ESG Emergency Shelter Grants (Program) ETA Employment and Training Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GAO General Accounting Office GSA General Services Administration HCMI Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill (Veterans Program) HRSA Health Resources and Services Administration HHS Department of Health and Human Services HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development HVRP Homeless Veterans Reintegration Project NIAAA National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism OCS Office of Community Services PHA Public Housing Authority RFP request for proposal SAFAH Supplemental Assistance for Facilities to Assist the Homeless (Program) SHDP Supportive Housing Demonstration Program SRO single-room occupancy TEFAF' Temporary Emergency Food Assistance Program THDP Transitional Housing Demonstration Program VA Department of Veterans Affairs VAMCs Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers VISTA Volunteers in Service to America Page 11 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds App&dix I Authorizations and Appropriations for MC Kinney Act Programs, F’iscalYears 1987-89 Dollars in millions 1987 1988 1989 !YPf!... II .._._.. _..._.._.._- Auth.O Appro.b Auth.a Appro.b Auth.8 Appromb Department ___.. -..I---.-- of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plans NAC NAG NAG NAG NAG NAC Shelter Grants Program $110.0 $60.0 $120.0 $8.0 $120.0 $46.5 Rehabilitation Assistance 35.0 35.0 35.0 0.09 50.0 45.6 Supportive Housing Demonstration Program I .._..t.- .__. .“---- ._._ 85.0 85.0 100.0 64.3 100.0 80.0 Sudplemental Assistance for Facilities 25.0 15.0 25.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 Sutitotal 255.0 195.0 280.0 72.3 280.0 171.5 Federbl Emergency --_-. _.._ ----.--.- Management Agency - __..._ Emergency Food and Shelter Program ----.-+ .- __....--.---- 85.0 125.0e 124.0 114.0 129.0 126.0" Suljtotal 85.0 125.0 124.0 114.0 129.0 128.0 Department of Health and Human Services .__. ‘.-.. +.“--- -.-...... ---.-- _. Demonstration Projects for Alcohol and Drug Abuse -.- ._ I.... _, _ .“..- _-... 10.0 9.2’ 0.09 0.09 14.0 4.5' __. Mental Health Services Demonstration Projects - _._.. - .-.-..... -_----_-. 10.0 9.3’ 0.09 0.09 11.0 4.6' h 11.5’ Mental Health Services Block Grant 35.0 32.2' 35.0 14.1' Emergency ..-. ._ ; Community -~..-.-___- -~.- Services Homeless Grant Program 40.0 36.6 40.0 19.1’ 42.0 18.9’ Health Care for the Homeless Program 50.0 46.0 30.0 14.3' 61.2 14.8' __.-.__.... f.-.- ..“. _“~“_ . ..--..-_ --.~- Emergency Assistance Demonstration Program d d d d d d __.-- .~-- . Subtotal -~‘--.--- 145.0 133.3 70.0 44.9 183.2 58.9 Department of Veterans Affairs Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans 5.0 10.oe 6.0 0.09 36.0' 13.3 ---._ ,....- -.....-...__ -.._” -. Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans 15.0 15.0 0.09 0.0s I 0.09 -..-...* __.... --~_-..-_ Subtotal 20.0 20.0 8.0 0.0 38.0 13.3 Department of Education Adwlt Education for the Homeless --.--A -- __....---. 7.5 6.9 10.0 7.2' 10.0 7.1' ___. Education --c_ .___ for Homeless Children and Youth --.-_.-___ 5.0 4.6 5.0 4.6 5.0 4.8 Exemplary Education Grants 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 Subtotal 12.5 11.5 17.5 11.8 17.5 12.0 Department of Labor Homeless Veterans Reintegration Projects 0.0 0.0 2.0' 1.9’ 2.2' 1.9’ Job Training Demonstration Program 0.0 0.0 10.0 7.6 10.8 7.6 ___..._...-._.^._. ---.~-._.--._______. Subtotal 2.0 0.0 12.0 9.5 13.0 9.5 (continued) Page 12 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of M&hey Act Funds Appendix I Authorlzatious and Appropriatione for McKinney Act Programa, Fiscal Years 1987438 1987 1988 we9 Agent Auth.’ Approsb Auth.’ Appro.b AM.’ Appro.b -&-F, dent Council lndepe _.___ 0.2 0.0 2.5 0.95s 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.0 2.5 0.95 1.1 1.1 General Services Administration -~ NAC NAC NAC NAC NAC NE Total ~ $517.7 $484.8 $512.0 $253.45 $839.8 $390.3 Note: Grand total authorized: $1.7 billion. Grand total appropriated: $1 .l billion. aAuth.= authorized. bAppro.= appropriated. CNA = Not applicable. uThis program was not authorized until fiscal year 1990. eThis figure includes funds transferred from other appropriation accounts. ‘The appropriation for this program was contained in a larger lump-sum amount. sNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program, but a lump-sum appropriation was available for it and other authorized activities. hPublic Law 100-77 authorized “such sums as may be necessary.” ‘These funds were earmarked in authorizations and appropriations for the Department of Labor’s Job Training for the Homeless Program. IPublic Law loo-628 provided $30 million as a joint authorization for both Department of Veterans Affairs’ homeless assistance programs. Page 13 GAO/RCED-9042 Status of &Kinney Act F’unda Appendix II I L&gislative History of the Stewart B. McKinney HomelessAssistance Act In the early 198Os,the plight of the nation’s homeless began receiving increased attention. As homeless individuals became more visible and public awareness of their problem grew, the Congress began debating the question of how active a role the federal government should play in helping the homeless. The 100th Congress responded to the problem of homelessness in June 1987 by enacting the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 100-77). The McKinney Act was Congress’response to concerns about both the urgency of the homelessness crisis and the diverse needs of the homeless. The McKinney Act was the first comprehensive home- less assistance law. Prior to the act, federal support to alleviate the problems of the homeless had been largely targeted to meeting their immediate needs for food and shelter through various agencies and programs. In December 1982, the House Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Early Efforts Focus on Affairs held the first major hearing to examine the appropriate role for Emergency Food and the federal government to assist homeless individuals and explored the Shilter / Assistance efforts at the state and local level. Advocates on behalf of the homeless, representatives of private voluntary organizations providing food and shelter, and state and local officials expressed strong support for greater federal involvement. Shortly thereafter, the Congress enacted the Emergency Jobs Appropri- ation Act (P.L. 98-8) in response to the high unemployment rates during the winter of 198283. This law provided additional funds to public works and income transfer programs such as the Women, Infants, and Children’s Supplemental Nutrition Program and unemployment insur- ance assistance. It also created an emergency shelter program specifi- cally to aid the homeless, appropriating $60 million to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to distribute to public and pri- vate organizations providing emergency food and shelter. The Emer- gency Food and Shelter (EFS) Program was created because of reports that emergency service providers in both the private charitable and local government sectors were overwhelmed by the demand for services to the hungry and homeless. FEM’S EFSprogram continued to receive appropriations for the next 4 years, including $40 million in November 1983, $70 million in August 1984 (which extended the program into fis- cal year 1985), an additional $20 million in 1985, and $70 million in fis- cal year 1986. Page 14 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds AppmUxII Legislative History of the Stewart B. MeKinney Homeless Assistance Act Recognizing an increase in the number of individuals needing food assis- tance, the Congress added a provision to the Emergency Jobs Appropri- ations Act to expand a Department of Agriculture program that provided surplus commodities for low-income households-the Tempo- rary Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFM). TEFAPprovided sur- plus commodities such as cheese, butter, nonfat dry milk, rice, flour, honey, and cornmeal, packaged in l- to 5-pound quantities, to homeless shelter providers. Continuing these federal efforts, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, in February 1983, announced his intention of “expediting the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)" funds to meet the needs of the homeless as identified by local communities. This resulted in efforts to notify CDBGgrantees about the possible uses of this money for such things as acquiring and rehabilitating buildings to be used as shelters for the homeless. By January 1985, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reported that $53 million in CDBG funds had been used to help the homeless over the previous 2 years (1983 and 1984). In October 1983, an interagency task force was created in the Depart- ment of Health and Human Services (HHS) to cut red tape and act as a “broker” between the federal government and the private sector for making available federal facilities that might be used to assist the home- less, During that same year, the General Services Administration (GSA) agreed that the Community for Creative Non-Violence (CCNV), a Wash- ington, D.C.-based advocacy group and shelter provider, could establish an 800- to l,OOO-bed shelter in an empty building on a temporary basis, which later was provided to CCNV on a permanent basis to establish a model shelter for the homeless in Washington, D.C. In fiscal year 1984, the Congress earmarked $8 million of the Department of Defense’s appropriation to make military facilities available to house the homeless. In October 1986, the Congress adopted the Homeless Housing Act of Le$islation Goes 1986 (Conference Report H.R. 5313, enacted by section 101(g) of P.L. Beyond Emergency 99-591). This law defined the homeless as “families and individuals who Needs of the Homeless are poor and have no access to either traditional or permanent housing.” The act provided $15 million to HUD to be distributed between an emer- ” gency shelter grant program and a program to fund demonstration projects to provide transitional housing for homeless persons (HUD'S Emergency Shelter and Supportive Housing Programs). The transitional Page 15 GAO/RCED-99-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix II Legislative History of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act housing program grew out of the concern that homeless persons needed assistance to leave the shelters, find permanent housing, and lead inde- pendent lives. Transitional housing funds could also be used to provide supportive services, such as assistance in obtaining permanent housing, medical care, psychological counseling, and employment assistance. In addition to providing federal funds for more permanent shelter, the Congress sought to assist the homeless through the modification of existing laws to allow homeless persons easier access to existing federal entitlement programs. For example, the Food Security Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-198) contained a provision directing state agencies administering the Food Stamp Program to develop a method of certifying and issuing cou- pons to eligible households that do not reside in permanent dwellings or who do not have fixed mailing addresses. In addition, the Congress enacted the Homeless Eligibility Clarification Act (P.L. 99-570) in Octo- ber 1986, which provided for the delivery of identification cards, pay- ments, and benefits provided by the Food Stamp, Medicaid, Aid to Families With Dependent Children, and Supplemental Security Income Programs to persons who do not reside in permanent dwellings and who have no fixed mailing addresses, The law also made homeless individu- als eligible for assistance under federal veterans assistance programs and the Job Training Partnership Act. Although by 1987 congressional actions had expanded the federal role 100th Congress to assist the homeless through various agency programs, many believed Expands Homeless that a more comprehensive effort was needed. Thus, when the 100th Assistance Programs, Congress convened in January 1987, legislative proposals to expand assistance to the homeless were among the first items on the agenda. Enacts the McKinney Act (P.L. 100-77) One of the first actions the 100th Congress took was to enact an emer- gency appropriation measure for FEMA'SEFSProgram. In February 1987, the Congress enacted a law (P.L. 100-6) transferring $60 million from FEMA'Sdisaster relief program to the EFSProgram. In addition, $5 million of the $50 million transferred to FEMAwas appropriated to the Depart- ment of Veterans Affairs (VA) for its Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program, a community-based psychiatric residential treatment program for veterans. In 1987 the Congress introduced several bills to broaden the federal role in helping the homeless. The legislation that eventually became law was H.R. 668, the Urgent Relief for the Homeless Act, introduced by Repre- sentative Thomas Foley on January 8,1987, and cosponsored by 110 Page 16 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix IL LegNative History of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Aasietance Act Members of Congress. H.R. 668 authorized several programs involving various federal agencies. Programs included (1) health care; (2) commu- nity-based mental health services for homeless individuals who are chronically mentally ill; (3) emergency shelter; (4) transitional housing, especially for the elderly and homeless families with children; (5) com- munity services to provide follow-up and long-term services; (6) job and literacy training; (7) permanent housing for handicapped homeless per- sons; and (8) grants for groups to renovate, convert, purchase, lease, or construct facilities. In response to concerns that overall responsibility for homelessness programs was spread among several agencies, the Con- gress created the Interagency Council on the Homeless, an independent council to coordinate federal homeless assistance programs. Hearings on H.R. 558 were held in February 1987, after which both the House and Senate moved quickly to pass separate homeless assistance packages. On March 5,1987, the House passed H.R. 558; on April 9, 1987, the Senate amended and passed H.R. 658. In June, both the House and Senate approved the conference report, and the President signed the McKinney Act (P.L. 100-77) on July 22, 1987. Public Law 100-77 autho- rized programs for fiscal years 1987 and 1988. The legislation was enti- tled in honor of the dedication and work for homeless and disadvantaged persons put forth by Representative Stewart B. McKin- ney of Connecticut, who died on May 7,1987. Public Law 100-77 authorized a total of 20 homeless assistance pro- grams for fiscal years 1987 and 1988, including the Surplus Property Program, the Interagency Council on the Homeless, and a requirement for submitting a comprehensive planning document to apply for HUD'S programs. The legislation also extended the TEFAPprogram until Septem- ber 30, 1988, and expanded the commodities available for distribution under this program. The law also amended the Food Stamp Act of 1977, allowing federal funding for state outreach efforts to provide informa- tion to homeless persons about applying for food stamps. During the second session of the 100th Congress, the McKinney Act was The McKinney Act Is reauthorized for fiscal years 1989 and 1990 (P.L. 100-628). The Reauthorized (P.L. reauthorization included funding authority for a total of 21 homeless 100-628) - assistance programs. This included extending the Surplus Property Pro- gram and the Interagency Council on the Homeless, and keeping HUD'S Y homeless assistance planning document requirement. It also authorized funds for two VA medical programs for homeless veterans and