United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to the Chairman, Committee on 

Veterans’ Affairs, House of 

Representatives 

HOMELESS 

VETERANS 

PROGRAMS 

Improved 

Communications and 

Follow-up Could 

Further Enhance the 

Grant and Per Diem 

Program 

September 2006 

 

GAO-06-859 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

September 2006

HOMELESS VETERANS PROGRAMS

Improved Communications and Follow-up 

Could Further Enhance the Grant and Per 

Diem Program 

Highlights of GAO-06-859, a report to the 

Chairman, Committee on Veterans’ 

Affairs, House of Representatives 

About one-third of the nation’s 

adult homeless population are 

veterans, according to the 

Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA). Many of these veterans have

experienced substance abuse, 

mental illness, or both. The VA’s 

Homeless Providers Grant and Per 

Diem (GPD) program, which is up 

for reauthorization, provides 

transitional housing to help

veterans prepare for permanent 

housing. As requested, GAO 

reviewed (1) VA homeless veterans 

estimates and the number of

transitional housing beds, (2) the 

extent of collaboration involved in 

the provision of GPD and related

services, and (3) VA’s assessment

of GPD program performance. 

GAO analyzed VA data and

methods used for the homeless 

estimates and performance

assessment, and visited selected 

GPD providers in four states to

observe the extent of collaboration.

What GAO Recommends

To further strengthen VA’s ability 

to help homeless veterans, GAO is 

recommending that VA take steps 

to ensure policies are understood 

by providers and staff who

implement them. GAO also

recommends that VA explore 

feasible and cost-effective means of 

obtaining information on long-term

outcomes for veterans who leave 

the GPD programs. VA generally

agreed with our findings and 

recommendations. 

VA estimates that on a given night about 194,000 veterans were homeless in 

2005. The estimate, generally lower than the numbers reported prior to 2004,

is considered by VA officials to be the best available. VA officials believe that

its new estimation process and use of better local data have improved the 

estimate. While VA has increased the capacity of the GPD program over the 

past several years, VA reports that an additional 9,600 transitional housing 

beds from various sources are needed to meet current demand. VA has plans 

to make 2,200 additional GPD beds available. 

Number of GPD Beds and Admissions from Fiscal Year 2000 through 2005 

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Source: GAO analysis of VA data rounded to nearest 100th.

Fiscal year

Admissions of homeless veterans

2,000

4,100 4,800

6,700 7,300 8,000

4,800

10,100

11,900 12,400 13,500

16,600

Operational GPD beds

GPD providers collaborate with other agencies to help veterans regain their 

health and obtain housing, jobs, and various services to enable them to live 

independently. However, resource and communications gaps may stand in 

the way of VA and provider efforts to meet these goals. Limited availability 

of affordable permanent housing, for example, may make it difficult to move 

veterans out of homelessness, according to GPD providers. We also 

identified instances of misunderstandings of program policies related to 

eligibility and program stay limits that could prevent homeless veterans from 

being admitted into the GPD program. 

VA assesses overall program performance by the success of veterans in 

attaining stable housing, income, and self-determination at the time they 

leave the program. VA data show that the percentage of veterans achieving 

these goals has generally increased or held steady over time. In 2006, VA also 

stepped up its assessment of the performance of GPD providers. While these 

assessments do not indicate how veterans fare after they leave the program,

preliminary results of a onetime VA study indicate positive housing 

outcomes were maintained 1 year later. However, VA does not routinely 

collect follow-up data and may not be able to determine how veterans who 

were not included in the study are faring after they leave the program. www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-859.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Cristina T. 

Chaplain at (202) 512-7215 or 

chaplainc@gao.gov. 
Contents 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2 

Background 4

VA Estimates about 194,000 Veterans Are Homeless and Has 

Increased Its Capacity to Provide Transitional Housing 12 

GPD Providers Collaborate to Offer a Range of Services but Still 

Face Challenges in Helping Veterans 19 

VA Data Show That the GPD Program Helps Veterans Get Housing 

and Income, but Data Are Limited on Veterans’ Circumstances 

after They Leave the Program 26 

Conclusions 34

Recommendations for Executive Action 34 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 35 

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 37 

Appendix II VA’s Programs for Homeless Veterans Other than 

the GPD Program 41 

Appendix III Range of Services Offered by GPD Programs 

Nationwide 44 

Appendix IV Participant Outcomes for the Grant and Per Diem 

Program 46 

Appendix V Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs 48 

Appendix VI GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 52 

Related GAO Products 53 

Page i GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Tables 

Table 1: Available and Needed Transitional Beds for Homeless 

Veterans, Fiscal Year 2005 18 

Table 2: Examples of Services and Partners That Worked with GPD 

Providers We Visited 21 

Table 3: Numbers and Percentages of Veterans Leaving the GPD 

Program with Employment or Benefit Income, Fiscal Years 

2000 through 2005 29 

Table 4: Number of Veterans Leaving GPD Program and Percentage

with Specific Problems at Entry, Fiscal Years 2000 and 

2005 31 

Table 5: Features of GPD Programs That GAO Visited 38 

Table 6: Percentage of GPD Facilities Reporting They Provided 

Selected Services by Method 45 

Table 7: Number Served by VA’s Health Care for Homeless 

Veterans and Grant and Per Diem Program and Veterans’ 

Outcomes, Fiscal years 2000 through 2005 47 

Figures 

Figure 1: VA Services and Programs for Homeless Veterans 5 

Figure 2: Interiors and Exteriors of Selected GPD Buildings That 

GAO Toured 8 

Figure 3: VA Estimates of Homeless Veterans Nationwide, Fiscal 

Years 2000 through 2005 14 

Figure 4: Number of GPD Beds Compared to Admissions of 

Homeless Veterans, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2005 16 

Figure 5: Distribution of the Beds Available under the GPD 

Program in May 2006 17 

Figure 6: Flow of Policy and Program Information from VA to GPD 

Providers 24

Figure 7: Percentage of Veterans with Independent or Secured 

Housing upon Leaving GPD Program, Fiscal Years 2000 

through 2005 28 

Figure 8: Percentage of Veterans Leaving the GPD Program with 

Greater Self-Determination, Fiscal Years 2000 through 

2005 30

Page ii GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Abbreviations 

CHALENG Community Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and 

Networking Group for Veterans 

DOL Department of Labor 

GPD Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem 

HCHV Health Care for Homeless Veterans 

HHS Department of Health and Human Services 

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development 

NEPEC Northeast Program Evaluation Center

OIG Office of Inspector General 

VA Department of Veterans Affairs 

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. However, 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. 

Page iii GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

September 11, 2006 

The Honorable Steve Buyer 

Chairman 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

House of Representatives 

Dear Chairman Buyer: 

On any given night in the United States, an estimated 700,000 people, 

including veterans, are homeless and sleep on the streets or in shelters. 

Veterans constitute about one-third of the adult homeless population, 

according to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Many veterans who 

are not homeless may be at risk of homelessness as a result of poverty, 

lack of support from family and friends, or precarious living conditions in 

overcrowded or substandard housing. 

To help address the needs of homeless veterans, VA operates several 

programs, the largest of which is the Homeless Providers Grant and Per 

Diem (GPD) program. Scheduled for reauthorization in 2007, this program 

provides a transitional setting to help veterans prepare for permanent 

housing. The program is not intended to serve all homeless veterans but is

focused instead on serving those who are most in need, including veterans 

whose circumstances make them likely to remain homeless unless they 

receive assistance, such as those who have had problems with mental 

illness, substance abuse, or both. Through a network of local nonprofit or 

public agencies, the program provides beds to homeless veterans in 

settings free of drugs and alcohol that are supervised 24 hours a day, 

7 days a week. Program rules generally allow veterans to stay with a single

GPD provider for 2 years, but providers have the flexibility to set shorter 

time frames. In addition, veterans are generally limited to a total of three 

stays in the program over their lifetime. The program’s goals are to help

homeless veterans achieve residential stability, increase their skill levels 

or income, and attain greater self-determination. 

As Congress considers the reauthorization of the GPD program, you asked 

us to review (1) VA estimates of the total number of homeless veterans 

and the number of transitional beds available, (2) the extent of

collaboration involved in the provision of GPD and related services, and

(3) VA’s assessment of GPD program performance. 

Page 1 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
In examining VA’s estimates of the number of homeless veterans, we 

reviewed relevant reports and interviewed outside experts as well as 

officials with the Bureau of the Census, the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD), and VA’s Community Homelessness 

Assessment, Local Education and Networking Group for Veterans 

(CHALENG). To assess the extent of coordination among community 

partners serving homeless veterans, we visited 13 GPD providers located

in California, Florida, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin, including some in 

rural areas as well as large cities. In addition, we analyzed data from a 

survey of GPD providers conducted by VA’s Northeast Program Evaluation 

Center (NEPEC) and attended a meeting of VA’s Advisory Committee on 

Homeless Veterans. We focused our review on those GPD providers 

serving homeless veterans in general rather than special subgroups, such 

as the chronically mentally ill. In each of these locations, we interviewed 

local VA officials, GPD staff, community partners, and, where possible, 

current and former program participants. To develop information on GPD 

performance, we interviewed officials and analyzed data from NEPEC and 

VA’s national program office. Data obtained were considered sufficiently 

reliable for our purposes. We coordinated with VA’s Office of Inspector 

General so that our review complemented but did not duplicate its recent 

review related to GPD financial management and oversight issues.1

 We 

conducted our work between August 2005 and July 2006 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards. For more 

information on our scope and methodology, see appendix I. 

VA reports that about 194,000 veterans were homeless nationwide on a 

given night in fiscal year 2005—an estimate that VA officials consider the

best available. VA changed its estimation process in 2004 to provide a 

snapshot of the number of homeless veterans at a given point in time, as 

opposed to an aggregate total of veterans who were homeless over the 

course of the year. Earlier estimates combined these aggregate totals with 

the snapshot data. While VA officials consider the current estimate to be 

more reliable than those for earlier years, the agency believes the estimate 

to be on the low side because some veterans cannot be located at the time 

the counts are taken. To accommodate veterans ready and willing to 

assume the responsibilities involved in transitional housing, VA reports 

that a total of 45,000 transitional beds are needed. VA has identified 35,400

Results in Brief 

 1 VA’s Office of Inspector General reviewed the GPD program and planned to issue a report

in September 2006 titled Evaluation of the Veterans Health Administration Homeless

Grant and Per Diem Program that will be available on the Internet.

Page 2 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
beds that are available from various sources, including the GPD program, 

resulting in a shortfall of about 9,600 beds. In fiscal year 2005, the GPD 

program had about 8,000 beds available for homeless veterans. Because 

veterans only stayed in GPD beds on average about 4 months, the GPD 

program was able to admit over 16,000 veterans over this same period. VA 

officials told us that they have plans to expand the GPD program by 

2,200 beds in the near future. As the GPD program continues to grow, VA 

also recognizes that it will have to accommodate the needs of the changing

homeless veteran population, including increasing numbers of women and 

veterans with dependents. 

The GPD providers that we visited often collaborated with public and 

nonprofit agencies in helping veterans to recover from substance abuse or 

mental illness and obtain permanent housing, employment, financial 

stability, and services needed to enhance their ability to live 

independently. While GPD providers were generally able to build 

successful partnerships, most of them identified resource and 

communications gaps that presented challenges to delivering certain 

services. For example, providers reported difficulties in locating 

affordable permanent housing for veterans ready to leave the program 

because of shortages in their communities. In addition we found that those 

responsible for program implementation did not always understand the 

policies. Some GPD providers believed that homeless veterans were 

eligible for the GPD program only if they were eligible for VA health care.

