Public Housing: Status of the HOPE VI Demonstration Program

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1997-02-25.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

                 United States General Accounting Office

GAO              Report to the Subcommittee on VA,
                 HUD, and Independent Agencies,
                 Committee on Appropriations, House of

February 1997
                 PUBLIC HOUSING
                 Status of the HOPE VI

      United States
GAO   General Accounting Office
      Washington, D.C. 20548

      Resources, Community, and
      Economic Development Division


      February 25, 1997

      The Honorable Jerry Lewis
      The Honorable Louis Stokes
      Ranking Minority Member
      Subcommittee on VA, HUD,
        and Independent Agencies
      Committee on Appropriations
      House of Representatives

      In its final report dated August 1992, the National Commission on Severely
      Distressed Public Housing found that severely distressed public housing
      was a national problem.1 According to the Commission, 86,000 (or
      6 percent) of the nation’s public housing units, located primarily in
      deteriorating neighborhoods of large urban communities, were plagued by
      crime, unemployment, and deteriorated physical conditions. Moreover, the
      Commission maintained, the traditional approaches to address these
      problems were not working. Responding to the Commission’s findings, the
      Congress created the HOPE VI-Urban Revitalization Demonstration
      Program2 in October 1992 to help public housing authorities revitalize
      severely distressed housing developments. As a demonstration program,
      HOPE VI was to foster innovative approaches to revitalization and to
      encourage housing authorities, residents, and local communities to work
      together with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in
      transforming distressed areas into productive residential and commercial

      For fiscal years 1993-95, the Congress appropriated $1.58 billion3 for the
      HOPE VI program. Because of this significant level of funding, the
      Subcommittee asked us, in its June 18, 1996, report accompanying the
      fiscal year 1997 VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies appropriations bill,
      and as agreed with Subcommittee staff, to

      The Final Report of the National Commission on Severely Distressed Public Housing (Washington,
      D.C., Aug. 1992).
       HOPE VI is the most recent of a series of Homeownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere
      (HOPE) programs created by the Congress and administered by the Department of Housing and Urban
      Development to address specific housing needs.
       Although the Congress appropriated funds for the HOPE VI program for fiscal years 1996 and 1997,
      fiscal year 1996 funds were not available to public housing authorities until October 1996, and HUD
      does not expect to make fiscal year 1997 funds available until March 1997. Because we limited our
      review to the expenditures received through the end of fiscal year 1996, this report focuses primarily
      on the uses of the funds appropriated for the program for fiscal years 1993-95.

      Page 1                                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                   •   provide information on the expenditures and activities for HOPE VI
                       projects funded with appropriations for fiscal years 1993-95,
                   •   determine whether HUD has identified innovative or successful approaches
                       taken by housing authorities to implement their HOPE VI projects, and
                   •   describe HUD’s strategy for evaluating the HOPE VI program’s outcomes.

                       To answer these questions, we relied heavily on data from HUD, public
                       housing authorities, and HUD contractors. We also obtained detailed
                       information about HOPE VI projects at five housing authorities.

                       Of the $1.58 billion that the Congress appropriated for the HOPE VI
Results in Brief       program for fiscal years 1993-95, HUD had awarded $1.54 billion for capital
                       improvements and community and supportive services as of September 30,
                       1996. In addition, the Congress earmarked $5 million of the appropriation
                       for HUD to provide technical assistance to housing authorities. The awards,
                       which fund 39 HOPE VI projects at 32 public housing authorities (7
                       housing authorities received two grants), range in size from $7.5 million to
                       $50 million and averaging about $39 million.4 These funds have been used
                       primarily for capital improvements to the housing stock, for which
                       housing authorities have budgeted an average of 87 percent of their grants.
                       The participating authorities, as of September 30, 1996, had

                   •   demolished 6,538 housing units out of a planned total of 22,573 units,
                   •   rehabilitated 705 units out of a planned total of 5,407 units,
                   •   constructed 419 new units out of a planned 15,299 units, and
                   •   provided housing vouchers to 1,639 families displaced by the demolition or

                       HUD has identified several innovative approaches used by HOPE VI
                       grantees to implement their projects. These approaches, which could
                       serve as models for other housing authorities, include Cleveland’s concept
                       of centralizing its social services, Milwaukee’s street layout to reduce
                       density and enhance the neighborhood’s security and cohesiveness, and
                       Atlanta’s use of private investors to help finance its improvements. To
                       assist other HOPE VI grantees, HUD has disseminated information about
                       these and other approaches.

                        In addition to the $1.54 billion awarded to fund 39 projects and the $5 million in technical assistance,
                       HUD set aside, per congressional mandate, $20 million for youth training and apprenticeship programs
                       in the construction field and awarded $14.45 million for 35 planning grants. Planning grants could be
                       used to plan for the revitalization projects and could not be more than $500,000 each. HUD carried
                       over into fiscal year 1996 approximately $1.4 million that was not awarded in previous years.

                       Page 2                                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

             To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of the HOPE VI program, HUD is
             conducting a phased 10-year evaluation. In August 1996, HUD completed a
             baseline study of 15 HOPE VI grantees’ distressed housing and early
             revitalization activities. HUD plans 5- and 10-year follow-up evaluations of
             these activities. According to HUD, an evaluation at this time of the HOPE
             VI program’s progress to date could be premature because several
             significant housing policies and regulatory ground rules changed after the
             program started. These changes resulted, in turn, in changes to the
             implementation plans for many HOPE VI projects and in delays in meeting
             initial milestones.

             In 1989, the Congress established the National Commission on Severely
Background   Distressed Public Housing to identify the nation’s worst public housing
             and propose a national action plan to eradicate this housing by the year
             2000. In 1992, the Commission reported that approximately 86,000 units, or
             6 percent, of public housing could be considered severely distressed and
             that the traditional approaches to revitalizing this housing had not been
             effective. Physically deteriorated buildings were but one aspect of severely
             distressed public housing; the Commission also observed two other
             conditions: (1) the residents were living in despair and needed high levels
             of social and support services and (2) the surrounding communities were
             economically and socially distressed. The symptoms of these conditions
             include the absence of economic resources, high rates of crime and
             unemployment, lack of opportunity for training and education, and
             barriers to effective management, such as high vacancy rates. The
             Commission recommended that funds be made available to address all
             three conditions and that these funds be added to the amounts
             traditionally appropriated for modernizing public housing.

             In response to the Commission’s report, the Congress created the HOPE VI
             program to address these three conditions and incorporated many of the
             Commission’s recommendations. By making HOPE VI a demonstration
             program, the Congress made the program more comprehensive and
             flexible than previous approaches to revitalizing public housing. The
             program’s flexibility enabled public housing authorities (PHA) to take
             advantage of the developments in national public housing policy, such as
             the suspension of the one-for-one replacement requirement5 and the

              In place since 1988, this requirement provided that PHAs must replace every housing unit that they
             take out of service with another unit of public housing or housing assistance under HUD’s project- or
             tenant-based housing assistance program. The HOPE VI appropriations acts permitted PHAs with
             HOPE VI awards to request section 8 certificates for up to one-third of the one-for-one replacements.
             The Congress suspended this requirement in July 1995.

