Government service delivery needs standard definitions, former government tech leaders say
narvo vexar/Getty Images
A patchwork of technical definitions mean Americans are missing out on benefits and agencies face an additional administrative burden, a new paper from Democratic think tank Searchlight Institute says.
Tech Viaduct, a group of technologists and public servants drafting a day one playbook for the next administration, is urging Congress to standardize the definition of common terms — such as disability, homelessness and income — to make government service delivery more efficient.
“Simplifying definitions is necessary and the sensible first step to making technological solutions possible. The next administration should come prepared with legislation that would simplify the laws governing the safety net,” the Tech Viaduct paper reads.
With standard definitions, creating software that can serve as a single front door for government benefits becomes possible, Arabella Crawford, a former U.S. Digital Service employee and paper co-author, told Nextgov/FCW.
The paper, which is the first Tech Viaduct has released since the project launched in January, details how federal and state agencies rely on vastly different definitions for disability, homelessness and income. Those differences, dubbed “administrative homographs,” mean “Americans miss out on benefits they are eligible to receive while agencies are forced to be less efficient,” the paper claims.
For example, the paper notes that the the Department of Housing and Urban Development defines homelessness as “an individual or family who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence” and includes people who stay in places not meant for habitation.
But the Department of Education uses a similar definition for homeless children while also counting people sharing housing due to hardship, living in motels, camping and similar circumstances as homeless.
In practical terms, the discrepancy means that a couch-surfing veteran staying at a friend’s house would not be considered homeless under HUD’s definition but their children staying at the same place would be considered homeless under Education’s definition, the paper explains.
A community-based service organization tasked with supporting the veteran and their children would then have to “track and differentiate its services based on these separate definitions. This level of complexity impedes the efficiency and scope of service delivery when Americans need assistance most,” the paper claims.
Further adding to the complexity is that foster care systems and the federal Runaway and Homeless Youth Act rely on additional definitions of homelessness, the paper adds.
Similar complexities exist between SNAP, Medicaid, Section 8 housing and other programs, which all count income in different ways. The result of those differences is that income data collected for one program likely does not apply to another program even though both try to support the same population.
Congress should reconcile differences with legislation that mandates and provides “funding to develop a common glossary of federally regulated definitions across programs, highlight when these terms differ, and provide guidance on how to reconcile the differences,” the paper urges.
“Even if Congress can’t decide on a single common definition for terms, lawmakers should consolidate where they can and ensure differences are clearly defined and straightforward for agencies to reconcile. In tandem, Congress should instruct the Office of Management and Budget to harmonize program definitions and map out where they conflict in order to identify further changes needed to reduce administrative burden,” the paper adds.
Tech Viaduct is working on additional papers and resources around government procurement, workforce and data management, Christopher Whitaker, paper co-author and executive director of the Alliance of Civic Technologists, told Nextgov/FCW.
Technologists who previously served in the federal government started Tech Viaduct earlier this year, in part as a reaction to the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency.
The group, which is a project of the Democratic think tank Searchlight Institute, wants the next “friendly administration” to adopt plans to make tech-enabled government service delivery thrive, Nextgov/FCW previously reported. Those plans will include structural reform objectives, day-one executive orders, memoranda and more.