This assumption was incorrect and may have had the effect of erroneously 

turning away veterans seeking to enter the GPD program. There were also 

instances in which GPD providers did not understand that veterans may be 

able to exceed the 3-stay lifetime limit under certain conditions. This 

assumption, also incorrect, could keep veterans from obtaining needed 

care. 

VA assesses performance in two ways—the veterans’ circumstances at the

time they leave the program and the ability of individual GPD providers to 

meet their own objectives—but VA generally does not know how veterans 

are faring months or years later. When veterans leave the program for any 

reason, VA collects information on their immediate success in obtaining 

housing, income, and greater self-determination—the primary measures of 

overall GPD program performance. VA reports that of all veterans leaving

the program in fiscal year 2005, half had successfully arranged

independent housing, one-third had jobs, over one-third were receiving

public benefits, and 57 to 69 percent showed progress with substance 

abuse, mental health or medical problems or demonstrated greater selfdetermination in other ways. In addition, in 2006 VA took steps to ensure 

Page 3 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
that its local staff conduct annual reviews to determine if the GPD 

providers are meeting their objectives. VA does not require providers to 

collect data from veterans months or years after they leave the program, 

although many providers attempt to maintain contact with former 

participants. Some indication of how veterans are faring after they leave 

the program should be available from VA’s recent follow-up study of 

520 program participants. Preliminary results of this study indicate that 

veterans maintained positive housing outcomes 1 year after leaving the 

GPD program. 

To further strengthen VA’s ability to help homeless veterans, we are 

recommending that VA take steps to ensure that GPD policies and 

procedures are consistently understood and to explore feasible means of 

obtaining information about the circumstances of veterans after they leave 

the GPD program. In its comments on a draft of this report, VA concurred

with our recommendations and described several initiatives planned or 

under way to address some issues raised in our report as well as other 

challenges the GPD program faces. 

The GPD program is one of nine VA programs that specialize in serving 

homeless veterans. Six of these programs fall under the responsibility of 

the Veterans Health Administration, which obligated about $224 million in

fiscal year 2006 for these programs as well as $1.2 billion for outreach and 

treatment of homeless veterans. Outreach is considered particularly 

important to locate and serve veterans living on the street and in 

temporary shelters who otherwise would not seek assistance. Treatment 

involves primary and specialty medical care, mental health care, and 

alcohol and drug abuse services for eligible homeless veterans. Three of 

the nine programs are run jointly or solely by the Veterans Benefits 

Administration that also serves homeless veterans as part of its broader 

mission to provide disability compensation and pensions to eligible 

veterans. Figure 1 illustrates some of the key programs and services for 

homeless veterans—including the GPD program that is the focus of this 

report—provided by VA. (App. II provides a general description of the 

eight programs not otherwise covered in this report.) 

Background 

Page 4 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Figure 1: VA Services and Programs for Homeless Veterans 

Provides compensation, pension and

educational benefits; vocational rehabilitation, home loan guarantees, life insurance

Veterans Benefits Administration

VA

Benefit income

services

Veterans Benefits

Administration

Outreach Programa

Housing services

Acquired Property

Sales for Homeless

Providers Program

Veterans Health Administration

Provides primary health care,

specialized care, related medical 

and social support services through

its medical centers

Transitional housing

services

Homeless Providers

Grant and Per Diem Program

Domiciliary

Residential Rehabilitation

and Treatment Program

Contracted Residential

Treatment

Loan Guarantee for Multifamily

Transitional Housing Program

Work therapy services

Compensated Work

Therapy Program

Outreach, assessment

and intake services

Health Care for 

Homeless Veterans

Labor-VA Incarcerated Veterans

Transition Program

Permanent

housing services

Housing and Urban

Development-VA

Supported Housing

Program

This program is 

the focus of this report 

(these two services are part

of the same program)

Source: GAO analysis of VA data.

a

This program is a joint initiative with VHA. 

b

HUD provides the housing subsidy; VA provides case management services. 

Page 5 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
The GPD program—-VA’s major transitional housing program for 

homeless veterans—-spent about $67 million in fiscal year 2005. It became 

VA’s largest program for homeless veterans after fiscal year 2002, when VA

began to increase GPD program capacity and phase out national funding 

for the more costly contracted residential treatment—another of VA’s 

transitional housing programs. 2 To operate the GPD program at the local 

level, nonprofit and public agencies compete for grants. The program 

provides two basic types of grants—capital grants to pay for the buildings 

that house homeless veterans and per diem grants for the day-to-day 

operational expenses. 

GPD Transitional Housing 

Program for Homeless 

Veterans

• Capital grants cover up to 65 percent of housing acquisition, 

construction, or renovation costs and require that agencies 

receiving the grants cover the remaining costs through other 

funding sources. Generally, agencies that have received capital 

grants are considered for subsequent per diem grants, so that the 

VA investment can be realized and the buildings can provide 

operational beds. 

• Per diem grants support the operations of about 300 GPD providers3

nationwide. The per diem grants pay a fixed dollar amount for each 

day an authorized bed is occupied by an eligible veteran up to the 

maximum number of beds allowed by the grant. Generally under 

this grant, VA does not pay for empty beds. VA makes payments 

after an agency has housed the veteran, on a cost reimbursement 

basis, and the agency may use the payments to offset operating

costs, such as staff salaries and utilities. By law, the per diem 

reimbursement cannot exceed a fixed rate, which was $29.31 per 

person per day in 2006. Reimbursement may be lower for providers 

receiving funds for the same purpose from other sources. 

On a limited basis, special needs grants are available to cover the 

additional costs of serving women, frail elderly, terminally ill, or 

chronically mentally ill veterans. Although the primary focus of the GPD 

 2

 Some medical centers continue to fund contracted residential treatment from their own 

budgets. For more on earlier VA programs serving homeless veterans, see GAO, Homeless 

Veterans: VA Expands Partnerships, but Homeless Program Effectiveness Is Unclear, 

GAO/HEHS-99-53 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 1, 1999). 

3

Throughout this report, we use the term “GPD provider” to refer to a locally run program.

In some cases a single organization may have several GPD grants for housing at different 

locations, and we generally report this as multiple providers. 

Page 6 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
program is housing, grants may also be used for transport or to operate 

daytime service centers that do not provide overnight accommodations. 

According to VA, in fiscal year 2005, GPD grants supported about 75 vans

that were used to conduct outreach and transport homeless veterans to 

medical and other appointments. Also, 23 service centers were operating 

with GPD support. 

Most GPD providers have 50 or fewer beds available for homeless 

veterans, with the majority of providers having 25 or fewer. 

Accommodations vary and may range from rooms in multistory buildings 

in the inner city to rooms in detached homes in suburban residential 

neighborhoods. Veterans may sleep in barracks-style bunk beds in a room 

shared by several other participants or may have their own rooms. Figure 

2 shows the exteriors and interiors of selected GPD buildings we visited. 

Page 7 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Figure 2: Interiors and Exteriors of Selected GPD Buildings That GAO Toured

Source: Maryland Center for Veterans Education and Training. Source: Veterans Hospice Homestead, Inc.

Source: GAO. Source: GAO.

Generally housing is either male only or has separate sleeping areas for 

males and females. Multipurpose rooms may be available for television, 

games, and conversation, as well as communal kitchen facilities where 

meals can be purchased or made by the participants themselves. Not all 

GPD providers supply food. Some may assist the participants in obtaining 

items from community food banks. GPD providers may require veterans to 

pay rent, but the rent cannot exceed 30 percent of a veteran’s income, 

after deducting the costs of medical, child care, and court-ordered 

payments. In addition, veterans may be charged fees for other services not

Page 8 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
supported by the GPD grant, such as cable television. According to VA 

rules, veterans may stay with a single GPD provider for 24 months or 

longer under certain conditions.4

 GPD providers may specify shorter limits 

such as 3, 6, or 12 months. In fiscal year 2005, the average stay for veterans 

was about 4 months with a single GPD provider. 

Veteran Eligibility for the 

GPD Program 

To meet VA’s minimum eligibility requirements for the program, 

individuals must be veterans and must be homeless. A veteran is defined 

as an individual who has been discharged or released from active military 

service and includes members of the Reserves and National Guard with 

active federal service. Although the GPD program definition excludes 

individuals who have received a dishonorable discharge, it is less 

restrictive in terms of length of service requirements. As a result, some 

homeless veterans may be eligible for the GPD program and not eligible

for VA health care.5

 VA does not pay for spouses and children of veterans 

who are not themselves veterans, but they may be served by GPD 

providers using other funds.6

 Consistent with the definition used in many 

other federal programs, VA defines a homeless individual as a person who 

lacks a fixed, regular, adequate nighttime residence and instead stays at 

night in a shelter, institution, or public or private place not designed for 

regular sleeping accommodations.7

 Prison inmates are not deemed 

homeless, but may be at risk of homelessness and may be eligible for the 

program upon their release. GPD providers determine if potential 

participants are homeless, but VA officials determine if potential 

participants meet the program’s definition of veteran. VA officials are also 

responsible for determining whether veterans have exceeded their lifetime 

limit of three stays in a GPD program and for issuing a waiver to that rule

when appropriate. 

 4

 VA granted extensions to about 1 percent of the veterans who left the program in fiscal 

year 2005. The rules allow extensions when permanent housing for the veteran has not

been located or the veteran requires additional time to prepare for independent living. 

5

 In contrast to the GPD program, veterans must meet the minimum length of service 

requirements of in 38 U.S.C. §5303A in order to be eligible for VA health care. In certain

cases veterans with dishonorable discharges may obtain an upgrade to their discharge

status and thus become eligible for the GPD program or for VA medical care. 

6

Veterans must constitute at least 75 percent of participants in facilities that have received 

GPD capital grants. 

7

The definitions appear at 42 U.S.C. § 11302 and 38 C.F.R. § 61.1. 

Page 9 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Prospective GPD providers may identify additional eligibility requirements 

in their grant documents. Because the providers are responsible for 

providing a clean and sober environment that is free of illicit drugs, about 

two-thirds of providers require that veterans entering the program be 

sober and free from alcohol and drug use for a given length of time. The 

time frames set by many providers range from 1 to 30 days of sobriety. 

Many providers also conduct drug tests of veterans after they enter the 

program to ensure their continued sobriety. Most providers will not accept 

veterans considered to be a danger to themselves or others, in need of 

detoxification, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. About one-fifth 

of providers also exclude veterans who are considered seriously mentally 

ill, because the providers may not be able to provide adequate care. 

The GPD program is focused primarily on helping those most in need—

veterans who might remain homeless for long periods of time if no 

intervention occurs—and is not intended to serve all homeless veterans. 

About two-thirds of homeless veterans in the program in fiscal year 2005 

had struggled with alcohol, drug, medical, or mental health problems. 

About 40 percent of homeless veterans seen by VA had served during the 

Vietnam era, and most of the remaining homeless veterans served after 

that war, including over 2,500 who served in military operations in the 

Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Almost all homeless veterans seen by

VA are males; about half are between 45 and 54 years old, one-quarter are 

older, and one-quarter are younger. African-Americans are 

disproportionately represented, constituting the largest racial group at 

47 percent; whites are the next largest group at 45 percent. About 

75 percent of veterans are either divorced or never married. 