a program to aid homeless families who receive Aid to Families With Dependent Page 17 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix II Legislative History of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act Children (AFDC)benefits. In addition, two programs previously included under the original McKinney Act were removed from the act and reauthorized under the Hunger Prevention Act (P.L. lOO-435)-TEFAP and the Food Stamp Outreach Program. On March 3 1, 1988, Representative Bruce Vento introduced H.R. 4352 to reauthorize the McKinney Act programs. The House approved this legis- lation on August 3,1988, and the Senate approved an amended version on September 28. In reauthorizing the McKinney Act, the House consid- ered and rejected, by a slim margin, an amendment to convert the HUD homeless assistance programs to a block grant. The conference report on the legislation was approved in October, and the President signed the bill (P.L. 100-628) into law on November 7, 1988. Page 18 GAO/RCED-W-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds I Appendix III HomelessAssistance Programs of the D&partment of Housing and Urban Development This appendix provides information on the following McKinney Act homeless assistance programs administered by HUD: Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan (CHAP),Emergency Shelter Grants (IL%), Sec- tion 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program for Single-Room Occupancy (SRO)Dwellings for Homeless Individuals, Supportive Housing Demon- stration Program (SHDP),and Supplemental Assistance for Facilities to Assist the Homeless (SAFAH). Co@prehensive Hopeless Assistance Plain Description of the The Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan is a document that must Requirement be submitted annually by any state, city, or urban county applying for funds under HUD'Shomeless assistance programs. These programs, dis- cussed later in this appendix, include the ESGProgram, the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation for SRODwellings for Homeless Individuals Pro- gram, the SHDP,and the SAFAHProgram. CHAP'Spurpose is to require state and local jurisdictions to examine their existing facilities and resources for providing homeless assistance, assess the special needs of the existing homeless population, and then develop a strategy by which federal homeless assistance programs can supplement or expand on already available services. Each CHAPmust be approved by HUD before a state or local jurisdiction can apply for funds under HUD'Shomeless assistance programs. A CHAPmust provide the following information: . An explanation of the need for assistance provided by any or all of HUD'Shomeless assistance programs. . A brief inventory of the facilities and services that assist the homeless in that particular jurisdiction. . The jurisdiction’s strategy to match the needs of its homeless population with the existing services and facilities as well as to recognize special needs of certain groups such as the elderly or veterans. . An explanation of how the homeless assistance sought from HUD will complement the services already provided by the jurisdiction. Page 19 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix III Homelese Aes&ance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development . Assurances that each grantee will administer, in good faith, a policy designed to ensure a drug- and alcohol-free facility. . The name, address, and telephone number of a person who will provide a single point of contact for information regarding the contents of the CHAP. In addition to the above requirements, the states must provide a descrip- tion of how they will coordinate any job-training demonstration pro- grams provided under the Department of Labor’s homeless assistance programs (see app. VIII) with the state’s other homeless services. States must also exchange their CHAP with local jurisdictions to improve coordi- nation of state and local assistance. Also, each jurisdiction that has an approved CHAPmust annually review its progress toward implementing the plan and submit a report on its progress. The report must respond to any recommendations made by HUD regarding the jurisdiction’s performance. CHAPS are due to the responsible HUD field office, where they are reviewed for approval, by October 1 of each year.’ Annual performance reports are required by May 31 of each year and cover the period between the last report and April 30 of the reporting year. Eniergency Shelter Grbnts Program Ho\ivthe Program Works EGGallocates funds to help improve the quality of emergency shelters for the homeless; make available additional emergency shelters; and meet the costs of operating emergency shelters and providing essential social services to homeless individuals, including activities to prevent homelessness. Projects funded under this program may use the money for (1) renovating, rehabilitating, or converting buildings for emergency shelters; (2) paying for maintenance, certain operating expenses, insur- ance, utilities, and furnishings; and (3) preventing homelessness by pro- viding financial assistance to eligible families to help pay utility services, security deposits, or back rent. In addition, up to 20 percent of FFGfunds may be used to provide essential social services including employment assistance, health care, drug abuse treatment, or education. ‘In fiscal year 1989, CHAPS were due to HUD by Feb. 13,1989. Page 20 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix KU Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Each recipient of ESGfunds must match the federal share on a dollar-for- dollar basis. Dedision Process for As required by the McKinney Act, HUD uses the Community Develop- Prqviding Funds ment Block Grant formula to determine which states, metropolitan cit- ies, urban counties, and territories are eligible to apply for the program I funds and how much each of them will receive. ! The CDBGformula is really two formulas, and state and local jurisdic- tions are entitled to an allotment based on the one which yields the larger amount of money. The first formula consists of weighted factors of the jurisdiction’s population, population below the poverty level, and the number of housing units in each jurisdiction with one or more per- sons per room. The second is based on weighted factors of the jurisdic- tion’s population in poverty, the number of pre-1940 housing units, and a jurisdiction’s lag in population growth rate. Allocations are divided into two categories: funds that go directly to the states and funds that go directly to localities in each state. Cities or counties that did not qualify to receive JBG funds directly may obtain funds from the amount provided to the state. While states must dis- tribute all of their funds to local governments and/or private nonprofit organizations (whose projects are approved by the local government), local governments have the option of distributing all or only a portion of their funds. To receive funding, a state, urban county, or metropolitan city must sub- mit an application as well as develop, and have approved by HUD, a CHAP which includes a description of the need for assistance under the ESG program and the manner in which ESG assistance will complement home- less services already available. Nonprofit organizations are not required to prepare a CHAP. HUD reallocates funds originally allocated to those states, territories, cit- ies, and counties that fail to have their request for FSGfunds or their CHAPapproved. Table III.1 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table III.2 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state/territory (including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico). Page 21 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds .X Appendix III Homeless Assistance Programa of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Table 1;ll.l: Funds Authorized and Approbriated for the Emergency Shelter Dollars in millions Grantd Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 Authorized $110 $120 $120.0 Appropriated 60 8 46.5 Table 1~11.2: Emergency Shelter Grant8 Progrqm-Funds Provided for Fiscal State/territory* Amount Year 1989 by State/Territory Alabama $742,000 Alaska 51,000 American Samoa 12,000 Arizona 450,000 Arkansas 387,000 I California 4,740,ooo Colorado 410,000 Connecticut 541,000 Delaware 101,000 District of Columbia 261,000 Florida 1,874,OOO Georara 968,000 Guam 37,000 Hawaii 215,000 Idaho 116,000 Illinois 2,503,OOO Indiana 917,000 Iowa 531,000 Kansas ---- -- 365,000 Kentuckv 675,000 Louisiana _I______---. 883,000 Maine 225,000 Maryland ~- 749,000 Massachusetts 1,406,OOO Michigan 1,860,000 ~-- Minnesota ______---. 754,000 Mississiooi 512,000 Missouri 985,000 Montana 108,000 ____.--____- Nebraska 250,000 Nevada 117,000 Y 144,000 -.New Hampshire New Jersey 1,506,OOO -- (continued) Page 22 GAO/RCED90-52 Status of McRinney Act Funds Appendix III Homeless Aselstanw Pcogranw of the Department of Housing and Urban Development State/territory* Amount New Mexico 213,000 New York 4,908,Ooo North Carolina 853,000 North Dakota 94,000 Ohio 2,184,OOO Oklahoma 395,000 Oregon 378,000 Pennsylvania 3,017,000 Puerto Rico 1,626,0L% Rhode Island 225,000 South Carolina 517,000 South Dakota 114,000 Tennessee 751,000 Texas 2,788,OOO Utah 248,000 Vermont 89,z Virgin Islands 32,000 Virginia 765,000 Washington 668,000 West Virginia 344,000 Wisconsin 838,000 Wyoming 48,000 Total $46,490,000 aThese amounts are a total of funds provided directly to the state or territory, plus those provided directly to localities in the states. Se’ction8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program for Single- Room Occupancy Dwellings for HomelessIndividuals &nv the Program Works This program is designed to provide funds for moderate rehabilitation to * owners of rehabilitated SRO housing through rental assistance to home- less persons residing in these buildings. An SRO is a one-room unit in a multiunit structure. It is occupied by a single, eligible individual capable Page 23 GAO/RCED&O-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds AppendixIII HomelessAssistanceProgramsof the Departmentof Housingand Urban Development of independent living. Under the McKinney Act, homeless individuals have highest priority for occupancy in SROunits, although other individ- uals would be eligible to live in these units as well. Under this program, a building owner who rehabilitates a substandard property for SROunits receives guaranteed Section 8 rental assistance for the tenants. A Public Housing Authority (PHA) pays the owner the difference between the fair market rent of a unit and that portion pay- able by the tenant, which is 30 percent of a tenant’s adjusted annual income. In such projects, the monthly rent for each unit includes, among other things, the rehabilitation costs borne by the owner. HUD and a PHA enter into an annual contribution contract that guaran- tees the availability of funds for rental assistance and for the PHA’S administrative costs. Once a housing authority secures a contract from HUD, it then executes a contract with the owner. The contract establishes the conditions under which rental assistance will be paid following the completion of the rehabilitation. PHASmust also engage in an active out- reach effort in order to make known the availability of the program to homeless persons and ensure that needed supportive services are provided. DecilsionProcess for HUD makes this funding available through a competitive process to those Providing Funds PHASwhich best demonstrate a need for the assistance and the ability to undertake and carry out the program. In applying to this program, PHAS must . describe the size and characteristics of the population within their juris- diction that would occupy SROdwellings; l list additional commitments from public and private sources that they might be able to provide in connection with the program; l provide a description of suitable housing stock to be rehabilitated with such assistance; and . describe the interest that has been expressed by builders, developers, and others in participating in the program. PHASmust also submit additional information on such things as sched- uled completion dates for project development, their experience in administering Section 8 assistance and other assisted housing rehabilita- tion programs, and the type of financing the owner will use. Page 24 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix IU Homeless Aeebtance Progcww of the Department of Homdng and Urban Development Once HUD receives the applications, it conducts an environmental review on all of them and ranks the applications on the basis of a combination of factors such as the need for assistance as demonstrated by the PHA and the PHA’Sability to undertake the project. The highest ranked projects are the ones that receive funding. Table III.3 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for this program for fiscal years 1987-89. Table III.4 shows the total amount of funds provided for fiscal year 1989 by state/territory. Tabi+ 111.3:Funds Authorized and Appr(opriated for the Section 8 Moderate Dollars in millions Rehgbilitation Program for Single-Room Fiscal year Occ$pancy Dwellings for Homeless Funding 1987 1988 1989 lndididuais Authorized $35 $35 $50 Appropriated 35 0” 45 aNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program. However, P.L. loo-202 provided $496 million for HUD’s Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program which, to the extent of the $35 million authorization, could have been used for the Section 8 SRO Program. Tabig 111.4:Section 8 Moderate Rehebiiitation Program for Single-Room State Amount Occbpancy Dwellings for Homeless Arizona $1,492,080 Indiyiduais-Funds Provided for Fiscal 3,816,OOO California Yeai 1989 by State Florida 4,486,320 Kentucky 665,280 Louisiana 1,407,600 Maryland 253,200 Massachusetts 2,963,520 Minnesota 2,970,ooo New York 1,025,280 Oregon 4,887,840 Rhode Island 3,758,400 South Carolina 3,772,800 Tennessee 456,960 Texas 2,798,400 Vermont 1,306,800 Virginia 1,330,320 Washington 4,268,160 West Virginia 1,628,160 Wisconsin 1,709,040 Total $44,998,180 Page 25 GAO/RCED-90-82 Status of MeKinney Act Funds Appendix IlI Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Supportive Housing Dertponstration Pro&am Howethe Program Works SHDPmakes funds available to state, local, and nonprofit organizations for projects providing housing and supportive services to homeless per- sons, including those with special needs such as the handicapped. The program provides funds for two types of assistance: (1) transitional housing to facilitate the movement of homeless individuals to indepen- dent living and (2) permanent housing for handicapped homeless per- sons. The program serves homeless individuals, deinstitutionalized homeless individuals, individuals with mental disabilities, families with children, and families where the head of the household is mentally ill. Transitional Housing The Transitional Housing Demonstration Program (THDP) is designed to Dempnstration Program develop innovative approaches to help homeless persons make the tran- sition into independent living by providing them with housing and sup- portive services. It serves families with children and individuals with mental disabilities for up to 24 months. The support services provided range from employment assistance, job training, and job placement to mental health care, child care, and case management. In addition, some projects also provide legal assistance, child care, and transportation to and from work sites. The program provides assistance for . advances of up to $200,000 (or up to $400,000 in high-cost areas) to cover the costs of acquisition, and