             Page 3                                                  GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                         introduction of private-public financing for constructing public housing

                         To obtain HOPE VI grants, PHAs must submit competitive applications to
                         HUD’s Office of Urban Revitalization. The Congress stipulated that the PHAs
                         applying for these funds during the first 3 years must be located in the 40
                         most populous U.S. cities, based on 1990 Census data, or included on HUD’s
                         list of troubled housing authorities6 as of March 31, 1992.7 HUD awarded
                         successful applicants grants of up to $50 million for each HOPE VI project,
                         and some PHAs have received more than one grant. HUD withholds most of
                         the grant from the PHA until it approves the authority’s “revitalization plan,”
                         which includes the budget to implement HOPE VI. The revitalization plan
                         is the housing authority’s blueprint and schedule for implementing its
                         HOPE VI project and specifies its goals and budget.8 Once HUD approves
                         the plan, it authorizes, or makes available, funding in accounts
                         corresponding to the amounts that the housing authority has budgeted for
                         the project. HUD disburses funds from the accounts at the request of the
                         PHAs and allows them to draw down no more than 5 percent of their
                         authorized amounts per month to pay for goods and services received. The
                         withholding of funds may also occur after the funds are authorized as a
                         result of concerns, such as whether a PHA has the ability to successfully
                         manage a HOPE VI project, that HUD may have about the HOPE VI project.

                         Thirty-two housing authorities have budgeted an average of 87 percent of
Most HOPE VI             the $1.54 billion they have received in awards, or $1.33 billion, to fund
Funding Is for Capital   capital activities for the 39 HOPE VI projects,9 according to an analysis
Improvements             conducted by HUD. The awards fund 39 HOPE VI projects ranging in size
                         from $7.5 million to $50 million and averaging about $39 million. Capital
                         activities include demolition, rehabilitation, and new construction as well
                         as the expenses associated with relocating residents who have been

                          HUD maintains a list of troubled PHAs based on their annual performance score in the Public Housing
                         Management Assessment Program. HUD uses the assessment program to measure PHAs’ compliance
                         against standard property management criteria. PHAs receiving scores under 60 out of a possible 100
                         are designated as “troubled.”
                          The Congress removed this criterion in the fiscal year 1996 appropriations for HOPE VI.
                          In addition to the budget, HUD requires that the revitalization plan include a community service plan
                         that outlines how residents and local service agencies will contribute to the revitalization of their
                         neighborhood. The revitalization plan may also consist of plans for other major activities as
                         appropriate, such as demolition, replacement housing, resident relocation, and management.
                          As of December 13, 1996, HUD had approved 31 of the 39 budgets received from PHAs for their
                         revitalization plans. HUD does not anticipate significant changes in the budgeted amounts for capital
                         activities for the remaining eight HOPE VI projects. Thus, our summary includes the plans of all 39
                         HOPE VI projects.

                         Page 4                                                  GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                                         displaced to accommodate capital activities. While no PHA has completed
                                         its capital improvements, construction is under way at 20 of the 39 sites.
                                         As figure 1 shows, the PHAs have budgeted the remaining $200 million, or
                                         13 percent, for community and supportive services.

Figure 1: Planned Expenditures for the
39 HOPE VI Projects                                                                            Community and supportive
                                                                                               services—$200 million

                                                      • 13%

                                                                  87% •                        Capital activities and resident
                                                                                               relocation—$1.33 billion

                                         Note: This analysis does not include $5.2 million that, in late 1996, HUD awarded as additional, or
                                         amendment, funds to six HOPE VI projects. Therefore, these funds have not been factored into
                                         the projects’ budgets.

                                         Source: HUD’s analysis of the budgets for the 39 HOPEVI projects’ revitalization plans.

Capital Improvements                     The HOPE VI program allows a PHA to determine through a revitalization
Under HOPE VI                            plan which capital improvements would be the most effective for its
                                         community and in the best interests of its residents. The PHA must work
                                         with its residents and local government to ensure that their concerns are
                                         addressed by the proposed capital improvements. Most projects fund
                                         demolition, rehabilitation, and/or new construction. The PHA may also use
                                         section 8 certificates10 to house displaced residents.

                                           HUD’s section 8 certificate and voucher programs are designed to allow lower-income households to
                                         live in decent and affordable private rental housing of their choice.

                                         Page 5                                                 GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

    Capital improvement activities are time-consuming and complex, as the
    experience of other public housing programs has shown. In the HOPE VI
    program, the authority must consult with its residents before the project
    can move forward. However, at several project sites, disagreement
    between the residents and the authority has impeded the decision-making
    on which activities to fund. In addition, the PHAs must obtain HUD’s
    approval of their plans and comply with the program’s requirements and
    many other applicable regulations, such as those dealing with
    environmental reviews, historic preservation, and the federal procurement
    process. Only then can ground-breaking activities occur.

    Funding status. As of the end of fiscal year 1996, HUD had authorized
    $653 million for HOPE VI capital improvement activities and disbursed
    $127 million to the PHAs. This authorization is about half of the $1.33 billion
    that is budgeted for activities associated with capital improvements. HUD
    has not authorized more funds because only about two-thirds of the
    projects have begun or are ready to begin capital activities. As of
    December 13, 1996, HUD had not approved the revitalization plans for eight
    HOPE VI projects. Nevertheless, HUD does not anticipate that there will be
    significant changes in the average percentages for funding capital
    activities and community and supportive services once the other eight
    budgets are approved.

    Activities completed or under way. Officials in HUD’s Office of Urban
    Revitalization told us that HUD does not currently maintain a centralized
    database to track all HOPE VI activities, including those associated with
    improving the housing stock. However, HUD recently contracted with the
    Housing Research Foundation (HRF), a nonprofit organization, to conduct
    a survey, the results of which are entered into a database that can be
    updated. According to the survey, as of September 30, 1996, the 32 PHAs, in
    accomplishing their capital improvement activities, had

•   demolished 6,538 units, or 29 percent of the 22,573 units currently planned
    for demolition;
•   rehabilitated 705 units, or 13 percent of the 5,407 units that are scheduled
    for rehabilitation or reconfiguration; and
•   constructed 419 new units, or 3 percent of the 15,299 proposed new units.

    Using data from the HRF survey, figure 2 compares the 39 HOPE VI
    projects’ completed and planned capital activities. Because some PHAs are
    using their HOPE VI funding as leverage to attract funds from other
    investors, they may be accomplishing more than they could with HOPE VI

    Page 6                                     GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                                        funds alone. According to the HRF survey, 15,004 of the 20,706 planned
                                        rehabilitated and newly constructed units reported are HOPE VI units,
                                        meaning that they are to be funded solely with HOPE VI funds.
                                        Furthermore, because of the flexibility of the HOPE VI program, the PHAs’
                                        plans for capital activities are subject to change.

Figure 2: Status of HOPE VI Projects’
Capital Improvements as of              Number of units
September 30, 1996                      24000



                                        16000                                         15299




                                         6000                       5407


                                                                             705              419

                                                   Demolished         Rehabilitated    Newly
                                                   Capital improvements

                                                           Planned units

                                                           Completed units

                                        Source: HRF’s September 1996 survey.

                                        In addition, HUD had provided 3,194 certificates and vouchers to the
                                        housing authorities to be used to house relocated residents. However,
                                        HUD’s section 8 certificate and voucher program funds this housing
                                        assistance, not the HOPE VI program. The PHAs have reported to HUD that
                                        1,639 families have been assisted through the section 8 program.
                                        According to HUD, no HOPE VI project had completed all of its capital

                                        Page 7                                                GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                          activities as of the end of calendar year 1996. However, 26 HOPE VI
                          projects had started demolition and 20 projects had begun construction by
                          the end of 1996.