The complex problems faced by homeless veterans require a system of 

comprehensive, integrated services that often involves multiple 

organizations. Key federal agencies with programs specifically targeted to

the homeless, including veterans, are HUD, the Department of Health and 

Human Services (HHS), and the Department of Labor (DOL). HUD makes 

funds available to bring together community organizations to plan and

coordinate service delivery through local or regional networks designated

as the “Continuums of Care.” In their planning role, the Continuums 

arrange for counts of the homeless in their area, and since 2003, are 

required to report the number for a given point in time and to do so at 

Characteristics of Veterans 

Eligible for the GPD 

Program 

Roles of Various Agencies 

Serving Homeless Veterans 

Page 10 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
least every 2 years.8

 Further, as part of their coordination role, the 

Continuums review agency applications for certain HUD grants. HUD also

funds emergency shelters that are open seasonally or year-round for 

temporary, overnight accommodations. In addition, HUD is the only 

federal agency that is authorized to provide permanent subsidized housing 

for the homeless. HHS specializes in funding health care and researching 

the needs of homeless with substance abuse and mental health issues. 

DOL, like VA, has programs targeted specifically to veterans within the 

homeless population, with DOL’s emphasis on helping veterans obtain 

employment. Charities, businesses, and state and local governments are 

also involved in meeting the needs of homeless veterans and, in some 

cases, providing funding to GPD providers. 

At the federal level, VA works with these and other federal agencies 

through two key committees. VA’s Advisory Committee on Homeless 

Veterans is responsible for assessing the needs of homeless veterans and 

determining if VA and others are meeting these needs. The committee 

comprises homeless veterans, experts and advocates, community-based 

service providers, state and federal government officials, and 

representatives of veterans’ service organizations. The committee has 

made several recommendations on improvements to homeless veterans’ 

programs, including the GPD program, some of which have been 

implemented. In 2004 the committee urged VA to fund GPD providers 

serving veterans with special needs, especially female veterans; in fiscal 

year 2005 there were 29 programs of this kind, including 8 for female 

veterans.9

VA is also a participant on the Interagency Council on Homelessness, 

which coordinates the federal response to homelessness and works with 

state and local governments to develop plans for ending chronic 

homelessness among individuals, including veterans, in 10 years.10

Although the chronic homeless represent only 10 to 20 percent of all 

 8

To assist Continuums in conducting counts of the homeless, HUD issued A Guide to 

Counting Unsheltered Homeless People, which is available on the Internet. 

9

For the committee’s recommendations and VA’s responses, see Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 2005 Annual Report of the Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans: Reaching 

Out to Homeless Veterans (Washington, D.C.: July 2005). 

10The chronic homeless are unaccompanied individuals with disabling conditions who have

either been continuously homeless for a year or have had at least four episodes of 

homelessness in the past 3 years. An estimated 63,000 veterans were considered 

chronically homeless in 2005. 

Page 11 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
homeless adults, they take up roughly half of all shelter beds and also use 

a disproportionate share of resources for the homeless. 

At the local level, VA works with various agencies through the Community 

Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and Networking Groups for 

Veterans, referred to as Project CHALENG. An arrangement of this kind is 

needed, according to VA, because no single agency can provide the full 

range of services required to help homeless veterans become more 

productive members of society. Through CHALENG, a designated VA 

official in each medical center, usually VA’s homeless coordinator, reaches

out to community agencies that provide services to the homeless to raise 

awareness of homeless veterans’ particular needs and to plan to meet 

those needs. Specific needs to be addressed include outreach, counseling, 

health care, education and training, employment, and housing. Every year 

these VA officials prepare estimates of the total number of homeless 

veterans in their area, based on input from various sources. In addition, 

the officials meet with community representatives to complete a survey of

available resources, additional resources needed, priorities for service, 

and an action plan.11

VA estimates that on a given night in fiscal year 2005 about 

194,000 veterans were homeless.12 The estimate, generally lower than the 

numbers reported prior to 2004, is considered by VA officials to be the 

best estimate available. VA officials believe that a new methodology and

use of local HUD data has improved the estimate, although some homeless 

veterans may not have been included because they could not be found 

when the estimate was developed. While VA has increased its capacity to 

provide transitional housing for homeless veterans in recent years, its 

program planning efforts indicate that an additional 9,600 transitional 

housing beds from various sources are needed to meet current demand. 

VA officials report that they are working to operationalize an additional 

2,200 beds for the GPD program. 

VA Estimates about 

194,000 Veterans Are 

Homeless and Has 

Increased Its Capacity 

to Provide 

Transitional Housing 

 11For the fiscal year 2005 report, see VA, Community Homelessness Assessment, Local 

Education and Networking Group (CHALENG) for Veterans: The Twelfth Annual 

Progress Report on Public Law105-114, Services for Homeless Veterans Assessment and

Coordination, (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 15, 2006). 

12 The estimate of homeless veterans is derived from the CHALENG survey of designated 

local VA officials who are asked to provide the highest number of homeless veterans 

estimated in their service area on one day of the official’s choosing in fiscal year 2005. 

Page 12 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
VA bases its national estimate of homeless veterans on the summation of 

local estimates developed by VA officials for the areas served by VA 

medical facilities. This process is part of the annual CHALENG planning 

effort, which involved 135 local VA officials in 2005. Local VA officials are 

not responsible for conducting their own counts of homeless veterans, but 

are expected to rely on data from other groups that have collected these 

data. More than 75 percent of VA officials use multiple data sources, in 

part because the areas covered by VA medical facilities often comprise 

several cities, counties, or even states, while local data sources may cover 

one or more of these jurisdictions, but rarely cover the full area served by

the medical facility. Most often, local VA officials rely on data collected by 

the HUD-funded Continuums of Care, local governments, university 

researchers, or other groups along with information from local homeless 

providers. The estimates reported by local VA officials are compared to 

the previous year’s and if they have significantly changed, the local VA 

officials are asked to explain the differences before their estimates are 

incorporated into the national figure.

VA Considers Its Homeless 

Veterans Estimate to Be 

the Best Available 

Prior to 2004, local VA officials used a methodology to develop their 

estimates that was the equivalent of mixing apples with oranges and, as a

result, yielded less consistent, reliable counts of the homeless veteran 

population. This mixed methodology combined cumulative numbers such 

as the total who were homeless over the course of a year with point-intime numbers involving the number homeless on any given day or night.

The numbers were not comparable because over the course of a year some

individuals who were not homeless when the counts were conducted later 

became homeless. Generally, the number of veterans who are homeless 

sometime over the course of a year is larger than the number who are 

homeless on any given night. Since 2004, local VA officials have been 

directed to use point-in-time data exclusively in developing their estimates 

to reflect the number of homeless veterans on any given day of the year. 

VA reports that this standardized method yields more reliable estimates 

than were developed for earlier years, although there may be some 

veterans who cannot be located. Figure 3 shows VA’s estimates of the 

homeless veteran population from fiscal years 2000-2005. 

Page 13 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Figure 3: VA Estimates of Homeless Veterans Nationwide, Fiscal Years 2000 

through 2005 

0

25,000

50,000

75,000

100,000

125,000

150,000

175,000

200,000

225,000

250,000

275,000

300,000

325,000

350,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Homeless veterans

Source: GAO analysis of VA data from CHALENG reports.

Fiscal year

292,000 295,000 299,000

313,000

192,000 194,000

Recent estimates are also likely to be more reliable, according to VA, 

because local VA officials increasingly use homeless data from counts 

funded by HUD’s Continuum of Care, which are believed to be more 

accurate. In 2005, more than twice as many local VA officials used HUD 

counts as was the case in 2003. HUD-funded counts in many communities 

are gradually improving as the census takers increasingly seek out the 

“hidden” homeless who do not contact service providers as well as the 

homeless who congregate at soup kitchens and shelters. In both Atlanta 

and Los Angeles, homeless individuals were hired in 2005 to assist the 

census takers in locating areas where homeless individuals could be 

found. As a result, the local counts that were conducted in these two 

communities were more accurate than the counts conducted in earlier 

years, according to VA officials. 

Although VA officials believe that the number is likely an underestimate, 

VA officials consider their 2005 year estimate of 194,000 homeless veterans 

on any given night to be the best available. Counting the homeless is a 

challenge for several reasons, as VA and other agencies have 

Page 14 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
acknowledged,13 since the homeless are hard to locate and some may not 

be included in the current estimate. Also, the number may change in

relation to social and economic factors, such as job layoffs or a tighter 

housing market. In addition, veterans who are doubled up and sharing 

crowded living quarters with others are considered at risk of becoming 

homeless but are not included in the counts because they do not meet VA’s 

definition of homeless. 

VA Expanded GPD 

Program Capacity and 

Plans Further Expansion 

to Help Meet Homeless 

Veterans’ Needs 

Since fiscal year 2000, VA has almost quadrupled the number of available 

beds and the number of admissions of homeless veterans to the GPD 

program in order to address some of the needs identified through the 

CHALENG survey. In fiscal year 2005, VA had the capacity to house about 

8,000 veterans on any given night. However, over the course of the year, 

because some veterans completed the program in a matter of months and 

others left before completion, VA was able to admit about 16,600 veterans 

into the program. Figure 4 illustrates the growth in GPD program capacity

from fiscal years 2000 through 2005.

 13The Bureau of the Census has had difficulty enumerating the overall homeless population,

as we reported in GAO, Decennial Census: Methods for Collecting and Reporting Data on 

the Homeless and Others without Conventional Housing Need Refinement, GAO-03-227 

(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 17, 2003). A Census official we interviewed cautioned that the 

2010 Census may not enumerate homeless veterans. 

Page 15 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Figure 4: Number of GPD Beds Compared to Admissions of Homeless Veterans, 

Fiscal Years 2000 through 2005 

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Source: GAO analysis of VA data rounded to nearest 100th.

Fiscal year

Admissions of homeless veterans

Operational GPD beds

2,000

4,100

4,800

6,700

7,300

8,000

4,800

10,100

11,900

12,400

13,500

16,600

Note: Not all beds shown were in operation for the full year; for example, only 7,800 beds were in 

operation at the end of fiscal year 2005.

VA has pursued a policy of making GPD beds available in all states and the 

District of Columbia, in line with the recommendation made by the VA 

Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans. As shown in figure 5, all but 

three states had beds available in May 2006, and VA officials told us that 

they were working with potential providers to develop the capacity in 

these states. The greatest number of beds is in California (1,867 beds); 

Florida and Massachusetts (430 and 378 beds, respectively); and New 

York, Ohio and Pennsylvania (274, 261, and 332 beds respectively). 

Page 16 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Figure 5: Distribution of the Beds Available under the GPD Program in May 2006 

Source: GAO analysis of VA data. 

Vt.

N.H.

Mass.

R.I.

Conn.

N.J.

Del.

Md.

D.C.

W. Va.

Alaska

Hawaii

Ala.

Ariz.

Ark.

Calif. Colo.

Ga.

Idaho

Ill.

Ind.

Iowa

Kans.

La.

Mich.

Minn.

Mo.

Mont.

Nebr. Nev.

N.Mex.

N.Y.

N.Dak.

Okla.

Oreg.

Pa.

S.C.

S.Dak.

Tenn.

Tex.

Utah

Va.

Wash.

Wisc.

Wyo.

Fla.

Miss.

Ohio

Ky.

States with zero operational GPD beds

States with 1-150 operational GPD beds

States with 151-500 operational GPD beds

States with more than 500 operational GPD beds

Maine

N.C.

Note: VA reports that grants have been awarded to providers in Alaska, Maine, and North Dakota to 

develop 20, 18 and 48 beds respectively in those states. 