substantial rehabilitation or moderate rehabilitation of existing structures, including repayment of outstanding debt, subject to a dollar-for-dollar match from nonfederal sources; . grants of up to $200,000 ($400,000 in high-cost areas) for moderate rehabilitation of existing structures, subject to a dollar-for-dollar match from nonfederal sources; up to 75 percent (50 percent in fiscal year 1989) of the operating costs of a transitional housing project; technical assistance in establishing and operating transitional housing and providing supportive services to the residents; and grants for establishing and operating an employment assistance pro- gram for the residents of a transitional housing project. Page 26 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix Ill Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Eligible proposals include new projects or the expansion of existing projects. Expansion projects must include a substantial increase in the number of persons served or in the level of supportive services pro- vided, or a substantial change in the use of existing facilities. The recipi- ents of transitional housing grants are required to provide housing and support services for a minimum of 10 years. However, advances are for- given incrementally, and after 20 years of use for supportive housing, there is no obligation to repay any part of the advance. Delision Process for Applications received for fiscal year 1989 funds were reviewed jointly Prtjviding Funds by the Supportive Housing Demonstration Program staff in HUD head- quarters and staff in HUD'Sregional offices. Eligible applicants include states; metropolitan cities; urban counties; governmental entities, such as public housing authorities; Indian tribes; and private, nonprofit organizations. The application process works as follows. First, in order for an applica- tion to get ranked, applicants must satisfy threshold criteria, which are l their ability to demonstrate eligibility to receive assistance, including financial responsibility, capacity to carry out activities, and legal authority; 9 their ability to match HUD funds with an equal amount from other sources; . a demonstration that an unmet need for the proposed transitional hous- ing exists in the area to be served; . a demonstration that no assistance under THDPwill be used to replace funds already being provided by a state or local government assistance program to assist handicapped persons, homeless individuals, or handi- capped homeless persons during the calendar year preceding the date of the application; l a demonstration of proposal feasibility; and . an environmental impact review, if appropriate. Applications that fulfill each of the threshold requirements are scored and ranked on the basis of l an applicant’s relative ability to carry out activities under the program within a reasonable time and in a successful manner; l the innovative quality of the proposal; Page 27 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix III Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development . the extent to which the applicant will use other public or private entities to provide appropriate supportive services to the residents, or if the ser- vices are provided directly by the applicant, the extent to which the applicant will provide the services with funds from other sources or has demonstrated that the services are not available to the residents from other sources; . the extent to which the applicant proposes to match the amount of SHDP assistance on more than a dollar-for-dollar basis; l the cost effectiveness of the program; l the extent to which a proposed project contains an employment assis- tance program; and . the extent to which the applicant has control of the site. In the final stage of the selection process, the highest ranked applica- tions are considered for final selection in accordance with their rank order. Permanent Housing The Permanent Housing Program for Handicapped Homeless Persons, Progkam for Handicapped which provides the same types of assistance as THDP,funds projects that provide community-based, long-term housing and supportive services HomielessPersons for handicapped homeless persons. The program serves mentally and physically disabled individuals, deinstitutionalized individuals, and fam- ilies in which the head of the family is handicapped. Housing projects must either be group homes designed solely for housing handicapped homeless persons or rental units in a multifamily housing project, condominium project, or cooperative project. These housing projects are required to be integrated into the neighborhoods where they are located, and they may not be clustered unless the Secretary waives this requirement. As with the Transitional Housing Program, the recipi- ents of Permanent Housing funds are required to operate the project for at least 10 years. Decision Process for Application requirements for this program are basically the same as Providing Funds those for the THDP.The primary difference is that the application for permanent housing is prepared by both the state and the organization responsible for administering the project. States apply for funding on behalf of these project sponsors, which are generally private, nonprofit ” organizations. In addition, the 1988 McKinney Act Amendments allowed public housing authorities to be project sponsors. Page 28 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix III Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development HUD'Sreview process is similar to that done for the Transitional Housing Program in that applications must first meet the same threshold require- ments and other ranking criteria. In addition, as part of the threshold criteria, an applicant must match at least 50 percent of the operating costs with funds from nonfederal sources. However, for this program, no more than one-half of their match can come from local sources. The match can include state and local agency funds, salaries paid to program staff from a nonfederal source, the value of volunteer time and services, and donations of buildings and materials. Permanent housing applicants are not required to establish employment assistance programs. I Table III.6 shows the amounts authorized and appropriated for the pro- I gram for fiscal years 1987-89. Tables III.6 and III.7 show the amount of I funds provided in fiscal year 1989 to each state (including the District of Columbia). / I Tablej 111.5:Funds Authorized and Appr+priated for the Supportive Housing Dollars in millions Dem&stration Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 $85 $100.0 $100 -Authorized Appropriated 85 64.3a 80b aThe SHDP was appropriated $65 million, but $750,000 was transferred to the Interagency Council on the Homeless. , bFor fiscal year 1989, HUD had about $110 million to obligate for the SHDP. These additional funds, over and above their appropriation, resulted from (1) the carryover of unobligated amounts from fiscal years 1987-88 for the Permanent Housing Program (because of an insufficient number of applications) and (2) recovered funds in THDP from recipients who have been unable to use their funds. From the total amount of funds appropriated each year for SHDP,the McKinney Act requires HUD to set aside not less than $15 million each year for permanent housing for handicapped homeless individuals and at least $20 million for transitional housing for homeless families with children. Table lll.8: Supportive Housing Demonstration Program-Funds State Amount ---.. Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Alabama $46,822 for transitional Housing -._I~-.- Arizona 1,495,605 Arkansas __--__-- 892,400 California 10,925,716 -_____-.- ” Colorado 1,806,270 .--- Connecticut 3,629,910 (continued) Page 29 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix III Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development State Amount District of Columbia 4,411,525 Florida 1,345,510 Georgia 193,710 -- Illinois 1521,835 Indiana 21683,767 Iowa 438,275 Kentucky 231,250 Louisiana 226,325 Maine 302,500 Maryland 1,686,335 Massachusetts 4,343,914 Michigan 3,018,500 -- Minnesota 656,548 Missouri 3,830,780 New Hampshire 904,190 New Jersey 2,389,540 New York 25,866,264 North Carolina 155,000 North Dakota 172,000 Ohio- 1,486,643 --~-- Oklahoma 119,120 Oregon 172,467 ---- Pennsylvania 2,575,228 Rhode Island 686,975 South Carolina 25,000 -- Tennessee 892,280 _.__-__--.-. Texas 6,902,265 Vermont 358,595 ___-.-. Virginia 8,504,338 Washington 3,857,579 West Virginia 297,580 Wisconsin 939,380 Total $99,991,941 Page 30 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix III Homeless Assistance Programf4 of the Department of Housing and , Urban Development Tebld 111.7:Supportive Houbing Demc)nstration Program-Funds State Amount ProvifJed for Fiscal Year 1989 by State California $1,052,146 for Pfrmanent Housing 185,007 Colorado District of Columbia 304,498 Georgia 664,692 Illinois 449,376 Kentuckv 140,011 -I Maine 132,238 Maryland 309,284 Michiaan 147,025 Mississippi 31,375 New York 706,886 E Jersey 308,300 New Hamoshire 1,279,553 Ohio ’ 477,720 Oregon 107,136 Pennsylvania 1,120,317 khode Island 699,076 Texas 104,275 -- Vermont 158,154 Virginia 820,654 Washington 144,199 --_____- Wisconsin 605,267 - -.___- ~I_ Total $9,947,189 Sgpplemental Assistance for Facilities to Assist the Homeless How the Program Works SAFAHis designed to provide two types of homeless assistance: (1) com- prehensive assistance for particularly innovative programs meeting the immediate and long-term needs of homeless individuals and famil.ies and (2) additional assistance to projects receiving funds under ESGor SHDP.' w ‘SAFAH received appropriated funds only in fiscal year 1987. Consequently, this section does not contain any fiscal year 1989 award information. For descriptions of the EYSGprogram and the SHDP, see our discussion earlier in this appendix. Page 31 GAO/RCED-fW52 Status of McKhney Act Funds AppendLx III Homeless Assistance Program.9 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive assistance funds can be used to purchase, lease, reno- vate, or convert facilities to assist the homeless as well as to provide support services. These services include food, child care, assistance in obtaining permanent housing, outpatient health services, employment counseling, nutritional counseling, security arrangements necessary for the protection of residents, and other services deemed essential for maintaining independent living. Assistance provided to augment EN or SHDPfunds can be used to meet the special needs of homeless families with children, elderly homeless individuals, or the handicapped. In addition, these funds can also be used to facilitate the transfer and use of underutilized public buildings to assist homeless individuals. However, this funding may only be made available in connection with (1) a project that has been approved for, or has received money under, the ESGor SHDPprogram; (2) a project for which an application for the ES or SHDPhas been submitted, pending approval, or submitted and denied; and (3) a project for which assis- tance is sought to acquire property to be used for shelters for homeless families with children. Over half of the SAFAHprojects that received fiscal year 1987 funds used them to acquire or renovate space. Eighteen of these projects also pro- vided support services in the areas of health care, education training, counseling, job placement, help with security deposits and utility assis- tance, and transportation services. Many of the projects targeted a par- ticular population; these were mostly families or women with children, especially women who were victims of domestic violence. Decision Process for The SAFAHprogram is a competitive grant program for states; metropoli- Providing Funds tan cities; urban counties; Indian tribes; and private, nonprofit organiza- tions. Applications are submitted to HUD headquarters, which reviews them in two stages. First, applications seeking comprehensive assistance are reviewed and given first priority for funding. Then, if money remains after funding highly ranked projects in this category of assis- tance, HUD will consider applications that are seeking assistance above that received from the ESGprogram or the SHDP. HUD evaluates applications for both types of assistance in a two-tier pro- cess whereby a set of threshold requirements must first be met before the application is scored for funding purposes. Examples of these requirements include such things as the applicant’s eligibility to receive assistance, the need for the facility or service being funded, and the Page 32 GAO/RCED-SO-62 Status of MeKinney Act Funds Appendix III Homeless Assistance bograms of the Department of Housing and Urban Development applicant’s efforts to obtain other local resources with an explanation as to how these resources are insufficient or unavailable. Having met these requirements, applications are further judged and scored on other crite- ria. For projects seeking comprehensive assistance, the criteria are the extent to which the proposal involves a particularly innovative program; the comprehensiveness of the proposal; the extent to which the applicant will leverage the money received with other sources; the applicant’s ability to initiate the proposed activities within a reason- able time and carry out the project through the term of the proposed commitment; the extent to which the proposal reflects a clear understanding of the needs of the population it will serve; and whether the proposal is supported by a group coordinating a state or local response to homelessness. For projects seeking additional funding for ESGand SHDPprojects, the criteria are the applicant’s ability to carry out the proposal in a reasonable amount of time and throughout the term of the proposed commitment; the extent to which the activity will address one or more unmet special needs of homeless families with children, homeless elderly individuals, or the handicapped; . the cost effectiveness of the project; and . whether the project is targeted specifically to homeless elderly individu- als or families with children. Environmental reviews may be required for both types of assistance. The highest ranked projects are those approved for funding. Table III.8 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table 111.8:Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the Supplemental Dollars in millions Asdistance for Fecilitles to Assist the Fiscal year Homeless Program Funding 1987 1988 1989 * Authorized $25 $25 $10 Appropriated 15 0 0 Page 33 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKhmey Act Funds Appendix III Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development HUD awarded its fiscal year appropriation of $16 million to 45 recipients in 29 states. All of the funds were provided to projects seeking compre- hensive assistance. Y Page 34 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Aphndix IV HpmelessAssistance Programs of the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency This appendix provides a description of FEMA’Shomeless assistance pro- gram-the Emergency Food and Shelter Program. Erhergency Food and Sljelter Program Hdw the Program Works FEMA'SEFSProgram is designed to get funds quickly into the hands of food and shelter providers to alleviate the most pressing needs of home- less persons. The program is not intended to address long-standing issues of poverty but rather to supplement the current pool of resources available to provide emergency food and shelter assistance. The pro- gram funds the purchase of food, consumable supplies essential to the operation of shelters and mass-feeding facilities, per-diem sheltering costs, small equipment, limited leasing of capital