Surveys of Partner Satisfaction with HUD Performance

Surveys of Partner Satisfaction with HUD Performance

HUD works with thousands of partner groups — including local and state government officials and agencies, nonprofit organizations, and private sector partners — to deliver housing and community development services and benefits to the American people. The success of HUD’s programs depends in part on the strength and health of these partnerships. HUD's Strategic Plan FY 2010–2015 identifies strengthening partner relationships as critical to “transform[ing] the way HUD does business.”

Beginning in 2001 and continuing in 2005 and 2010, HUD sponsored confidential, third-party surveys of its partners to assess their satisfaction with HUD’s performance. More than 7,000 HUD partners responded to the 2010 survey, which measured mission-critical aspects of HUD-partner relationships. The surveys were administered separately to each of the following groups:

HUD partners with thousands of organizations to support housing and community development needs throughout the United States.

• Community development department directors

• Mayors and local chief elected officials

• Public housing agency directors

• Fair Housing Assistance Program directors

• Fair Housing Initiative Program directors

• FHA-approved single-family mortgage lenders

• Owners of Section 202/811 multifamily properties

• Owners of HUD-insured multifamily properties

• Owners of HUD-assisted multifamily properties

• Housing Partnership Network-affiliated nonprofit organizations.

The recently published results of the 2010 surveys suggest a relatively high rate of satisfaction with HUD’s programs in general, but satisfaction rates were variable across groups. While the majority reported being either very or somewhat satisfied with HUD’s programs, Fair Housing Assistance Program directors were more satisfied than most and HUD-Assisted multifamily owners and nonprofit housing organizations were less satisfied. Although respondents were generally satisfied with HUD’s programs, they expressed somewhat lower levels of satisfaction with the way HUD administers its programs, with the lowest level expressed by nonprofit housing directors and the highest level expressed by Fair Housing Assistance Program directors.

Comparisons of partner surveys conducted in 2005 and 2010 show some changes in overall partner satisfaction. For instance, the ratings of public housing agency and Fair Housing Assistance Program directors indicated improvement, whereas those of community development department directors and mayors showed a modest decline.

The report and accompanying data binders detail aspects where HUD is perceived to be strong, as well as aspects in need of improvement. For example, although respondents reported relatively high levels of satisfaction with the quality of information received from HUD and the competency and knowledge of HUD’s staff, there was considerable room for improvement regarding the timeliness of HUD’s decisionmaking, the clarity of HUD’s rules, and the time commitment needed to meet HUD’s requirements.

The 2010 Partner Satisfaction with HUD’s Performance report serves an important purpose by providing feedback to HUD on the strengths and weaknesses of our partner relationships. Variations across groups highlight areas of strength as well as areas in which partner relationships need to be improved. Also reflected is the complex role HUD plays with respect to our partners, acting as a source of critical program funding and support on the one hand and as a regulator and compliance evaluator on the other. The unique mix of these sometimes contradictory roles experienced by each partner likely influences their satisfaction with HUD.

The results of both the core survey questions asked of all partner groups as well as the results of those unique to each of the partner groups, can be found here. The data binders also contain the unabridged, verbatim comments of each partner respondent, a rich source of unstructured qualitative feedback to HUD.