Runaway and Homeless Youth Grants:
Improvements Needed in the Grant Award Process
GAO-10-335, May 10, 2010
Additional Materials:
- Highlights Page:
- Accessible Text:
Contact:
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) awards grants to provide shelter and services to runaway and homeless youth through the Basic Center, Transitional Living and Street Outreach Programs. In response to a mandate for a review of the grant award process for these programs in the Reconnecting Homeless Youth Act of 2008 (Pub. L. No. 110-378), GAO examined (1) grant announcements and application requirements, (2) technical assistance for grant applicants, (3) how grant award decisions are made, and (4) notification of grant award decisions. GAO reviewed requirements, documents, and records associated with this process for fiscal years 2007 and 2008, observed the grant evaluation portion of this process, and interviewed applicants, peer reviewers, and agency officials.
Based on GAO's review of past grant announcements for these programs, GAO found that the criteria upon which grant applications were evaluated were not clearly identified or presented in a single location in the announcement. Rather, GAO found that criteria were scattered throughout various sections of the announcement, had multiple labels, and were not presented in an orderly manner. As a result, applications that did not address the criteria from all sections were likely to receive lower evaluation scores, decreasing their chances of receiving a grant. HHS provides technical assistance to potential applicants for runaway and homeless youth grants, as required by statute. Of the 20 applicants GAO interviewed who sought technical assistance, 17 were satisfied with the help they received. Grant award decisions are primarily based on the results of the peer review process, and internal controls in place to ensure that applications are evaluated consistently were not always adequate. GAO found weaknesses in four out of the six procedures the agency relies on to ensure consistent evaluation of applications. For example, although HHS policy requires peer reviewers to be experts in the field of runaway and homeless youth programs, about one- quarter of the reviewers who evaluated applications for 2009 Street Outreach grants had little or no experience in this area. With regard to notification of grant award decisions, GAO found that they have not always been communicated to applicants in a timely manner, which can delay the start of new programs and present planning challenges for existing ones. GAO also found that the information in notification letters to applicants who were not awarded grants was not always clear or complete.
Status Legend:
- Review Pending
- Open
- Closed - implemented
- Closed - not implemented
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To enhance transparency and fairness in the grant award process, and improve grantees ability to plan for services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families to provide clear information to applicants about the specific reasons their applications were not approved.
Agency Affected: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In 2010, HHS stated that in accordance with ACF policy and procedures, every unsuccessful applicant is entitled to an explanation of why their application was not funded. In addition, upon request, the Program Office will provide a debriefing to applicants. However, we believe that letters sent to unsuccessful applicants should clearly note that applicants may request a debriefing by the Program Office regarding specific reasons why their application was not funded. Currently, letters to unsuccessful applicants do not include this information. It is also important to revise the language in letters to applicants that are screened out of the grant competition that implies their application was evaluated and scored. HHS did not provide an update on these efforts in FY11 or FY12.
Recommendation: To enhance transparency and fairness in the grant award process, and improve grantees ability to plan for services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families to document the specific reasons for denying grants to high-scoring applicants in favor of other applicants for the agency record.
Agency Affected: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS agreed with this recommendation and, in 2010, noted agency plans to include more details concerning geographic distribution in the letters to applicants who are denied grants for this reason. While these efforts would be in line with our recommendation, the details supporting such decisions must be consistently documented in the agency's records to support the information provided to applicants in their letters. HHS did not provide an update on these efforts in FY11 or FY12.
Recommendation: To enhance transparency and fairness in the grant award process, and improve grantees ability to plan for services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families to document and maintain records of Administration for Children and Families (ACF) comments to peer review panels during the review process.
Agency Affected: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In 2010, HHS did not comment on this recommendation nor did they provide subsequent updates in FY11 or FY12.
Recommendation: To enhance transparency and fairness in the grant award process, and improve grantees ability to plan for services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families to make all meetings for peer reviewers, including those for new reviewers and chairs, mandatory.
Agency Affected: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In 2010, HHS indicated that all meetings for peer reviewers and chairs are already mandatory but due to unforeseen factors, it is not always possible for all reviewers to attend. GAO observed that attendance at these meetings was not explicitly mandatory, but highly encouraged. Furthermore, attendance was not enforced and attendance records were not maintained. HHS plans to officially notify all reviewers and chairpersons participating in future reviews that all training is mandatory. In the event some reviewers and chairpersons are not able to attend the mandatory training sessions due to unforeseen circumstances, the agency intends to offer "make up" sessions. HHS did not provide updates in FY11 and FY12 confirming whether it has taken these actions.
Recommendation: To enhance transparency and fairness in the grant award process, and improve grantees ability to plan for services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families to select peer reviewers with expertise in the programmatic area for which they are evaluating grant applications.
Agency Affected: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In 2010, HHS commented that the agency elected to accept reviewers who are knowledgeable of the risk factors faced by runaway and homeless youth, and that many professional disciplines often intersect with runaway and homeless youth. The agency indicated that they plan to take steps to ensure that all reviewers possess the knowledge and expertise in the particular program for which they are reviewing grant applications. In the event of a shortage of reviewers, the agency intends to staff panels with at least one peer reviewer with extensive relevant knowledge, which would continue to differ from the current policy that grants must receive an objective, advisory review by a minimum of "three" unbiased reviewers with expertise in the programmatic area for which applications are submitted. GAO notes that because professionals in varied disciplines could have sufficient expertise to serve as reviewers and it may be difficult for the agency to find enough reviewers with expertise in a particular program, this recommendation includes those that have expertise in the programmatic area for which they are evaluating grant applications, and not a specific program. HHS did not provide an update in FY11 and FY12.
Recommendation: To enhance transparency and fairness in the grant award process, and improve grantees ability to plan for services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families to clearly identify in grant announcements all the criteria that peer reviewers will use to evaluate and score applications, and ensure that peer reviewers use only those criteria during the peer review process.
Agency Affected: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: HHS disagreed with this recommendation, maintaining that all of the criteria used to evaluate and score applications are contained in the "Evaluation Criteria" section (section 5) of the announcement. GAO observed, however, that in addition to evaluating and scoring applications based on criteria specified in section 5, some of the panels evaluated and scored applications based on criteria from two other sections of the announcement. This will ensure that all the criteria used to evaluate and score applications are clearly identified to applicants and peer reviewers, and that peer reviewers use only those criteria when evaluating and scoring applications. HHS did not provide an update in FY11 or FY12.
Recommendation: To enhance transparency and fairness in the grant award process, and improve grantees ability to plan for services, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families to notify applicants about the outcome of their applications as soon as grant award decisions are made.
Agency Affected: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Comments: In 2010, HHS commented that, as part of the grant application process, the agency plans to explain to applicants that final grant decisions depend on the results of the grant award negotiations between ACF and the prospective grantees. Although GAO recognizes that these grants are discretionary and final award decisions involve negotiations that may take time, every effort should be made to complete negotiations and notify both successful and unsuccessful applicants as quickly as possible. HHS did not provide an update in FY11 or FY12.