equipment, utility and rental assistance for people on the verge of becoming homeless, emer- gency lodging, and minor rehabilitation of shelter facilities. Providers receiving EFSfunds vary in size and the types of services they provide. Services include emergency shelter, prepared meals, groceries and food vouchers, rental/mortgage assistance, and utility assistance. For the most part, the smaller scale providers (those with average oper- ating budgets between $4,600 and $26,000) mostly supply emergency food assistance such as groceries, food vouchers, or prepared meals; but in several cases, they also provide rent, mortgage, and utility assistance. Some also provide on-site shelter. Medium-to large-scale providers (those with average operating budgets between $91,000 and $1.5 mil- lion) more routinely supply shelter, and rent or mortgage and utility assistance in addition to food assistance. Decision Process for The Emergency Food and Shelter National Board, which FEMAchairs, determines the local jurisdictions (and territories) eligible to receive Providing Funds funding through a formula which takes into consideration . the most current 12-month national unemployment rate, l the total number of unemployed persons within a civil jurisdiction,’ ‘A civil jurisdiction is generally defined as an area with 60,000 or more inhabitants, usually drawn along county lines. Page 36 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix N Homeless Awdetance Programs of the Federal Emergency Management Agency l the total number of individuals below the poverty level within a civil jurisdiction, and . the total population of the civil jurisdiction. The National Board consists of representatives from six national chari- table organizations: the United Way of America, which serves as the National Board’s secretariat and fiscal agent; the Salvation Army; the National Council of Churches; Catholic Charities, USA; the Council of Jewish Federations, Inc.; and the American Red Cross. However, before eligible communities are actually awarded money, they must convene a Local Emergency Food and Shelter Program Board. The local board determines the programs and local providers which will receive the funds, monitors performance, and reports back to the National Board as to who the recipients are and how they will use the money. Representatives on the local board are, for the most part, affili- ates of the voluntary organizations represented on the National Board. Local boards are also encouraged to expand participation by inviting or notifying other private, nonprofit organizations to serve on the board. In addition to funds going directly to eligible local jurisdictions, some EFS funds are reserved for state set-aside committees. These committees, with compositions similar to the National Board, make allocation recom- mendations to the National Board as to which other jurisdictions to fund in their respective states. (Jurisdictions that are already receiving money directly from the National Board are not exempt from receiving additional funding through these state set-aside committees. However, emphasis is placed on areas not previously funded.) This arrangement allows for greater flexibility and regional expertise in determining deserving communities. The National Board makes the final decision and directly awards the money to these additional jurisdictions. Table IV. 1 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89 for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program. Table IV.2 shows the amount of funds provided for fiscal year 1989 by state/ territory (including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico). Page 36 GAO/RCED-!W52 Status of McRinney Act Funds . Appendix IV Homeless Assistance Programs of the Federal Emergency Management Agency TabId IV.1: Fundo Authorized and Apprbpriated for the Emergency Food Dollars in millions and $helter Program Fiscal year Funding 1997 1980 1989 Authorized $85 $124 $129 Appropriated 80a 114 114b aThe EFS Program actually had $125 million available to spend in fiscal year 1987. In addition to its appropriation, P.L. 100-6 transferred $45 million to the program from FEMA’s Disaster Relief Program. bThe EFS Program actually had $126 million available to spend in fiscal year 1989. In addition to its appropriation, P.L. 101.45 transferred $12 million to the program from HUD’s Urban Development Action Grants Program. TabIf) IV.2: Emergency Food and Shelter Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal State/territory’ Amount Year/ 1989 by State/Territory Alabama $2,478,256 __- Alaska 409,689 American Samoa 74,395 Arizona- 1,864,706 Arkansas 1,393,455 California 14,438,227 Colorado 2,036,437 Connecticut 905,367 Delaware 272,932 District of Columbia 375,680 Florida 5,723,930 .--___ Georgia 2,740,944 Guam 70,645 Hawaii 256,454 -____.--.-__ Idaho 456,576 Illinois 7,133,460 -.--I Indiana 2,370,024 ----- Iowa 740,924 Kansas 627.663 .~ --.- Kentucky 2.243,814 Louisiana 4,136,362 Maine 424,615 Maryland 1,257,479 ___l___l__-- Massachusetts 1,639,507 Michigan 6,951,067 Minnesota 1,450,950 .-___. Mississiooi 1.690,191 Y Missouri 2,149,870 (continued) Page 37 GAO/RCEDfJO-52 Status of M&hey Act Funds Appendix IV Homeless Ad&ance Programs of the Federal Emergency Management Agency State/territory0 Amount Montana 347,222 Nebraska 436,522 Nevada 512,905 New Hampshire 250,000 New Jersey 2,290,337 New Mexico 1,058,347 New York 6,967,330 North Carolina 2,206,377 North Dakota 252,994 Northern Marianas 44,387 Ohio 5,995,305 Oklahoma 1,995,763 Oregon 1,649,721 Pennsylvania 5,098,270 Puerto Rico 1,854,795 Rhode Island 291,758 South Carolina 1,550,095 South Dakota 253,447 Tennessee 28394.726 Texas 13,711,749 Trust Territory 221,021 Utah 709,147 Vermont 252,409 Virain Islands 97,526 Virginia 1,507,290 Washington 3,025,415 Kest Virainia 1,345,678 Wisconsin 1,953,776 Wyoming 264,913 Total $1 24,052,844b aThis table provides the total amounts of money awarded to the state set-aside committees plus eligible localities within each state. bThe discrepancy between the total amount of money awarded in fiscal year 1989 and FEMA’s fiscal year 1989 appropriation is due to funds used for administrative costs. Page 38 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V HomelessAssistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services This section provides descriptions of HHS’homeless assistance programs. These programs are the Community Demonstration Grant Projects for Alcohol and Drug Abuse Treatment of Homeless Individuals; the Com- munity Mental Health Services Demonstration Projects for Homeless Individuals Who are Chronically Mentally Ill; the Community Mental Health Services for the Homeless Block Grant Program; the Emergency Community Services Homeless Block Grant Program; and the Health Care for the Homeless Program. conmunity De nonstration Grant Pr ,jects for Alcohol 1 Drug Abuse 2 batmentof HomelessIndividuals How the Program Works This demonstration program, which is administered by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), funds community- based public and nonprofit organizations that provide alcohol and drug abuse treatment and rehabilitation services for individuals with alcohol and/or drug-related problems who are homeless. The purpose of this program is to provide, document, and evaluate successful and replicable approaches to community-based alcohol and/or drug abuse treatment and rehabilitation services. Because little is known about the efficacy of treatment interventions for homeless persons with alcohol and drug abuse problems, and because of the need to develop an effective national strategy, NIAAA places considerable emphasis on the evaluation component of this program. Implementation of an effective national evaluation strategy and the dissemination of the findings will enhance the replicability of each of the demonstration projects funded. With fiscal year 1987 funds, NIAAA funded nine projects for 2 years. All of the funded projects focus on developing innovative approaches to serving the particular homeless population through such activities as outreach programs in the streets and homeless shelters, intensive-case management, and supportive housing arrangements. Of the nine projects funded, five of NIAAA’S awardees provided direct treatment services to Page 39 GAO/RCED-9042 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V Homeless Assbtance Programs of the Department of Health end Human Services homeless individuals for both alcohol and drug abuse while also provid- ing other types of supportive services, such as housing, medical care, education, and job training. In many cases, the supportive services are provided by the project directly; in others, they are coordinated by case managers at the project but accessed through other programs. Long- term residential housing is provided in three of the projects, while four offer temporary shelter space or “sleep-off” areas. Three projects targeted a specific population such as women with children. According to estimates made in the projects’ applications, approximately 3,000 individuals will receive some level of treatment and/or services annually. Decision Process for Grants are awarded by the Institute through a review process of experts on alcohol and drug abuse problems. In deciding which projects to fund, Providing Funds the panel focuses on urban areas with large homeless populations and entities with working knowledge of and experience in dealing with the special needs of the target population. The panel assessesthe technical merit of the proposals on the basis of criteria which include (1) the extent to which the applicants demonstrate a clear understanding of the scope and range of service needs among the target population; (2) the availability of community resources in the proposed demonstration area; (3) the level of need for the demonstration project in the proposed local- ity; and (4) prior experience and expertise of the applicant and proposed staff in working with alcohol-dependent, drug-dependent, and/or home- less individuals. NIAAA makes funding decisions based on the assessment by the panel of the proposal’s technical merit but also considers whether the proposal focuses on urban areas, the need for geographic distribu- tion in NIAAA'S funding decisions, the balance of racial/ethnic popula- tions to be served by proposals considered for funding, and the availability of funds. As a requirement of the grant, each grantee evaluates its own project, and participates in a national evaluation across all demonstration projects serving the homeless, These evaluations are to provide informa- tion for future service efforts and are intended to enhance the repli- cability of the approaches demonstrated. Twenty-five percent of each award is to be used for evaluation purposes. Table V-1 shows the amount of funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table V.2 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state. Page 40 GAO/RCED-SO-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V Homelese Assietance Programa of the Department of Health and Human Sepenticee Table Y.1: Fund8 Authorized and Apprdpriated for the Community Dollars in millions D&nofwtration &ants Program for Fiscal year I and Drug Abuse Treatment for Funding 1987 1988 1989 .- .._ _-- Authorized $10.0 $Ob $14.0 Appropriated 9.2a Ob 4.5c aP,L. 100-71 appropriated a lump-sum amount of $50.7 million to HHS for three of its homeless assis- tance programs combined-Alcohol and Drug Abuse Treatment Demonstration Grants, Mental Health Services Demonstration Projects, and Mental Health Services Block Grant. bNo funds were specifically earmarked in fiscal year 1988 for this program. However, P.L. loo-202 autho- I rized and appropriated a lump sum of $1.37 billion to HHS for alcoholism, alcohol and drug abuse, and I mental health programs. I CNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program in fiscal year 1989. P.L. loo-436 appropriated a I lump-sum amount of $158 billion to HHS for alcoholism, alcohol and drug abuse, and mental health programs. / , In fiscal year 1987, NIAAA awarded nine 2-year grants. Fiscal year 1989 funds were used only to renew funding to seven of the original nine projects; no new applications for the program were accepted. Table) V.2: Community Demonstration Grants Program for Alcohol and Drug - ___- State8 Amount Abu8b Treatment for Homeless - California $524,297 incWJduals-Funds Provided for Fiscal .- Kentucky 722,770 year 1989 by State Massachusetts 616,072 ..- -_.- Minnesota 519,791 New York 628,673 Pennsylvania 989,967 Tntal . -.-. $4.001,570b . . aFunds were provided to demonstration projects located in these states. OThe discrepancy between the total amount of funds provided in fiscal year 1989 and the program’s fiscal year 1989 appropriation is due to funds used for administrative and evaluation costs. Page 41 GAO/RCRD-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services Corkununity Mental He<h Services Demonstration Proijectsfor Homeless IndSviduals Who Are Ch$onically Mentally Ill H& the Program Works The Community Mental Health Demonstration Projects for Homeless Individuals Who Are Chronically Mentally Ill is a competitive grant pro- gram which emphasizes the development of two types of demonstration programs: comprehensive service systems for homeless mentally ill adults, and targeted service delivery services for homeless children and adolescents who are severely mentally ill. Administered by the National Institute of Mental Health, the goals of the demonstration projects are to respond comprehensively to the needs of the homeless mentally ill by l demonstrating a coordinated system of mental health outreach, case management, treatment/rehabilitation, and a range of housing alterna- tives and other supportive services; l stimulating cooperation and formal linkages between health, mental health, housing, education, rehabilitation, and social welfare agencies in addressing the multiple needs of homeless mentally ill persons; . enhancing the capacity of communities to provide effective community- based treatment, rehabilitation, and supportive services for the target population; and l documenting and evaluating successful and replicable approaches to the provision of coordinated housing, treatment, and supportive services for homeless mentally ill persons. Although the demonstration projects are community-based initiatives, state mental health authorities are the only eligible applicants. Each applicant, however, has to designate the local organization(s) that would implement the project activities. The Institute awards the grants to state authorities, who, in turn, award the money to local homeless assistance providers. Previously funded proposals included various provisions for implement- ing the program goals noted, but optional programs have also been Page 42 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services funded. For example, one currently funded program serves minority populations by providing bilingual staff and translating mental health assessments, while others provide vocational training and job assistance to clients. Decision Process for State mental health authorities are the only organizations eligible to sub- Proyiding Funds mit an application. Applications are for 2-year grants in one local geo- graphic area, serving either homeless mentally ill adults or homeless severely emotionally disturbed children and adolescents. Applications are reviewed and ranked by a review panel of outside experts. Each application has a primary and secondary reviewer. The criteria by which proposals to serve homeless mentally ill adults are judged include the proposals’ ability to provide (1) outreach to eligible individuals in nontraditional settings such as