Technical Assistance      During the first 3 years of HOPE VI, the Congress appropriated $5 million
Supports Revitalization   for HUD to use in providing technical assistance to HOPE VI projects. The
                          Congress appropriated an additional $3.22 million for HUD’s use during
                          fiscal year 1996, bringing the total for fiscal years 1993 through 1996 to
                          $8.22 million, or about 0.4 percent of the total HOPE VI appropriations for
                          that time period.11 In providing technical assistance, HUD’s contractors
                          have assisted the PHAs and their residents by, for example, assessing the
                          needs for resident services and planning for community and economic
                          development. On the local level, HUD, when concerned about the housing
                          authorities’ management capability, has planned for contractors to assist
                          the PHAs in planning and managing their projects and is planning for
                          contractors to assist as needed in managing revitalized properties. HUD
                          staff also assist PHAs and residents as part of their responsibility for
                          managing HOPE VI grants.

                          Funding status. As table 1 shows, for each year except fiscal year 1993, the
                          Congress has set aside from the HOPE VI appropriation an amount for
                          technical assistance. The services that HUD has procured with these funds
                          have assisted the PHAs in establishing their HOPE VI project community
                          and supportive service activities, among others. As of the end of fiscal year
                          1996, HUD had contracted for technical assistance costing approximately
                          $4.35 million (53 percent of technical assistance appropriations), and of
                          that amount, HUD had paid out nearly $2.02 million (25 percent) to
                          contractors. Approximately 39 percent, or $3.22 million, of the total
                          funding set aside for technical assistance through fiscal year 1996 was not
                          available to HUD to use until May 1996 because of the delayed enactment
                          and signing of the fiscal year 1996 appropriations act. (App. II contains a
                          breakdown of total funds set aside for each HUD contractor, the services
                          provided, and the funds paid out to these contractors as of September 30,

                           While this report focuses primarily on the activities funded with fiscal years 1993-95 HOPE VI
                          program appropriations, it also includes a discussion of fiscal year 1996 appropriations set aside for
                          HUD-contracted technical assistance. These funds were made available for use by HUD in May 1996.

                          Page 8                                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

Table 1: HOPE VI Appropriations
Designated for Technical Assistance,                                                                    Technical
Fiscal Years 1993-96                                                         Total HOPE VI             assistance        Percent of total
                                           Fiscal year                       appropriations         appropriations        appropriation
                                           1993                                $300,000,000                       $0                         0
                                           1994                                  778,240,000              2,500,000                     0.3
                                           1995                                  500,000,000              2,500,000                     0.5
                                           1996                                  480,000,000              3,216,000                     0.6
                                           Total                             $2,058,240,000             $8,216,000                      0.4

                                           Assistance completed or under way. As defined broadly by HOPE VI
                                           program officials, technical assistance is any kind of support that helps a
                                           housing authority carry out its project. At the national level, HUD has
                                           procured the following kinds of services from contractors with the funds
                                           set aside from the HOPE VI appropriation:

                                       •   Developing and approving community service plans: The Corporation for
                                           National Service (CNS) provided assistance with community and
                                           supportive service planning and plan approvals for implementation
                                       •   Project assessment: Through on-site visits to HOPE VI projects, HRF is
                                           assessing the capability and performance of HOPE VI grantees. It is also
                                           assessing technical assistance needs as well as recommending corrective
                                           action and technical assistance contractors. HRF is also providing
                                           appropriate training for PHA and HOPE VI project staff. To date, HRF has
                                           completed formal assessments for 11 HOPE VI projects and expects to
                                           complete additional assessments in the future.
                                       •   Information exchange: HRF established a computerized communication
                                           system that is available to all HOPE VI PHAs. Twenty-seven PHAs have
                                           chosen to participate, of which 21 are currently on-line and another 6 are
                                           in the process of getting on-line. Furthermore, HRF provides informational
                                           services to HOPE VI PHAs, including (1) an extensive library of program
                                           documents both in printed and electronic formats and (2) a monthly
                                           newsletter distributed to all grantees, consultants, and interested parties,
                                           and has assisted HUD to provide three national technical assistance
                                           conferences. To make HOPE VI information more widely available, HRF
                                           recently integrated its Lotus Notes system with the Internet.
                                       •   Community building/Campus of Learners technical assistance: Two HUD
                                           contractors, Aspen Systems and the Urban Institute, will provide 18
                                           months of technical assistance in developing community-building

                                            The Congress mandated that CNS define the community service programs allowable in the HOPE VI
                                           program and approve all projects’ community service plans. CNS is a congressionally established
                                           organization that administers national service programs that provide community services.

                                           Page 9                                              GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                               programs, including a Campus of Learners educational component, to nine
                               HOPE VI projects selected to date.
                           •   HOPE VI database: HRF is developing a HOPE VI database to track and
                               store information on all aspects of the program. Under contract to HUD,
                               HRF continues to collect these data and will keep them current for
                               monitoring, reporting, and policy development purposes. As discussed
                               earlier, HRF provided HUD with program data as of the end of
                               September 1996.

                               Locally, contractors also provide technical assistance, including project
                               management, to HOPE VI PHAs. HUD has required 11 PHAs to hire
                               private-sector management professionals to manage their HOPE VI
                               projects. Eight other PHAs either have decided on their own to hire such
                               managers or were advised by HUD to do so. Like other revitalization efforts,
                               HOPE VI projects also procure technical design assistance from
                               architectural and engineering firms. Furthermore, HUD recognizes the
                               importance of effectively managing a development after it has been
                               revitalized. The director of HUD’s Office of Urban Revitalization told us that
                               HUD looks closely at a PHA’s HOPE VI management plans and, after
                               assessing the PHA’s management capability, often requires or recommends
                               management reforms. As a result, HUD has required one PHA to hire a
                               private contractor to manage the revitalized property. Four other PHAs plan
                               to do so as a result of HUD’s advice. In total, HRF’s database shows that 16
                               HOPE VI projects will have private property managers. The PHAs use
                               HOPE VI grant funds or other resources to pay for project and property
                               management contractors.

                               HUD’s field and headquarters staff also provide technical assistance to PHAs
                               and their residents, according to HUD’s program guidelines. HOPE VI
                               grantees told us that both HUD headquarters and field staff have provided
                               helpful assistance, including useful advice about project design, allowable
                               expenses, HUD’s regulations, and cutting the Department’s red tape, when
                               appropriate. The costs for these services are not identified separately
                               within HUD’s overall personnel expenditures.

Community and                  By funding community and supportive services, HOPE VI is addressing the
Supportive Services            conditions prevalent in public housing, such as severely dysfunctional
Address Residents’ Needs       families, residents’ distrust of PHAs, a lack of employment opportunities,
                               limited economic development in the local community, and generational
                               cycles of poverty. Community services are defined as services that public
                               housing residents provide voluntarily. Residents may, for example,

                               Page 10                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

volunteer with the Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA),13 in battered
women’s shelters, on community newsletters, and with residents’
organizations and recreational centers for community youth. In contrast,
supportive services are provided by social service agencies and nonprofit
groups to help residents become more self-sufficient. The supportive
services currently offered include day care, basic education in areas such
as mathematics and verbal skills, health care services, and counseling on
family coping skills or substance abuse prevention.

For the most part, HOPE VI projects—with their dual focus on addressing
capital and human needs—resemble successful community development
programs that we reviewed in an earlier 1995 study.14 In that study, we
reported that significant neighborhood revitalization may take a
generation or longer to achieve. We found that programs with the greatest
chances for success are generally community-based, focusing on a specific
geographic area and actively involving the residents. Successful programs
also confront the multiple needs facing communities and are frequently
initiated and sustained through collaboration with many organizations.

