Honolulu has been laboring for some years under the weight of a distinction it wants to shed: This city has the highest homelessness rate in the nation, per capita.

But apparently it hasn’t been laboring in a smart, efficient or agile way. So says the city auditor, in a critique of efforts by the administration of Mayor Kirk Caldwell and its nonprofit partners to pursue a solution to this socioeconomic breakdown.

The audit noted city projects hitting some of their marks, but overall finds these efforts under- whelming.

Officials perpetually describe homelessness as a crisis, which is why the public reaction has got to be one of deep disappointment. One hopes for greater progress toward any goal, but especially toward one identified as a singular priority for city government.

Compounding that dismal news: The city also has received official notice from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development that it missed a deadline to spend nearly $2.4 million for which it was eligible, money that could have helped with rental subsidies and other needs.

This is horrendous, given Hawaii’s abysmal gap in housing inventory, especially for lower- income residents. These are people living at the edge of homelessness themselves, and losing housing assistance could push them into the streets.

But the first salvo came last week with release of the report by city Auditor Edwin Young, one that gives the city a black eye for its initiatives countering homelessness.

The Caldwell administration lacks benchmarks for gauging success, and has mismanaged programs aimed at sheltering people, according to the 75-page document.

Young reserved most of his fire for the administration, but also took the Institute for Human Services to task. IHS is one of the city’s principal nonprofit partners, cited in the report for its Hale Mauliola transitional housing and navigation center for the homeless at Sand Island.

His critique of Hale Mauliola centered on that project’s missed first-year target to move 250 homeless individuals into housing. Instead, the Year 1 tally reached only 96, according to the audit.

Connie Mitchell, IHS executive director, responded by saying the report did not make the point that there were 224 people served in the first year through its outreach and social service assists, including the 96 who were housed.

The audit did acknowledge that two other initiatives, Housing First and the Community Assistance Program, both exceeded their service goals.

But its larger point is that overall management was less than stringent. The Homeless Initiatives Group is the section of the city’s community services office established to manage $14 million in homeless program funds.

It was overseen by contractual staff and “lacks policies and procedures, adequate resources, training or an effective back office” to provide administrative support.

Young also pointed to a disconnect between city and state agencies, a lack of coordination made worse by the failure to develop a comprehensive plan with measurable performance benchmarks.

“Opportunities to leverage or pool resources, or build on others’ efforts, are lost,” the report said.

These are opportunities the city and state cannot afford to waste. Both levels of government must work together if there’s any hope of making headway against this crisis.

Failure to do so is seen in the persistent, growing encampments of homeless families and individuals on public sidewalks, in parks and in places hidden in the brush.

Among its list of recommended fixes, the auditor proposes that the city Department of Community Services, at the completion of its contracts, “formally evaluate Housing, Community Assistance Program, and Hale Mauliola (in particular) against program goals, objectives, performance metrics, and other pertinent criteria to determine future support, sustainability and viability.”

All of that should go without saying, but the auditor had to say it.

The city’s official response included an acknowledgement of this point, among others. Officials assert that the department is developing policies and “an automated grants and contract management system” for improved efficiency. It needs to be held to that commitment.

On the issue of $2.4 million untapped due to the missed HUD deadline, city Managing Director Roy Amemiya issued a written response citing challenges to spend money “on initiatives that require close and significant coordination with the private sector.”

While it’s certainly true third-party contracts demand careful oversight, the city ought to be able to fulfill that and to get the money spent within deadlines that other municipalities seem capable of managing.

The city seems to recognize that solving its housing problem is an imperative, and has gone to great lengths to establish a new housing office with staff to handle it.

But Honolulu residents deserve results, not just the bureaucratic vessel intended to deliver them. If the city can’t make greater strides in its battle against homelessness, then all such exercises would be pointless indeed.