shelters and streets; (2) intensive, long-term case management, including needs assessment and treatment, and service planning; (3) mental health treatment, including screening, diagnosis, and drug and alcohol abuse detoxification and treatment; (4) staffing and operation of supportive living programs where housing provisions are linked with health services; and (5) man- agement and administrative activities to link together these various ser- vices. The criteria used to judge proposals to serve the needs of mentally ill children and adolescents are the proposals’ ability to (1) provide screening activities to identify unserved children, assess their mental health and other social welfare needs, and refer them to appropriate programs and (2) provide for those who are severely disturbed, and arrange for mental health outreach and intensive-case management. The results of these evaluations are submitted in writing to the panel. No criterion is weighted as more important in the scoring process. The panel votes on the application and determines a score for each proposal. The proposals are ranked and funded according to these scores. Two-year grants were awarded at the end of fiscal year 1987 to 12 state mental health authorities. Fiscal year 1987 funds for this program went to nine adult projects and three children’s projects. The 12 projects funded in fiscal year 1987 had to apply for renewal funding for an addi- tional 2 years by May 22,1989. Eight of these were provided renewal funds in September 1989. Page 43 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds , Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services Table V.3 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table V-4 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state. Table p.9: Fund8 Authorized and ApproDriated for the Mental Health Dollars in millions Demonstration Projects for Fiscal year individuals Who Are Funding 1987 1988 1989 Authorized $10.0 $Ob $11 .o Aoworxiated 9.3” Ob 4.6” ?L. 100-71 provided a lump-sum amount of $50.7 million to HHS for three of its homeless programs combined, including this one, for fiscal year 1987. bNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program in fiscal year 1986. However, P.L. 100202 autho- rized and appropriated a lump-sum amount of $1.37 billion to HHS for chronically mentally ill programs. cP.I_. loo-436 provided a lump-sum amount of $1.5 billion for alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health programs. Table V.4: Community Mental Health Se&es Demonstration Projects for State’ Amount Homeless individuals Who Are Illinois $636,183 Chronically Mentally iii-funds Provided 481,212 Michigan for Fiicai Year 1989 by State New York 660,370 Ohio 633,841 South Carolina 649,030 Tennessee 350,073 Vermont 218,029 Virginia 393,617 Total $4,022,355b aFunds were provided to demonstration projects in these states. bThe discrepancy between the total amount of funds provided in fiscal year 1989 and the program’s fiscal year 1989 appropriation is due to funds used for administrative, evaluation, and technical assis tance costs. Community Mental Health Services for the HomelessBlock Grant How the ProgqamWorks The Community Mental Health Services for the Homeless Block Grant Program was created to provide funding to states and territories for a variety of community mental health services to homeless individuals Page 44 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds -. -.. -. _-______. .-__- Appendix V Homeleae &Wance Program@ of the Department of Health and Hums S~rvWe and those at significant risk of becoming homeless. The program, admin- istered by the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration (ADAMHA),guarantees funds to each state upon applying, provided that the state agrees to provide a defined set of community mental health programs covering a wide range of services for the chronically mentally ill. Services which must be provided in order to participate in the program include outreach; community mental health services such as crisis inter- vention; referrals for hospital, primary health care, and substance abuse; case management; and training to outreach workers and other individuals who provide these services to the homeless. Although states must offer all of these services, each program does not have to make available all services at each site. States differ in how they define and propose to deliver these services. For example, in providing outreach services, several states planned to develop mobile units that are staffed by a variety of professionals including social workers, psychologists, case managers, and nurse prac- titioners. Other states planned to provide these services through estab- lished community sites such as soup kitchens or shelters, as well as at jails and psychiatric hospitals, For example, one state proposed provid- ing 24-hour on-site emergency services at community mental health cen- ters which would be available to persons using shelters. The diversity of proposals from the states reflects their existing services for the home- less in that some states use these funds to enhance existing programs and services while others are just developing programs to target this population. Decision Process for ADAMHAawards grants to the states according to a statutory formula. Providing Funds The McKinney Act, as amended, requires that each state, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico receive no less than $275,000 and the four territories (Guam, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Northern Marianas), no less than $50,000 each. However, because the Congress appropriated less funds than needed to pay these minimum amounts for fiscal year 1989, allotments were reduced and prorated. For fiscal year 1989, each state that applied (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) received $267,944, while each of the four territories received $48,717. The McKinney Act, as amended, extended the block grant authority for another 3 years and specified that if the amounts appropriated are insufficient to provide the states with a minimum of Page 46 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds , Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services $160,000, the distribution formula will be suspended and grants will be distributed as the Secretary deems appropriate. Funding is not automatic, States must submit an application describing how the funds will be spent and must match every $3 federal dollars with $1 dollar from nonfederal public or private sources. States are also required to identify the geographic areas where the greatest number of homeless mentally ill in need of services are located. In previous fiscal years, states complied with the requirement in a variety of ways, but the most widely used method was to estimate the homeless population of an entire state, region, or community and then, by using other appro- priate data, estimate that a percentage of these individuals was men- tally ill. Estimates of the homeless population were obtained using a variety of methods, including local or statewide surveys of the number of individuals using shelters and other homeless services and national or state homeless rates adjusted to local population rates. There is no deadline for the application, but money must be awarded by the end of the federal fiscal year in which the funds were made availa- ble. For fiscal year 1989, all states applied for their money. Table V.5 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987439. Table V.6 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided to each state and territory (including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) for fiscal year 1989. Tablb V.5: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the Community Mental Dollars in millions Healih Services for the Homeless Block Fiscal year Grant Funding 1987 1988 1989 b $35.0 Authorized $35.0 Appropriated 32.2” 11.5” 14.16 aP.L. 100-71 appropriated a lump-sum amount of $50.7 million for three homeless assistance programs, including this one, for fiscal year 1987. bThe McKinney Act, as amended (P.L. IOO-628) authorized “such sums as may be necessary.” CNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program. However, P.L. loo-202 appropriated a lump- sum amount of $1.37 billion to HHS for alcoholism, alcohol and drug abuse, and mental health programs. dNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program. However, P.L. loo-436 appropriated a lump- sum amount of $1.5 billion to HHS for alcoholism, alcohol and drug abuse, and mental health programs. Page 46 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services Table V.6: Community Mental Health Serviqes for the Homeless Block Grant- State Amount Fund Provided for Fiscal Year 1989 by Each state $267,944 State x, erritory Each territory 48,717 Efiergency Co$umnity Services Ho+ the Program Works The Emergency Community Services Homeless Grant Program (EHP), which is operated by the Office of Community Services (ocs), provides grants to states and territories using the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG)allocation formula. State agencies distribute the funds to eligible entities, such as community action agencies, to provide emer- gency assistance to the homeless. The McKinney Act states that EHP funds may be used only to (1) expand comprehensive services to homeless individuals to provide follow-up and long-term services to help them make the transition out of poverty; (2) provide assistance in obtaining social and maintenance services and income support services for homeless individuals; (3) promote private- sector and other assistance to homeless individuals; and (4) provide assistance under certain conditions to an individual who has received a notice of foreclosure, eviction, or termination of utility services, in order to prevent him or her from becoming homeless. Decision Process for To receive an EHPgrant, a state must submit an application to ocs Providing Funds describing the agencies, organizations, and activities that the state intends to support with the funding received. In addition, the applica- tion must contain seven assurances signed by the Governor or his/her designee, along with a written plan describing how the state will carry out each assurance. Basically, these assurances restrict how the state may spend the funds it receives. For example, the state must agree that funds will not be used to defray state administrative costs and that not more than 25 percent of the funds will be used for activities to prevent homelessness. Page 47 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds -7 -- -- ~- Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services Funds appropriated for EHP are to be distributed to 57 states and territo- ries that receive funds under CSBG(42 USC. 9901 et seq.), using its allo- cation formula. In addition, the McKinney Act directs that not less than 1.5 percent of appropriated funds be set aside for federally recognized Indian tribes. The state must award all of its funds to community action agencies and other entities eligible to receive funds from the state under Section 675(c)(2)(A) of the CSBGAct, organizations serving migrant and seasonal farm workers, and certain other organizations that received fiscal year 1984 CSBGfunds from a state under special waiver provisions included in Public Law 98-139. Ninety percent of the amounts must go to eligible agencies and organizations that were providing services to meet the crit- ically urgent needs of homeless individuals as of January 1, 1987. In the event that a state fails to apply for its allocation or submits an applica- tion which is not approved, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is to award the state’s allocation directly to eligible organizations within the state. Table V.7 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table V-8 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state/territory (including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico). Tabl’ V.7: Funds Authorized and App,r opriated for the Emergency Dollars in millions Communlty Services Homeless &ant Fiscal year Program Fundina 1987 1988 1989 Authorized $40.0 $40.0 $42.0 Appropriated 36.6” 19.1b 18.9” aEHP’s appropriation was $36.8 for fiscal year 1987. However, according to the program manager, $250,000 was transferred to the Interagency Council on the Homeless. bNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program for fiscal year 1988. However, P.L. 100202 appropriated a lump-sum amount of $382.3 million to HHS for the Community Service Block Grant Act. ‘No funds were specifically earmarked for this program for fiscal year 1989. However, P.L. loo-436 pro- vided a lump-sum amount of $382.2 million to HHS for the Community Service Block Grant Act. Page 48 GAO/WED-So-B2 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V Homelees Assistance l?cograms of the Department of Health and Human Services Table $8: Emergency Community Servlc+ Homeless &ant Program- State/territory Amount rovlded for Fiecal Year 1989 by Alabama $360,099 Alaska 79,397 American Samoa 20,217 Arizona 275,476 Arkansas 263,762 California 1,729,785 Colorado 169,759 Connecticut 234,065 Delaware 47,295 District of Columbia 318,615 Florida 563,763 Georgia 521,836 Guam 19,134 Hawaii 80,991 Idaho 52,793 iiii%s 916,281 Indiana 282,470 Iowa 209,935 Kansas 158,257 Kentuckv 327,105 Louisiana 455,429 Maine 102,488 Maryland 266,115 Massachusetts 483,500 Michigan 719,105 Minnesota 233,478 Mississippi 311,502 Missouri 536,805 Montana 84,705 Nebraska 135,203 Nevada 47,295 New Hampshire 52,511 New Jersey 531,383 New Mexico 186,708 New York 1,684,633 North Carolina 516,437 North Dakota 60,142 Northern Marianas 11,986 Ohio 756,118 Oklahoma 272,365 (continued) Page 49 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V . Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services State/territory Amount Oregon 155,424 Palua -__ 16,823 Pennsylvania 821,277 Puerto Rico 817,175 Rhode Island 109,276 South Carolina 298,295 South Dakota 88,318 Tennessee 382,211 Texas 934,109 Utah 81,633 Vermont 54,289 Virginia 310,507 Virgin Islands 26,430 Washington 241,309 West Virginia 217,115 Wisconsin 237,567 Wyoming 47,295 Total $18,918,000 Health Care for the Hqmeless Hoiv the Program Works This program, administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)of the Public Health Service, makes grants availa- ble to provide for the delivery of health services to homeless individu- als. Grants are available to local private, nonprofit, and public health organizations for primary health care, substance abuse, and mental health services for the homeless. Projects are generally administered by local public health departments, community and migrant health centers, inner-city hospitals, and local community coalitions. The program was modeled after a national demonstration program funded by the Robert Wood Johnson/PEW Foundation to provide health care for the homeless. The Johnson Foundation program funded demon- stration projects in 19 large cities in 1985 to show that homeless people needed and would accept primary health care services if they were 3 delivered in a dignified manner in outreach settings where homeless per- sons are located. Page 50 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act F’unds Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services Since the passage of the McKinney Act, HRSAhas funded 109 projects; approximately half are administered by existing community and migrant health centers and half are administered by nonprofit coali- tions, inner-city hospitals, and local public health departments serving the homeless. In the first year of operation, these projects served over 230,000 homeless persons, of which 40 percent were families and run- away/homeless youths, 15 percent were children 14 years and under, and 60 percent were minorities. The services provided by these projects include aggressive outreach efforts to bring health care services to the homeless as well as interdisciplinary, comprehensive health service projects. An interdisciplinary approach brings together primary health, mental health, substance abuse, and social services, which are generally operated by independent agencies in local communities with limited coordination, and builds a more coordinated network. Decision Process for Grants are awarded under this program on a competitive basis, whereby Providing Funds applications are reviewed by an expert panel. A lo-member review 1 panel consisting of outside experts votes and recommends funding levels on the basis of the project’s adherence to mandated requirements, such as (1) the provision of all legislatively required services; (2) adherence to the goals and objectives of the program; (3) membership in a commu- nity coalition; and (4) the justification for the funding level, based on a description of the program’s services, In addition, recipients had to explain how their project would l provide health services at locations accessible to homeless persons, . provide round-the-clock access to emergency health services, . refer homeless persons for necessary hospital services, . refer homeless persons for needed mental health services unless the ser- vices are directly provided, . provide outreach services to inform homeless individuals of the availa- bility of health services, and l aid homeless individuals in establishing eligibility for assistance and obtaining services under entitlement programs. Funded projects had to match 25 percent of project costs with nonfederal sources in the first year and 33-l/3 percent any subsequent fiscal year unless a waiver was obtained. The 1988 McKinney Act amendments allow projects to continue to provide follow-up services to homeless individuals for 1 year after the individuals have been placed in permanent housing. Page 61 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds - .~ Appendix V Homeless Assistance Program of the Department of Health and Human Services Because of low appropriation levels for fiscal years 1988 and 1989, no applications for new projects were considered in fiscal year 1989. The fiscal year 1989 funds were only used to augment the existing 109 projects. The goal was to fund the existing programs as close to fiscal year 1987 levels as possible in order to maintain the same level of services. Table V.9 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table V.10 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state (including the District of Columbia). Table V.9: Funds Authorized and Apprbpriated for the Health Care for the Dollars in millions Homeless Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 Authorized $50 $30.0 $61.2 Ar.xvorxiateda 46 14.3b 14.8” aThese amounts represent only new funds allocated by HHS to the program. The total amount of money available for obligation for fiscal year 1989 was actually around $45 million, which consists of a total of unobligated funds carried over from fiscal year 1987 plus new funds allocated in fiscal years 1966 and 1989. bNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program in fiscal year 1986. However, P.L. loo-202 appro- priated a lump-sum amount of 51.55 billion to HRSA to carry out various programs, including this one. The 514.3 million allocated to the program was done so at HHS’ discretion. ‘No funds were specifically earmarked for this program in fiscal year 1989. However, P.L. loo-436 appro- priated a lump-sum amount of 51.63 billion to HHS to carry out various HRSA programs. The 514.8 million allocated to the program was done at HHS’ discretion. - Table V.10: Health Care for the Homeless Program-Funds Provided for Fiscal state Amount Year 1989 by State Alabama $488,357 Arizona 1,592,902 California 7,564,307 Colorado 590,829 Connecticut 709,916 District of Columbia 1,473,429 1,583,941 Idaho 367,388 Illinois 1,849,774 ____ Indiana 245,720 Iowa 513,530 (continued) Page 52 GAO/RCEDSO-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix V Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services State’ Amount Kansas 320,796 Kentucky 441,117 Louisiana 875,000 Maryland 834,743 Massachusetts 1,344,343 -- Michigan 1,369,340 -_ Minnesota 962,468 Mississippi 147,315 Missouri 1,941,353 Nebraska 158,352 New Hampshire 124,130 - New Jersey 1,189,150 New Mexico 263,333 New York 3,883,363 -- North Carolina 449,372 Ohio 2,001,174 Oklahoma 393,319 Oregon 557,534 Pennsvlvania --__ 2,703,493 Puerto Rico 300,000 Rhode Island 257,257 South Carolina 114,930 Tennessee 1,018,879 Texas 2,293,569 Utah 442,739 Vermont 275,025 Virginia 565,929 Washington 1,298,816 West Virginia 201,165 Wisconsin 772,000 Total $45,441,590, aAwards were made to private, nonprofit, and public organizations in these states, the District of Colum- bia, and Puerto Rico. bThis figure is the total of new fiscal year 1989 funds allocated to the program plus any funds carried over from fiscal year 1987 by each project. Y Page 63 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VI ]Etomeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs This appendix provides descriptions of VA’S homeless assistance pro- grams These programs are the Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill (HCMI) Veterans Program and the Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans (ncuv) Program. HomelessChronically Mentally Ill Veterans PfDgram Hay the Program Works The HCMIProgram, which was initially established and funded through Public Laws 100-6 and 100-322, is designed to meet the specific needs of homeless veterans with chronic mental health problems. With subse- quent authorizations from the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act Amendments (P.L. lOO-628), VA has funded 43 VA medical care facilities in 26 states (and the District of Columbia) for programs to serve home- less chronically mentally ill veterans. These programs provide outreach staff and case managers who work closely with community coalitions to locate homeless, chronically men- tally ill veterans on the streets, in soup kitchens, and in temporary shel- ters, and to identify others eligible for care. Once located, the veteran is brought to a VA Medical Center (VAMC), whereby the HCMIProgram pro- vides direct clinical care that includes medical and psychiatric assess- ment and treatment, substance abuse treatment, job counseling, and crisis intervention. Following assessment, some veterans are placed in community-based residential treatment programs such as halfway houses or psychiatric residential treatment centers for psychiatric care, alcohol and drug abuse dependency, and rehabilitation. The VA case managers monitor and supervise care provided to these veterans in the various residential treatment programs. Decision Process for VAMCSare the only eligible recipients of HCMIfunds. VA funded 43 VAMCSin the first year of the program. Fiscal year 1989 funds were used only to Providing Funds renew funding for these 43 centers; no new centers were funded. Y To begin implementing the program, VA sent a request for proposal (RFP) to all of its VAMCS. Each proposal that was submitted was reviewed for (1) its strategy for integrating the VA effort into an existing community, Page 64 GAO/WED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix Vl Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs or rural, city, or state organization working with the homeless; (2) a description of the specific on-site service delivery efforts needed to initi- ate contact with the homeless veteran; (3) a description of the facilities that would be available in the community to provide residential treat- ment; and (4) how the program would be integrated within the VAMCS, focusing on the available resources to provide comprehensive psychiat- ric and medical workups for the homeless veterans to be served. Addi- tional criteria which VA considered included a project’s ability to initiate the program relatively quickly, and its overall quality. When assessing the proposals, particular consideration was given to the (1) number of homeless veterans to be served by the project, (2) degree of interest expressed by the medical center leadership and participating community coalition, (3) creative innovations which would enhance the value and effectiveness of the project, (4) extent to which integration with other programs would improve the project’s quality, and (5) devel- opment of statistical data and a tracking system for monitoring purposes. The proposals were first assessedat VA’Sregional offices through proce- dures of their choosing. The results of this assessment were sent to VA in Washington, DC., where they underwent a second review by an in- house panel. This panel ranked the proposals and presented their recom- mendations to the Chief Medical Director for final approval. Table VI.1 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table VI.2 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state (including the District of Columbia). Table kl.1: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the Homeless Dollars in millions Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 $6b ______- Authorized .-__ ____-_--_---.___~ $5 -~ $36.0d Appropriated 1oa 0” 13.3 aThe HCMI program received two appropriations for fiscal year 1987. The first, P.L. 1006, transferred $5 million from FEMA’s disaster relief program. The second, P.L. 100-71, provided supplemental appropria- tions of $5 million. bP.L. 100-322 authorized $6 million for fiscal years 1988 and 1989. CNo money was specifically earmarked for this program. However, P.L. loo-202 provided a lump-sum amount of $10.1 billion for medical care for veterans. dP.L. loo-626 authorized $30 million for HCMI and the Domiciliary Care program for homeless veterans. The additional $6 million was authorized by P.L. loo-322 for fiscal years 1988 and 1989. Page 56 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of MeKinney Act Funds Appendix VI Homeless Awlstance Programs of the Department of Veterans Affaim liiblb Vl.2: Homeleeo Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program-Funds Stat& Amount Provided tar Fiscal Year 1989 by State Alabama $235,000 Arizona 671,723 Arkansas 212,818 California 1,580,173 I Colorado 525,379 I District of Columbia 408,523 Florida 227,642 Georgia 409,159 Illinois 265,653 Indiana 335,855 Kentucky 332,500 Louisiana 717,404 Maryland 407,440 Massachusetts 191,470 Missouri 1,132,018 New Jersey ‘249;8% New York 759,462 Ohio 1,164,549 Oregon 426,161 Pennsvlvania 621,618 South Carolina 244,677 Tennessee 374,106 Texas 595,217 Utah 160,336 Virginia 237,626 Washington 110,752 Wvomina 320,543 Total $12,917,604 ?-lCMl money was provided to VAMCs in these states and in the District of Columbia. However, the total does not include $279,396 awarded to a center in West Haven, Connecticut. The money is for con- ducting a national evaluation of the program, not to provide services. Domiciliary Care for HomelessVeterans How the Program Works The DCHVProgram was established as a specialized treatment component within the existing Domiciliary Care Program administered by VA. The program is a clinical care program that provides less intensive care than Page 66 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VI Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Veterans Affab a hospital or nursing home but a higher level than community residen- tial care settings. The program’s purpose is to use VA medical facilities to provide primary health, mental health, and social services to homeless veterans or veterans at serious risk of becoming homeless. According to the VA, the veterans admitted into the program are generally socially iso- lated, unemployed, impoverished, and troubled by a broad spectrum of medical and psychiatric problems, with substance abuse being most prominent among them. The ultimate goal is to help homeless veterans suffering from medical or psychiatric disabilities to function at their highest level of independence in the community. The VA has established domiciliary care programs for homeless veterans at 20 sites around the country. In November 1987, VA converted beds for domiciliary care in 10 VA facilities in urban areas with significant num- bers of homeless veterans. In addition, VA also established specialized homeless veterans treatment programs at 10 existing VA domiciliaries. As of June 1989, over 300 of these domiciliary care beds had been iden- tified as being devoted to homeless veterans. Existing domiciliaries provide two distinct types of care. Active bio- psychosocial rehabilitation targets the physical, mental health, and social impairments which inhibit the patient from reaching an optimal level of functional independence and health. Long-term health mainte- nance care prevents or delays degradations in health that would, if unchecked, be expected to result from the progression of chronic dis- ease. Small (40- to loo-bed) domiciliaries focus their resources and efforts primarily on providing active biopsychosocial rehabilitation ser- vices. Patients found to require long-term health maintenance care would ordinarily be referred to the larger (IOO-or-more-bed) domiciliar- ies or to clinically appropriate alternative sources of care. Services include medical and psychiatric assessments, psychotherapy, substance abuse treatment, skills training, and rehabilitation services. Assistance is also available in finding housing and employment and pro- viding ongoing support once veterans leave the domiciliaries. Decision Process for The DCHVProgram provided funds to 20 VAMCSduring the first year of Providing Funds the program. Fiscal year 1989 funds were used to renew funding to these centers; no new centers have been funded. To participate in the DCHVprogram, VAMCSwere required to submit appli- cations that described Page 57 GAO/RCEDSO-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VI Homeless AWf5tance Programa of the Department of Veterans Affairs l how the program would be integrated with and operate in support of existing VAMC services and treatment programs; . existing medical center programs/activities related to providing care to homeless veterans; . existing underutilized space that could be redesignated to domiciliary use, specifically discussing renovations that may be necessary to sup- port domiciliary care program operating requirements; . staffing enhancements that would be required to supplement staff cur- rently assigned to areas proposed for redesignation; and . actions that would facilitate the activation of domiciliary care beds within 90 to 120 days. In addition to these criteria, particular consideration is given to (1) the potential number of homeless veterans to be served; (2) the degree of interest expressed by the medical center leadership team and the partic- ipating community coalition; (3) the number of geographically contigu- ous beds/amounts of underutilized space available for redesignation to domiciliary care uses; (4) the rapidity with which the program could be initiated; (6) estimated costs of necessary renovation; (6) creative inno- vations that would enhance the value and effectiveness of the proposal; (7) the ability to integrate with other existing programs and agencies; and (8) the ability to manage clinical care issues relating to substance abuse, AIDS/HIVinfection, post-traumatic stress disorder, and vocational rehabilitation. The proposals are reviewed by an in-house panel of subject matter experts. Final recommendations are made by the panel and then pre- sented to VA’S Chief Medical Director for approval. Table VI.3 shows the amount of money authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table VI.4 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state. Page 68 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKhney Act Funds Appendix VI Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs Table +: Funds Authorized and Approfwiated for the Domiciliary Care for Dollars in millions Homel/ess Veterans Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 b Authorized $15 $0 Appropriated 15 Oa 0” *No funds were specifically earmarked for this program for fiscal years 1988 and 1989. However, a lump- sum appropriation was provided for veterans medical care. This amount was $10.1 billion for fiscal year 1988, provided in P.L. 100-202, and $10.5 billion in fiscal year 1989, provided in P.L. 100-404. According to VA’s budget officer, VA spent $10.4 million on this program for these fiscal years. bP.L. loo-628 provided a $30 million joint authorization for the program and HCMI. Table 1.4: Domiciliary Care for Homel sb Veterans Program-Funds State’ Amount Provid ‘: d for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Arkansas $1,034,622 California 867,748 / Florida 178,000 1,034,622 Kansas 59,200 Mississipoi 88,800 New Jersey 689,748 New York 1,876,807 Ohio 1,471,277 Oreaon 778,548 Pennsylvania 689,748 South Dakota 59,200 Tennessee 148.000 Virginia 148,000 Washington 1,034,622 Wisconsin 148,000 Total $10308,942 aThe awards were provided to VA medical centers in these states. However, the total excludes 560,058 awarded to a center in West Haven, Connecticut. This award was provided to the center to conduct an evaluation of the program, not to provide services. Page 59 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VII HomelessAssistance Programs of the Department of Education This appendix provides descriptions of the Department of Education’s homeless assistance programs. These programs are the Adult Education for the Homeless and the Education for Homeless Children and Youth Programs. Because the appropriation cycle for the McKinney Act education pro- grams differs from the appropriation cycle for other McKinney Act pro- fc/r Education grams, fiscal year 1989 awards information for these programs was not Programs Differs available at the time of our review. The Congress provides money for the major education programs, including those under the McKinney Act, F;i-omOther McKinney on the basis of the school year rather than the federal fiscal year in A$t Programs order to give state and local education agencies time to plan for the use of funds. For example, fiscal year 1989 appropriations used for school year 1989-90 became available to the Department of Education for obli- gation in July 1989 (the last quarter of fiscal year 1989) and remain available until September 30, 1990. Consequently, fiscal year 1989 award decisions had not been completed at the time of our review, which ended in October 1989. Therefore, we have provided information on the status of fiscal year 1988 funds for the McKinney Act education programs which follow. Adult Education for the Homeless - Mow the Program Works The Adult Education for the Homeless Program, a new grant program for statewide literacy initiatives created by the McKinney Act, provides state education agencies with funds to enable them to develop a plan and implement literacy training and basic skills remediation programs for homeless adults. Programs are tailored to the literacy and basic skills needs of the specific homeless population being served by each state and directed toward building cooperative relationships with other service agencies to provide an integrated package of support services. To accomplish this, programs are to include outreach activities, espe- cially interpersonal contacts at locations where homeless persons are known to gather, and outreach efforts through cooperative relations with local agencies that provide services to the homeless such as com- munity-based organizations, Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA), the Adult Basic Education Program, and nonprofit literacy-action organizations. Page 60 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VII Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Education Decision Process for The Department of Education allocated its fiscal year 1988 funds to the Protiding Funds 60 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico on a formula basis. Each state was required to submit a copy of its plan for addressing the education problems of its adult homeless population and a count of the homeless persons to be served in that state. States were funded accord- ing to the ratio of individuals in each state who were 16 or older, did not have a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary edu- cation or its equivalent, and were not enrolled in such a school to the total number of those individuals in all states. The minimum grant amount to a state was $75,000. Legislative changes were made to this program during fiscal year 1988, changing it from a formula grant program to a discretionary one. The Department developed new program regulations to incorporate these changes and will be implementing them to distribute its fiscal year 1989 money. The comment period for the proposed program regulations ended on June 12, 1989. Final regulations became effective on October 2, 1989. The Department planned to make program funds available in the fall of 1989 so that they could be used during the cold months when shelters are more frequently visited by the homeless. Table VII.1 shows the amount of funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table VII.2 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1988 by state/territory (including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.) Table; VII.1: Funds Authorized and Apprbpriated for the Adult Education for Dollars in millions the Homeless Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 Authorized $7.5 $10.0 $10.0 Aoorooriated 6.9 7.2a 7.1a aNo funds were specifically earmarked for this program. However, P.L. loo-202 and P.L. loo-436 pro- vided lump-sum appropriations for vocational and adult education activities. Page 61 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McRinney Act Funds Appendix VII Homelees As8h3tance Programs of the Department of Education Table Vll.2: Adult Education for the Homglesr Program-Funds Provlded for State/territory Amount Flscfjl Year 1988 by State/Territory Alabama $129,363 Alaska 75,000 Arizona 75,000 Arkansas 78,900 California 526,992 Colorado 75,000 Connecticut 75,000 Delaware -75,ooo District of Columbia 75,000 Florida 278,126 Georgia 183,112 Hawaii 75,000 Idaho 75,000 Illinois 300,690 Indiana 142,328 Iowa 75,000 Kansas 75,000 Kentucky 133,618 Louisiana 132,225 Maine 75,000 Maryland 108,731 Massachusetts 126,247 Michiaan 225,788 Minnesota 81,696 Mississippi 84,493 Missouri 141,298 Montana 75,000 Nebraska 75,000 Nevada - 75,000 New Hampshire 75,000 New Jersey 190,714 New Mexico 75,000 New York 472,866 _~.-__- North Carolina 205,437 North Dakota 75,000 ---. Ohio 274,804 Oklahoma 81,347 -.-- Oreaon 75,000 -Y- -..-- Pennsylvania 320,965 Puerto Rico _l_----- 132,704 (continued) Page 62 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act F’unda Appendix VII Homeless Assi13tauce Programa of the Department of Fhcation State/territory Amount Rhode Island 75,000 South Carolina 107,548 South Dakota 75,000 Tennessee 157,740 Texas 411.646 Utah -- 75,000 Vermont 75,006 Virginia 158,361 Washington -___ 76,283 West Virainia 75,000 Wisconsin 107,978 Wyoming 75,000 Total $7,180,000 Education for Hotieless Children and YoLith How the Program Works The Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program provides formula grants to state education agencies (and territories) to enable them to prepare and carry out a state plan to provide for the education of homeless children and youth; establish an Office of Coordinator of Education for Homeless Children and Youth; and carry out policies which shall ensure a free and appropriate public education for homeless children. Unlike most McKinney Act programs, these funds do not pro- vide direct services to the homeless-in this case, homeless school-age children. Rather, the funds establish a coordinator’s office and support state efforts in reviewing and revising policies which would otherwise keep homeless children from attending public schools. Funds are pro- vided to the 60 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Decision Process for States receive funding on the basis of the basic grant formula under the Providing Funds Chapter 1 Program of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1966. The Chapter 1 Program, as amended by Public Law 100-197, pro- vides financial assistance to meet the compensatory educational needs Page 63 GAO/RCED-9062 Status of McKinuey Act Funds Appendix VII r Homeless Asslstauce Programs of the Department of Education of educationally disadvantaged children who live in low-income areas and those of migrant parents; Indian children; and handicapped, neglected, and delinquent children. The grant allocation formula is based on the number of (1) school-age children from families below the poverty level, (2) children living in institutions for neglected or delin- quent children, (3) foster children, (4) children on AFDCbut above the national poverty level, and (5) the state’s per pupil expenditure. The minimum state allocation under the program is $50,000 per year. To receive funding, states must apply to the Department of Education. The application includes a list of assurances that states will use the funds in accordance with the requirements of the act and all applicable statutes. Additional assurances are that the states will encourage the adoption of promising or innovative education techniques and that they will disseminate information on program requirements and successes throughout the state. States previously funded under this program must include plans outlining provisions for such things as procedures for resolving disputes over the educational placement of homeless children and youth and for maintaining appropriate school records for these children. Table VII.3 shows the amount of funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table VII.4 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1988 by state/territory (including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico). Table Vll.3: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the Education for Dollars in millions Hoineless Children and Youth Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 Authorized $5.0 $5.0 $5.0 Appropriated 4.6 4.6 4.8 Page 64 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKhney Act Funds Appendix VII Homeless Assistauce Programs of the Department of Education Table V/l.4 Education for Homeless Chlldreh and Youth Progrsm-Funds State/territory’ Amount for Fiscal Year 1988 by State/ Alabama $81,599 Alaska 50,000 American Samoa 50,000 Arizona 50,000 Arkansas 50,000 California --._ _. 392,330 Colorado 50,000 Connecticut 50,000 Delaware 50,000 District of Columbia 50,000 Florida 173,356 Georgia 108,200 Idaho 50,000 Illinois 186,639 Indiana 62,292 Iowa 50,000 Kansas 50,000 Kentuckv 71,971 Louisiana 98,709 Maine 50,000 Marvland 69,676 Massachusetts 95,448 Michigan 158,735 Minnesota 50,000 MississippiI . 75,941 Missouri 65,611 Montana 50,000 Nebraska -__I____ 50,000 Nevada 50,000 New Hampshire 50,000 New Jersey 134,094 New Mexico 50,000 New York 422,401 North Carolina 96,181 North Dakota 50,000 Ohio 145,677 Oklahoma 50,000 Oregon 50,000 Pennsylvania 205,060 Puerto Rico 133,648 (continued) Page 65 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinley Act Funds .--_I Appendix VII Homeless Asslstnuce Programs of the Department of Education State/territory0 Amount Rhode Island -- 50,000 South Carolina _--_ 63,509 South Dakota -- -_____________----_- 50,000 Tennessee 85,897 Texas -~ 267,694 Utah 50,000 Vermont 50,000 Virginia .--. 80,942 Virgin Islands ______-- 50,000 Washington 50,100 West Virginia 50,000 Wisconsin ___.__- 61,210 Wyoming 50,000 Total $4.787.000 aHawaii, Guam, and the Northern Marianas did not apply for funds. The amounts normally allocated to them were reallocated to the other states and territories. Page 66 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKiuuey Act Funds Appendix VIII HomelessAssistance Programs of the Department of Labor This appendix provides descriptions of the Department of Labor’s home- less assistance programs. These programs are the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Projects (HVRP) and the Job Training for the Homeless Demonstration Program. HomelessVeterans Re$tegration Projects Ho9 the Program Works The Homeless Veterans Reintegration Projects are designed to expedite the reintegration of homeless veterans into the labor force. The pur- poses of the program are to (1) contact and open communication chan- nels with homeless veterans, (2) help homeless veterans take advantage of the other social service benefits for which they are eligible, and (3) assist them in reentering the job market. This program grew out of a l-year demonstration pilot program called Jobs for Homeless Veterans, which was funded under the Job Training Partnership Act. The pilot program demonstrated that using outreach workers to interact between homeless veterans and the bureaucracy, which could provide them with needed services, was an effective method of serving this population. The Department of Labor, through its Office of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans’ Employment and Training, has provided grants to 16 projects across the country that demonstrate innovative methods of employing and assisting homeless veterans in this way. The major focus of the current projects is to provide employment and training services such as job counseling, resume preparation, job search assistance, reme- dial and vocational education, on-the-job training, and job placement. In addition, supportive services deemed necessary to assist a veteran to enter the workforce and to regain self-sufficiency may be provided directly by the project, or by referral to other resources. Such assistance may be for transportation, clothes, or tools needed for employment; or alcohol and drug treatment referrals and psychiatric counseling. The projects also access temporary housing through a variety of resources to assist the veteran returning to work in need of transitional housing. Page 67 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VIJI Homelese Aesistance Progranw of the Department of Labor Decision Process for The Department awards grants to states, counties, and municipalities although grantees may use other public agencies or private, nonprofit Providing Funds organizations to carry out the demonstration projects. For fiscal year 1989, the Department only provided renewal funding to the 16 projects originally funded in fiscal year 1988. In funding the original 15 projects, the Department limited the applica- tions to (1) the 35 largest cities and (2) state and local public agencies in jurisdictions which were served through the Jobs for Homeless Veterans Program, This was done for two reasons: to target funds to areas which the Department believed had the largest homeless populations, and to facilitate projects’ efforts to develop linkages with other social services and other McKinney Act programs, thus maximizing the amount of funds provided. The applications were reviewed against four criteria: The applicant’s understanding of its homeless population and the number of homeless veterans the project would serve. The project’s approach and design, in particular the proposal’s employ- ment focus, outreach services to be conducted by former homeless veter- ans, and linkages to other community services. The extent to which the legislative objectives would be met (i.e., the number of homeless placed in jobs). The cost-effectiveness of the proposal (i.e., its use of resources available through other programs and the community). The proposals were evaluated by the program director, an official from the Department’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA), which has overall responsibility for the Department’s homeless assis- tance programs, and an outside consultant who had conducted the eval- uation of the Job for Homeless Veterans pilot program. The proposals were scored and ranked, with funding primarily based on the score of each proposal. However, the Department did reserve the right to fund out of sequence if doing so seemed more appropriate, such as to obtain more complete geographic coverage. Table VIII.1 shows the amount of funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table VIII.2 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided for fiscal year 1989 by state. Page 68 GAO/RCED-90-82 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VIII Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Labor Table Vlill.1: Funds Authorized and Appropiiated for the Homeless Veterans Dollars in millions Reintegration Projects Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 Authorized - $0 $2.0” $2.2” Appropriated 0 1.9b 1.9b ‘The authorization for this program was contained in the larger authorization for the Job Training Dem- onstration Program provided for in P.L. 100-77 and discussed later in this appendix. bThe appropriation for this program was part of the larger appropriation for the Job Training Demonstra- tion Program, discussed later in this appendix. Table V 11.2:Homeless Veterans Reinteg ation Projects-Funds Provided State’ Amount for Fist I I Year 1989 by State California $236,000 Colorado 100,000 Florida 123,000 Georaia 83,000 Massachusetts 118,000 Michigan 90,000 Missouri 84,000 New York 97,000 Oreaon 101,000 Pennsylvania 68,000 Tennessee 130,000 Texas 100,000 Washinaton 218,000 Wisconsin 49,000 Total $1 ,605,000b aFunds were provided to demonstration projects in these states. &rhe discrepancy between the total amount of fiscal year 1989 funds provided and the program’s fiscal year 1989 appropriation is due to funds used for administrative and evaluation costs. w Page 69 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix VIII Homelew Assistance Programa of the Department of Labor J8b Training for the Homeless Dhmonstration Ptogram H(IW the Program Works The Job Training for the Homeless Demonstration Program, adminis- tered by the Department’s ETA, provides funds to job-training demon- stration projects that serve homeless persons, age 14 years and older. These projects can provide remedial education activities, job counseling, job search services, job training, basic skills instruction, supportive ser- vices, outreach, and coordination with related community programs. The purpose of this demonstration program is to provide information and direction for the future of job-training programs for homeless Amer- icans. One goal is to collect information on the most effective ways to provide employment and training services to homeless persons. Another goal is to learn how states; local public agencies; private, nonprofit orga- nizations; and businesses can develop effective systems of coordination to address the causes of homelessness and meet the needs of homeless persons. To measure the progress toward these goals, each grantee must conduct individual project evaluations and participate in a national evaluation conducted by the Department. Of the projects supported in the past by the program, most providers offered a variety of services to help homeless persons, focusing on job employment skills (i.e., vocational training) as well as job services (i.e., counseling and job search techniques). In addition, basic skills courses such as remedial math and reading courses are also provided by many programs. Typically, projects incorporated a support services compo- nent into their programs, either providing some themselves or referring and coordinating with other programs; some provided housing to their participants. While many programs served all homeless individuals who applied, several did target their programs to certain subgroups, such as families, the mentally ill, and youths. Decision Process for Program grants are awarded by a competitive process to eligible grant Providing Funds recipients, which include state and local public agencies; private, non- profit organizations; private industrial councils; private businesses; and Indian tribes. Applicants’ proposals are evaluated on the (1) need for Page 70 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act F’unds Appendix VIII Homeless Assistance Programs of the Department of Labor the project (the problems of the homeless in the applicant’s state/local- ity to which the project will address itself), (2) project methodology (the project’s plan for conducting outreach and coordination as well as a timetable for such activities), (3) evaluation methodology (indicators to measure the success of the project), (4) expected outcomes (the project’s accomplishments in concrete and measurable terms), (5) level of effort (resources needed to conduct the project), and (6) organizational capa- bility (the organizational structure of the entity responsible for the pro- ject). Because of the multiple problems and needs of many homeless individuals, ETA gives special consideration to proposals specializing in adult job training that provide a continuity of service to individuals from application through the end of the retention-in-employment period. In addition, proposals are to provide matching funds for between 10 to 50 percent of the cost of the project. The funds must come from nonfederal sources. Table VIII.3 shows the amount of funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Table VIII.4 shows the total amount of funds pro- vided in fiscal year 1989 by state (including the District of Columbia). Table V[lM: Funds Authorized and Appropiiated for the Job Training for the Dollars in millions Homelejm Demonstration Program Fiscal year Funding 1987 1988 1989 Authorized $0 $lo.oa $10.8 Awxowiated 0 7.6b 7.6b aFor fiscal years 1988 and 1989, this program was authorized a total of $12 million and $13 million, respectively. However, $2 million in fiscal year 1988 and $2.2 million in fiscal year 1989 were earmarked for the HVRP. bFor fiscal years 1988 and 1989, this program was appropriated a total of $9.5 million. However, $1.9 million in fiscal year 1988 and 1989 were earmarked for the HVRP. Page 71 GAO/RCED-90452Status ofMcKinneyActPunds Appendix VIII Homeless Assistance Progranw of the Department of Labor Table V111.4:Job Training for the Ho eless Demonstration Program- State* Amount Fun% s Provided for Fiscal Year 1999 by California --...- - $862,961 Stel/e 249,520 Connecticut District of Columbia 664,774 Illinois 331,086 Kentucky 856,470 Minnesota 598,495 New Jersey 600,000 New York 595,653 North Carolina 153,184 Ohio 187,891 Oregon 448,207 Pennsylvania 318,729 Tennessee 248,580 Texas 434,059 Virginia 125,829 Washington 133,562 Total $6,609,000b aFunds were provided to demonstration projects in these states and in the District of Columbia. bThe discrepancy between the total amount of fiscal year 1989 funds provided and the program’s fiscal year 1989 appropriation is due to funds used for a national evaluation of this program. Page 72 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix IX Infbrmation on the Interagency Council on thd Homeless This appendix provides information on the purpose and activities of the Interagency Council on the Homeless, an independent council created by the McKinney Act. I TnteqagencyCouncil on the Homeless How the Council Works Title II of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act created the Interagency Council on the Homeless as an independent organization within the executive branch whose main purpose is to oversee federal homeless programs and to coordinate the delivery of funds and services to those in need. Specifically, the McKinney Act requires the Council to . review all federal activities and programs to assist homeless individuals; . reduce duplication of effort between federal agencies’homeless assis- tance programs; . monitor, evaluate, and recommend improvements in these programs; . provide technical assistance to states, local governments, and other pri- vate and nonprofit organizations; . collect and disseminate information relating to homelessness; . prepare bimonthly bulletins describing resources available to the states and other providers as well as application deadlines for the various fed- eral programs; and . prepare an annual report to the President and the Congress. Membership on the Council consists of the heads, or their designees, of 11 cabinet departments; FEMA,ACTION, GSA,and the Postal Service; plus heads of other federal entities as determined by the Council. For exam- ple, the Council recently added a designee from the Office of Manage- ment and Budget to its membership. The Council members elect a Chair and Vice-Chair; at present, these positions are held by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, respectively. The daily operating activities of the Council are managed by an Execu- tive Director, appointed by the Council, and staff hired by the Director. In addition to the headquarters staff, the Council has requested its mem- ber agencies to designate coordinators in each of their federal regional offices to assist the Council in carrying out its mandate of providing technical assistance to states, localities, and private nonprofit agencies Page 73 GAO/RCEDBO-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix IX Information on the Interagency Council on the Homeless on homeless assistance programs. At present, a staff person from each of HUD’Sregional offices is assigned full-time to act as the Council’s lead regional coordinator. Regional coordinators’ duties include arranging state and local conferences, holding monthly meetings with other regional coordinators as well as with state and local organizations, responding to inquiries on homeless programs, and submitting weekly reports to the Council on highlights of regional activities. The Council’s activities include publishing bimonthly bulletins (which contain information on programs and application deadlines), newsletters (which provide general information about the Council’s activities and topics on homelessness), holding regional conferences that serve as an information network for federal, state, and local groups, and writing its annual report to the Congress.1 Table IX.1 provides the amount of funds authorized and appropriated for fiscal years 1987-89. Tqble 1X.1: Funds Authorized and Appropriated for the Interagency Council Dollars in millions on the Homeless Fiscal year Funding 1997 1989 1985 Authorized $0.2 $2.50 $1 .I Appropriated 0.0 0.75a 1.1 aThe Council actually received a total of $950,000 in fiscal year 1988~$750,000 was transferred from HUD’s Supportive Housing Demonstration Program and $200,000 was transferred from the HHS Task Force on the Homeless. ‘For more information on the Council and its effectiveness, see Status of the Activities of the Inter- agency Council on the Homeless (GAO/T-RCED-89-16, Mar. 16, 1989), and Homelessness:Additional Information on the Interagency Council on the Homeless (GAO/RCED-89-2&W Sept. 22,1989). Page 74 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McRinney Act Funds qPpen&x X In@mation on the Surplus Property pr~gOgram This appendix provides information on the purpose of the Surplus Prop- erty Program and a general overview of how the program works.’ I Surp/lusProperty Progixrn How the Program Works The purpose of the Surplus Property Program is to make available unu- tilized and underutilized federal property (federal buildings and other federal real properties, including fixtures) that can be used to assist the homeless. These properties consist of land and buildings in urban and rural areas that may be used for shelters, clinics, storage, or administra- tive space. HUD collects information from other landholding agencies about their properties that are unutilized, underutilized, excess, or surplus, and it determines which of the identified properties are suitable to assist the homeless. Suitability criteria have been developed jointly by HUD, GSA, and HHS. Once suitable properties are identified, HUD publishes a list of suitable properties in the Federal Register with the name and telephone number of contact people from whom interested groups can obtain information about the properties and leasing procedures. Leasing procedures are handled by either HHSor the federal landholding agency, depending on who controls the property. Budget Information The McKinney Act did not provide money to the federal agencies to carry out this program. ‘At present, we have an ongoing assignment reviewing this program in more detail. Page 75 GAO/RCED-99-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds Aipendix XI @I rmlative Amounts Provided Under the MCKinney Act F?rogramsfor FIsca3.Yeax 1989 by state State/territory Amount Alabama $4,829,440 Alaska 933,030 American Samoa 205,329 Arizona 8,235,436 Arkansas 4,580,901 California 49,524,630 Colorado 6,216,625 Connecticut 6,662,722 Delaware 814,171 District of Columbia 8,610,988 Florida 16,825,532 Georgia 6,871,594 Guam 175,496 Hawaii 1,125,885 Idaho 1,385,701 Illinois 178396,543 Indiana 7,307,400 Iowa 2,826,608 Kansas 1,923,86' Kentucky 7,108,8X Louisiana 9,200,078 Maine 1579,785 Maryland 6,209,947 Massachusetts 13,595,965 Michigan 15296,716 Minnesota 8,545,370 Mississippi 3,209,561 Missouri 11,134.679 Montana 932,871 Nebraska 1,373,021 ----. Nevada 1,070,144 -__-_ New Hampshire 3,147,328 New Jersey 10,347,OlO New Mexico 2,114,332 New York 50,822,932 North Carolina 4,902,932 North Dakota 972,080 Northern Marianas 105,090 Ohio 17,046,943 Oklahoma 3,574,858 -~ (continued) Page 76 GAO/RCED-90-62 Status of McKinney Act Fbnds . Appendix XI Cumulative Amounts Provided Under the M&hey Act Programa for Fiscal Year 1989 by State Stateherritorv Amount Orenon io,o54,982 Palau 16,823 Pennsylvania 18,825,616 Puerto Rico 5132,266 Rhode Island 6,420,686 South Carolina 7,610,828 South Dakota 907,909 Tennessee 7,658,396 Texas - 31,608,927 Trust Territory 221,021 Utah 2,034,799 Vermont 3,105,245 Virgin Islands 254,673 Virginia 15,216,357 Washinaton 15,394,741 West Virginia 4,428,642 Wisconsin 7,689,162 Wyoming 1,073,695 Total $456,397,15F’ aThis figure does not add to the total appropriated amount for fiscal year 1989 presented in appendix I because, in addition to new funds appropriated in fiscal year 1989, some programs also used carryover funds for their fiscal year 1989 awards. w Page 77 GAO/RClXNO-52 Status of McKinney Act Funds A$endix XII Map of Cumulative Amounts Provided Under ’ the McKinney Act Programs for F’iscalYear 1989 by State-Regional Distribution $2 million or IeSS ‘~ $240 million $10-20 million $30 million or more Page 78 GAO/RCED-W-62 Status of McKinney Act Funds Appendix XIII Major Corkibutors to This Report Gene Aloise, Assignment Manager Janet L. Mascia, Evaluator-in-Charge Amy Maron, Evaluator Eco comic Division, DeV lopment Patricia Metz, Evaluator 9 Was$ington, D.C. Page 79 GAO/RCED-90-52 Status of McKhney Act Funds (386178) ‘I’ht*rt~ is a 25% clisctwnt, 011orciws for 100 or more wpiw mailed t,o 8 sill&h atldrt~ss.
Homelessness: McKinney Act Programs and Funding for Fiscal Year 1989
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1990-02-16.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)