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