Page images
PDF
EPUB
[subsumed][merged small][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

COMPARISON OF PLANNED WITH ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION OF HOUSES
FISCAL YEARS 1967-70

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

year 1970--continues, it will take about 12 years to satisfy the housing needs of the 63,000 families still living in substandard housing.

The June 30 estimate of housing needs did not consider, however, the effects that population growth, family migration, Indian families living adjacent to the reservation, and deterioration of standard housing would have on future housing needs. The Bureau estimates that population growth alone will increase housing needs by about 1,500 units a year, or about 18,000 units over the next 12 years.

Although the number of housing units constructed or renovated usually is a good indicator of the progress of a housing program, we found instances where this was not necessarily so. For example, Bureau records showed that, at the Rosebud Reservation in South Dakota, 400 housing units financed by HUD were completed during fiscal year 1969. As of April 1970, however, 72 of these units had not been occupied and thus had no impact on reducing the number of Indian families living in substandard housing. (See p. 51 for additional information on this project.)

Our review showed that Bureau field officials generally did not use any formal criteria but relied on subjective judgment when determining whether houses were standard (decent, safe, and sanitary and met applicable housing codes). As a result of suggestions we made during our review, in May 1970 the Bureau issued new guidelines with respect to general construction, heating, plumbing, wiring, and living space.

In our inspection of the design and construction of selected Indian housing projects, we considered factors similar to those contained in the Bureau's May 1970 guidelines. The deficiencies we noted are listed in appendix I.

During our inspections of Indian houses on several reservations, we noted instances where recently constructed or renovated housing units were substandard, but, according to Bureau records, the number of substandard units had been reduced. For example, the Bureau renovated and moved 124 Government-surplus houses onto the Pine Ridge Reservation and considered the houses as meeting the standards although

[graphic][graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][graphic][merged small]
[graphic][merged small][graphic][merged small]
« PreviousContinue »