Funding status. The HOPE VI guidelines allow PHAs to spend up to 20
percent of their grant on community and supportive services. But
obtaining expenditure data is difficult because HUD does not collect or
centrally maintain the data on expenditures by HOPE VI projects for
community and supportive services. Budget data are available, however,
from the projects’ plans, and according to an analysis done by HUD in
December 1996, housing authorities have budgeted an average of 13
percent of their HOPE VI grants, or about $5.1 million, for community and
supportive services. Currently, 11 of the 39 HOPE VI projects have
budgeted 19 percent or more of their implementation grant for these
services, while 3 projects have budgeted less than 4 percent of their grants.

Activities completed or under way. In September 1996, HRF surveyed the
HOPE VI projects to determine the extent and type of community and
supportive services planned or provided and whether the plans for such
services had been approved so that activities could begin. The survey
reported that since January 1996, an overall increase had occurred in the
delivery of community and supportive services, as well as an increase in
the number and variety of the partners and existing community resources

 The VISTA program, administered by CNS, recruits volunteers to serve full time for 1 to 5 years in
poverty and poverty-related projects.
 Comprehensive Approaches Address Multiple Needs but Are Challenging to Implement
(GAO/RCED/HEHS-95-69, Feb. 8, 1995).

Page 11                                                 GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

now being used to provide support for the residents. HRF also reported that
nearly 76 percent of the plans for community and supportive services had
been approved, 81 percent of the sites were delivering supportive services,
and 73 percent of the sites were providing community services (some
service activities had been on-going long before the HOPE VI project was
proposed). (See app. III for a list of the community and supportive services
planned for selected HOPE VI projects.)

In general, community and supportive services promote self- sufficiency
through education, training, mentoring, and counseling. As the following
examples show, PHAs can adopt varying approaches, depending on the
services deemed best for their residents, to providing community and
supportive services.

Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority (Cleveland). At its HOPE VI
project located at the Outhwaite Homes/King Kennedy development,
Cuyahoga provides community and supportive services through a “village
concept” where services are centrally located. Cuyahoga budgeted
$8 million of its $50 million HOPE VI award for this project’s community
and supportive service activities. In a converted high-rise, senior-citizens
building, Cuyahoga has opened a multistoried social services mall that
features a variety of community and supportive services. Its supportive
services include a Montessori school and day care facility, health care
services, and family self-sufficiency programs, such as employment and
vocational training. Also available are leadership and entrepreneurship
training programs, transitional housing services for homeless men, and a
drug rehabilitation residence for mothers in public housing. The
community services include the Boys and Girls Club, which is staffed by
both professionals and resident volunteers and offers a variety of services
and activities for children, and a mentorship program offered through
Cleveland State University.

Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee. Milwaukee has budgeted
$3.8 million of its $45 million award for the community and supportive
services for its HOPE VI project at Hillside Terrace. Milwaukee has used
its HOPE VI funds to reinforce and expand existing partnerships, such as a
Boys and Girls Club. The supportive services include on-site health care
and alcohol/drug prevention services, day care, and classes in child
development, parenting, and nutrition. Some of the public housing
residents are being trained for future jobs by rehabilitating vacant units
and working in the construction trades. In the community services area,

Page 12                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                        Milwaukee has a micro-neighborhood mentoring program, a block watch
                        program, and volunteer opportunities, including the Boys and Girls Club.

                        Community partnerships are critical to the effective delivery and
                        continued viability of services. HOPE VI project officials told us that their
                        partnerships with social service and nonprofit agencies are keys to
                        effectively delivering services to their residents. The partners include local
                        elected officials, colleges and universities, social service providers,
                        nonprofit groups, and national groups such as CNS and the Child Welfare
                        League of America. By partnering with the local social service agencies
                        and nonprofit foundations, some HOPE VI projects are able to provide
                        early expanded job readiness programs, educational programs, and family
                        self-sufficiency programs, such as health clinics for the residents. The
                        existing community partners provide services to supplement the HOPE VI

                        As part of the HOPE VI program, HUD is identifying the innovative or
PHAs’ HOPE VI           particularly promising approaches used by PHAs to implement the
Approaches Are Being    components of their HOPE VI projects. These approaches, if proven
Identified and          successful, could become models for use in other distressed housing
                        redevelopment efforts across the entire public housing program. HUD and
Disseminated, but       HRF are providing information to PHAs on potentially effective approaches
They May Take Time      through conferences, newsletters, and an electronic communication
                        system. HUD officials caution, however, that such housing redevelopment
to Be Proven            methods may not be proven to be fully successful for 7 to 10 years.
Success of Identified   Table 2 shows four examples of approaches that HUD, HRF, and other
Approaches May Take     officials identified as being potentially successful and applicable to other
                        PHAs’ redevelopment efforts.
Time to Prove

                        Page 13                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

Table 2: Potentially Successful HOPE
VI Redevelopment Approaches            Location of PHA                                Description of approacha
                                       Atlanta, GA                                    Leverage HOPE VI grant with low-income
                                       (Housing Authority of the City of Atlanta)     housing tax credits and funds from private
                                                                                      and other investors to demolish and
                                                                                      construct over 1,000 units—twice what
                                                                                      could have been accomplished with HOPE
                                                                                      VI funds alone—of assisted and affordable
                                       Cleveland, OH (Cuyahoga Metropolitan           Create a “social service mall” in a
                                       Housing Authority)                             converted mid-rise building. Twenty
                                                                                      different social service agencies offer
                                                                                      services that range from graduate-
                                                                                      equivalent diploma classes to AIDS
                                                                                      counseling and day care.
                                       Milwaukee                                      Create less dense and less isolated
                                       (Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee)   “micro-neighborhoods” by demolishing
                                                                                      deteriorated housing and constructing
                                                                                      streets that cross through the
                                                                                      development. In addition, the housing
                                                                                      authority created early and strong
                                                                                      partnerships with the local social service
                                                                                      agencies and nonprofit foundations to
                                                                                      bring apprenticeship programs, job
                                                                                      readiness programs, and a family health
                                                                                      clinic to its residents.
                                       Seattle, WA                                    Redevelop the community to end the
                                       (Seattle Housing Authority)                    separation of residents from the
                                                                                      surrounding neighborhood and to involve a
                                                                                      variety of cultures represented by the
                                                                                      residents. Develop housing to match the
                                                                                      appearance of the neighborhood and
                                                                                      connect the development’s streets to
                                                                                      community roads. Since nine major
                                                                                      languages are spoken at the HOPE VI
                                                                                      project, the PHA provides translations for
                                                                                      meetings, training, and surveys to increase
                                                                                      participation and serve the entire
                                       HUD, CNS, and/or HRF identified these approaches.

                                       Officials from HUD and other organizations associated with HOPE VI agree
                                       that proving that an approach is successful and determining the
                                       sustainability of its outcome could take years—as long as 7 to 10 years,
                                       according to HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Housing
                                       Investments, who oversees the HOPE VI program. Yet HUD’s Director of
                                       the Office of Urban Revitalization, CNS’ HOPE VI Director, and HRF’s HOPE
                                       VI Director stated that aspects of a redevelopment effort’s success may be

                                       Page 14                                             GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                      proved before this time passes. According to CNS’ HOPE VI Director, the
                      amount of time needed to demonstrate the success of an approach
                      depends on the goal the PHA is trying to accomplish. He said, for example,
                      that if a PHA’s approach involves improving the lives of children, 7 to 10
                      years may be necessary to demonstrate the approach’s impact on the
                      children. Alternatively, if a PHA’s goal is to develop neighborhood watches,
                      this approach’s success can be measured in a few months by counting the
                      number of watches established.

HRF and HUD Provide   HRF provides information to HOPE VI PHAs on potentially successful
Information on        approaches by publishing a monthly newsletter, managing an electronic
Approaches            communication system, and giving the PHAs access to documents such as
                      the contracts used by PHAs, the PHAs’ HOPE VI plans, and HUD’s guidance.
                      HRF’s monthly newsletter contains descriptions of the PHAs’ approaches to
                      implementing the HOPE VI program, contacts at the PHAs for more
                      information, updates on the status of regulations and other issues affecting
                      the HOPE VI program, and information on events such as conferences and
                      training sessions. HRF’s electronic communication system provides
                      information and allows the PHAs to send messages to each other and
                      discuss such issues as real estate development and finance, economic
                      development, services, and general housing topics. HRF also maintains a
                      collection of contracts used by HOPE VI PHAs, HUD documents and
                      guidance, and profiles of PHAs and descriptions of their HOPE VI programs
                      that can be accessed via the electronic system.

                      With conferences and samples of the documents that PHAs are currently
                      using, HUD informs other PHAs of potentially successful HOPE VI
                      redevelopment approaches. Since the program’s inception, HUD has held
                      nine conferences on implementing the HOPE VI program and operating
                      newly revitalized housing developments. During these conferences, HOPE
                      VI managers presented information on the approaches they have used at
                      their developments. In addition, on request HUD provides PHAs with
                      examples and documents detailing how other housing authorities have
                      successfully implemented the components of the program.

                      To assess the long-term effectiveness of the HOPE VI program, HUD has
HUD Is Conducting a   completed the initial phase of a multistage evaluation. HUD officials told us
Phased, Long-Term     that short-term evaluations of HOPE VI projects may be premature
Evaluation of the     because time is needed for the projects to achieve their intended
                      outcomes on revitalized physical structures, PHAs’ management
HOPE VI Program

                      Page 15                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

improvements, and the well-being of residents, including job training and
family self-sufficiency.

HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research is conducting a
three-phase, 10-year evaluation of the conditions at HOPE VI sites. The
first phase, completed in August 1996, was a baseline study of 15 HOPE VI
grantees. The second and third phases will be 5- and 10-year evaluations of
the activities and outcomes of the HOPE VI projects at the 15 sites. The
baseline study contained historical descriptions of the distressed housing
and planned revitalization activities of the 15 HOPE VI grantees that were
chosen on the basis of their location, development type, types of distress,
and proposed approaches. The study documented that although most of 23
sampled developments (within the 15 PHAs) were rated as having “poor” or
“very poor” physical conditions and overall maintenance, their vacancy
rates were nevertheless very low. In addition, most of the 15 sampled PHAs
planned to reduce the number of units in their HOPE VI project portfolio
and create mixed-income communities.

According to HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Housing
Investments, it may take 7 to 10 years before revitalization efforts at a
HOPE VI development could be determined as successful. He told us that
short-term evaluations may be premature because the measurable
outcomes have been limited in part because of several factors, including
delays in PHAs’ development of approvable plans. According to HUD, many
PHAs revised their revitalization plans to take advantage of the expanded
opportunities that became available as the HOPE VI program evolved.

As a demonstration program, HOPE VI offered new opportunities, both to
the PHAs and their communities, and these opportunities have expanded
since the program began. For example, in mid-1994, HUD began
encouraging the PHAs to demolish rather than attempt to repair obsolete
housing, leverage HOPE VI dollars with other funding sources such as
low-income housing tax credits and state funds, and partner with the
private sector to develop mixed-income housing and encourage
neighborhood development. HUD also encouraged the PHAs to partner with
organizations such as social service agencies and nonprofit corporations
to provide services to the residents of HOPE VI communities. In 1995, the
Congress suspended the one-for-one replacement rule for demolished
units, thereby further expanding the PHAs’ revitalization options by
allowing the PHAs to remove housing units without replacing them.
Reacting to these opportunities, many PHAs changed their plans and thus
delayed the implementation of their HOPE VI projects to incorporate these

Page 16                                  GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

                  new opportunities into their plans. Meanwhile, some PHAs encountered
                  delays while attempting to reach agreement with their residents or local
                  communities on their revitalization plans. In fact, the HOPE VI program’s
                  guidelines urged the PHAs to involve residents and local communities in the
                  planning process. Also, HOPE VI legislation prohibited the PHAs from
                  receiving funds until CNS approved their community and social services

                  HUD expects the implementation of HOPE VI projects to last an average of
                  4 to 5 years, but to date no project has reached this milestone. In addition
                  to HUD’s evaluation, some PHAs are evaluating their own HOPE VI
                  programs. For instance, four of the five PHAs—Cuyahoga, Kansas City,
                  Milwaukee, and Oakland—we spoke with already have contracted with
                  local groups to conduct evaluations of their HOPE VI projects.

                  We provided a draft of this report to HUD and the Housing Research
Agency Comments   Foundation (HRF) for their review and comment. We discussed the draft
                  report with HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Housing
                  Investments, the Director of the Office of Urban Revitalization, and HRF’s
                  HOPE VI Project Director. HUD officials found the report to be a good, fair,
                  and useful summary of the HOPE VI program. Other comments by HUD and
                  HRF pertained primarily to the data that were cited in our report. HUD and
                  HRF had conflicting data pertaining to the number of demolished units as
                  of September 30, 1996, and the number of HOPE VI projects that had
                  started demolition and construction in calendar year 1996. After
                  discussions with both HUD and HRF, we agreed to use HRF’s data for total
                  demolished units and HUD’s data for demolition and construction start
                  dates. We incorporated these and other clarifying comments into the
                  report, as appropriate.

                  For information on the HOPE VI program and the expenditures and
Scope and         activities of the grants, we collected data from many sources. We reviewed
Methodology       HUD’s program guidelines, project files for the grants, and status reports.
                  We also reviewed the correspondence and the required quarterly reports
                  from the participating PHAs. We interviewed officials from HUD, CNS, and
                  HUD contractors, including HRF and the Urban Institute. Our work also
                  benefitted from HRF’s September 1996 survey of HOPE VI grantees to
                  collect detailed information about the status and accomplishments of their
                  projects. At our request, HRF incorporated a number of our suggestions and

                  Page 17                                   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

questions into their survey, the results of which were released in
November 1996.

We also contacted five HOPE VI projects that are at varying stages of
implementation: (1) the Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee,
(2) the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority, (3) the Kansas City
Housing Authority, (4) the Oakland Housing Authority, and (5) the
Chicago Housing Authority. We obtained information about the results and
status of their HOPE VI projects to determine the details of their progress
and the uniqueness of their implementation approach. We did not,
however, verify the accuracy of this information as it was provided by HUD,
its contractors, or the PHAs we contacted. We also did not evaluate the
pace at which these PHAs are implementing their projects nor compare
their results with each other. We conducted our work from July 1996
through December 1996 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.

As arranged with your offices, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 14 days after the
date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies of this report to
appropriate Senate and House committees; the Secretary of HUD; and the
Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will make copies available
to others on request.

Please call me at (202) 512-7631 if you or your staff have any questions
about the material in this report. Major contributors to this report are
listed in appendix IV.

Judy A. England-Joseph
Director, Housing and Community
  Development Issues

Page 18                                    GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
Page 19   GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration

Letter                                                                                            1

Appendix I                                                                                       22

Capital Improvements
to Distressed Housing
Appendix II                                                                                      26

Summary of the
HOPE VI Program’s
Technical Assistance
Budget Activity
Appendix III                                                                                     27

Selected HOPE VI
Projects’ Community
and Supportive
Appendix IV                                                                                      32

Major Contributors to
This Report
Tables                  Table 1: HOPE VI Appropriations Designated for Technical                  9
                          Assistance, Fiscal Years 1993-96
                        Table 2: Potentially Successful HOPE VI Redevelopment                    14

Figures                 Figure 1: Planned Expenditures for the 39 HOPE VI Projects                5
                        Figure 2: Status of HOPE VI Projects’ Capital Improvements as of          7
                          September 30, 1996

                        Page 20                                 GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration


CNS        Corporation for National Service
GED        general equivalency diploma
HAKC       Housing Authority for Kansas City
HRF        Housing Research Foundation
HUD        Department of Housing and Urban Development
PHA        public housing authority
TA         technical assistance
VISTA      Volunteers in Service to America

Page 21                              GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
Appendix I

Capital Improvements to Distressed
Housing in HOPE VI Developments

              Data as of September 30, 1996

              PHA                 HOPE VI project                Fiscal year       Award amount
              Atlanta             Techwood/Clark Howell                1993         $42,562,635 b
              Baltimore           Lafayette Courts                     1994          $49,663,600
              Baltimore           Lexington Terracea                   1995          $22,702,000
              Boston              Mission Main                         1993          $49,992,350
              Boston              Orchard Parka                        1995          $30,000,000
              Camden              McGuire Gardens                      1994          $42,177,229
              Charlotte           Earle Village                        1993          $41,740,155b
              Chicago             Cabrini Homes Extension              1994          $50,000,000
              Cuyahoga/           Ouithwaite/King Kennedy              1993          $50,000,000
              Cuyahoga/           Carver Parka                         1995          $21,000,000
              Columbus            Windsor Terrace                      1994          $42,053,408b
              Dallas              Lakewest                             1994          $26,600,000
              Denver              Quigg Newton Homes                   1994          $26,489,288b
              Detroit             Jeffries Homes                       1994          $39,807,342
              Detroit             Parkside Homes                       1995          $47,620,227
              El Paso             Kennedy Brothers Memorial            1995          $36,224,644b
              Houston             Allen Parkway Village                1993          $36,602,761
              Indianapolis        Concord Village/Eagle                1995          $29,999,010
              Kansas City         Guinotte Manor                       1993          $47,579,800
              Los Angeles         Pico Gardens/Aliso North &           1993          $50,000,000
              Memphis             LeMoyne Gardens                      1995          $47,281,182
              Milwaukee           Hillside Terrace                     1993          $45,689,446b
              Newark              Walsh Homes                          1994          $49,996,000
              New Haven           Elm Haven                            1993          $45,331,593
              New Orleans         Desire                               1994          $44,255,908
              New York City       Beach 41st Street Houses             1995          $47,700,952
              Oakland             Lockwood/Coliseum/Lower              1994          $26,510,020b
              Philadelphia        Richard Allen Homes                  1993          $50,000,000
              Pittsburgh          Allequippa Terrace                   1993          $31,564,190
              Pittsburgh          Manchester                           1995            $7,500,000

              Page 22                                        GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
                                         Appendix I
                                         Capital Improvements to Distressed
                                         Housing in HOPE VI Developments

                                        Units            Units                                         Total rehabbed   rehabbed &
Units demol.c        Units demol.c    rehabbedc        rehabbedc       New unitsc        New unitsc     & new unitsc     new unitsc
      (Planned)            (Actual)     (Planned)         (Actual)        (Planned)         (Actual)        (Planned)       (Actual)
          1,067                747                14               0          1,166             233             1,180           233
            807                771                 0               0           771                0               771             0
            677                677                 0               0           591                0               591             0
            822                 90                 0               0           585                0               585             0
            585                  0            126              26              509                0               635            26
                 0               0            367                  0                0             0               367             0
            386                  0                23               0           239              155               262           155
            660                330                65               0           493                0               558             0
                 0               0            693             312                   0             0               693           312

           TBDd                  0           TBDd                  0           TBDd               0              TBDd             0

            442                265                 0               0           372                0               372             0
          3,462              2,112                 0               0          1,285               0             1,285             0
                20               0            380              11                   20            0               400            11
          1,438                  0            480                  0           370                0               850             0
            565                424            501                  0           162                0               663             0
            124                 42            240                  7           174                0               414             7

            677                 12            286                  0           314                0               600             0
            310                140                14               0           206                0               220             0

            196                  0            216                  0           232                0               448             0
            577                  0                 0               0           440                0               440             0

            758                  0                84               8           556                0               640             8
            119                119            477             239                   79           24               556           263
            630                  0                 0               0           498                0               498             0
            462                  0                 0               0           395                0               395             0
          1,832                256                 0               0           800                0               800             0
           TBDd                  0           TBDd                  0           TBDd               0              TBDd             0
                21               8            417                  0                21            0               438             0

            129                  0            562                  0           149                0               711             0
          1,652                  0            102             102             1,235               0             1,337           102
            102                 51                 0               0           144                7               144             7

                                         Page 23                                             GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
Appendix I
Capital Improvements to Distressed
Housing in HOPE VI Developments

Data as of September 30, 1996

PHA                  HOPE VI project               Fiscal year       Award amount
Puerto Rico          Crisantemos I/Manual A.             1994          $50,000,000
St. Louis            Darst-Webbe                         1995          $46,771,000
San Antonio          Spring View Apts.                   1994          $48,810,294
San Antonio          Mirasol Homes                       1995          $48,285,500
San Francisco        Bernal Dwellings/Yerba              1993          $49,992,377
                     Buena Homes
San Francisco        Hayes Valleya                       1995          $22,055,000
Seattle              Holly Park Apts.                    1995          $48,116,503b
Springfield          John Hay Homes                      1994          $19,775,000
Washington, DC       Ellen Wilson Dwellings              1993          $25,075,956b

Page 24                                        GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
                                           Appendix I
                                           Capital Improvements to Distressed
                                           Housing in HOPE VI Developments

                                          Units               Units                                             Total rehabbed       rehabbed &
Units demol.c       Units demol.c       rehabbedc           rehabbedc       New unitsc         New unitsc        & new unitsc         new unitsc
      (Planned)           (Actual)        (Planned)            (Actual)         (Planned)         (Actual)           (Planned)           (Actual)
            264               224                  360                  0            120                0                  480                 0

            758                 0                    0                  0            525                0                  525                 0
            421                97                    0                  0            545                0                  545                 0
            500                 0                    0                  0            596                0                  596                 0
            484                 0                    0                  0            353                0                  353                 0

                e                   e                   e               e                  e                e                    e                 e

            893                 0                    0                  0           1,200               0                1,200                 0
                                                       d                                 d                                       d
            599                39                 TBD                   0            TBD                0                 TBD                  0
            134               134                    0                  0            154                0                  154                 0
                                            These HOPE VI projects include leveraged financing.
                                            These HOPE VI projects received additional funding, known as amendment funds, subsequent
                                           to their original awards. The amendment funds are included in these figures.
                                            Data reported may also include units funded with funds other than HOPE VI.
                                               TBD = To be determined by PHA.
                                            Did not respond to HRF’s survey.

                                           Source: HUD and HRF’s survey.

                                           Page 25                                                 GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
Appendix II

Summary of the HOPE VI Program’s
Technical Assistance Budget Activity

                                         Technical assistance                                                 Funds disbursed
Fiscal year   Contractor                 (TA) activity                            Funds reserved                 as of 9/30/96
1994          Corporation for National   Community service                                $150,000                      $150,000
              Service (CNS)              planning TA and plan
1994                                     Travel                                            126,000                       126,000
1995          Corporation for National   Community service                                 540,811                       540,811
              Service                    planning TA and plan
1995          Housing Research           Needs assessment and                            1,500,000                       780,000
              Foundation                 information sharing
1995          Aspen Systems              Resident initiatives                                30,000                        30,000
              Corporation                information dissemination
1995          Aspen Systems              Community building and                            984,492                       148,078
              Corporation                Campus of Learners TA
1995                                     Travel                                            126,000                       126,000
1996          Innovative Technologies    Satellite TV training                               36,660                        28,567
1996          Center for Community       For Houston Housing                                 56,000                         5,600
              Change                     Authority, Resident
                                         Council TA
1996          Video Software             Satellite training                                   7,428                         7,428
1996          Aspen Systems              Community building and                              46,324                             •
              Corporation                Campus of Learners TA
1996          Abt Associates             TA for Springfield Housing                        277,007                              •
1996          Abt Associates             Economic Lift Program                             300,000                              •
1996                                     Travel                                              73,000                        73,000
1996          SOZA International, Ltd    HOPE VI conference                                100,000                              •
Total                                                                                   $4,353,722                    $2,015,484
                                In the fiscal year 1993 appropriations act, the Congress stipulated that CNS define community
                               service programs and approve such plans for all HOPE VI projects.

                               Page 26                                               GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
Appendix III

Selected HOPE VI Projects’ Community and
Supportive Services

Housing authority                              Community services                              Supportive services
Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority (Cleveland)
Cuyahoga’s plan for community and              Over the next 3 years, residents will have      Residents will be provided with business
supportive services, called Central Vision:    opportunities to earn stipends as full time     training to operate a food cooperative in
Community Is Action, is intended to address    VISTA community service volunteers.             the Carl B. Stokes Social Service Mall.
unmet needs for human services, public
safety, education, and environmental care.    The Cleveland Conservation Corps will            The Youth Enhancement Service will train
                                              employ 56 young men and women in a               residents to operate family day care homes
Cuyahoga provides its community and           “work-earn-learn” program for 6 months           to provide respite care for public housing
supportive services through a “village” where before they become apprentices in the            parents.
services are centrally located. The village   Laborers International Union.
center model will assist residents in                                                          More than 20 social service agencies and
obtaining their general equivalency diploma Through a pilot project with the Department        programs will be housed in the Carl B.
(GED), starting a business, or owning a       of Social Work at Cleveland State                Stokes Social Service Mall to provide a
home.                                         University, 12 undergraduate and graduate        range of services and opportunities for
                                              students will provide mentoring, tutoring,       residents.
Cuyahoga’s community and supportive           and case management services to
services are directly linked. For example,    residents.                                       Through HUD’s Supportive Housing
Cuyahoga asked all supportive service                                                          Program, 40 homeless men will receive
providers to hire resident volunteers.        The Health Services Corps, in partnership        transitional housing services at the social
                                              with Case Western Reserve University, will       service mall.
                                              provide opportunities for medical students
                                              to provide a variety of services to residents.   Cleveland State University will link 160
                                                                                               residents electronically with local
                                               To be reintegrated into the community,          community and support service providers
                                               ex-offenders will act as escorts for seniors,   for a 1-year demonstration. On-line
                                               disabled residents, and single women in         services may include job postings for youth
                                               the community.                                  and adults, information on family services
                                                                                               and senior events, and games for the
                                               Intergenerational programs will link            young.
                                               elementary aged youth in two schools with
                                               tutoring by 10 senior citizens working          Twenty youth will participate in Stock
                                               through the RSVP program.                       Market Clubs to learn about the economy
                                                                                               and compete with other stock market
                                                                                               investment clubs in the state. Youth will
                                                                                               select their stocks and be evaluated on the
                                                                                               stocks’ returns on investment.

                                                                                               Cuyahoga is developing a foster home and
                                                                                               daycare homes at the developments for
                                                                                               child care.

                                               Page 27                                            GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
                                               Appendix III
                                               Selected HOPE VI Projects’ Community and
                                               Supportive Services

Housing authority                              Community services                            Supportive services
Housing Authority of Kansas City, Missouri
The Guinotte Manor development of the          Residents will be trained as Senior         HAKC has partnered with the Kansas City
Housing Authority of Kansas City (HAKC)        Companions to assist frail, homebound       Full Employment Council and the Missouri
spans 25 acres of land and contains 412 row    seniors to maintain independent living.     Department of Family Services to provide
dwelling units of public housing. The                                                      residents access to GED classes, job
development and the surrounding                HAKC has partnered with the Kansas City     readiness, training, and placement
neighborhood are characterized by poor         Police Department to set up a public safety services.
physical conditions, densely concentrated      program aimed at increasing the level of
residences, lack of open space, insufficient   community policing services to Guinotte     A Family Self Sufficiency program is
street and security lighting, and isolation    and supporting residents’ involvement in    established to help residents identify and
from commercial and retail services. High      crime prevention.                           achieve self-sufficiency goals.
rates of crime and unemployment also
characterize the area. The community is        An AmeriCorps VISTA volunteer worked          A Family Development and Learning
currently comprised of 45 percent              with the authority and the Guinotte Manor     Center is under development; it will have
African-American, 43 percent Asian, and 12     Tenants Association on outreach and           conference and training rooms, a computer
percent Hispanic residents. A 13-member        educational activities, including providing   lab, child care facilities, a resource room,
task force consisting of community residents   information on welfare reform and other       and other facilities.
actively participates in the HOPE VI process   relevant issues.
and provides input on all proposed services                                                  The Full Employment Council is providing
to HAKC’s court-appointed Receiver.            Residents received training to encourage      construction training to young adult
                                               the development of small businesses and       residents so that they can participate in the
                                               to build expertise in the creation of         construction jobs generated by the HOPE
                                               business plans.                               VI project.

                                                                                             The Francis Child Development Center
                                                                                             trained residents to qualify them to be child
                                                                                             care workers.

                                                                                             A revolving loan fund is under development
                                                                                             to provide start-up and expansion capital
                                                                                             for neighborhood-based small businesses.

                                                                                             The University of Kansas will provide
                                                                                             reading literacy training for up to 45
                                                                                             Guinotte residents as part of an overall job
                                                                                             readiness strategy.

                                                                                             HAKC has partnered with the Child Welfare
                                                                                             League of America to increase health
                                                                                             services on site, explore the feasibility of
                                                                                             establishing a primary health care facility,
                                                                                             and increase resident access to entry level
                                                                                             health care jobs.

                                               Page 28                                          GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
                                               Appendix III
                                               Selected HOPE VI Projects’ Community and
                                               Supportive Services

Housing authority                               Community services                              Supportive services
Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee
The HOPE VI site in Milwaukee is a 496-unit      The Youth Scholarship Fund will create         On-site health care services are provided
family development named Hillside Terrace        opportunities for community service and        by the Black Health Coalition.
that is located within the city’s Community      scholarships for youth between the ages of
Development Block Grant area and                 14 and 21. The scholarships would be           The on-site Boys and Girls Club includes a
Enterprise Community. The community’s            awarded annually to 10 to 15 Hillside          full-size gym, game room, and computer
HOPE VI service plan is designed to              Terrace residents who had completed 500        center and offers recreation, education,
promote self-sufficiency by linking              hours of community service. The fund will      employment, and social service programs.
opportunities for service to job training,       be administered by the Boys and Girls
permanent jobs, and educational awards.          Club of Greater Milwaukee and                  Child care and Head Start are provided
                                                 compliments the Milwaukee Guarantee,           on-site.
According to the Executive Director of the       which provides up to $3,250 per year in
Milwaukee Housing Authority, Wisconsin’s         college expenses for low-income high           The University of Wisconsin extension
Welfare Reform Initiative is stricter than the   school graduates who graduate from high        offers classes on-site in child development,
recently passed federal welfare reform           school with at least a 2.5 grade point         nutrition and parenting.
legislation. Milwaukee had to curtail some of average, demonstrate financial need, and
its plans for community and supportive           are interested in attending a local college,   Milwaukee Area Technical College
services. At least half of the residents are not university, or technical school.               provided GED classes.
available during the day due to required
attendance at job training or jobs. Services     The Community Enrichment Program will          Students from two nursing schools offer
are now offered primarily on the weekend or create opportunities for adult residents to         on-site health screening, home visits, and
in the evening.                                  earn 1 or 2 months’ rent by performing         health classes.
                                                 community service. Interested residents will
                                                 sign a partnership agreement identifying     The Housing Authority Board approved a
                                                 the agencies at which they will perform      contract with the University of
                                                 service. Residents can earn (a) 1 month’s    Wisconsin-Extension to coordinate an
                                                 rent by completing 240 hours of service      educational enrichment center for the
                                                 and attending 6 resident council meetings    residents of Hillside Terrace. The Hillside
                                                 and (b) 2 month’s rent by completing 400     Educational Enrichment Center is a
                                                 hours of service and attending all resident  year-round site for enrichment classes
                                                 council meetings. The program is intended    where the entire family can develop
                                                 to build the capacity of the Hillside        life-long learning skills. This center includes
                                                 Resident Council, develop future leaders,    computers for residents’ use and
                                                 and broaden residents’ representation in     classrooms where staff will coordinate job
                                                 decision-making.                             readiness and world-of-work classes. There
                                                                                              will also be a small community-based
                                                Under the Micro-Neighborhood Program,         reference library on personal enrichment
                                                new residents moving into the development and employment topics.
                                                will be mentored by families currently living
                                                in the area. Mentors, who also serve as
                                                neighborhood leaders, will receive stipends
                                                for their services.

                                               Page 29                                             GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
                                                   Appendix III
                                                   Selected HOPE VI Projects’ Community and
                                                   Supportive Services

Housing authority                                  Community services                              Supportive services
Oakland Housing Authority
The Oakland Housing Authority has targeted         La Clinica de la Raza is implementing an “It    A community center is under construction
two locations, East Oakland and Lower              Starts Now” program, which is designed to       in Lockwood Gardens to house a wide
Fruitvale, for revitalization. The authority has   offer the youth of the Fruitvale area the       range of support services for residents. The
broad-based community support, including           opportunity to become directly involved in      authority is also forming a Youth Advisory
the support of the Mayor’s office as well as       the renovation of their neighborhoods.          Board to encourage youth to become
numerous local and community-based                                                                 involved in the various programs offered
organizations.                                     The Fruitvale Community Collaborative is        through HOPE VI.
                                                   conducting community organizing in the
                                                   Fruitvale area.                                Several partners currently provide small
                                                                                                  business development training, technical
                                                   The Spanish Speaking Unity Council is          assistance, job and entrepreneurship
                                                   facilitating conflict resolution workshops for training, and health services. They include
                                                   residents and nonresidents.                    the following:

                                                   The Bay Area Urban League has hired one         East Bay Conservation Corps for basic
                                                   resident to assist with community               literary and numeracy services, GED
                                                   organizing in Coliseum Gardens. The             preparation, and pre-vocational skills
                                                   League is conducting door-to-door               training.
                                                   outreach in the community and assisting
                                                   the residents in identifying projects for the   East Bay Small Business Development
                                                   utilization of resident-designated funds.       Center for providing technical assistance
                                                                                                   and training in self-employment and small
                                                                                                   business development.

                                                                                                   Spanish Speaking Unity Council for
                                                                                                   providing self-employment and business
                                                                                                   development assistance in the Fruitvale

                                                                                                   Asian Community Mental Health Services
                                                                                                   for providing outreach, education and
                                                                                                   citizenship classes, translation services,
                                                                                                   and assistance with employment

                                                                                                   Boys and Girls Club for recreational
                                                                                                   activities, academic services, and antidrug


                                                   Page 30                                            GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
                                               Appendix III
                                               Selected HOPE VI Projects’ Community and
                                               Supportive Services

Housing authority                              Community services                             Supportive services
Chicago Housing Authority
Chicago’s HOPE VI plan relies on citywide      Cabrini Alive: Resident volunteers will        Substance abuse prevention is part of all
collaboration to revitalize the                renovate vacant units in one building and      HOPE VI program orientations and is
community. The plan focuses on families, not   determine what social services would be        included as part of the Family Assessments
just individuals. The mayor’s office has       most appropriate for them. This program,       process.
brought schools, parks, the Chicago            which the authority hopes to expand to
Housing Authority, the Department of           other buildings affected by HOPE VI, is        The Chicago Works program is the primary
Housing, and planners together to develop a    designed to help residents adjust and          placement program for residents in both
comprehensive plan to leverage other           prepare for all the redevelopment activities   construction and nonconstruction job
resources and integrate public housing         that are occurring as a result of HOPE VI.     areas, with emphasis on skill assessment
residents into the community.                                                                 and job linkages with area industrial
                                               Project Peace: This is a peer mentoring        businesses.
                                               program that will train students in violence
                                               prevention and conflict resolution through    Job opportunities in child care will be
                                               peer mediation.                               provided. Subsidized child care services
                                                                                             will be available for those residents
                                               Cabrini Green Youth Corps: A local service enrolled in training and job
                                               provider has been contracted to work with development/placement programs.
                                               the youth and help them identify their social
                                               needs and get involved in serving their       Alternative education is provided to “at-risk”
                                               community.                                    youth and “potential drop-outs.” Each youth
                                                                                             will be matched with a “career mentor.”
                                               Tenant Patrol: This project helps to train
                                               and engage residents in anticrime             The authority will provide small grants to
                                               strategies. The project’s goals include the   help groups of residents implement
                                               development of a tenant patrol in each        small-scale activities that would improve
                                               building.                                     their quality of life. Also, an
                                                                                             entrepreneurship revolving loan fund will
                                                                                             be made available to residents.

                                               Page 31                                           GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
Appendix IV

Major Contributors to This Report

                       Larry Dyckman, Associate Director
Resources,             Eric A. Marts, Assistant Director
Community, and         Martha Chow, Evaluator-in-Charge
Economic               Gwenetta Blackwell, Chicago/Detroit Field Office
                       Angela Crump-Volcy
Development Division   Stephen Jones
                       William Sparling

(385642)               Page 32                                GAO/RCED-97-44 HOPE VI Demonstration
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the
following address, accompanied by a check or money order
made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when
necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.
Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address
are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office
P.O. Box 6015
Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100
700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)
U.S. General Accounting Office
Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000
or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and
testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any
list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a
touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on
how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,
send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:


or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:


United States                       Bulk Rate
General Accounting Office      Postage & Fees Paid
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001           GAO
                                 Permit No. G100
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested