{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/140945"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/140945","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"HUD-VASH Efficiency and Effectiveness: Homelessness and Veterans' Housing Policy","abstract":"The research explores why federal funding targeted for vouchers for homeless veterans in the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program (HUD-VASH) declined between 2009 and 2024. It compares funding for the expansion of the veteran homelessness program and the use of that funding for housing vouchers before and after implementation of Housing First in the Ending Veteran Homelessness Initiative. The study employs an exploratory, mixed quantitative and qualitative analysis. As coalitions to address homelessness among military veterans formed after HUD-VASH was authorized, different narratives about the causes of and possible remedies to veterans' underutilization of housing vouchers emerged as vehicles for policy entrepreneurs to promote different means for achieving the same ends for homeless veterans. Melding the Jenkins-Smith/Sabatier advocacy coalitions perspective with narrative, punctuated equilibrium, and multiple stream theories, the research highlights that limiting the program's funding evidently had little to do with its effectiveness at reducing homelessness. Instead, program efficiency and policy efficacy became the focus as coalition advocacy for implementation spanned partisan and ideological divides. Program efficiency, not effectiveness, emerged as the problem that policy entrepreneurs focused upon, building coalitions around opposing narratives of fiscal stewardship of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Over time, HUD-VASH effectiveness flourished, but funding increasingly languished under advocacy coalitions' control of congressional committees. These coalitions' identification of the Housing First policy strategy as the pre-eminent \"cause\" of and \"cure\" for the underutilization of vouchers became a point of contention, limiting growth. In the absence of systematic analysis by the VA of the efficiencies of HUD-VASH or its underwritten policies, a pro-Housing First Coalition formed around international empirical evidence of Housing First's improving program outcomes. At around the same time, due to over- reliance on a single metric, an anti-Housing First Coalition emerged that challenged Housing First's insistence on excluding other approaches to addressing homelessness. The amount of funding that congressional committees approved for additional HUD-VASH vouchers decreased, even as program effectiveness and need increased. This suggested declining congressional willingness to justify further program expansion amidst the contention and ambiguity over the Housing First strategy for addressing homelessness. The findings suggest that the policy disagreements have not been over whether the HUD-VASH program should remain sufficiently funded or about the actual underutilization of vouchers (the usage rate was more or less consistent between 2019 and 2024) since 2019. Rather, they revolved around whether to proceed programmatically as long as the Housing First policy strategy was linked to housing vouchers for veterans.","abstract_html":"The research explores why federal funding targeted for vouchers for homeless veterans in the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program (HUD-VASH) declined between 2009 and 2024. It compares funding for the expansion of the veteran homelessness program and the use of that funding for housing vouchers before and after implementation of Housing First in the Ending Veteran Homelessness Initiative. The study employs an exploratory, mixed quantitative and qualitative analysis. As coalitions to address homelessness among military veterans formed after HUD-VASH was authorized, different narratives about the causes of and possible remedies to veterans' underutilization of housing vouchers emerged as vehicles for policy entrepreneurs to promote different means for achieving the same ends for homeless veterans. Melding the Jenkins-Smith/Sabatier advocacy coalitions perspective with narrative, punctuated equilibrium, and multiple stream theories, the research highlights that limiting the program's funding evidently had little to do with its effectiveness at reducing homelessness. Instead, program efficiency and policy efficacy became the focus as coalition advocacy for implementation spanned partisan and ideological divides. Program efficiency, not effectiveness, emerged as the problem that policy entrepreneurs focused upon, building coalitions around opposing narratives of fiscal stewardship of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Over time, HUD-VASH effectiveness flourished, but funding increasingly languished under advocacy coalitions' control of congressional committees. These coalitions' identification of the Housing First policy strategy as the pre-eminent "cause" of and "cure" for the underutilization of vouchers became a point of contention, limiting growth. In the absence of systematic analysis by the VA of the efficiencies of HUD-VASH or its underwritten policies, a pro-Housing First Coalition formed around international empirical evidence of Housing First's improving program outcomes. At around the same time, due to over- reliance on a single metric, an anti-Housing First Coalition emerged that challenged Housing First's insistence on excluding other approaches to addressing homelessness. The amount of funding that congressional committees approved for additional HUD-VASH vouchers decreased, even as program effectiveness and need increased. This suggested declining congressional willingness to justify further program expansion amidst the contention and ambiguity over the Housing First strategy for addressing homelessness. The findings suggest that the policy disagreements have not been over whether the HUD-VASH program should remain sufficiently funded or about the actual underutilization of vouchers (the usage rate was more or less consistent between 2019 and 2024) since 2019. Rather, they revolved around whether to proceed programmatically as long as the Housing First policy strategy was linked to housing vouchers for veterans.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Bell, Spencer Hagen"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Arts","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Political Science","degree_department":"Political Science","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Hult, Karen M."],"committee_members":["Kitchens, Karin E.","Avey, Paul C."],"year":2026,"date_issued":"2026-01-22","date_published":"2026-01-22","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:20:18Z","subjects":["HUD-VASH","Veteran","Homelessness","Efficiency","Effectiveness","Housing Policy","Housing First"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["vt_gsexam:45578"],"render_values":[{"text":"vt_gsexam:45578","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/10919/140945","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Hult, Karen M."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Kitchens, Karin E.","Avey, Paul C."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Bell, Spencer Hagen"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2026-01-23T09:00:13Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2026-01-23T09:00:13Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2026-01-22"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["HUD-VASH","Veteran","Homelessness","Efficiency","Effectiveness","Housing Policy","Housing First"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["vt_gsexam:45578"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/10919/140945"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The research explores why federal funding targeted for vouchers for homeless veterans in the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program (HUD-VASH) declined between 2009 and 2024. It compares funding for the expansion of the veteran homelessness program and the use of that funding for housing vouchers before and after implementation of Housing First in the Ending Veteran Homelessness Initiative. The study employs an exploratory, mixed quantitative and qualitative analysis. As coalitions to address homelessness among military veterans formed after HUD-VASH was authorized, different narratives about the causes of and possible remedies to veterans' underutilization of housing vouchers emerged as vehicles for policy entrepreneurs to promote different means for achieving the same ends for homeless veterans. Melding the Jenkins-Smith/Sabatier advocacy coalitions perspective with narrative, punctuated equilibrium, and multiple stream theories, the research highlights that limiting the program's funding evidently had little to do with its effectiveness at reducing homelessness. Instead, program efficiency and policy efficacy became the focus as coalition advocacy for implementation spanned partisan and ideological divides. Program efficiency, not effectiveness, emerged as the problem that policy entrepreneurs focused upon, building coalitions around opposing narratives of fiscal stewardship of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Over time, HUD-VASH effectiveness flourished, but funding increasingly languished under advocacy coalitions' control of congressional committees. These coalitions' identification of the Housing First policy strategy as the pre-eminent \"cause\" of and \"cure\" for the underutilization of vouchers became a point of contention, limiting growth. In the absence of systematic analysis by the VA of the efficiencies of HUD-VASH or its underwritten policies, a pro-Housing First Coalition formed around international empirical evidence of Housing First's improving program outcomes. At around the same time, due to over- reliance on a single metric, an anti-Housing First Coalition emerged that challenged Housing First's insistence on excluding other approaches to addressing homelessness. The amount of funding that congressional committees approved for additional HUD-VASH vouchers decreased, even as program effectiveness and need increased. This suggested declining congressional willingness to justify further program expansion amidst the contention and ambiguity over the Housing First strategy for addressing homelessness. The findings suggest that the policy disagreements have not been over whether the HUD-VASH program should remain sufficiently funded or about the actual underutilization of vouchers (the usage rate was more or less consistent between 2019 and 2024) since 2019. Rather, they revolved around whether to proceed programmatically as long as the Housing First policy strategy was linked to housing vouchers for veterans."]},{"key":"dc:description.abstractgeneral","label":"General Abstract","values":["Addressing homelessness among military veterans generally is broadly supported, but appropriate and effective means of doing so often generate heated debate. Frequently, such debate reflects poorly defined strategies for addressing a policy problem or insufficient coordination and funding among federal agencies. This study examines why federal funding for additional HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) housing vouchers declined between 2009 and 2024, even though most outcomes displayed increases in effectiveness above and beyond the general population's voucher program. The study found that congressional concerns over program efficiency and direction were key. Ambiguity centered around the Housing First policy strategy as one of the two features that distinguished the voucher program for veterans from that for the general population. Over time, HUD-VASH effectiveness at reducing veteran homelessness grew, but funding for expanding it to meet growing demand languished. The advocacy coalitions supporting and opposing Housing First identified this policy strategy as both the pre-eminent \"cause\" of and the \"cure\" for underutilization of vouchers, complicating congressional debate. The contentiousness of the rhetoric surrounding Housing First coincided with a decrease in funding for expanding the HUD-VASH program, essentially limiting growth. Peculiarities were also unearthed regarding veteran population reductions. These findings suggest that the policy disagreements were less over whether the HUD-VASH program should be funded and more over whether to proceed programmatically with the Housing First strategy that was linked to veterans. To reduce policymakers' doubts about continuing or expanding the program, the program's features needed to demonstrate effectiveness and efficiency. Yet the general absence of relevant data (or data that were ignored) confused analyses and weakened legislative and other support."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["ETD"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["HUD-VASH Efficiency and Effectiveness: Homelessness and Veterans' Housing Policy"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Hult, Karen M."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Kitchens, Karin E.","Avey, Paul C."],"dc:contributor.department":["Political Science"],"dc:creator":["Bell, Spencer Hagen"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2026-01-23T09:00:13Z"],"dc:date.available":["2026-01-23T09:00:13Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2026-01-22"],"dc:description.abstract":["The research explores why federal funding targeted for vouchers for homeless veterans in the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program (HUD-VASH) declined between 2009 and 2024. It compares funding for the expansion of the veteran homelessness program and the use of that funding for housing vouchers before and after implementation of Housing First in the Ending Veteran Homelessness Initiative. The study employs an exploratory, mixed quantitative and qualitative analysis. As coalitions to address homelessness among military veterans formed after HUD-VASH was authorized, different narratives about the causes of and possible remedies to veterans' underutilization of housing vouchers emerged as vehicles for policy entrepreneurs to promote different means for achieving the same ends for homeless veterans. Melding the Jenkins-Smith/Sabatier advocacy coalitions perspective with narrative, punctuated equilibrium, and multiple stream theories, the research highlights that limiting the program's funding evidently had little to do with its effectiveness at reducing homelessness. Instead, program efficiency and policy efficacy became the focus as coalition advocacy for implementation spanned partisan and ideological divides. Program efficiency, not effectiveness, emerged as the problem that policy entrepreneurs focused upon, building coalitions around opposing narratives of fiscal stewardship of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Over time, HUD-VASH effectiveness flourished, but funding increasingly languished under advocacy coalitions' control of congressional committees. These coalitions' identification of the Housing First policy strategy as the pre-eminent \"cause\" of and \"cure\" for the underutilization of vouchers became a point of contention, limiting growth. In the absence of systematic analysis by the VA of the efficiencies of HUD-VASH or its underwritten policies, a pro-Housing First Coalition formed around international empirical evidence of Housing First's improving program outcomes. At around the same time, due to over- reliance on a single metric, an anti-Housing First Coalition emerged that challenged Housing First's insistence on excluding other approaches to addressing homelessness. The amount of funding that congressional committees approved for additional HUD-VASH vouchers decreased, even as program effectiveness and need increased. This suggested declining congressional willingness to justify further program expansion amidst the contention and ambiguity over the Housing First strategy for addressing homelessness. The findings suggest that the policy disagreements have not been over whether the HUD-VASH program should remain sufficiently funded or about the actual underutilization of vouchers (the usage rate was more or less consistent between 2019 and 2024) since 2019. Rather, they revolved around whether to proceed programmatically as long as the Housing First policy strategy was linked to housing vouchers for veterans."],"dc:description.abstractgeneral":["Addressing homelessness among military veterans generally is broadly supported, but appropriate and effective means of doing so often generate heated debate. Frequently, such debate reflects poorly defined strategies for addressing a policy problem or insufficient coordination and funding among federal agencies. This study examines why federal funding for additional HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) housing vouchers declined between 2009 and 2024, even though most outcomes displayed increases in effectiveness above and beyond the general population's voucher program. The study found that congressional concerns over program efficiency and direction were key. Ambiguity centered around the Housing First policy strategy as one of the two features that distinguished the voucher program for veterans from that for the general population. Over time, HUD-VASH effectiveness at reducing veteran homelessness grew, but funding for expanding it to meet growing demand languished. The advocacy coalitions supporting and opposing Housing First identified this policy strategy as both the pre-eminent \"cause\" of and the \"cure\" for underutilization of vouchers, complicating congressional debate. The contentiousness of the rhetoric surrounding Housing First coincided with a decrease in funding for expanding the HUD-VASH program, essentially limiting growth. Peculiarities were also unearthed regarding veteran population reductions. These findings suggest that the policy disagreements were less over whether the HUD-VASH program should be funded and more over whether to proceed programmatically with the Housing First strategy that was linked to veterans. To reduce policymakers' doubts about continuing or expanding the program, the program's features needed to demonstrate effectiveness and efficiency. Yet the general absence of relevant data (or data that were ignored) confused analyses and weakened legislative and other support."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Arts"],"dc:format.medium":["ETD"],"dc:identifier.other":["vt_gsexam:45578"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/10919/140945"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["HUD-VASH","Veteran","Homelessness","Efficiency","Effectiveness","Housing Policy","Housing First"],"dc:title":["HUD-VASH Efficiency and Effectiveness: Homelessness and Veterans' Housing Policy"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Political Science"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:20:18Z"}