Introduction The present paper aims to analyze the national intensive case management and rental assistance program for homeless veterans described by Kasprow et al. (2000). The program is assessed using the four principles of community psychology, which include problems addressed, values reflected in the program approach and methods, conceptual foundation of the program, and action and research tools (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010). The recommendations for improvement are provided after the analysis Program Description The program targeted veterans that experienced a housing problems with renting an apartment. The program consisted of two parts that aimed at addressing two aspects of veteran adaptation. On the one hand, the program helped to cover the rent of an apartment if it exceeded 30% of the veteran’s income. On the other hand, the program provided intensive case management, which allowed addressing the mental health problems of the participants. The terms of service provision were reevaluated every year with an intention to decrease support gradually. The program was evaluated using quantitative methods. Program Evaluation The problem addressed by the program was the after-service adaptation of veterans to civil life. Kasprow et al. (2000) stated that many veterans are unprepared to live civil life due to lack of experience, physical trauma, or mental health problems. Thus, the program aimed to assist veterans with housing problems and mental health issues. According to Nelson and Prilleltensky (2010), the program utilized an individually-oriented ameliorative rather than transformative approach. Instead of holistically considering the problem of veteran adaptation, the program addressed two aspects of post-service adaptation. The values of the program were not explicitly stated, and they were difficult to deduct implicitly. The program clearly valued housing stability and mental well-being, as the program aimed at helping to achieve these matters. However, it is unclear what other values were crucial for the program. The values appear to address personal rather than relational or collective well-being (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010). The program was not based on any theoretical framework, which is a significant drawback. The importance of theory for planning programs and interventions is difficult to overstate, as it helps to predict outcomes and align methods with the purpose (French & Cooke, 2012). The actions were aligned with the purpose of the program. In particular, the program assisted veterans with housing by providing a subsidy. While it may seem insufficient to solve the problem, veterans were also provided intensive case management services, which included vocational services. Case management also helped to improve the mental health of the participants, which is a crucial factor for the successful adaptation of veterans (Kasprow et al., 2000). As for the research tools, they were insufficient to reflect the complexity of the problem. Quantitative methods did not provide any insights into how the program can be enhanced to increase its effectiveness and accessibility. Conclusion and Recommendations for Improvement While the program helped many veterans receive financial support and assistance through case management, its effectiven