No way to run a homeless program

Mario Tama/Getty Images

Kerry Jackson is the William Clement Fellow in California Reform at the Pacific Research Institute.

Last year’s count of the homeless population in both Los Angeles County and City showed a slight decrease, which is a small measure of progress.

But the findings of recent audit of city-funded homelessness assistance programs suggests changes are needed in the local response if there is to be a major push forward in curbing homelessness.

The private-sector consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal, which performed the court-ordered review, said the during its efforts “it became apparent to A&M that key stakeholders did not monitor or regard the city programs in the same manner as the court,” resulting in a “misalignment” which “created confusion.”

Other problems include: “fragmented accounting”; the inability “to completely quantify the total amount spent by the city for each component of the city programs”; a “disjointed continuum-of-care system”; “limited financial oversight and performance monitoring”; and a “lack of contractual clarity and accountability.”

Reviewers also determined funding and budget allocations “for homelessness assistance services were not routinely reconciled with actual spending or contractual obligations.”

Where have we heard a similar evaluation of homeless services before? That’s right, four years ago then-California State Auditor Elaine Howle released a report that said the state’s “approach to addressing homelessness is disjointed.”

“At least nine state agencies administer and oversee 41 different programs that provide funding to mitigate homelessness, yet no single entity oversees the state’s efforts or is responsible for developing a statewide strategic plan,” the Courthouse News reported.

A follow-up investigation by her successor, current state Auditor Grant Parks, released last year, found that bookkeeping problems and a lack of transparency and accountability still plagued efforts.

Between the audits, the homeless population grew by about 30,000 even as taxpayer-provided funding reached $24 billion over roughly the same period, which strongly suggests that government programs are failing.

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisor Lindsey P. Horvath seems to have had it with the bureaucratic knots. Days after the Alvarez & Marsal report was filed with the United States District Court for the Central District of California, she introduced a motion to create a consolidated county department “to end this nightmare.”

“It's another reminder of what we already know: the current system is broken. No more wasted resources. No more contracts for services that don't deliver. We need accountability.”

Will we ever get accountability? Will waste be eliminated? Efficiency boosted?

Given the amount of money that goes into the programs, it’s unlikely that the process can be fully cleaned up.

While the state continues to scrutinize Norwalk's response to homeless related services,

it has yet to apply the same level of oversight to Los Angeles County — home to the largest homeless population in the nation. That imbalance raises serious concerns about the state's priorities.

Maybe it’s time, well it’s actually past time, for government officials, the elected and unelected, to look at the policies that incentivize homelessness and work from that angle rather than relying so heavily on public programs that don’t live up to the promises we keep hearing from lawmakers.