Page 17 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
VA’s CHALENG report found that about 45,000 transitional housing beds 

were needed in fiscal year 2005 to help homeless veterans become more 

socially and economically independent. As shown in table 1, the report 

identified over 35,000 transitional housing beds that were available 

through various sources for this purpose—-including the GPD beds, 

another 2,400 beds funded by VA through its other specialized homeless 

programs, and additional beds funded by other sources. Still needed were

about 9,600 more transitional housing beds nationwide beyond the number 

currently available to meet the demand in fiscal year 2005. To begin to 

address the demand, VA officials told us that, as of May 2006, they have 

negotiated an additional 2,200 beds for the GPD program that are expected 

to be available in the near future. 

Table 1: Available and Needed Transitional Beds for Homeless Veterans, Fiscal 

Year 2005 

Transitional beds needed 45,000

VA transitional beds available

• GPD program 

• Non-GPD programsa 

Other transitional beds available 

10,400

(8,000) 

(2,400)

25,100

Total transitional beds availableb35,400

Additional beds still neededb 9,600

Source: GAO analysis of VA data. 

a

Beds for VA’s contracted residential treatment are not included, but VA officials estimate about 

304 beds are available. 

b

Numbers are CHALENG estimates rounded to nearest 100; subtotals included in these numbers

may not add to numbers shown due to rounding. 

Although VA reports the need for transitional housing beds is greater than 

the capacity, the demand varies throughout the year and by location. Some 

GPD programs we visited had vacancies and others had waiting lists at the 

time of our visit. GPD providers and VA officials identified several reasons 

that beds may go unfilled at any given time. Some beds are held for 

veterans who are receiving medical treatment, while others may be 

unfilled as a result of the normal transition when one veteran has left the 

program and another veteran will soon be entering the program. 

VA officials and GPD providers also told us they expect a change in the 

demographics of homeless veterans that may require them to reconsider 

the type of housing and services that they are providing with GPD funds. 

Specifically, VA officials expect to see more homeless women veterans 

Page 18 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
and more veterans with dependents who are in need of transitional 

housing. GPD providers told us that women veterans have sought 

transitional housing; some recent admissions had dependents; and a few 

of their beds were occupied by the children of veterans, for whom VA 

could not provide reimbursement. To meet the needs of homeless women 

veterans, VA has provided additional funding in the form of special needs 

grants to a few GPD programs. 

GPD providers often worked with public and nonprofit agencies to offer a 

spectrum of services that may help veterans meet individual and GPD 

program goals. While GPD providers were generally able to build 

successful partnerships, most of them identified resource gaps that 

presented challenges to helping veterans, particularly affordable 

permanent housing. We also found that communication issues related to 

program policies could prevent veterans from being offered care. 

Providers did not always understand eligibility requirements such as 

which veterans may be eligible for the program and the allowable number 

and length of program stays. Further, providers were not always aware of 

policy changes. 

GPD providers generally created partnerships to help prepare veterans to

obtain permanent housing and, ultimately, to live independently. VA’s 

grant process encourages such collaboration by awarding points to GPD 

program applicants that demonstrate they have relationships with other 

organizations. GPD providers are to identify how they will provide 

services to meet the program’s goals—residential stability, increased skill

level or income, and greater self-determination. For example, providers 

may identify services such as substance abuse and mental health 

treatment, financial counseling, employment assistance and training, 

transportation to appointments and job interviews, and related services. 

We found variation in the agencies that provided these services. According 

to a VA survey, most GPD providers used their own on-site staff to offer 

services like case management and transportation assistance. In contrast, 

mental health assessments were mostly handled indirectly, with 79 percent 

of the GPD providers using the staff of other agencies, often the VA. (More 

information from the survey can be found in app. III.) 

GPD Providers 

Collaborate to Offer a 

Range of Services but 

Still Face Challenges 

in Helping Veterans 

GPD Providers Create 

Partnerships to Help 

Veterans Meet Program 

Goals, but Resource Gaps 

Remain 

Page 19 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
The GPD providers that we visited established partnerships with state and 

local government agencies, other federal agencies, and local community 

organizations. Further, several of the providers that we visited participated

in the local Continuum of Care funded by HUD or in other community 

coalitions, taking advantage of community networks that serve homeless 

individuals. While most providers offered a range of services, not all 

veterans received each service. To identify the specific services a veteran 

may need, providers typically worked with veterans to develop individual 

treatment plans that identified the veteran’s needs on entering the 

program. Table 2 lists examples of services and partners of GPD providers 

we visited. 

Page 20 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Table 2: Examples of Services and Partners That Worked with GPD Providers We Visited

Veterans’ needs Select services Partners that provided servicesa

Case management and individual treatment plan • VA liaison with GPD provider 

Mental health treatment • VA 

• Local area hospitals 

• Local organizations 

Substance abuse treatment • VA 

• Local area hospitals 

• Local organizations 

Counseling (family, nutritional, etc.) • VA 

• Local organizations 

Health Care 

Medical services • VA 

• Local area hospitals 

Financial counseling • Local organizations 

Employment assistance and training • Department of Labor 

• Disabled Veterans’ Outreach Programb

• Homeless Veterans Reintegration 

Programc

• VA 

• Compensative Work Therapy 

• Incentive Therapyd

• State and local training programs 

• Local organizations and colleges 

Employment and Income 

Assistance with getting benefits • VA 

• Social Security Administration

representative

• State/county benefits counselors 

• Veterans service organizations

Stable housing • State and local programs 

• HUD 

After leaving GPD program 

Follow-up care and supportive servicese • VA 

• Local organizations 

Other needs Legal assistance • Local organizations and law offices 

• Local colleges

• Outreach to local jails 

Transportation • VA GPD van grants 

• Relationship with local transit authority 

Source: GAO analysis of GPD provider partnerships. 

a

GPD provider staff also may have been directly involved in providing services in any of these 

partnership examples. 

b

Program provides funding through state employment security agencies to support dedicated staff 

positions to develop and provide employment and job training opportunities for disabled and other 

qualified veterans. 

c

Program provides services to assist in reintegrating homeless veterans into meaningful employment 

within the labor force. 

d

Program helps veterans regain work habits and skills by participating in various work situations within 

VA as part of their treatment or rehabilitative programs.

Page 21 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
e

Supportive services for veterans who leave the GPD program may include health care services

rendered during a veteran’s GPD program stay, as well as other services to help veterans maintain 

housing. 

GPD programs often collaborated with VA and others to provide health

care-related services—such as mental health and substance abuse 

treatment, and family and nutritional counseling—to help veterans 

become more self-sufficient in their day-to-day activities. Several programs 

hosted Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and other counseling services, 

while some GPD programs expected veterans to attend regular meetings 

elsewhere in the community. At least two GPD providers we visited 

provided their own substance abuse treatment and did not rely on 

community partners to provide such services. At least two other providers 

that referred veterans to VA for substance abuse treatment expressed 

concerns about waiting lists for that service, making it hard for veterans to

access care immediately. Typically, a VA local medical center provided 

veterans with primary and specialized health care. However, GPD 

providers sometimes expressed concerns about difficulties obtaining 

dental care.14 To meet the needs of veterans who were not eligible for VA 

health care, GPD providers made other arrangements. For example, a 

program in the Boston area partnered with the local hospital which 

provided free health care to homeless veterans who were in the GPD 

program but were ineligible for VA health care. We also found that many 

providers either used their own staff or used partners’ staff to provide 

mental health services and family and nutritional counseling services. 

All providers we visited tried to help veterans obtain financial benefits or 

employment. Some had staff who assessed a veteran’s potential eligibility 

for public benefits such as food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, or

Social Security Disability Insurance. Other providers relied on 

relationships with local or state officials to provide this assessment. For 

example, a Wisconsin GPD provider worked with a county veterans’ 

service officer who reviewed veterans’ eligibility for state and federal 

benefits. The provider also had a relationship with a county employment 

representative who came to the GPD facility to discuss job searches, 

training, and other employment issues with veterans. Several providers 

were receiving DOL grants to provide employment training services, 

worked with local colleges, or relied on other local programs to help 

 14 VA issued a directive for a onetime dental care opportunity for homeless veterans (VHA

Directive 2002-080) in line with 38 U.S.C. § 101 note. VA officials told us that funding was 

provided in 2006 to implement this directive. 

Page 22 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
veterans to increase skills.15 However, a lack of available jobs in an area

may sometimes pose problems to finding employment for veterans. 

Most of the GPD providers in the areas that we visited worked with 

community partners to obtain permanent housing for veterans ready to 

leave the GPD program, but indicated this was sometimes difficult 

because of limited affordable permanent housing. Some providers had 

established extensive partnerships with organizations that provide or find 

affordable permanent housing. For instance, several of the providers 

worked with the local HUD-funded Continuum of Care network to identify 

permanent housing resources. Some providers had or were applying for 

HUD funds to build single room occupancy housing units that could serve 

as a transition to more permanent long-term housing.16 As at least one 

provider mentioned, veterans sometimes become resourceful and agree to

share apartments. In some instances, providers have asked for an 

extension to allow veterans to stay until housing becomes available. 

GPD providers and VA staff coordinated with community resources to 

help address other issues that they identified that might also present 

obstacles for transitioning veterans out of homelessness. For example, 

staff in some locations indicated that such legal issues as criminal records 

or credit problems may preclude veterans from obtaining employment and 

housing. To help overcome these issues, some GPD providers worked with 

lawyers who provided services at no cost or other volunteer organizations. 

Staff in some of the locations also reported that transportation issues 

made it difficult for veterans to get to medical appointments or 

employment-related activities. To help address potential transportation 

difficulties, some providers received GPD grants to purchase vans. One 

provider that we visited partnered with the local transit company that 

provided subsidies to homeless veterans. This option is not always 

available, however, and transportation remained an issue in areas not near

a medical center. 

 15 For more information on DOL programs, see GAO, Homeless Veterans: Job Retention 

Goal Under Development for DOL’s Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program, 

GAO-05-654T (Washington, D.C.: May 4, 2005). 

16Through the Continuum of Care, HUD contracts with public housing agencies for the 

rehabilitation of residential properties that provide multiple single room dwelling units. 

These agencies make Section 8 rental assistance payments generally covering the

difference between a portion of the tenant’s income (normally 30 percent) and the unit’s 

rent to participating owners (i.e., landlords) on behalf of homeless individuals who rent the 

rehabilitated dwellings. 

Page 23 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Communication of 

Program Polices May 

Affect Providers’ Ability to 

Serve Veterans 

VA has five staff in the national program office who administer the GPD 

program through a network of 21 regional homeless coordinators and 

136 local VA liaisons. While program policies are developed at the national

level by the GPD program staff, the local VA liaisons designated by VA 

medical centers have primary responsibility for communicating with GPD 

providers in their area. Figure 6 depicts the flow of information about the 

GPD program. 

Figure 6: Flow of Policy and Program Information from VA to GPD Providers 

VA GPD

program office

136 full- and part-time

VA liaisons to

GPD

21 VA 

homeless

coordinators

About 300

GPD

providers

Source: GAO analysis of VA data.

The VA liaisons may serve in a full-time or part-time capacity, in part 

depending on the number of GPD beds in the area served by the VA 

medical centers and the number of admissions per year. In fiscal year 

2006, there were 60 full-time liaisons and another 76 individuals serving as 

part-time liaisons in addition to their other VA duties. Liaisons sometimes 

found it hard to readily assist providers, according to some staff we met, 

because of the liaisons’ large caseloads and multiple GPD 

responsibilities—including eligibility determination, verification of intake 

and discharge information, case management, fiscal oversight, monitoring 

program compliance and inspections of GPD facilities, among other 

duties. To help address this issue, VA has set aside additional funding for 

more full-time liaisons.17

 17 According to VA, in fiscal years 2005 and 2006 it had allocated funding for a total of 

97 full-time liaisons. As of the time of our review, some sites were still going through the

recruitment and hiring processes to fill these positions.

Page 24 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
The program office communicates with GPD providers and VA liaisons 

through written guidance and teleconferences. VA provides liaisons with a 

guidebook about their responsibilities and the program rules as well as a 

manual prepared by NEPEC on the forms to be completed for all program 

participants. To stay up-to-date on GPD program policies, liaisons 

participated in monthly conference calls and also had the opportunity to 

attend a conference conducted by the GPD program office in 2004. The 

program office recently held a training seminar for new liaisons and also

offers training via phone. VA also gives GPD providers program 

handbooks and holds monthly conference calls to discuss program rules. 

In addition, some of the VA medical centers we visited held meetings with 

local GPD program providers in their areas to share information. 

Despite VA’s efforts, we found that some providers did not understand all 

of the GPD program policies. Some misunderstandings could affect a 

veteran’s ability to get—and a GPD provider’s ability to offer—care. For 

instance, two providers said that VA staff told them that veterans eligible

to participate in the GPD program were also required to be eligible for VA 

health care, but this is not the case. Similarly, in another location, the local 

VA liaison and a provider both told us that they had received information 

from the GPD program office indicating that the total lifetime length of 

stay was 2 years, but the GPD program officials told us this interpretation 

of the information that they provided is incorrect. Elsewhere several 

providers understood the lifetime limit of three GPD stays but may not 

have known or believed that waivers to this rule could be granted. They 

argued that the limit could hinder a veteran’s ability to participate in the 

GPD program if participation involved phased care offered by separate 

GPD providers, each specializing in certain phases of treatment, such as 

detoxification or job preparation. Since each phase of treatment is 

counted as one GPD stay, veterans may exhaust their 3-stay limit before 

they have received services vital to their improved functioning. Although

VA has the authority to waive the 3-stay limit in such cases, these 

providers did not seem to understand that this option was available to

them.18 In addition, providers were not always aware of changes in the 

GPD program in a timely fashion; sometimes not at all. For example, not 

all GPD providers knew in 2006 that their program’s inspections would 

 18 VA may waive the episode requirement if the services offered are different from those 

previously provided and may lead to a successful outcome. The VA liaisons must review

and approve or deny the waiver based on their best clinical assessment of the individual 

case. 

Page 25 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
include a review of whether they were meeting the objectives described in

their GPD grant documents. 

VA recognizes that communication to providers and liaisons needs to be 

improved. In its fiscal year 2005 report, the VA Advisory Committee on 

Homeless Veterans recommended that VA hold an annual conference and 

that each GPD provider have an opportunity to attend at least one such 

conference. The purpose of the conference would be to improve 

communications, program compliance, and treatment strategies. In the 

spring of 2006 when the committee reconvened, VA had not yet accepted

the committee’s recommendation. 

VA data show that in fiscal years 2000-2005 a steady or increasing 

percentage of veterans had stable housing, income, and greater selfdetermination at the time they left the GPD program. These national 

performance results are derived from standard forms filled out by VA staff 

or by provider staff with VA’s review and sign-off for every veteran who 

leaves the program for any reason. While the veterans’ success is VA’s 

primary measure of program performance, in 2006 VA took steps to ensure 

that the performance of individual GPD providers would also be reviewed, 

in line with a recommendation of VA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). 

Some GPD providers we visited had stated in their grant documents that a 

certain percentage of veterans they served would have permanent housing 

or employment a year after they left the program. Also, VA recently 

completed a onetime study looking at longer-term outcomes for homeless 

veterans, including 520 who participated in the GPD program, and 

preliminary results show that positive housing outcomes were maintained 

1 year after veterans left the GPD program. However, VA does not 

routinely collect follow-up information to determine the status of 

participants at specified times after they leave the program and may not be 

able to rely on the results of its study to determine the success of future 

program participants. 

VA Data Show That 

the GPD Program 

Helps Veterans Get 

Housing and Income, 

but Data Are Limited 

on Veterans’ 

Circumstances after 

They Leave the 

Program 

Page 26 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
The following sections compare VA’s GPD performance data from fiscal 

year 2005 with data from fiscal years 2000 through 2004. 

VA reports that about 81 percent of veterans had arranged some form of 

housing at the time they left the GPD program in fiscal year 2005, a 

significant improvement over the 56 percent with housing in fiscal year 

2000. VA considers the program successful if veterans have obtained either 

independent or secured housing.19 Independent housing comprises 

apartments, rooms, or houses, while secured housing includes transitional 

housing programs, halfway houses, hospitals, nursing homes, or similar 

facilities. Most of the improvement in housing outcomes has occurred in 

independent housing. While independent housing may be a more desirable 

outcome, for some veterans, including those with severe disabilities, 

secured housing may be more appropriate. Figure 7 shows the percentages 

of veterans who had arranged housing when they left the GPD program in 

fiscal years 2000 through 2005. 

Many Veterans Attain 

Stable Housing, Income, 

and Greater SelfDetermination 

Immediately upon Leaving 

the Program, According to 

VA Data

Stability in Independent and 

Secured Housing 

 19Since fiscal year 2002, VA’s strategic plan has included a performance target to capture

the housing status of veterans discharged from three of its transitional housing programs,

including the GPD program. VA has gradually increased its target from 65 percent in fiscal 

year 2002 to 79 percent in fiscal year 2005. VA estimates that it exceeded this target in fiscal 

year 2005. 

Page 27 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Figure 7: Percentage of Veterans with Independent or Secured Housing upon

Leaving GPD Program, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2005 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage of discharges

Fiscal year

Secured housing

Independent housing

Source: GAO analysis of NEPEC data.

30

26

26

26

28

25

40

25

54

26

54

27

In its annual reports, VA compares the housing arrangements of veterans 

who successfully met provider requirements with those who did not. As 

might be expected, proportionately more veterans who met requirements 

had obtained independent housing in fiscal year 2005—-nearly 

70 percent—compared to the 40 percent with independent housing who 

had not met provider requirements. In terms of numbers, about half of the 

15,000 veterans who left the program in fiscal year 2005 were considered

by the GPD providers to have met program requirements, an improvement 

over earlier years. Of the approximately 7,500 veterans remaining, about

half dropped out and the other half violated program rules, such as rules 

on maintaining sobriety, or they left for other reasons. VA derives this 

information from discharge forms completed by VA or GPD staff for all 

veterans at the time they leave the program. VA’s evaluation center 

NEPEC aggregates this data and prepares annual reports on overall GPD 

program performance. For more on this process, see appendix IV. 

Page 28 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
The program goal of increased income can be achieved through 

maintaining or obtaining employment or financial benefits such as VA 

disability compensation or pensions, Supplemental Security Income, or 

food stamps. From fiscal years 2000 to 2005, about one-third of veterans 

had jobs, mostly on a full-time basis, when they left the GPD program. The 

number of veterans with jobs more than tripled over the period, with 

about 4,900 employed in fiscal year 2005 at the time they left the program. 

The number of veterans receiving VA benefits when they left the GPD 

program was about 3,800, while another 2,200 veterans had applied or 

planned to apply for VA benefits. Table 3 shows the percentages and 

numbers of those employed or receiving benefits for fiscal years 2000 

through 2005, but VA did not have data on receipt of benefits until 2003.

Income from Employment or 

Financial Benefits 

Table 3: Numbers and Percentages of Veterans Leaving the GPD Program with Employment or Benefit Income, Fiscal Years 

2000 through 2005

Number and 

percentage of

discharges from GPD 

program with

Fiscal 

year 2000 

Fiscal 

year 2001

Fiscal 

year 2002

Fiscal 

year 2003 

Fiscal 

year 2004

Fiscal 

year 2005

• Total full- and parttime employment  1,404 (37%) 2,803 (33%) 3,579 (33%) 3,735 (33%) 4,108 (34%) 4,920 (33%) 

• full-time 1,163 (30%) 2,178 (26%) 2,852 (26%) 2,995 (26%) 3,311 (27%) 3,927 (26%) 

• part-time 241 (6%) 625 (7%) 727 (7%) 740 (7%) 797 (7%) 993 (7%) 

• Total with any benefits 3,594 (31%) 4,400 (36%) 5,840 (38%) 

• VA benefits only NA NA NA 1,530 (13%) 2,091 (17%) 2,924 (19%) 

• other benefits only NA NA NA 1,494 (13%) 1,699 (14%) 2,089 (14%) 

• both VA and 

other benefits 

NA NA NA 570 (5%) 610 (5%) 827 (5%) 

Source: GAO analysis of VA data. 

Notes: Percentages may not add up to total shown due to rounding. 

NA = Data on receipt of VA and other benefits were not available for fiscal years 2000 through 2002. 

Page 29 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Page 30 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program 

To track greater self-determination, VA examines such goals as veterans’ 

progress in handling of alcohol, drug, mental health, and medical problems 

and overcoming deficits in social or vocational skills.20 A greater 

proportion of veterans leaving the program each year have met these 

goals, with 57 to 69 percent showing improved functioning in fiscal year 

2005, as shown in figure 8. 

Figure 8: Percentage of Veterans Leaving the GPD Program with Greater Self-Determination, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2005 

Note: The percentage calculations are based on the number of veterans who showed the problem at 

admission. 

These improvements have occurred while the proportion of veterans who 

entered the GPD program with a history of such problems remained 

constant or increased. Specifically, the proportion entering with substance 

 20 VA also asks participants for their evaluations after they have been in the program for 

1 month. Nearly half of the participants completed the surveys in fiscal year 2005. Most 

reported satisfaction with the GPD, rating it at 3.2 on a scale where 4 is the highest possible 

score, and with their VA case managers, rating them at 4.6 on a scale where 6 is the highest 

possible score. 

Greater Self-Determination in 

Terms of Improved Functioning 

in Several Areas 

Source: GAO analysis of VA data.

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage

Fiscal year

Mental illness

Drugs

Alcohol

Improved handling of problems with

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Percentage

Fiscal year

Social or vocational

Medical

Improvement in the following areas
abuse problems who left the program in fiscal years 2000 through 2005 

remained relatively constant, while the proportion of veterans with a 

history of mental or medical illness more than doubled, according to VA 

data. See table 4. 

Table 4: Number of Veterans Leaving GPD Program and Percentage with Specific 

Problems at Entry, Fiscal Years 2000 and 2005 

Number of discharges from GPD program Fiscal year 2000 Fiscal year 2005

4,020 15,403

Number of discharges for whom data are 

available 

3,826 15,048

Problems that discharged veterans showed on 

entering the program: 

• Alcohol 2,789 (73%) 11,180 (74%)

• Drugs 2,579 (67%) 10,307 (68%)

• Mental illness 1,205 (32%) 9,736 (65%)

• Medical illness 1,255 (33%) 10,488 (70%)

• Social or vocational 2,276 (60%) 10,864 (72%)

Source: GAO analysis of data from NEPEC annual reports. 

In addition to assessing the program through the success of its veterans, 

VA policy calls for all VA liaisons to review the performance of individual 

GPD providers in meeting objectives that are identified in their grant 

documents. Providers are required to establish specific measurable 

objectives for each of the three program goals. To reach the housing goal, 

for example, some providers we visited established savings objectives, 

requiring veterans to set aside a portion of any income they receive so that 

they can accumulate sufficient cash reserves to cover costs of renting a 

room or apartment when they leave the program. Most providers we 

visited also set outcome objectives for the percentage of veterans 

expected to obtain independent housing when they left the program. For 

the income goal, some providers set objectives requiring that a certain

percentage of veterans be offered or enrolled in vocational training, 

develop résumés, interview for jobs, or apply for entitlement benefits. 

Most providers also set objectives that a certain percentage of veterans 

would find work. For the self-determination goal, some providers required 

that a certain percentage of veterans maintain sobriety or attend weekly 

Alcoholics or Narcotics Anonymous meetings. 

In 2006 VA Took Steps to Help 

Ensure That VA Liaisons 

Conduct Required Reviews of 

GPD Provider Performance 

In its 2006 examination of the GPD program, VA’s OIG found, however, 

that many providers had not tracked their performance in achieving these 

Page 31 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
objectives and some VA liaisons had not reviewed the providers’ 

performance. The OIG recommended that VA liaisons ensure that the 

providers’ performance be monitored. The GPD program office has since 

moved to enforce the requirement that VA liaisons review GPD providers’ 

performance when the VA team comes on-site each year to inspect the 

GPD facility.21 The VA liaison will have the flexibility to determine the 

method for reviewing and recording the providers’ performance, so long as 

the results are documented. GPD providers who do not meet performance 

objectives will be required to work with their local VA staff to create a 

corrective action plan or resubmit their applications with new objectives. 

VA Does Not Routinely 

Collect Data on Veterans’ 

Long-Term Success, but 

Recent Study May Provide 

Insights on How Veterans 

Fare a Year after Leaving 

the Program 

VA does not require that veterans be contacted for purposes of program 

evaluation after they leave the GPD program. With a view to the long-term 

health of veterans, however, VA attempts to have its clinicians provide 

GPD participants with a substance abuse or mental health assessment 

within 2 months of leaving the program. In addition, the forms completed 

when veterans leave the GPD program identify any follow-up that may 

have been arranged to help them continue to cope with problems that they 

have experienced. While follow-up is not required, about 80 percent of 

GPD providers reported that they conduct some sort of follow-up with 

veterans after they leave the GPD program. Providers may call veterans 

who have left, obtain data on those who return for additional support 

services, or arrange reunions or other gatherings. Some grant documents 

also indicate that the providers planned to measure their performance, in 

part by following up with veterans from 3 to 12 months after they left the 

program. Some providers follow up to meet the requirements of non-VA 

funding they receive. Several providers we interviewed had DOL grants 

requiring them to report the employment status of veterans 3 and 6 months 

after they left the DOL program. These providers were able to report 

results for the veterans deemed employable who participated in both the

GPD and DOL programs. However, GPD participants who were deemed 

unemployable because of their disabilities may not have been included in 

the DOL program. While many providers attempt to follow up with 

veterans, several told us that it is sometimes difficult to maintain contact, 

especially with veterans lacking telephones or reliable mailing addresses 

and with veterans who have moved away from the area. 

 21 This effort has been possible, according to VA, in part because increased funds have 

made it possible for more liaisons to work with the GPD program on a full-time rather than 

a part-time basis.

Page 32 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
While VA considers it important for veterans to achieve immediate success 

on leaving the GPD program, homeless veterans may experience setbacks 

later on that may negatively affect their housing arrangements, 

employment and financial benefits, and self-determination. Furthermore, 

veterans who were not immediately successful on leaving the program 

nevertheless may have benefited from participating and may be able to 

achieve success at a later time. To explore the long-term outcomes of 

program participants, VA funded a onetime follow-up study in May 2001 to 

examine the outcomes for a randomly selected sample of about 

1,300 veterans spread across five geographic locations who were 

participating in the GPD program and two other VA-sponsored homeless 

programs. According to a VA official, the cost of the study was about 

$1.5 million.22 Included in the sample were 520 veterans housed with 

19 GPD providers. Proportionately more veterans in the GPD programs 

were chronically homeless, while veterans in one of the other programs 

had higher levels of serious medical and psychiatric problems and greater 

impairments. At the time of selection, the veterans had various lengths of 

stays in these programs. 

For the study, university and RAND Corporation researchers interviewed

veterans to determine their status at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after they left

the programs, with the last interviews conducted in October 2005. About 

360 of the former GPD participants responded to the last interviews. VA 

officials do not expect to release final results of the study until 2007, but 

preliminary results show that just over 80 percent of the GPD participants

had housing 12 months after they left the program. Other outcomes that 

are expected to be included in the report are the number of days that the 

veterans have either been housed or homeless, their income and 

employment situation, their use of drugs and alcohol, their physical and

mental health status, and quality of life. 

 22VA has also conducted other follow-up studies designed to test innovative approaches to

serving homeless veterans, including ways to improve employment outcomes, ensure the

safety and serve the needs of female veterans, and intervene on behalf of veterans dually 

diagnosed with both mental health and substance abuse problems. 

Page 33 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Addressing homelessness is a daunting challenge, given the difficulties 

associated with identifying those who need help and the broad spectrum 

of services that need to be successfully tailored, coordinated, and 

delivered in order to enable individuals and even families to secure 

permanent housing and to live more independently. Limited resources—

particularly the availability of affordable permanent housing—make this 

job even more difficult. Moreover, the physical and emotional conditions 

including substance abuse, and mental illness, prevalent in the homeless 

veteran population further increase the difficulty.

VA has taken a number of steps to tackle this challenge by enhancing its 

ability to estimate how many veterans need assistance, increasing the 

number of GPD beds, instituting measures that help gauge the program’s 

effectiveness, and through the GPD program, working proactively with 

local and federal government agencies and nonprofits to provide the 

assistance needed. However, more could be done to optimize VA’s 

investment, particularly with respect to ensuring policies and criteria are 

clearly understood and consistently applied and assessing longer-term 

outcomes. In enhancing communications, VA will need to identify effective 

ways of sharing information with the more than 100 agency liaisons in 

addition to the 300 local GPD program providers—each with a potentially

different means of operating. In assessing longer-term outcomes, VA will 

need to weigh the costs, benefits, and feasibility of implementing a variety 

of analytical approaches. Clearly, these endeavors will not be easy, but 

they are critical to better equipping VA to help homeless veterans. 

We recommend that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs take the following 

two steps to improve and evaluate the GPD program: 

1. To aid GPD providers in better understanding the GPD policies and 

procedures, we recommend that VA take steps to ensure that its 

policies are understood by the staff and providers who are to 

implement them. For example, VA could make more information, such 

as issues discussed during conference calls, available in writing or 

online, hold an annual conference, or provide training that may also 

include local VA staff. 

Conclusions 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

2. To better understand the circumstances of veterans after they leave 

the GPD program, we recommend that VA explore feasible and costeffective ways to obtain such information, where possible using data 

from GPD providers and other VA sources. For example, VA could 

review ways to use the data from its own follow-up health assessments 

Page 34 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
and from GPD providers who collect follow-up information on the 

circumstances of veterans whom they have served. 

We provided a draft of this report to VA for review and comment. VA 

agreed with our findings and concurred with our recommendations and 

provided information on initiatives it has under way or planned that will

address issues raised in our report as well as other challenges the GPD 

program faces. 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation 

VA concurred that there is an apparent lack of consistency in GPD 

program implementation and stressed its commitment to further enhance 

communications with VA liaisons and GPD providers, including providers 

whose operations are still in the developmental stage. For example, VA 

plans to develop a comprehensive GPD implementation plan that will 

address several operational issues, including training and certification 

requirements. As well, for the first time, the VA’s Veterans Health 

Administration plans to host a conference or series of regional 

conferences for GPD providers and VA liaisons to review program 

requirements and expectations. VA estimates these conferences will take 

place in spring 2007. 

VA also concurred with the need to better understand the circumstances 

of veterans after they leave the GPD program and stated that it has plans 

in place to address optional approaches for long-term study in this area 

after it completes an analysis of its longitudinal outcome studies of VA’s 

homeless program. In the interim, VA said it would continue to explore 

options for using existing data to evaluate program effectiveness. 

However, the agency disagreed with the statement in our draft report that 

VA officials attribute the decrease in the estimates of homeless veterans to

VA’s estimation process and better local data. VA believes that the recent

decrease in the estimates is a direct result of its progress in treating these 

veterans through the GPD program. 

Several factors may have contributed to the decrease in the estimates of 

homeless veterans. We did not intend to imply that the decrease was 

solely attributable to changes in VA’s estimation process and better local

data, nor did we intend to downplay VA’s program successes. We have 

revised the language in this report accordingly. 

VA’s written comments appear in appendix V. VA also provided technical 

comments, which have been incorporated into the report as appropriate. 

Page 35 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

We will also make copies available to others on request. In addition, the 

report will be available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at 

http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions about this 

report, please contact me at (202) 512-7215 or chaplainc@gao.gov. Contact 

points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs can be 

found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major 

contributions to this report are listed in appendix VI. 

Sincerely yours, 

Cristina T. Chaplain 

Acting Director 

Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues 

Page 36 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

The objectives of this report were to review (1) Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) estimates of the total number of homeless veterans and the 

number of transitional beds available, (2) the extent of collaboration 

involved in the provision of Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem 

(GPD) program and related services, and (3) VA’s assessment of GPD 

program performance. 

In conducting our review, we focused on the GPD providers that serve the 

general homeless veteran population rather than those serving veterans 

with special needs, although we visited some special needs grantees. We

interviewed officials at VA headquarters, the GPD program office, the

regional Veterans Integrated Service Networks, VA’s Northeast Program 

Evaluation Center (NEPEC), and organizations knowledgeable about 

homeless veterans’ issues, including the National Coalition for Homeless 

Veterans. To gain an initial understanding of the GPD program in 

operation, we spoke with staff and toured GPD facilities in Baltimore, 

Maryland; Denver, Colorado; and Washington, D.C. To develop greater indepth material for this report, we made more extensive visits to 13 GPD 

providers that fall under the responsibility of VA’s medical centers in 

Boston, Massachusetts; Los Angeles, California; Tampa, Florida; and 

Tomah and Madison, Wisconsin. We selected these GPD providers to 

obtain a range of geographic locations, size of programs, and proximity to 

VA medical centers. (See table 5 for a listing of sites we visited and their 

characteristics.) During our visits, we toured GPD facilities, interviewed 

GPD providers, medical center staff, community agencies that partner 

with the GPD providers, and current and former GPD program 

participants. Additionally, we interviewed staff but did not tour facilities of 

16 other GPD providers in the areas we visited. We also met with GPD and 

other service providers at conferences sponsored by the Departments of 

Labor and Health and Human Services. 

Page 37 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Table 5: Features of GPD Programs That GAO Visited

Number of 

GPD beds

Fiscal Year 

‘05 Admits

Fiscal Year ‘05

Discharges

Location 

Typea

Massachusetts—Boston, Fitchburg, Leominster Veterans Integrated Service Network 1

New England Shelter for Homeless Veterans, 

Post-Detox Program (Boston)

30 149 137 urban

Veteran Hospice Homestead (Fitchburg) 12 19 21 rural 

The Armistice Homesteadb (Leominster) 15 NA NA rural 

Florida—Tampa, Melbourne, Cocoa Veterans Integrated Service Network 8

Agency for Community Treatment Services, (Tampa) 60 64 53 urban 

Vietnam Veterans of Brevard (Melbourne) 19 70 53 urban 

Volunteers of America—Florida (Cocoa)c 80 100 100 urban 

Wisconsin—Tomah, Madison, Fort McCoy Veterans Integrated Service Network 12

Veterans Assistance Foundation (Tomah)d60 162 167 rural

Veterans Assistance Foundation, Step Up Program (Madison) 7 9 10 urban

Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs (Fort McCoy) 14 23 18 rural 

California—Los Angeles Veterans Integrated Service Network 22

P.A.T.H.c10 28 23 urban 

The Salvation Army, The Haven d 95 193 200 urban 

Volunteers of America—LAc 102 106 98 urban 

Weingart Center Association 100 107 113 urban 

Source: GAO review of VA data. 

a

VA does not classify grantees as rural; however, we included this type of information for site 

selection purposes. 

b

The Armistice Homestead is part of a collaborative grant under Massachusetts Veterans Inc. The 

entire grant funds 43 beds, 15 of which are located at the Armistice. Specific admission and 

discharge data were not available for the Armistice program. 

c

Program also has funding for a service center. 

d

Program is located on VA medical center grounds. 

Throughout our review, we worked with the VA’s Office of Inspector 

General (OIG) to ensure that we complemented but did not duplicate a 

review it was conducting on GPD program management. The OIG’s review 

was designed to determine if records demonstrate that (1) homeless 

veterans receive appropriate assessment and treatment, (2) GPD provider 

performance is evaluated and actions are taken to improve conditions, 

(3) GPD providers achieve their stated goals, (4) VA’s guidelines for the 

inspection of GPD facilities are followed, (5) GPD operations are properly 

monitored by VA, and (6) fiscal controls are adequate. Although the OIG’s 

report was not available at the time we prepared our report, we were 

Page 38 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

briefed on results that were relevant to our work and incorporated the 

information as appropriate. In addition, we discussed with the OIG’s team 

our selection of sites to visit and chose sites that were not included in the 

team’s review. 

In reviewing VA estimates of the number of homeless veterans, we 

reviewed the literature, read relevant reports, and interviewed VA officials, 

particularly those involved in the federally mandated Community 

Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and Networking Group for 

Veterans (CHALENG). We interviewed experts in the subject area and 

officials with the Bureau of the Census and the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD). We used information from our site visits 

to supplement our discussion on how local entities conduct counts of 

homeless individuals. We did not review the validity of VA’s estimates. To 

identify GPD program capacity, location, and number of admissions, we 

analyzed data from a series of annual reports prepared by NEPEC, 

updated where appropriate by information from the GPD program office 

in May 2006.

To assess the overall extent to which GPD providers collaborated with 

other agencies to offer services to homeless veterans, we analyzed NEPEC 

survey data. The survey included responses from all GPD providers in 

2003, when NEPEC first conducted the survey, and all programs that 

became operational or were funded in subsequent years through 

November 2005. For more information on the survey data, see appendix 

III. We performed basic reasonableness tests on the survey data and 

contacted NEPEC for any clarifications or discrepancies. We determined 

these data to be sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. To get 

an understanding of how collaboration was actually occurring at the local 

level, we conducted site visits. During these visits we gathered information 

on the types of services GPD providers offer, how providers partnered 

with local agencies (including VA) to offer services, and how these 

partnerships were working. To review how VA coordinates with other 

federal agencies, we attended a meeting of VA’s Advisory Committee on 

Homeless Veterans, talked with a representative from the Interagency

Council on Homelessness, and contacted other prominent federal 

partners. 

To identify how VA assesses the performance of the GPD program, we 

reviewed GPD program goals, interviewed VA officials, including a team 

with the OIG, and analyzed data obtained from VA’s national program 

office and NEPEC. We reviewed the Grant and Per Diem Program 

Evaluation Procedures Manual that NEPEC sends to each VA liaison that

Page 39 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

describes the responsibilities of liaisons and GPD providers in completing, 

reviewing, and submitting intake and discharge forms on individual 

participants. We extracted data on outcomes from tables included in 

NEPEC’s series of annual reports on the program and discussed the 

reliability of these data with NEPEC officials. This information is briefly 

summarized in appendix IV along with relevant findings from the OIG’s 

review. We did not independently verify the NEPEC data. We reviewed 

how VA collects and analyzes outcome data and found these data to be

sufficiently reliable for our purposes. Additionally, we reviewed grant 

documents for the sites we visited to identify the specific objectives they 

set to meet program goals and asked VA officials and providers about 

various aspects of performance measurement during our site visits. We did 

not conduct our own review of outcomes for homeless veterans served by 

the GPD providers we visited. 

At the time we conducted our analysis, VA’s follow-up study had not been 

released; therefore, our discussion of the study is based on our review of 

preliminary results that identified the numbers and characteristics of the 

participants, the timetable and roles of the universities and researchers 

involved, and the housing outcomes at the end of the year. Conducted 

from 2001 through 2005, the study followed a total of 1,294 participants, 

with approximately 260 participants from each of five medical center areas

serving California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Maryland, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Veterans were randomly selected from 

lists of active participants that included recent admissions as well as 

participants with longer stays in the program. Participants were drawn 

from programs operated by 6 domiciliary care providers, 16 contracted 

residential treatment providers, and 19 GPD providers. The study had an 

overall response rate of 72 percent for all participants in the three 

transitional housing programs, with a response rate of 69 percent for the 

GPD participants, for the interviews conducted a year after they left the 

program. Of the 520 GPD participants studied, 359 were interviewed a year 

after leaving the program. Of those interviewed, 60 percent were in their 

own independent housing, 23 percent were sharing with friends or family, 

and 15 percent were in temporary housing, including shelters or in an 

institution other than a jail. 

We conducted our work between August 2005 and July 2006 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Page 40 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix II: V

Veterans O

A’s Programs for Homeless

ther than the GPD Program 

Page 41 GAO-06-859 

Appendix II: VA’s Programs for Homeless 

Veterans Other than the GPD Program 

Under the HCHV umbrella program, VA provides outreach, health and 

mental health assessments, treatment, and referrals for homeless veterans 

with mental health and substance abuse problems. Veterans with limited 

length of service or with other than a dishonorable discharge are eligible

for the HCHV program but may not necessarily be eligible for VA health 

care, where the criteria are more restrictive. A veteran needing transitional 

housing while undergoing treatment may be placed in one of the 

approximately 300 contracted residential treatment beds that are funded 

from the budgets of individual medical centers. In fiscal year 2005, there 

were about 1,700 admissions for an average stay of 2 months at $36 per 

day; the recommended maximum stay is 6 months. Where contracted 

residential treatment is not available, veterans in need of transitional 

housing may be referred to the more widely available GPD program or 

domiciliary care. In fiscal year 2005, VA’s HCHV program provided 

outreach, treatment, and referral services to about 61,000 homeless 

veterans, with obligations of about $40 million. 

This transitional housing program is designed for homeless veterans who 

do not need hospital or nursing home services while their clinical status is 

being stabilized. In this program, veterans receive various services, 

including medical and mental health evaluations, treatment, and 

community support. Domiciliary programs are generally located on the 

grounds of VA medical centers, and unlike the GPD programs, they are 

usually managed and staffed by the local VA medical center. In fiscal year 

2005 about 5,000 homeless veterans stayed an average of 4 months in this 

program. About 1,800 beds were available exclusively for homeless 

veterans, with obligations of about $58 million. Additional funding was 

awarded in 2005 to increase the number of beds available to about 2,200 in 

fiscal year 2007, bringing total obligations up to a projected $73 million.

Veterans Health 

Administration 

Programs for 

Homeless Veterans 

Health Care for Homeless 

Veterans (HCHV) including 

Contracted Residential 

Treatment 

Homeless Domiciliary 

Residential Rehabilitation 

and Treatment Program 

Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix II: VA’s Programs for Homeless

Veterans Other than the GPD Program 

This work therapy program provides veterans with job skills and income. 

Through the program veterans produce items for sale or provide services 

such as temporary staffing to a company. While participating in this 

program, veterans may receive individual or group therapy and follow-up 

medical care on an outpatient basis. At some locations, program 

participants can stay in one of the about 500 beds available in transitional, 

community-based group homes. Veterans participating in this program are 

required to use a portion of their income from the work program to pay for 

rent, utilities, and food. Obligations for this program in fiscal year 2005 

were about $10 million.

This transitional housing program provides guaranteed loans to nonprofit 

organizations to construct or rehabilitate multifamily transitional housing 

for homeless veterans, including single room occupancy units. Supportive 

services and counseling, including job counseling, must be provided with 

the goal of encouraging self-determination among participating veterans. 

Veterans must maintain sobriety, seek and maintain employment, and pay 

a fee in order to live in these transitional units. Not more than 15 loans 

with an aggregate total of $100 million may be guaranteed under this 

program. In fiscal year 2005, the Vietnam Veterans of San Diego housing 

project was under construction. Other programs have been conditionally 

selected and are expected to be approved in fiscal years 2006 and 2007. 

For information on the challenges encountered in implementing this 

initiative, see Related GAO Products for GAO’s report on this program. 

This permanent, subsidized housing program provides HUD rental 

assistance (Section 8) vouchers for use by homeless veterans with chronic 

mental health or substance abuse disorders. Veterans are required to pay a 

portion of their income for rent; those without income receive fully 

subsidized housing. In general, veterans who do not exceed the maximum 

allowable income can remain in the housing permanently, but must agree 

to intensive case management services from VA staff and make a longterm commitment to treatment and rehabilitation. Local housing 

authorities control access to the vouchers. Many of the 1,780 vouchers 

allocated by HUD remain in use but no new vouchers have been made 

available. As a result, in fiscal year 2005, only 142 veterans were admitted 

to the program. VA’s obligations in support of this program in fiscal year 

2005 were about $3 million. 

Homeless Compensated 

Work Therapy/Transitional 

Residence 

Loan Guarantee for 

Multifamily Transitional 

Housing 

Housing and Urban 

Development-VA 

Supported Housing 

Page 42 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix II: VA’s Programs for Homeless

Veterans Other than the GPD Program 

According to VA, in 20 of its 57 regional offices VA has designated full-time 

homeless veterans coordinators who work with HCHV and other VA staff 

to conduct joint outreach, provide counseling, and offer other services to

homeless veterans, such as helping them apply for veterans benefits. In the

remaining regions, staff may be assigned collateral responsibility to work 

with homeless veterans. One of the goals of this program is to expedite the 

processing of benefit claims made by homeless veterans. According to VA, 

in fiscal year 2005, VA received approximately 4,400 claims from homeless 

veterans. Of these claims, 56 percent were for disability compensation and 

44 percent were for pensions. Of the compensation claims, 26 percent 

were granted, 33 percent denied, and 41 percent pending an average of 

about 4 months. Of the pension claims, 62 percent were granted, 

18 percent denied, and 21 percent pending an average of about 3 months. 

VA properties that are obtained through foreclosures on VA-insured 

mortgages are available for sale at below fair market value to nonprofit 

and public agencies that use the properties to shelter or house homeless 

veterans. Since the inception of this program, more than 

200 properties have been sold or leased. 

Under this demonstration program, the Department of Labor (DOL) funds 

community agencies to provide training and support services, and VA 

contributes its services, to help veterans who are incarcerated and at risk 

of homelessness make a successful transition back into the workforce. 

According to DOL, services provided include career counseling, 

employment training, job-search and job-placement assistance, life-skills 

development, and follow-up. Local staff from both VA’s Health 

Administration and Benefits Administration provide information about 

available VA benefits and services. Grantees must report the number of 

veterans who are still employed 6 months after job placement, whether 

they are in the same or similar jobs, and the reasons why veterans who 

were placed are no longer employed. DOL provided $2 million to seven 

community agencies in 2006 for this purpose. 

Veterans Benefits 

Administration 

Programs for 

Homeless Veterans 

Veterans Benefits 

Administration Outreach 

Acquired Property Sales 

for Homeless Providers 

Labor-VA Incarcerated 

Veterans’ Transition 

Program 

Page 43 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix III: Range of Services Offered by

Appendix III: Range of Services Offered by GPD Programs Nationwide 

GPD Programs Nationwide 

We analyzed NEPEC’s Facility Survey data to identify the types of services 

that programs provide and how they are provided. NEPEC conducted the 

survey to capture information on the types of GPD programs funded. 

According to NEPEC officials, the survey was used to capture information 

such as program location, admissions criteria, services available, and 

licensing. Because the survey was not intended to be used as a tool to 

review how programs were performing, NEPEC does not conduct rigorous 

internal reviews of the data collected. We conducted basic reasonableness 

tests and contacted NEPEC for any clarifications or discrepancies. We 

found the survey data sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. 

The survey was first deployed in 2003 to all agencies that were receiving

funding that year. In subsequent years, NEPEC had newly funded agencies 

complete this onetime survey. A total of 281 transitional housing facilities 

were included in the survey data we analyzed—148 of the facilities were 

surveyed in 2003, 94 in 2004, and 39 in 2005. According to NEPEC, this 

represents all operational programs as of November 2005. While there 

were about 300 agencies with GPD grants, some of the agencies have 

multiple grants for one facility, resulting in one survey being completed for 

that facility. The surveys were completed by the VA liaisons in 

consultation with GPD provider staff. NEPEC officials were confident they

have achieved a 100 percent response rate. While we did not

independently verify the response rate for the survey, we concluded that it

would be at least 90 percent. 

Table 6 shows the percentage of facilities that reportedly provide the 

selected services and how the services were provided. Survey respondents 

were asked to identify how, if at all, services were provided and were 

directed to choose only one method. It may be the case, however, that as 

in some locations we visited, services were provided by more than one 

method. As can be seen, the majority of GPD programs provided a 

spectrum of services for veterans. However, these programs varied in how 

services were provided, with some services more likely to be provided 

through partnerships and others more likely to be provided in-house 

directly by staff. Some of the services that were more likely to be provided 

through partnerships include those that require counseling or medicalrelated treatment. Services primarily provided directly by GPD providers 

tended to be more related to case management type activities.

Page 44 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix III: Range of Services Offered by

GPD Programs Nationwide 

Table 6: Percentage of GPD Facilities Reporting They Provided Selected Services by Method 

How services were provided by programs 

Services (ordered by prevalence of service being

offered) 

Indirectly 

through

linkagesa

Indirectly 

by staffb

Directly 

by staffc

Total percentage

of facilities 

providing service

Vocational/educational counseling 48.0 11.5 39.8 99.3

Discharge planning 8.2 2.5 88.6 99.3

Assistance with obtaining social services 

(e.g., Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, 

Social Security Disability Insurance) 

25.7 5.4 67.5 98.6

Case management services 10.0 3.2 85.4 98.6

Housing assistance 20.8 4.3 73.1 98.2

Assistance with spending money, banking or other 

financial matters

18.6 8.2 70.0 96.8

Transportation or assistance using public 

transportation 

20.0 7.1 69.3 96.4

Relapse prevention groups 48.8 5.4 41.9 96.1

Comprehensive mental health assessment/diagnosis 70.4 8.6 16.8 95.7

Individual therapy 47.9 5.4 42.5 95.7

Referral to other transitional services 13.9 3.2 78.2 95.4

Comprehensive substance abuse 

assessment/diagnosis 

47.7 8.6 38.7 95.0

Group therapy, not including relapse prevention 38.6 5.7 47.1 91.4

Aftercare counseling 48.2 5.4 37.5 91.1

AIDS screening and counseling 75.0 7.5 6.8 89.3

Nutritional counseling 54.6 11.4 23.2 89.3

Legal advice or counseling 76.1 3.9 5.7 85.7

Outcome follow-up (post discharge) 18.6 6.1 56.3 81.0

Family counseling 44.3 7.1 28.6 80.0

Religious or spiritual counseling 51.1 8.2 17.5 76.8

Domestic violence—family/partner violence services 63.2 4.3 8.2 75.7

Representative payee servicesd 51.4 3.6 8.6 63.6

Child care 17.1 3.2 1.8 22.1

Source: GAO analysis of NEPEC GPD program facility survey. 

Note: Percentages were calculated for facilities that completed the survey question, either 279 or 280

facilities depending on the question. 

a

Indirectly through linkages means treatment is provided indirectly through links with other agencies,

including VA. 

b

Indirectly by staff means treatment is provided indirectly by other staff of the organization. 

c

Directly by staff means treatment is provided directly by staff at this program. 

d

Representative payees handle an individual’s benefits if the individual is unable to. The benefits must 

be used to meet the needs of the beneficiary. 

Page 45 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix IV: Participant Outcomes for the Appendix IV Grant and Per Diem Program : Participant Outcomes for the 

Grant and Per Diem Program 

Outcomes are reported on a standard Northeast Program Evaluation 

Center discharge form that must be filled out by VA staff or by GPD staff 

with VA’s review and sign-off when the participant leaves the program. 

The form also captures information on the length and cost of stay in the 

GPD, reasons the participant left the program, and any plans for follow-up 

treatment for substance abuse or other problems. NEPEC officials told us 

that they do not verify the data submitted to them, but they do perform 

tests for completeness and internal consistency. VA’s Office of Inspector 

General (OIG) found that not all outcomes shown on the discharge forms 

were supported by additional information in the sample of case records 

that the OIG reviewed. For example, 76 percent of records included 

information supporting the veterans’ outcomes indicated on the form, but 

about 24 percent of records lacked such support. 

Outcomes for housing and income are shown as a percentage of all 

participants who left the program for any reason. However, outcomes for 

self-determination in terms of improved functioning are shown as a 

percentage of those veterans who had an identified problem when they 

entered the program. The determination that a participant has or has not 

improved may be considered somewhat subjective. The problems are 

described by participants themselves to VA staff in response to a series of 

questions on a standard NEPEC intake form that also includes a section 

for the VA clinical staff to record their observations of the substance abuse 

or mental health problems that the participants face. The intake form also 

captures other characteristics of the participants, such as their military, 

financial and living circumstances. VA staff are expected to complete 

these forms when they first contact homeless veterans but no later than 

the veterans’ third day with a GPD provider and to forward the forms to 

NEPEC. NEPEC reports that it does not receive intake forms for about 

10 percent of participants in the GPD program each year. 

Page 46 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix IV: Participant Outcomes for the 

Grant and Per Diem Program 

Table 7: Number Served by VA’s Health Care for Homeless Veterans and Grant and Per Diem Program and Veterans’ 

Outcomes, Fiscal years 2000 through 2005 

Participants served and outcomes 

Federal fiscal year (October through September of year 

shown) 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Number of 

• veterans treated by VA’s Health Care for Homeless Veterans’ 

(HCHV) staff 

• intake assessments of homeless veterans by HCHV staffa

• admissions of veterans to GPDs 

• discharges from GPDs 

43,082

34,206

4,841

4,020

57,854

46,862

10,137

8,706

61,123

44,296 

11,913

11,098 

60,970 

42,380

12,396

11,467 

63,283

42,485

13,509

12,454

61,261

41,111

16,597

15,403

Days a veteran stays at a GPD, on average 91 85 93 110 126 127

Housing stability outcomes: 

Number of discharges from GPDs with 

• independent housing 

• placement in halfway house or institution such as hospital. 

nursing home, or domiciliary 

1,163

991

2,187

2,162

3,073

2,731 

4,590 

2,882 

6,597

3,127

8,186

4,003

Increased income or skills outcomes: 

Number of discharges from GPDs with 

• full-time or part-time employment 

• VA benefitsb

• Other public benefitsb

1,404

NA

NA

2,803

NA

NA

3,579 

NA 

NA 

3,735 

2,100 

2,064 

4,108

2,701

2,309

4,920

3,751

2,916

Greater self-determination outcomes: 

Percentage of discharges from GPDs with 

• improved alcohol, drug, mental healthc

• improved medical, social/vocational conditionc

• success in program 

38-42

43-46

30

42-49

40-44

32

43-50 

43-46 

38 

56-62

50-57

43

60-67

55-63

49

62-69

57-64

50

Source: VA data. 

a

Intake assessments are completed by HCHV staff when they first encounter a homeless veteran, 

unless the contact is casual and no services are offered or referrals made. After a year, new 

assessments are required if VA care or services are provided and VA staff have not been working 

with the veteran.

b

Numbers shown here include veterans who receive both types of benefits as well as those who 

receive only the designated benefits. For this reason, they differ from the numbers shown in table 3. 

c

Percentages are ranges showing the highest and lowest of each of two or three outcome measures.

Page 47 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix V: Comments from the Department Appendix V of Veterans Affairs : Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 48 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 49 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 50 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix V: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 51 GAO-06-859 Homeless Veterans Program
Appendix VI: 

A

GAO Contact and Staff 

cknowledgments 

Page 52 GAO-06-859 

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Cristina T. Chaplain, Acting Director, (202) 512-7215, chaplainc@gao.gov

Shelia Drake, Assistant Director; Patricia L. Elston; David Forgosh; and 

Nyree M. Ryder made significant contributions to this report. In addition, 

Roger Thomas provided legal assistance; Walter Vance and Lynn Milan 

analyzed and assessed the reliability of data; Lily Chin, Jonathan 

McMurray, and Charles Willson assisted in report development; and 

Amy Sheller supported the team during its Los Angeles site visit. 

GAO Contact 

Acknowledgments 

Homeless Veterans Program
Related GAO Products 

Page 53 GAO-06-859 

Related GAO Products 

Homeless Veterans: Job Retention Goal Under Development for DOL’s 

Homeless Veterans’ Reintegration Program. GAO-05-654T. Washington, 

D.C.: May 4, 2005. 

Veterans Affairs Homeless Programs: Implementation of the 

Transitional Housing Loan Guarantee Program. GAO-05-311R. 

Washington, D.C.: March 16, 2005. 

VA Health Care: VA Should Expedite the Implementation of 

Recommendations Needed to Improve Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

Services. GAO-05-287. Washington, D.C.: February 14, 2005. 

Decennial Census: Methods for Collecting and Reporting Data on the 

Homeless and Others without Conventional Housing Need Refinement.

GAO-03-227. Washington, D.C.: January 17, 2003. 

Homelessness: Improving Program Coordination and Client Access to 

Programs. GAO-02-485T. Washington, D.C.: March 6, 2002.

Homeless Veterans: VA Expands Partnerships, but Effectiveness of 

Homeless Programs Is Unclear. GAO/T-HEHS-99-150. Washington, D.C.: 

June 24, 1999. 

Homeless Veterans: VA Expands Partnerships, but Homeless Program 

Effectiveness Is Unclear. GAO/HEHS-99-53. Washington, D.C.: April 1, 

1999. 

Homelessness: Overview of Current Issues and GAO Studies. 

GAO/T-RCED-99-125. Washington, D.C.: March 23, 1999. 

Homelessness: Demand for Services to Homeless Veterans Exceeds VA

Program Capacity. GAO/HEHS-94-98. Washington, D.C.: February 23,

1994. 

(130513) Homeless Veterans Program
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. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (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 www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER