[Senate Hearing 110-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008
----------
FRIDAY, MARCH 16, 2007
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:08 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary L. Landrieu (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senator Landrieu.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID M. WALKER, COMPTROLLER GENERAL
OF THE UNITED STATES
Senator Landrieu. The subcommittee will come to order. Good
morning, and welcome to everyone.
Regrettably, Senator Allard is attending a family funeral
in Colorado this morning and will not be able to join us. So,
our thoughts, prayers, and condolences are with him and his
family this morning.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD
But I do understand that he's prepared a statement for the
record, and, at this time, I will submit it on his behalf.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Wayne Allard
Madam Chairman, I regret that I cannot attend this morning's
hearing with the Government Accountability Office, the Government
Printing Office, the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of
Compliance.
There are many important issues before these agencies, not the
least of which is the large percentage increase being requested by
each--especially the Government Printing Office with a 49 percent
increase over the fiscal year 2007 continuing resolution level.
The Government Accountability Office is requesting $523.8 million
for fiscal year 2008, which will return GAO to the fiscal year 2006
operating level. Thanks to Comptroller General David Walker and his
staff, our subcommittee has received excellent assistance in overseeing
legislative branch agencies, particularly the Architect of the Capitol
and the Capitol Visitor Center, as well as the Capitol Police
management issues.
An issue I would like GAO to address is its capacity to continue to
undertake technology assessment work. I understand there is interest in
starting up the old Office of Technology Assessment, and frankly I'm
very concerned about that idea. GAO had a pilot project to do
technology assessment projects several years ago, which was very
successful. GAO subsequently completed three additional projects on
technology assessment which were requested on a bi-partisan and
bicameral basis, and were well-received as I understand it. I would
like to know whether GAO can continue to perform such work, on a bi-
partisan, bicameral basis, with appropriate peer review, and whether
this is consistent with GAO's mission. The notion of starting up a new
agency at a time when we have extraordinary budget constraints does not
make sense.
With respect to the Government Printing Office, I would note that
Bruce James retired at the end of last year and the Acting Public
Printer, Bill Turri, has been ably filling his shoes. GPO's request of
roughly $182 million is a 49 percent increase, as I mentioned earlier.
I understand that this increase is in part due to the need to re-pay
the revolving fund for shortfalls in Congressional printing and binding
costs, and the 2006 updating of the U.S. Code. GPO is able to use the
revolving fund for these shortfalls, but we must pay those funds back.
In addition, GPO has numerous information technology improvements
which have been deferred or are nearing completion and need the final
infusion of funds to complete. Having said that, we know your full
request likely will be difficult to fully accommodate, so we look
forward to seeing a prioritization of your request.
The Congressional Budget Office has a new director, Dr. Peter
Orszag, who comes to CBO with excellent credentials and I look forward
to working with him. CBO is requesting a steady-state budget of almost
$38 million and 235 employees, but is now asking for additional funds
for health-care related work. I look forward to getting more
information on the need for that additional work.
Finally, the Office of Compliance, represented by Ms. Tamara
Chrisler, is requesting just over $4 million. The office is in the
midst of completing a settlement with the Architect of the Capitol on
the complaint OOC filed over a year ago on the utility tunnels. That is
a precedent-setting case and that has taken tremendous resources. We
look forward to that coming to conclusion shortly so that AOC can move
ahead expeditiously with its repairs and improvements in the tunnels.
Madam Chairman, this concludes my statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARY L. LANDRIEU
Senator Landrieu. Today, we meet to take testimony on the
fiscal year 2008 budgets for the Government Accountability
Office (GAO), the Government Printing Office (GPO), the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and the Office of Compliance
(OOC). Since we have four agencies testifying this morning, I
ask that each of you just present your remarks in summary form.
I've read all of your statements, and they will be included for
the record.
We're looking at some pretty substantial increases in your
steady budget requests. While I realize the continuing
resolution held you to 2006 dollars in fiscal year 2007, we
really need you to think about the priorities that you have as
we move forward in this process. Priorities in this context may
mean overall lower dollars that we have to work with, but we
will explore this as the subcommittee moves forward.
I want to welcome today's witnesses: David Walker, Bill
Turri, Peter Orszag, and Tamara Chrisler. Thank you all for
attending, this morning.
The Government Accountability Office budget request totals
$523 million, which is an increase of 8 percent over the
current year and would fund an increase of 104 full-time
employees. I appreciate the oversight your agency has provided
to this subcommittee, on both the Capitol Visitor Center and
the utility tunnel repair work. I want to particularly thank
Bernie Ungar, Terry Dorn, and Gloria Jarmon, of your staff, for
their hard work and assistance to me and to my staff on these
complicated and time consuming projects.
I hope to have a detailed conversation with you today, Mr.
Walker, about a number of workforce issues, including the
implementation of the GAO Human Capital Act of 2004,
legislation you requested from Congress. Some of the promises
that you made have not yet been completely fulfilled, and we'll
talk about where we are in that process a little later.
The Government Printing Office budget request totals $182
million, a 49-percent increase over fiscal year 2007 and would
include 86 additional employees.
Mr. Turri, I hope you're prepared to defend this request,
which is literally doubling your current budget. I understand
that there are some expansions and changes in technology, and
we'd like to hear more about that today.
The Congressional Budget Office budget request totals $38
million, which is an 8-percent increase over current year, and
would support the current level of 235 employees. I understand
the CBO is looking into expanding the scope of their work to
include identifying and analyzing ways to control healthcare
spending. I look forward to hearing more about that proposal
this morning.
And, finally, the Office of Compliance is requesting $4.1
million, which is an increase of $1 million, or 32 percent,
over the current year, and would fund four additional
employees.
Ms. Chrisler, I appreciate the fact that your organization
has had an increased workload over the last year because of the
problems in the utility tunnels, and I look forward to hearing
an update on the progress being made by the Architect of the
Capitol (AOC) in addressing the issues in the complaint filed
by your agency.
GAO deg.GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICES' FISCAL YEAR 2008
BUDGET REQUEST
Now, Mr. Walker, if you would begin. And let me thank you
for your visit to my office. I found it extremely enlightening
and insightful. I want to begin by commending you on what I
consider to be an excellent job that you're doing. I want to
help you to continue to achieve more of the goals that you
outlined to me. But I'd like to allow you to make your
statement. We will then question some of the increases in your
budget.
Mr. Walker. Sure.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
Mr. Walker. Thank you, Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to be
here today to talk about GAO's fiscal year 2008 budget request.
I would like to thank you and the subcommittee for your
past support of GAO. I'm especially appreciative of your
efforts to try to provide us some additional funding above
fiscal year 2006 levels, rather than just a flat-line
continuing resolution, which we had been under. That helped us
to avoid unpaid furloughs, but, as you know, because we still
had a shortfall, we could only make our pay raises retroactive
to February 18, 2007, rather than January 7.
I'm particularly pleased with the results that GAO achieved
for the Congress and the American people. For fiscal year 2006,
we returned $105 for every $1 invested in GAO--number one in
the world. Second place in the world is 24 to 1. I think it's
important--and I know you believe this--to consider results,
not just resources, because the U.S. Government needs to do a
better job, I believe, in linking resources to results.
While 2006 was a record year for us in many regards, we've
had to delay and cancel a number of items, because we're
operating under constrained resource levels. As you undoubtedly
know, since 2003 GAO's budget has not kept pace with inflation.
Our purchasing power is down 3 percent since 2003, which
concerns me because about 80 percent of our budget is for
payroll costs, and, needless to say, you have to pay people
more than inflation, especially top performers. The other 20
percent of our budget is primarily nondiscretionary costs which
are subject to inflationary increases. So, that's a real
concern.
Candidly, Madam Chair, my concern is we've done a lot of
things to improve our economy, our efficiency, and our
effectiveness, but they're about played out. I'm very concerned
that unless we receive a more reasonable resource allocation
that's better aligned with our results, it's going to start to
have an adverse effect on employee morale, on our ability to
serve the Congress, and on our ability to generate the type of
unparalleled return on investment that we've delivered to the
Congress and the country in recent years.
We have, and will continue to take steps to try to deal
with constrained resource levels. We are asking for about an 8-
percent increase for next year, which is designed to try to
help deal with some of the deterioration in our purchasing
power in recent years, and to be able to fund some of the
projects that we've had to defer for quite a number of years.
GAO deg.REBUILDING GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE OVER THE
NEXT 6 YEARS
Looking beyond fiscal 2008 I promised the Congress, when I
came in, in 1998, that I would do everything that I could to
improve the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of GAO.
Nonetheless I was asked virtually every year, ``What's the
optimum staffing level for GAO?'' I've always said, ``I'm not
going to ask for any more, at this point in time, until I
believe that we've accomplished the first objective.'' I
believe we've accomplished that objective now. I have 6\1/2\
years left until the end of my 15-year term. Based upon
preliminary estimates, and based upon the many challenges that
the Congress and the country face, I believe we and the
Congress need to think about taking GAO, over the next 6 years,
from about 3,200 personnel to potentially up to about 3,750,
for a number of reasons, which I will provide in detail as a
supplement for you to consider in the future. This does not
relate to our fiscal 2008 budget request. It is an attempt to
try to look longer-range and to try to help begin the
discussion over our longer-range role and resources, because I
think it's important to do so.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I'm happy to answer
any questions that you may have.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of David M. Walker
Mrs. Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee: I am pleased to
appear before the subcommittee today in support of the fiscal year 2008
budget request for the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). The
requested funding will help us continue our support of the Congress in
meeting its constitutional responsibilities and will help improve the
performance and ensure the accountability of the Federal Government for
the benefit of the American people. An overview of GAO's strategic plan
for serving the Congress and our core values is included as appendix I.
I would also like to thank you and your subcommittee for your past
support of GAO. I am especially appreciative of your efforts to help us
avoid a furlough of our staff during fiscal year 2007. Had we not
received additional funds this year and not taken other cost
minimization actions, GAO would have likely been forced to furlough
most staff for up to 5 days without pay. At the same time, due to
funding shortfalls, we were not able to make pay adjustments
retroactive to January 7, 2007.
It is through the efforts of our dedicated and capable staff that
we were able to provide the Congress with the professional, objective,
fact-based, nonpartisan, non-ideological, fair, and balanced
information it needs to meet the full range of its constitutional
responsibilities. I am extremely pleased and proud to say that we
helped the Federal Government achieve a total of $51 billion in
financial benefits in fiscal year 2006--a record high that represents a
return on investment of $105 for every dollar the Congress invested in
us. As a result of our work, we also documented 1,342 nonfinancial
benefits that helped to improve service to the public, change laws, and
transform government operations. The funding we received in fiscal year
2006 allowed us to conduct work that addressed many difficult issues
confronting the Nation, including U.S. border security, Iraq and
Hurricane Katrina activities, the tax gap and tax reform, and issues
affecting the health and pay of military service members. Our client-
focused performance measures indicate that the Congress valued and was
very pleased with our work overall.
While fiscal year 2006 was a record year, we will be required to
constrain vital support to our staff and engagements in fiscal year
2007 in order to manage within available funds. Although the additional
funding provided by the subcommittee allows us to avoid a furlough of
our staff, we must implement a number of actions to cancel, reduce, or
defer costs in order to manage within fiscal year 2007 funding
constraints. In fact, our fiscal year 2007 budget for most programs and
line items retains funding levels at or near fiscal year 2006 funding
levels--requiring that we absorb inflationary increases, which in turn
reduce our purchasing power, erode progress toward our strategic goals,
and ultimately affect our client service and employee support. For
example, in our travel account--a critical element in our ability to
conduct firsthand evaluation of federal funding and program
activities--we expect transportation costs and per diem rates to rise
(as they do annually). Also, our ability to hire staff to replace
departing staff, address key succession planning challenges and skill
gaps, and maintain a skilled workforce will be adversely affected.
While we must hold some critical employee benefits at last year's
funding level, such as transit benefits and student loan repayments,
our pool of employees eligible to retire has increased since last year.
Also, some other agencies may be offering increased benefits that will
be attractive to our employees and potential recruits. In addition, we
have reduced or deferred needed targeted investments and initiatives
geared to further increasing productivity and effectiveness, achieving
cost savings, and addressing identified management challenges.
Unfortunately, we expect that these actions will adversely affect
our ability to respond to congressional requests, making it even more
difficult to address supply and demand imbalances in areas such as
health care, disaster assistance, homeland security, the global ``war
on terrorism,'' energy and natural resources, and forensic auditing.
Our diminished capacity will likely, in turn, ultimately result in
reduced annual financial benefits, findings, and recommendations to the
Congress and the Nation and necessitate reductions in our
--ability to provide timely and responsive information to support
congressional deliberations;
--testimonies on the Congress's legislative and oversight agenda;
--products containing recommendations for improvements in government
operations;
--analyses of executive branch agencies budget justifications to
support appropriations decisions;
--support on reauthorization activities for pending programs, such as
the farm bill, Head Start, the Children's Health Insurance
Program, and the No Child Left Behind Act; and
--oversight of legislative branch programs, including the Capitol
Visitor Center.
In an effort to identify areas for potential improvement and help
ensure accountability, we plan to contract with a public accounting
firm in fiscal year 2008 to conduct a peer review of our financial
audit practice and have an international team of auditors conduct an
external peer review of our performance audit practices. GAO has
received clean opinions on its previous external peer reviews.
Consistent with generally accepted governmental auditing standards,
external peer reviews are conducted on a 3-year cycle and serve to
validate that the Congress and the American people can rely on our work
and products.
In recent years, GAO has worked cooperatively with the
appropriation committees to submit modest budget requests. During this
period, and for a variety of reasons, GAO has gone from the largest
legislative branch agency to the third largest in terms of total
budgetary resources. Adjusting for inflation, GAO's budget authority
has declined by 3 percent in constant fiscal year 2006 dollars since
fiscal year 2003, as shown in figure 1. These modest budget results do
not adequately recognize the return on investment that GAO has been
able to generate. In fact, these increases have hampered our progress
in rebuilding from the downsizing (40 percent reduction in staffing
levels) and mandated funding reductions that occurred in the 1990s.
Although GAO's fiscal year 2008 budget request represents a 7 percent
increase in constant dollar terms over our fiscal year 2007 operating
plan, it is one of the smallest increases requested in the legislative
branch.
Figure 1.--Budget Authority and Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Usage,
Fiscal Years 1992-2006
Shortly after I was appointed Comptroller General in November 1998,
I determined that the agency should undertake a major transformation
effort. As a result, GAO has become more results-oriented, partnerial,
and client focused. With your support, we have made strategic
investments; realigned the organization; streamlined our business
processes; modernized our performance classification, compensation, and
reward systems; enhanced our ability to attract, retain and reward top
talent; enhanced the technology and infrastructure supporting our staff
and systems; and made other key investments. These transformational
efforts have allowed GAO to model best practices, lead by example, and
provide significant support to congressional hearings, while achieving
record results and very high client satisfaction ratings without
significant increases in funding.
We have taken a number of steps to deal with funding shortfalls in
the past few years; however, we cannot continue to employ the same
approaches. Our staff has become increasingly stretched and we are
experiencing backlogs in several areas of critical importance to the
Congress (e.g., health care, homeland security, energy and natural
resources). In addition, we have deferred key initiatives and
technology upgrades (e.g., engagement and administrative process
upgrades) for several years and it would not be prudent to continue to
do so. These actions are having an adverse effect on employee morale,
our ability to produce results, and the return on investment that we
can generate.
There is a need for fundamental and dramatic reform to address what
the government does, how it does business, and who will do the
government's business. Our support to the Congress will likely prove
even more critical because of the pressures created by our Nation's
current and projected budget deficit and growing long-term fiscal
imbalance. Also, as we face current and projected supply and demand
imbalance issues and a growing workload over the coming years across a
wide spectrum of issues, GAO will be unable to respond to congressional
demands without a significant investment in our future. We have
exhausted the results that we can achieve based on prior investments.
Our ability to continue to produce record results and assist the
Congress in discharging its Constitutional responsibilities relating to
authorization, appropriations, oversight, and other matters will be
adversely impacted unless we take action now.
Therefore, our fiscal year 2008 budget request is designed to
restore GAO's funding to more reasonable operating levels.
Specifically, we are requesting fiscal year 2008 budget authority of
$530 million, an 8.5 percent increase over our fiscal year 2007 funding
level. The additional funds provided in fiscal year 2007 have helped
reduce our requested increase for fiscal year 2008 from 9.4 percent to
8.5 percent. This funding level also represents a reduction below the
request we submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in
January as a result of targeted adjustments to our planned fiscal year
2008 hiring plan. Our fiscal year 2008 budget request will allow us to
achieve our performance goals to support the Congress as outlined in
our strategic plan \1\ and rebuild our workforce capacity to allow us
to better respond to supply and demand imbalances in responding to
congressional requests. This funding will also help us address our
caseload for bid protest filings, which have increased by more than 10
percent from fiscal years 2002 through 2006. Our workload for the first
quarter of fiscal year 2007 suggests a continuation of this upward
trend in bid protest fillings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In the spring of 2007, we plan to issue our updated strategic
plan covering fiscal years 2007-2012 to reflect the agenda for the
110th Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will be seeking your commitment and support to provide the
funding needed to increase GAO's staffing level to 3,750 over the next
6 years in order to address critical needs including supply and demand
imbalances, high-risk areas, 21st century challenges questions,
technology assessments, and other areas in need of fundamental reform.
In addition, as we get closer to when GAO may be able to render our
opinion on the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. government
and the Department of Defense's financial and related systems, we will
need to increase our workforce capacity. We will be providing the
Congress additional information on the basis for and nature of this
target later this year.
Importantly, as I noted last year, we also plan to request
legislation that will assist GAO in performing its mission work, and
enhance our human capital policies, including addressing certain
compensation and benefits issues of interest to our employees. We plan
to submit our proposal to our Senate and House authorization and
oversight committees in the near future.
My testimony today will focus on key efforts that GAO has
undertaken to support the Congress, our fiscal year 2006 performance
results, our budget request for fiscal year 2008 to support the
Congress and serve the American people, and proposed legislative
changes.
KEY EFFORTS TO SUPPORT THE CONGRESS
As is the case with each new Congress, we are beginning to have
discussions with regard to many new requests for GAO's professional,
objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, and non-ideological information,
analysis, and recommendations. On November 17, 2006, I was pleased to
offer three sets of recommendations for your consideration as part of
the agenda of the 110th Congress. The first recommendation suggests
targets for near-term oversight; the second proposes policies and
programs in need of fundamental reform and re-engineering; the third
lists governing issues. The proposals represent an effort to synthesize
GAO's institutional knowledge and special expertise and suggest both
the breadth and the depth of the issues facing the new Congress. We at
GAO stand ready to assist the 110th Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities. To be effective, congressional
hearings and other activities should offer opportunities to share best
practices, facilitate governmentwide transformation, and promote
accountability for delivering positive results.
On January 9, 2007, we presented GAO's assessment of the key
oversight issues related to Iraq for consideration in developing the
oversight agenda of the 110th Congress and in analyzing the President's
revised strategy for Iraq. This assessment was based on our ongoing
work and the 67 Iraq-related reports and testimonies we have provided
to the Congress since May 2003. Our work spans the security, political,
economic, and reconstruction prongs of the U.S. national strategy in
Iraq. The broad, crosscutting nature of this work helps minimize the
possibility of overlap and duplication by any individual inspector
general. Our work has focused on the U.S. strategy and costs of
operating in Iraq, training and equipping the Iraqi security forces,
governance and reconstruction issues, the readiness of U.S. military
forces, and achieving desired acquisition outcomes. Our current work
draws on our past work and regular site visits to Iraq and the
surrounding region, such as Jordan and Kuwait. We plan to establish a
presence in Iraq beginning later this fiscal year to provide additional
oversight of issues deemed important to the Congress; subject to
approval by the U.S. Department of State and adequate funding. We have
requested supplemental fiscal year 2007 funds of $374,000 to support
this effort.
In January of this year, we also issued our high-risk series: An
Update, which identifies federal areas and programs at risk of fraud,
waste, abuse, and mismanagement and those in need of broad-based
transformations. The issues affecting many of these areas and programs
may take years to address, and the report will serve as a useful guide
for the Congress's future programmatic deliberations and oversight
activities. Issued to coincide with the start of each new Congress, our
high-risk update, first issued in 1993, has helped members of the
Congress who are responsible for oversight and executive branch
officials who are accountable for performance. Our high-risk program
focuses on major government programs and operations that need urgent
attention or transformation to ensure that our government functions in
the most economical, efficient, and effective manner possible. Overall,
our high-risk program has served to identify and help resolve a range
of serious weaknesses that involve substantial resources and provide
critical services to the public. Table 1 details our 2007 high-risk
list.
TABLE 1.--GAO'S 2007 HIGH-RISK LIST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year
2007 High-Risk Area Designated
High Risk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addressing challenges in broad-based transformations:
Strategic Human Capital Management \1\.............. 2001
Managing Federal Real Property \1\.................. 2003
Protecting the Federal Government's Information 1997
Systems and the Nation's Critical Infrastructures..
Implementing and Transforming the Department of 2003
Homeland Security..................................
Establishing Appropriate and Effective Information- 2005
Sharing Mechanisms to Improve Homeland Security....
Department of Defense (DOD) Approach to Business 2005
Transformation \1\.................................
DOD Business Systems Modernization.............. 1995
DOD Personnel Security Clearance Program........ 2005
DOD Support Infrastructure Management........... 1997
DOD Financial Management........................ 1995
DOD Supply Chain Management (formerly Inventory 1990
Management)....................................
DOD Weapon Systems Acquisition.................. 1990
Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Control 1995
Modernization......................................
Financing the Nation's Transportation System \1\ 2007
(New)..............................................
Ensuring the Effective Protection of Technologies 2007
Critical to U.S. National Security Interests \1\
(New)..............................................
Transforming Federal Oversight of Food Safety \1\ 2007
(New)..............................................
Managing Federal Contracting More Effectively:
DOD Contract Management............................. 1992
Department of Energy Contract Management............ 1990
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1990
Contract Management................................
Management of Interagency Contracting............... 2005
Assessing the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Tax Law
Administration:
Enforcement of Tax Laws \1\......................... 1990
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Business Systems 1995
Modernization......................................
Modernizing and Safeguarding Insurance and Benefit
Programs:
Modernizing Federal Disability Programs \1\......... 2003
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation Single-Employer 2003
Insurance Program \1\..............................
Medicare Program \1\................................ 1990
Medicaid Program \1\................................ 2003
National Flood Insurance Program.................... 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Legislation is likely to be necessary, as a supplement to actions by
the executive branch, in order to effectively address this high-risk
area.
Source: GAO.
In February of this year, we issued a new publication entitled
Fiscal Stewardship: A Critical Challenge Facing Our Nation that is
designed to provide the Congress and the American public, in a
relatively brief and understandable form, selected budget and financial
information regarding our Nation's current financial condition, long-
term fiscal outlook, and possible ways forward. In the years ahead, our
support to the Congress will likely prove even more critical because of
the pressures created by our Nation's current and projected budget
deficit and growing long-term fiscal imbalance. Indeed, as the Congress
considers those fiscal pressures, it will be grappling with tough
choices about what government does, how it does business, and who will
do the government's business. GAO is an invaluable tool for helping the
Congress review, reprioritize, and revise existing mandatory and
discretionary spending programs and tax policies.
In addition, I have participated in a series of town hall forums
around the Nation to discuss the Federal Government's current financial
condition and deteriorating long-term fiscal outlook, including the
challenges posed by known long-term demographic trends and rising
health care costs. These forums, popularly referred to as the ``Fiscal
Wake-up Tour,'' are led by the Concord Coalition and also include the
Heritage Foundation, the Brookings Institution, and a range of ``good
government'' groups. The fiscal wake-up tour states the facts regarding
the Nation's current financial condition and long-term fiscal outlook
in order to increase public awareness and accelerate actions by
appropriate Federal, State, and local officials.
PERFORMANCE, RESULTS, AND PLANS
We anticipate that the funds requested for fiscal year 2008 will
support efforts similar to those just completed in fiscal year 2006.
The following discussions summarize that work.
In fiscal year 2006, major events like the Nation's recovery from
natural disasters, ongoing military conflicts abroad, terrorist
threats, and potential pandemics repeatedly focused the public eye on
the Federal Government's ability to operate effectively and efficiently
and provide services to Americans when needed. Our work during the year
helped the Congress and the public judge how well the Federal
Government performed its functions and consider alternative approaches
for improving operations and laws when performance was less than
adequate. For example, teams supporting all three of our external
strategic goals performed work related to every facet of the Hurricane
Katrina and Rita disasters-preparedness, response, recovery, long-term
recovery, and mitigation. We developed a coordinated and integrated
approach to ensure that the Congress's need for factual information
about disaster preparedness, response, recovery, and reconstruction
activities along the Gulf Coast was met. We examined how federal funds
were used during and after the disaster and identified the disaster
rescue, relief, and rebuilding processes that worked well and not so
well throughout the effort. To do this, staff drawn from across the
agency spent time in the hardest hit areas of Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama, and Texas, collecting information from government officials at
the Federal, State, and local levels as well as from private
organizations assisting with this emergency management effort. We
briefed congressional staff on our preliminary observations early in
fiscal year 2006 and subsequently issued over 30 reports and
testimonies on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita by fiscal year end, focusing
on, among other issues, minimizing fraud, waste, and abuse in disaster
assistance and rebuilding the New Orleans hospital care system.
The following tables provide summary information on GAO's fiscal
year 2006 performance and the results achieved in support of the
Congress and the American people. Additional information on our
performance results can be found in performance and accountability
highlights fiscal year 2006 at www.gao.gov.
Table 2 provides examples of how GAO assisted the Nation in fiscal
year 2006.
TABLE 2.--EXAMPLES OF HOW GAO ASSISTED THE NATION IN FISCAL YEAR 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO Providing Information That
Goal Description Helped To--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Provide timely, quality Protect Social Security numbers
service to the Congress and from abuse; ensure the
the Federal Government to effectiveness of federal
address current and emerging investments in science,
challenges to the wellbeing technology, engineering, and
and financial security of the mathematics education
American people programs; identify actions
needed to improve Federal
Emergency Management Agency
and Red Cross coordination for
the 2006 hurricane season;
highlight weaknesses in the
Department of Health and Human
Services' communications with
beneficiaries about the new
Medicare prescription drug
benefit; identify funding and
drug pricing disparities in
the federal AIDS/HIV program;
strengthen the oversight
clinical laboratories;
identify challenges the
Department of Homeland
Security faces in controlling
illegal immigration into the
United States; assess the
thoroughness of the federal
fair housing complaint and
investigation processes;
improve the management of
federal oil and natural gas
royalty revenue; develop a
strategy for managing
wildfires; focus on the short-
and long-term challenges of
financing the Nation's
transportation infrastructure;
and identify outdated mail
delivery performance standards
used by the U.S. Postal
Service.
2 Provide timely, quality Identify current and future
service to the Congress and funding and cost issues
the Federal Government to related to DOD operations in
respond to changing security Iraq and Afghanistan;
threats and the challenges of highlight inefficiencies that
global interdependence could hinder DOD's efforts to
reform its business
operations; improve controls
over the issuance of passports
and vias and increase fraud
prevention; improve
catastrophic disaster
preparedness, response, and
recovery; improve the ability
of federal agencies to cost
effectively acquire goods and
services; improve the
management of payments to U.S.
producers injured financially
by unfairly traded imports;
alert the Congress to
companies that are marketing
costly mutual fund products
with low returns to military
service members; identify
steps needed to overhaul
investment and management
processes supporting major DOD
acquisitions; improve security
at nuclear power plants;
improve the Department of
Homeland Security's ability to
detect nuclear smuggling at
U.S. ports; promote government
efforts to secure sensitive
systems and information; and
highlight the cost concerns of
small public companies that
must comply with internal
control and auditing
provisions of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act.
3 Help transform the Federal Improve congressional oversight
Government's role and how it of the process for reviewing
does business to meet 21st foreign direct investment;
century challenges strengthen DOD's information
systems modernization efforts;
highlight serious technical
and cost challenges affecting
the purchase of a critical
weather satellite; highlight
key practices federal agencies
should adopt to prevent data
breaches and better protect
the personal information of
U.S. citizens; monitor the
development of the 2010
decennial census; identify
strategies to reduce the gap
between the taxes citizens pay
and the taxes actually owed;
focus attention on the revenue
consequences of tax
expenditures; identify fraud,
waste, and abuse in a
component of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency's
disaster assistance program;
emphasize the importance of
reliable cost information for
improving governmentwide cost
efficiency; and expose
government contractors who
used for personal gain federal
payroll taxes withheld from
their employees.
4 Maximize the value of GAO by Foster among other federal
being a model federal agency agencies GAO's innovative
and a world-class human capital practices, such
professional services as broad pay bands;
organization performance-based
compensation; workforce
planning and staffing
strategies, policies, and
processes; and share GAO's
model business and management
processes with counterpart
organizations in the United
States and abroad.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO.
outcomes of our work and the road ahead
During fiscal year 2006, we used 16 annual performance measures
that capture the results of our work; the assistance we provided to the
Congress; our ability to attract, retain, develop, and lead a highly
professional workforce; and how well our internal administrative
services help employees get their jobs done and improve their work life
(see table 3). We generally exceeded the targets we set for all of our
performance measures, which indicate our ability to produce results for
the Nation and serve the Congress.
TABLE 3.--AGENCYWIDE SUMMARY OF ANNUAL MEASURES AND TARGETS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Performance Measures Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Target Target
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Results:
Financial benefits (dollars in billions)..... $37.7 $35.4 $44.0 $39.6 $51.0 $40.0 $41.5
Nonfinancial benefits........................ $906 $1,043 $1,197 $1,409 $1,342 $1,100 $1,150
Past recommendations implemented (in percent) 79 82 83 85 82 80 80
New products with recommendations (in 53 55 63 63 65 60 60
percent)....................................
Client:
Testimonies.................................. 216 189 217 179 240 185 220
Timeliness (in percent)...................... 96 97 97 97 92 95 95
People:
New hire rate (in percent)................... 96 98 98 94 94 95 95
Acceptance rate (in percent)................. 81 72 72 71 70 72 72
Retention rate with retirements (in percent). 91 92 90 90 90 90 90
Retention rate without retirements (in 97 96 95 94 94 94 94
percent)....................................
Staff development (in percent)............... 71 67 70 72 76 75 76
Staff utilization (in percent)............... 67 71 72 75 75 78 78
Leadership (in percent)...................... 75 78 79 80 79 80 80
Organizational climate (in percent).......... 67 71 74 76 73 76 76
Internal operations:
Help get job done............................ N/A 3.98 4.01 4.10 4.1 4.0 4.0
Quality of work life......................... N/A 3.86 3.96 3.98 4.0 4.0 4.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO.
Note: N/A indicates the information is not available.
In fiscal year 2006, our work generated $51 billion in financial
benefits, primarily from actions agencies and the Congress took in
response to our recommendations. Of this amount, about $27 billion
resulted from changes to laws or regulations, $10 billion resulted from
agency actions based on our recommendations to improve services to the
public, and $14 billion resulted from improvements to core business
processes. See figure 2 for examples of our fiscal year 2006 financial
benefits.
FIGURE 2.--GAO'S SELECTED MAJOR FINANCIAL BENEFITS REPORTED IN FISCAL
YEAR 2006
[In billions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ensured continued monetary benefits from federal spectrum 6.1
auctions....................................................
Encouraged DOD to identify and reduce unobligated funds in 3.9
the military services' operations and maintenance budget....
Recommended payment methods that cut Medicare costs for 2.9
durable medical equipment, orthotics, and prosthetics.......
Helped to ensure that certain U.S. Postal Service retirement- 2.2
related benefits would be funded............................
Identified recoverable costs for the Tennessee Valley 1.8
Authority...................................................
Helped to increase collections of civil debt................. 1.6
Encouraged the Department of Housing and Urban Development to 1.4
take actions to reduce improper payments....................
Supported the Department of Energy's efforts to reduce its 1.2
carryover funds.............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO.
Many of the benefits that result from our work cannot be measured
in dollar terms. During fiscal year 2006, we recorded a total of 1,342
nonfinancial benefits. For example, we documented 61 instances where
information we provided to the Congress resulted in statutory or
regulatory changes, 667 instances where federal agencies improved
services to the public, and 614 instances where agencies improved core
business processes or governmentwide reforms were advanced. These
actions spanned the full spectrum of national issues, from identifying
the adverse tax impact of combat pay and certain tax credits on low-
income military families to improving the Department of State's process
for developing staffing projections for new embassies. See figure 3 for
additional examples of GAO's nonfinancial benefits in fiscal year 2006.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nonfinancial benefits that helped to change laws
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Public Law No. 109-171. Our work is
reflected in this law in different ways.
--Strengthened Medicaid program integrity.
--Improved oversight of the States' performance under the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families program.
--Addressed domestic violence.
--Improved oversight of schools that are lenders.
Safe and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster Children Act of
2006, Public Law No. 109-239.
Nonfinancial Benefits That Helped To Improve Services to the Public
Strengthened passport and visa issuance processes.
Identified vulnerabilities in the process to verify personal
information about new drivers.
Contributed to the increased visibility of a transportation
information sharing program for seniors.
Identified a problem with untimely pay allowances to deployed
soldiers.
Nonfinancial Benefits That Helped To Promote Sound Agency and
Governmentwide Management
Improved the quality of federal voluntary voting system standards.
Highlighted weaknesses in the Federal Aviation Administration's
control over computers and other assets.
Strengthened oversight of federal personnel actions.
Encouraged federal agencies to seek savings on purchase cards.
Identified improper payments in DOD's travel accounts.
Source: GAO.
Figure 3.--GAO's Selected Nonfinancial Benefits Reported in Fiscal Year
2006
----------------------------------------------------------------
During fiscal year 2006, experts from our staff testified at 240
congressional hearings covering a wide range of complex issues (see
table 4). For example, our senior executives testified on a variety of
issues, including freight rail rates, AIDS assistance programs, and
federal contracting. Over 100 of the hearings at which we testified
were related to areas and programs we designated as high risk.
Table 4.--GAO's Selected Testimony Issues by Strategic Goal, Fiscal
Year 2006
Goal 1--Address Challenges to the Well-Being and Financial Security of
the American People
Health savings accounts
Guardianships that protect incapacitated seniors
Lake Pontchartrain hurricane protection project
Funds to first responders for 9/11 health problems
Immigration enforcement at work sites
Future air transportation system
Nursing home care for veterans
Passenger rail security issues
Freight railroad rates
AIDS drug assistance programs
Federal Housing Administration reforms
Improving intermodal transportation
Hartford nuclear waste treatment plant
Evaluations of supplemental educational services
Factors affecting gasoline prices
Telecommunication spectrum reform
H-1B visa program
Federal crop insurance program
Goal 2--Respond to Changing Security Threats and the Challenges of
Globalization
A comprehensive strategy to rebuild Iraq
Deploying radiation detection equipment in other countries
Protecting military personnel from unscrupulous financial products
Sensitive information at DOD and the Department of Energy
Hurricane Katrina preparedness, response, and recovery
Alternative mortgage products
Global war on terrorism costs
Transportation Security Administration's Secure Flight program
DOD's business systems modernization
U.S. tactical aircraft
National Capital Region Homeland Security Strategic Plan
Polar-orbiting operational environmental satellites
Worldwide AIDS relief plan
Financial stability and management of the National Flood Insurance
Program
Information security laws
Procurement controls at the United Nations
Goal 3--Help Transform the Federal Government's Role and How It Does
Business
Contract management challenges in rebuilding Iraq
DOD's financial and business management transformation
Business tax reform
Astronaut exploration vehicle risks
Improving federal financial management governmentwide
Long-term fiscal challenges
Federal contracting during disasters
Improving tax compliance to reduce the tax gap
Protecting the privacy of personal information
DOD acquisition incentives
Decennial Census costs
Information security weaknesses at the Department of Veterans Affairs
Improper federal payments for Hurricane Katrina relief
Strengthening the Office of Personnel Management's ability to lead
human capital reform
Public/private recovery plan for the Internet
Tax system abuses by General Services Administration contractors
Compensation for federal executives and judges
GAO'S FISCAL YEAR 2008 REQUEST TO SUPPORT THE CONGRESS
Our fiscal year 2008 budget request seeks the resources necessary
to allow GAO to rebuild and enhance its workforce, knowledge capacity,
employee programs, and infrastructure. These items are critical to
ensure that GAO can continue to provide congressional clients with
timely, objective, and reliable information on how well government
programs and policies are working and, when needed, recommendations for
improvement. In the years ahead, our support to the Congress will
likely prove even more critical because of the pressures created by our
Nation's current and projected budget deficit and growing long-term
fiscal imbalance. GAO is an invaluable tool for helping the Congress
review, reprioritize, and revise existing mandatory and discretionary
spending programs and tax policies.
Consistent with our strategic goal to be a model agency, we
continuously assess our operations to ensure that GAO remains an
effective, high-performing organization, providing timely, critical
support to the Congress while being fiscally responsive. Our objective
is to be an employer of choice; maintain skills/knowledge, performance-
based, and market-oriented compensation systems; adopt best practices;
benchmark service levels and costs against comparable entities;
streamline our operations to achieve efficiencies; assess opportunities
for cross-servicing, outsourcing, or business process re-engineering;
and leverage technology to increase efficiency, productivity, and
results. We also continue to partner within and across the legislative
branch through the legislative branch chief administrative officers,
financial management, and procurement councils.
Transformational change and innovation is essential for progress.
Our fiscal year 2008 budget request includes funds to regain the
momentum needed to achieve these goals. Our fiscal year 2008 budget
request will allow GAO to
--address supply and demand imbalances in responding to congressional
requests for studies in areas such as health care, disaster
assistance, homeland security, the global ``war on terrorism,''
energy and natural resources, and forensic auditing;
--address our increasing bid protest workload;
--be more competitive in the labor markets where GAO competes for
talent;
--address critical human capital components, such as knowledge
capacity building, succession planning, and staff skills and
competencies;
--enhance employee recruitment, retention, and development programs;
--restore program funding levels and regain our purchasing power;
--undertake critical initiatives necessary to continuously re-
engineer processes geared to increasing our productivity and
effectiveness and addressing identified management challenges;
and
--pursue critical structural and infrastructure maintenance and
improvements.
Our fiscal year 2008 budget request represents an increase of $41.7
million (or 8.5 percent) over our fiscal year 2007 funding level and
includes about $523 million in direct appropriations and authority to
use about $7.5 million in offsetting collections as illustrated in
table 5. This request reflects a reduction of nearly $5.4 million in
nonrecurring fiscal year 2007 costs used to offset the fiscal year 2008
increase.
TABLE 5.--FISCAL YEAR 2008 BUDGET REQUEST, SUMMARY OF REQUESTED CHANGES
[Dollars in thousands]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative
Budget Category FTEs Amount Percentage
of Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2007 enacted budget 3,159 $488,627 ............
authority.....................
Fiscal year 2008 requested ........... ............ ............
changes.......................
Nonrecurring fiscal year ........... (5,374) (1.1)
2007 costs................
Mandatory pay costs........ ........... 19,841 3.0
Uncontrollable cost ........... 5,079 4.0
increases.................
Rebuild our capacity....... 58 14,826 7.0
Critical investments in ........... 7,314 8.5
technology improvements
and other transformation
areas.....................
Net fiscal year 2008 increase.. 58 41,686 8.5
Fiscal year 2008 budget 3,217 530,313 ............
authority.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO.
Mandatory pay and uncontrollable cost increases.--We are requesting
$24.9 million to cover anticipated mandatory performance-based pay and
uncontrollable inflationary increases resulting primarily from annual
across-the-board and performance-based increases, annualization of
prior fiscal year costs, and an increase in the number of compensable
days in fiscal year 2008. These costs also include uncontrollable
inflationary increases imposed by vendors as the cost of doing
business.
Rebuilding our capacity.--Our fiscal year 2007 budget request
sought funds to support an increase of 50 FTEs from 3,217 to 3,267.
However, in order to manage within expected funding levels in fiscal
year 2007, we will significantly curtail hiring by about 50 percent
below the previous year, resulting in a projected FTE utilization of
3,159--well below our planned level. In fiscal years 2007 and 2008, we
anticipate attrition of over 600 staff that will result in a
significant drain on GAO's knowledge capacity or institutional memory.
Further, almost 20 percent of all GAO staff will be eligible for
retirement by the end of fiscal year 2008, including almost 45 percent
of our senior executive service.
Thus, in fiscal year 2008, we are seeking funds to rebuild our
staff and knowledge capacity. In fiscal year 2008, we plan to hire
about 490 staff--the maximum that we could reasonably absorb--
increasing our FTE utilization to 3,217. While we are tempering our
immediate FTE request, increasingly higher demands are being placed on
GAO. We are experiencing supply and demand imbalances in several areas
of critical importance to the Congress (e.g., health care, homeland
security, and energy and natural resources). We have also seen an
increase in the number of bid protest filings.
Also, to remain competitive in the labor markets, we need to
increase employee benefits in areas such as student loan repayments and
transit subsidies where funding constraints in fiscal year 2007 limit
our flexibility. For example, effective in January 2007, the IRS
increased the monthly benefit for transit subsidies for eligible
employees who commute using public transportation. GAO, however, is
unable to extend this increased benefit to staff.
In addition, we need to ensure that staff have the appropriate
tools and resources to perform effectively, including training and
development, travel funds, and technology. And when our staff perform
well, they should be appropriately rewarded.
Undertake critical investments.--We are requesting funds to
undertake critical investments that would allow us to implement
technology improvements and streamline and re-engineer work processes
to enhance the productivity and effectiveness of our staff, conduct
essential investments that have been deferred as the result of funding
constraints and cannot continue to be deferred, and implement responses
to changing federal conditions, such as smart card technology. Also,
during recent years, we reduced, deferred, and slowed the pace of
critical upgrades (e.g., engagement and administrative process
upgrades) and deferred nonessential administrative activities. In
fiscal year 2008, we would like to have sufficient funding to take
action to protect our current investments and continue to be a model
agency and lead by example.
Legislative authority.--We are requesting legislation to establish
a board of contract appeals at GAO to adjudicate contract claims
involving contracts awarded by legislative branch agencies. GAO has
performed this function on an ad hoc basis over the years for appeals
of claims from decisions of the Architect of the Capitol on contracts
that it awards. Recently we have agreed to handle claims arising under
Government Printing Office contracts. The legislative proposal would
promote efficiency and predictability in the resolution of contractor
and agency claims by consolidating such work in an established and
experienced adjudicative component of GAO and would permit GAO to
recover its costs of providing such adjudicative services from
legislative branch users of such services.
We also plan to request legislation that will assist GAO in
performing its mission work and enhance our human capital policies,
including addressing certain compensation and benefits issues of
interest to our employees. While there are a number of important
provisions, today I will only discuss several of the significant ones.
Regarding provisions concerned with mission work, we have identified a
number of legislative mandates that are either no longer meeting the
purpose intended or should be performed by an entity other than GAO. We
are working with the cognizant entities and the appropriate
authorization and oversight committees to discuss the potential impact
of legislative relief for these issues. Another provision would
modernize the authority of the Comptroller General to administer oaths
in performance of the work of the office. To keep the Congress apprized
of difficulties we have interviewing agency personnel and obtaining
agency views on matters related to ongoing mission work, we will
suggest new reporting requirements. When agencies or other entities
ignore a request by the Comptroller General to have personnel provide
information under oath, make personnel available for interviews, or
provide written answers to questions, the Comptroller General would
report to the Congress as soon as practicable and also include such
information in the annual report to the Congress.
In regard to GAO's human capital flexibilities, among other
provisions, we are proposing a flexibility that allows us to better
approximate market rates for professional positions by increasing our
maximum pay for other than the senior executive service and senior
level from GS-15, step 10, to executive level III. Additionally, under
our revised and contemporary merit pay system, certain portions of an
employee's merit increase, below applicable market-based pay caps, are
not permanent. Since this may impact an employee's high three for
retirement purposes, another key provision of the bill would enable
these nonpermanent payments to be included in the retirement
calculation for all GAO employees, except senior executives and senior
level personnel.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
In summary, I believe that you will find our budget request
reasonable, responsible, and well-justified given the important role
that GAO plays and the unparalleled return on investment that GAO
generates. We are grateful for the Congress's continued support of our
mutual effort to improve government and for providing the resources
that allow us to be a world-class professional services organization.
We are proud of our record performance and the positive impact we have
been able to effect in government over the past year and believe an
investment in GAO will continue to yield substantial returns for the
Congress and the American people. Our Nation will continue to face
significant challenges in the years ahead. GAO's expertise and
involvement in virtually every facet of government positions us to
provide the Congress with the timely, objective, and reliable
information it needs to discharge its constitutional responsibilities.
Mrs. Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee, this concludes my
prepared statement. At this time, I would be pleased to answer any
questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have.
APPENDIX I: SERVING THE CONGRESS--GAO'S STRATEGIC PLAN FRAMEWORK
This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to
copyright protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and
distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO.
However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or other
material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you
wish to reproduce this material separately.
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. TURRI, ACTING PUBLIC PRINTER
Senator Landrieu. Mr. Turri.
Mr. Turri. Good morning. Thank you, Madam Chair.
It's clear that you have a busy schedule ahead of you
today, so I'll submit my full remarks for the record and make
only a few brief comments now.
GPO deg.RESULTS OF 2006
GPO had a successful year in 2006, the second full year
operating under our strategic vision for the future. We
increased net income, and we're on the verge of completing
GPO's transition to a full-service digital information
provider. We're committed to providing a full range of digital
and legacy information services to Congress and Federal
agencies. And last year we made real progress toward that goal.
With Congress' support, we awarded the key contracts for
development of our future digital system. This system provides
the essential technologies that tie input of analog and digital
materials to output in print and electronic formats. We are on
schedule for a startup later this year.
We began production of the e-Passport for the State
Department, and, following their schedule, we have ramped up
production to meet the demands of travelers in North America
and the Caribbean.
We conducted a pilot project to demonstrate our
capabilities in digitizing Government documents, taking the
opportunity to begin digitizing some of the Government's
considerable retrospective collection. We hope to make this a
standing operation in the current fiscal year.
We inaugurated the GPO Express card, which allows
Government agencies to take their short run printing needs
directly to local quick-print shops without concern that the
publication produced will fail to be included in the Depository
Library Program.
I know that Senator Allard is not present today, but I am
aware of his interest in the Government Performance and Results
Act (GPRA), so I'm pleased to report to you that the GPO has
begun the process of implementing Government Performance and
Results Act-like practices into our operations.
Building on our strategic vision, GPO is implementing a
balanced scorecard methodology. Not only will the balanced
scorecard dovetail with our GPRA practices, but will also link
our strategic goals with our annual performance reviews and
measure our organization's success with data and outcome.
GPO deg.APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST
Fully two-thirds of the funds we are requesting for the
coming fiscal year is for work we're required to provide, such
as producing and distributing a new edition of the U.S. Code,
handling the estimated workload of Congress, including the
Congressional Record, bills, calendars, and committee reports
and prints, and distributing Government publications to the
1,200 congressionally designated libraries in the Federal
Depository Library Program.
The balance we're requesting is to recover the shortfall we
are projected to experience, due to the continuing resolution
this year, and for investment in projects to continue moving
the strategic vision of GPO forward. Some of the shortfall
requirement can be offset with the use of approximately $5
million in unexpended prior-year funds for that purpose, with
the approval of the appropriations committees. Our request for
this authority will be sent to you soon.
Since 2003, Congress has strongly supported our digital
transformation, and the benefits have been dramatic: net
income, instead of losses; increased access to digital and
other information products, with nearly a 25-percent decrease
in our workforce; and a strategic vision of the future that is
not only attainable and sustainable, but which addresses
longstanding GPO needs, corrects system deficiencies, and
unlocks this venerable agency's potential for the future.
I'm asking that you continue to support our forward
advance. The goal is in sight. As our record demonstrates,
investment in the GPO results in real and measurable gains for
Congress, Federal agencies, and the public as a whole.
Finally, Madam Chair, I would like to thank you for your
support in providing an additional $1.9 million, in the
February 15 continuing resolution, to help us with mandatory
pay increases and retraining.
In accordance with past practice, we will be sending an
operating plan to the subcommittee soon.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Madam Chair, this concludes my opening remarks, and I will
be happy to respond to any questions you may have.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Mr. Turri.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of William H. Turri
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee on Legislative Branch
Appropriations: It is an honor to be here today to present the
appropriations request of the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) for
fiscal year 2008.
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
As the Nation's printer and disseminator of official Federal
documents, GPO has a long and rich history as the official producer of
every great American state paper--and an uncounted number of other
Government publications--since President Lincoln's time. Where once our
products and services were confined to ink on paper, today we provide
capabilities for the production of Federal documents in both electronic
and conventional formats, utilizing a broad range of information
technologies.
By law, GPO is responsible for the production and distribution of
information products and services for all three branches of the Federal
Government. Many of the Nation's most important information products,
such as the Congressional Record and other documents used by the U.S.
Senate and House of Representatives, are produced at GPO's main plant
in Washington, DC.
Working under a longstanding partnership with the printing
industry, GPO also maintains a pool of private sector vendors
nationwide to produce the vast range of publications ordered annually
by Federal agencies.
GPO's primary responsibility for the dissemination of Federal
publications traces its roots to an act of the 13th Congress, which
provided for the distribution of congressional and other government
documents on a regular basis to libraries and other institutions in
each State for that Congress and ``every future Congress.'' This
farsighted act established the antecedent for the Federal Depository
Library Program, a program funded through GPO's appropriations, which
today serves millions of Americans through a network of some 1,250
public, academic, law, and other libraries located in virtually every
congressional district across the Nation.
Along with that program, we also provide public access to the
wealth of official Federal information through public sales, through
various statutory and reimbursable distribution programs, and--most
prominently--by posting more than a quarter of a million Federal titles
online on GPO Access (www.gpo.gov/gpoaccess), our award-winning Web
site that is used by the public to retrieve more than 40 million
documents free of charge every month.
PREPARING FOR A DIGITAL FUTURE
Continuing advances in information technologies have transformed
the ways that Congress, Federal agencies, and the public obtain and
make use of government publications. As a result, printing is now
secondary to our broader task of producing and providing access to the
information products and services produced by the Federal Government, a
task that today is rooted in digital rather than analog technologies.
While printing remains an important information technology that
continues to be required, it has become just one of a range of
information product and service capabilities that GPO must transform
itself to support in order to fulfill our mission requirements
effectively in the digital era.
This development was confirmed by a June 2004 report of the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), Actions to Strengthen and
Sustain GPO's Transformation. The GAO recommended that GPO develop a
plan to focus our mission on information dissemination as our primary
goal; demonstrate to our customers the value we can provide; improve
and extend partnerships with agencies to help establish the GPO as an
information disseminator; and ensure that our internal operations--
including technology, how we conduct business, information systems, and
training--are adequate for the efficient and effective management of
our core business functions and services.
To that end, in December 2004 we published our strategic vision for
the 21st century. This document provides a framework for how our
transformation goals--including the development of a digital content
system to anchor all future operations, reorganization of the agency
into new product- and service-oriented business lines along with
investment in the necessary technologies, adoption of management best
practices agency-wide including retraining to provide needed skills,
and the relocation and/or reconfiguration of GPO facilities--will be
carried out, and since then GPO's operations and programs have been
conducted in accordance with it.
RESULTS OF 2006
During the past year we made significant progress in carrying out
the elements of our strategic vision:
--The core of our future operations will revolve around a GPO-
developed Future Digital System--currently called FDsys--which
is being designed to organize, manage, and output authenticated
content of authenticated Federal documents--in text, audio, and
even video formats--for any purpose. In 2006 we awarded
contracts for master integrator services and equipment
acquisition, and this project is on track to begin operations
in summer 2007.
--GPO's own production capabilities are focused in support of what we
call the ``Official Journals of Government,'' including the
Congressional Record and Federal Register, Congress's
requirements, and security and intelligent documents. To
improve production efficiency and broaden the range of product
and service options for Congress and Federal agencies, we've
invested in a variety of new technologies.
--We continue to work closely with the library community to move the
Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) toward a
predominately electronic basis as required by Congress, and
today more than 90 percent of all new titles entering the
program are electronic. In managing this transition we have
taken care to ensure that documents in print formats that are
required at this time by some libraries, particularly law
libraries, continue to be supplied.
--We're now working with our customers in Federal agencies more
cooperatively, offering them more flexibility in choosing and
working directly with vendors, especially with small value
purchases and complex purchases involving multiple functions
such as data preparation, personalization, and distribution. In
2006 we augmented our expert printing procurement services by
offering a new capability that provides Federal agencies with
innovative, digitally linked convenience duplicating and
printing services across the country.
--Security and intelligent documents--including passports, Federal
identification cards, and potentially other documents--today
are an increasingly important business line for GPO, and could
constitute as much as 50 percent of GPO's business in the
future. The major product of this unit is U.S. passports, and
in 2006 we began the successful production of the new e-
passport for the State Department.
--We've established a Digital Conversion Services Branch within
Customer Services to test document scanning services for the
FDLP and Federal agencies. In 2006, we began a pilot project to
demonstrate our retrospective digitization capabilities and
have recently completed that work. We look forward to sharing
our results of this pilot project at your earliest convenience.
In addition to these strategic directions, over the past 4 years we
have become a more efficient operation, our organizational structure
has been streamlined for faster decisionmaking, we have implemented
enterprise-wide planning for our information technology systems,
redundant facilities across the country have been consolidated or
closed, and staffing levels have been significantly reduced utilizing
early retirement authority authorized through Legislative Branch
Appropriations Acts. We also initiated planning and discussions with
our oversight and appropriations committees on the future of GPO's
current buildings on North Capitol Street in Washington, DC.
Perhaps most important, our finances have been restored to a
positive basis, reversing a pattern of financial losses that reached
$100 million in previous years. For fiscal year 2006, we generated a
net income of $9.8 million from operations, compared with a $6.1
million gain the year before, the third straight year of positive
financial results. We also recorded another reduction to our long-term
liability for the Federal workers' compensation program, freeing
additional funds for future investment. GPO is now on a solid financial
footing.
FISCAL YEAR 2008 APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST
For fiscal year 2008, we are requesting a total of $181,979,000, to
enable us to:
--Meet projected requirements for GPO's congressional printing and
binding and information dissemination operations during fiscal
year 2008;
--recover from the impact of restricted funding for fiscal year 2007
under the current continuing resolution;
--complete the development of our Future Digital System project and
implement other improvements to GPO's information technology
infrastructure;
--perform essential maintenance and repairs to our aging buildings;
and
--continue retraining and restructuring GPO's workforce to meet
changing technology demands.
Congressional Printing and Binding Appropriation.--This account
covers the cost of printing and other information services supporting
the legislative process in the House of Representatives and the Senate.
These services include production--in both print and online formats--of
the daily and permanent Congressional Record, bills, resolutions, and
amendments, hearings, committee prints and documents, miscellaneous
printing and binding including stationery and document franks, and
related products, as authorized by the public printing provisions of
Title 44, U.S. Code.
We are requesting $109,541,000 for this account, representing an
increase of $21,587,000 over the level provided by the current
continuing resolution. The increase contains two primary components:
$9,251,000 to adjust this account to projected operating requirements
for fiscal year 2008, and an extraordinary requirement of $12,336,000
to fund a projected shortfall for fiscal year 2007 under the current
continuing resolution.
For fiscal year 2008, we project the need for $96,460,000 to meet
anticipated congressional printing and binding requirements known to
typically occur in a second-session year. The current level of funding,
or $87,954,000, has remained essentially unchanged since fiscal year
2005 in spite of increasing costs and changes in workload.
Under the continuing resolution for fiscal year 2007, we anticipate
incurring a significant shortfall in congressional printing and binding
due to the unchanged level of funding since fiscal year 2005, the
requirement to produce the 2006 edition of the U.S. Code, the need to
fully fund contractual pay raises, and a projected increase in workload
consistent with a first-session year, including an anticipated increase
in days in session under the new congressional leadership. We will be
able to meet these requirements without disrupting service to Congress
by temporarily financing the shortfall through GPO's revolving fund. As
GPO has done in the past (most recently in fiscal year 2001), however,
we are seeking the restoration of the shortfall through subsequent
appropriations.
Under our appropriations bill language, GPO has the authority--with
the approval of the Committees on Appropriations--to transfer forward
the unexpended balances of prior year appropriations. This remains an
option to transfer to GPO's revolving fund up to approximately
$4,000,000 from the unexpended balance of the Congressional Printing
and Binding Appropriation remaining from fiscal year 2004 and an
estimated $1,000,000 remaining from fiscal year 2003. These funds could
be used to offset part of the anticipated shortfall and if this option
is exercised it would reduce our requirement for new funding for that
purpose.
CONGRESSIONAL PRINTING AND BINDING
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2007 Approved............................... 88.0
Fiscal Year 2007 Request................................ 109.5
Change \1\.............................................. 21.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Change includes: Mandatory requirements and continuing operations
and investment requirements.
Salaries and Expenses Appropriation of the Superintendent of
Documents.--The largest single component of this appropriation is for
the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). This account also
provides for the cataloging and indexing of government publications as
well as the distribution of government publications to international
exchange libraries and other recipients as authorized by the documents
provisions of Title 44, U.S. Code.
We are requesting $45,613,000 for this account, representing an
increase of $12,517,000 over the level provided by the current
continuing resolution. The increase is required to cover mandatory pay
and price level increases, recover from the impact of restricted
funding for fiscal year 2007 under the current continuing resolution,
and continue improving public access to government information in
electronic formats. Of the total increase, $1,885,000 is for mandatory
pay and price level costs.
Our requested increase provides $3,250,000 to recover the cost
impacts of restricted funding under the continuing resolution,
principally the requirement to distribute the 2006 edition of the U.S.
Code to depository libraries and cover increased overhead costs--
primarily for information technology services--while striving to
maintain our responsibility to distribute information products to
libraries in the formats needed by their users.
As GPO continues to perform information dissemination through the
FDLP on a predominately electronic basis, as mandated in the conference
report accompanying the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 1996, we also need to make continuing investments in
technology infrastructure and supporting systems. Our requested
increase provides $7,382,000 to cover projects for data migration and
processing, FDLP program outreach, Web harvesting, data storage,
authentication, and other modernization.
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2007 Approved............................... 33.1
Fiscal Year 2008 Requested.............................. 45.6
Change \1\.............................................. 12.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Change includes: Mandatory requirements and continuing operations
and investment requirements.
Revolving Fund.--We are requesting $26,825,000 for this account, to
remain available until expended, to fund essential investments in
information technology infrastructure and systems development,
workforce retraining and restructuring, and facilities maintenance and
repairs.
The key projects covered by this request include $10,500,000 to
complete the development of GPO's Future Digital System, which is
scheduled to go live later this year; $9,375,000 to cover the
replacement of GPO's 30-year old automated composition system, upgrade
our Oracle enterprise business systems, and implement other
improvements to our information technology infrastructure; $3,000,000
to continue our program for workforce retraining and restructuring; and
$3,950,000 for maintenance and repairs to GPO's aging buildings.
REVOLVING FUND
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2007 Approved............................... 1.0
Fiscal Year 2007 Request................................ 26.8
Change \1\.............................................. 25.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Change includes: Mandatory requirements and continuing operations
and investment requirements.
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee, with your support we
can continue GPO's record of achievement. We look forward to working
with you in your review and consideration of our request.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
STATEMENT OF PETER R. ORSZAG, DIRECTOR
Senator Landrieu. Peter.
Dr. Orszag. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
As you know, CBO provides the Congress with timely,
nonpartisan, and objective information about budget and
economic issues. And I just want to note that I assumed my
position in January, and look forward to working with you and
your colleagues throughout the rest of my 4-year term.
CBO's proposed budget for fiscal year 2008 totals $38
million, which is a $2.8 million, or 7.9 percent, increase over
our fiscal year 2007 funding level. After taking into account
increases in prices and costs, the budget restores CBO to its
fiscal year 2006 operating level.
As you may know, our budget is overwhelmingly for people.
Ninety-one percent of CBO's appropriation is devoted to
personnel costs, and the bulk of our requested increase, $2.1
million, is devoted to staff salaries and benefits.
On that note, I would point out that our staff is
overwhelmingly very highly skilled. More than three-quarters of
our professional and management staff have a Ph.D. or master's
degree, and obviously the market for those kinds of personnel
has become increasingly competitive, which puts pressure on
agencies like CBO.
The remaining 9 percent of our budget is devoted to IT
equipment, supplies, and small purchases of other items and
services. The funding for CBO's IT resources increases by a
little under $500,000. The reason is the rapid increase in IT
costs necessary to fulfill our various requirements. That IT
funding would restore CBO's fiscal year--restore IT funding to
CBO's fiscal year 2006 operating level.
CBO deg.HEALTHCARE
I would also like to mention that various members and
subcommittee chairmen of the House and Senate have asked CBO to
expand our ability to assist the Congress in identifying and
analyzing potential ways to address projected growth in
healthcare spending. This is perhaps the central long-term
fiscal challenge facing the Federal Government, and there is no
other agency that is providing options on what could bend the
curve on healthcare spending over the long term. Given the
central importance of this issue to the budget, and given the
potential role that CBO could play in providing such options, I
support the initiative to expand CBO's work in this area, and
we have put together staffing and other resources request that
would allow us to better meet the needs of the Congress in this
area. Totaling a little over $500,000, it includes funding for
an additional health position, visiting fellow, consulting
support, and the purchase of data that would allow us to
undertake more analysis.
Thank you very much.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Peter R. Orszag
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to
present the fiscal year 2008 budget request for the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO).
CBO's mission is to provide the Congress with timely, objective,
nonpartisan analyses of the budget and the economy and to furnish the
information and cost estimates required for the congressional budget
process. That mission is its single ``program.'' Approximately 91
percent of CBO's appropriation is devoted to personnel, and the
remaining 9 percent to information technology (IT), equipment,
supplies, and small purchases of other items.
CBO's proposed budget for fiscal year 2008 totals $37,972,000, a
$2.8 million or 7.9 percent increase over the fiscal year 2007 funding
level. After taking into account increases in prices and costs, this
budget request restores CBO to its fiscal year 2006 operating level.
(The continuing resolution for fiscal year 2007 provided funding at
less than the 2006 current services level for the agency.)
The requested increase is largely accounted for by $2.1 million for
increases in staff salaries and benefits, which are estimated to grow
by 6.3 percent in 2008.
In the request, funding for CBO's IT resources increases by almost
40 percent, or $458,200. The reason is the rapid increase in IT costs
necessary to fulfill CBO's IT requirements; the request does not entail
any significant increase in those requirements. In other words, the
increase restores IT funding to CBO's fiscal year 2006 operating level.
The remainder of CBO's nonpersonnel budget will increase by 18
percent, or $258,400, which restores funding to normal levels for CBO's
share of support for the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board
(FASAB), as well as providing for expert consultants, subscription
services, printing, miscellaneous support by contractors, and travel
and training requirements.
CBO assists the Congress in exercising its responsibilities for the
budget of the U.S. government and other legislation. Under the 1974
Congressional Budget Act, the primary duty of CBO is to support the
committees on the Budget of both Houses. Further, the agency supports
the congressional budget process by providing analyses requested by the
committees on the Budget; the committees on Appropriations; the
committee on Ways and Means; the committee on Finance; other
committees; and, to the extent that resources permit, individual
members. Contributing in various forms, CBO:
--Reports on the outlook for the budget and the economy to help the
Congress prepare for the legislative year;
--constructs baseline budget projections to serve as neutral
benchmarks for gauging the effects of spending and revenue
proposals;
--assists the committees on the Budget in developing the
congressional budget resolution by providing alternative
spending and revenue paths and the estimated effects of a
variety of policy options;
--analyzes the likely direct effects that the President's budgetary
proposals will have on outlays and revenues; their economic
implications, and any budgetary feedback;
--provides estimates of the cost of all appropriation bills at each
stage of the legislative process, including estimates for
numerous amendments considered during that annual process;
--reports on all programs and activities for which authorizations for
appropriations were not enacted or are scheduled to expire;
--estimates the cost of many legislative proposals, including formal
cost estimates for all bills reported by committees of the
House and Senate and detailed explanations of the components of
cost estimates and the estimating methodologies used;
--estimates the cost of intergovernmental and private-sector mandates
in reported bills and other legislative proposals;
--conducts policy studies of governmental activities having major
economic and budgetary impacts;
--provides testimonies on a broad range of budget and economic issues
addressing the agency's own budget projections as well as
specific issues related to national security, health care
policy, alternative means of financing infrastructure spending,
and numerous other program areas;
--helps the Congress make budgetary choices by providing policy
options, but not policy recommendations, for how it might alter
federal outlays and receipts in the near term and over the
longer term; and
--constructs statistical, behavioral, and computational models to
project short- and long-term costs and revenues of government
programs.
In fiscal year 2008, CBO's request will allow the agency to build
on current efforts. Specifically, the request:
--Supports a heavy workload of formal and informal estimates of the
costs of proposed or enacted legislation and of mandates
included in legislation, analytical reports, other publications
and updates, and congressional testimony;
--supports 235 FTEs (full-time-equivalent positions), including an
across-the-board pay adjustment of 3 percent for staff earning
a salary of $100,000 or less, which is consistent with the pay
adjustment requested by other legislative branch agencies;
--funds a projected 5.2 percent increase in the cost of benefits and
funds a combination of promotions and merit increases for
staff;
--funds CBO's share ($460,575) of FASAB's budget requirement;
--provides expert consultant and subscription services necessary to
fulfilling CBO's mission ($340,100);
--provides management and professional training at the funding level
in fiscal year 2006 ($125,000);
--provides travel funding at the fiscal year 2006 funding level
($140,000);
--supports the current level of maintenance and restores software
development funding for CBO's financial management system to
the 2006 funding level ($102,800);
--improves disaster recovery capabilities at the Alternate Computing
Facility ($70,000);
--allows for acquiring commercial data necessary for CBO's analyses
and studies ($193,000);
--maintains essential operations for desktop software ($83,000); and
--provides for replacing obsolete desktop computers and network
servers ($130,000).
CBO has been asked by various members and committee chairmen of the
House and Senate to expand its ability to assist the Congress in
identifying and analyzing potential ways to address projected growth in
health care spending. Continued rapid growth in such spending poses a
major long-term threat to the Nation's fiscal stability. Responding to
that request, CBO has identified staffing and other resources that
would enable the agency to better meet the needs of the Congress in
this area. Some additional funding would be necessary to augment CBO's
fiscal year 2008 budget request. Totaling $538,400, it includes funding
for an additional health position, visiting fellow, consulting support,
and the purchase of prescription drug and health insurance data, as
well as minor funding for related IT, office space reconfiguration,
travel, and training. CBO hopes that the subcommittee will consider
adding funding to CBO's fiscal year 2008 budget request to cover this
additional requirement.
Before I close, I would like to report that CBO received its third
consecutive clean opinion on the latest audit of its financial
statements. The agency's fourth audit (of fiscal year 2006 financial
statements) is ongoing.
The agency is committed to applying the principles of the
Government Performance Results Act, as discussed in the Senate's fiscal
year 2006 report. This past year, the agency developed its first formal
strategic plan and performance plan. On the basis of those documents,
CBO will prepare its first performance accountability report, using
fiscal year 2007 as the baseline.
Finally, I would like to thank the committee for the funding
provided this year, including the allowance for a cost-of-living
adjustment that supplemented the agency's payroll under the continuing
resolution.
OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE
STATEMENT OF TAMARA E. CHRISLER, ACTING EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR
ACCOMPANIED BY:
PETER A. EVELETH, GENERAL COUNSEL
BARBARA CAMENS, MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Senator Landrieu. Ms. Chrisler.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair. I'm
honored to appear before this subcommittee today as the Acting
Executive Director of the Office of Compliance (OOC).
OOC deg.OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE STRATEGIC PLAN GUIDES BUDGET
REQUEST
Our fiscal year 2008 budget request is guided by our newly
developed strategic plan, which focuses on collaboration and
communication and increasing our efforts at being a resource to
the legislative branch.
The first goal of our strategic plan involves our safety
and health program, and it's through that program that our
Office has been heavily engaged in collaborative and
communication efforts with the Office of Architect of the
Capitol, in negotiating a mutually acceptable resolution to the
complaint that was filed in the utility tunnels case.
It is anticipated that this resolution will involve a
written settlement agreement, whereby the abatement plan for
the hazards in the utility tunnels is outlined. We're
requesting your assistance, and the assistance of the
subcommittee today, to fund $280,000 approximate for our
efforts in meeting our obligations under the settlement
agreement; $120,000 to secure the services of a safety and
health expert to act as a liaison between our Office and the
Office of the AOC's liaison, to ensure that the terms of the
agreement are met. We're also seeking an additional $152,000 to
secure the expert services of consultants in heat issues and
egress issues, asbestos, and mold issues. We currently have, on
staff, contractors who are experts in some of these areas, but
these contractors' time and attention are devoted to other
matters, and, in order to meet our obligation under the
settlement agreement, we're requesting your support.
OOC deg.OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE AS RESOURCE TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
In developing our strategic plan, our office thought, and
considered, how we can be of help to the legislative branch,
how we can be a resource in ensuring that work environments are
safe and healthy environments from the beginning, before
conditions become hazardous. We recognize that it's education,
and it's knowledge, and it's preventive measures that are key.
To this end, we would like to work with Member offices, we
would like to work with employing offices, and review their
safety and health plans, and evaluate their safety and health
programs. We'd like to work with Congress to develop safety
checklists for State offices, so staff there know how to
recognize conditions before they become hazardous. It's
preventive, it's proactive, and it's a cost-efficient way of
providing services.
Now, we know we can't act as a resource in a bubble. We
can't sit in our Office and make determinations as to how to
provide assistance to the covered community. We know that it
takes collaboration with stakeholders so that we--our efforts
are targeted to the areas where our efforts are needed. We know
that it takes communication with safety and health officers and
managers so that our office understands the particular needs of
certain offices. We know that it takes financial resources. And
that's why we're here today, to ask for your support in this
endeavor.
OOC deg.MONITORING ABATEMENT OF MOST SERIOUS HAZARDS
Last year, I had the privilege of testifying before this
subcommittee in support of the fiscal year 2007 budget request
of the Office. In asking our general counsel about abatement of
specific identified hazards, Senator Allard shared with us his
experience, his prior experience, as an inspector. And the
Senator focused on the importance of follow-up in monitoring
abatement. And we heard the Senator, and we took those comments
very seriously. We recognize that the fundamental success of
any safety and health inspection program requires the ability
to facilitate abatement of identified hazards. And a major
factor of that facilitation is follow up. It's ensuring that
steps were taken, and it's making sure everything that was
supposed to be done has been done. Our Office has never had the
funding or the staffing to monitor abatement as it should.
With the large number of violations that were found in the
109th Congress alone, we know that it's going to take a
dedicated position to monitor the abatement of the identified
hazards in the 109th Congress and the other existing hazards.
And we're asking your support in funding an additional position
for our Office. That would be a compliance officer, who would
be dedicated to monitoring the abatement of identified hazards,
who would be responsible for that follow up and ensuring that
everything that's supposed to be done has been done.
ADDITIONAL FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT POSITIONS
Our Office is requesting three additional--outside of the
compliance officer--three additional full-time equivalent
positions, as well, two of which were requested in fiscal year
2007 budget request; those two being the accounts payable
position, which would bring on staff our accounts payable
function and allow for separation of duties, as well as a
management analyst, who would assist in monitoring the projects
that our Office is involved in, so that our program managers
can focus on managing their programs.
The fourth position that we're requesting is an
administrative position that would be shared between the half-
time receptionist that we currently have, bringing that
position to full time, and the administrative support of the
safety and health program that we anticipate--that we
anticipate with the increased workload.
Madam Chair, our office is energized about our new
strategic plan, and we are very excited about further servicing
the legislative branch as a resource. We want to be a part of
the preventative measures, and we want to be a part of
collaborative efforts, and we want to be a part of the
solution.
Joining me today is a member of our board of directors,
Barbara Camens, and, if time permits, I would ask that she be
allowed to make a brief statement, as well.
PREPARED STATEMENTS
Senator Landrieu. Okay, that may be possible, and thank you
for your testimony.
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of Tamara E. Chrisler
Madam Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today in support of the fiscal year
2008 budget request of the Office of Compliance.
Board member Barbara Camens is in attendance with me today to
express the support of the board of directors for the Office's fiscal
year 2008 budget request. Also with me today are General Counsel Peter
Ames Eveleth, Deputy Executive Director Alma Candelaria, and
Administrative and Budget Officer Beth Hughes Brown.
As we have in the past, we present our budget request as a
completely zero based budget, in an effort to provide transparency of
the office's operations, and to assist the committee in understanding
from the ground up how the office operates its mandated programs in
employment dispute resolution, in occupational safety and health and
ADA public access inspections and enforcement, and in education and
outreach programs. This year, we have requested a total of $4,106,000
for fiscal year 2008 operations. A large portion of this request,
$280,200 (28 percent of the requested increase), is attributed to the
required abatement monitoring of the utility tunnels case.
The Office of Compliance (OOC or Office) approaches fiscal year
2008 with a new strategic plan. Although our plan was implemented at
the beginning of fiscal year 2007, 2008 will be the first fiscal year
in which the Office has requested funding in support of this plan.
Prior to the end of our first 3-year strategic plan in fiscal year
2006, the Office began preparation for the drafting of our current
plan. We incorporated input from our entire staff, outlining our major
goal of focusing on meeting the workplace needs of the legislative
branch, and positioning ourselves to act as a resource to the covered
community. Shortly after the beginning of fiscal year 2007, the Office
finalized a plan which covers fiscal years 2007-2009, with focused
efforts on communication and collaboration with agencies and employing
offices, and providing technical guidance as needed. As we strive to
meet the goals and performance measures of our current strategic plan,
we face new operational challenges of funding and staffing. We request
your assistance in overcoming these challenges.
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
The Congressional Accountability Act's (CAA) statutory mandate
requires that our office conduct a workplace safety and health
inspection program. The monitoring of remediation of hazards found
through the Office's inspection program remains a vital part of the
safety and health program. During fiscal year 2006, the General Counsel
increased his efforts to remedy two serious violations which posed
imminent danger to workers, one of which was unabated safety violations
which existed in the Capitol Power Plant utility tunnels since before
1999. The Office's filing of our first ever formal complaint led the
Office of the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) to implement immediate
interim abatement measures to protect workers in the tunnels from
imminent harm.
With that protection in place, the AOC and the Office engaged in
settlement negotiations to resolve the formal complaint by devising a
plan which requires abatement of the identified hazards, continued
interim protection for affected AOC employees until full abatement is
achieved, and monitoring of the abatement progress by the Office of
Compliance. In order to ensure the safety and health of workers, this
monitoring may require the procurement of expertise that the Office
does not have available on staff. The current staff complement of the
OOC has been stretched in both FTE resources and contractor funding,
and we currently do not have available the expertise to address many of
the specifics involved in the abatement of the tunnels hazards. Our
fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $120,000 for funding to cover
the costs of an OOC liaison (a safety and health expert) who will help
us continuously interface with the AOC's liaison to facilitate
abatement pursuant to the tunnels settlement agreement. An additional
$152,000 is requested so that our office may obtain the expertise of
other expert consultants who can address structural, heat, egress,
mold, and asbestos issues.
The monitoring of the utility tunnels as well as the monitoring of
the nearly 13,000 findings our inspectors detected in our 109th
Congress biennial inspection will require substantial time and
resources. Our multi-year plan considers this time and resource
requirement and will allow for comprehensive abatement. One portion of
our plan to monitor abatement of the approximate 13,000 findings is the
acceleration and increase of our follow-up inspections of the most
critical of those findings. With the number of findings before us, we
recognize--and the fiscal year 2006 Senate Appropriations Subcommittee
Chairman reminded us--that it is essential that the Office incorporate
mechanisms and personnel to better assure efficiency and timeliness in
its monitoring program. As such, the need for a compliance officer, who
would be dedicated to monitoring the abatement schedules of employing
offices and ensure that employing offices have taken appropriate steps
towards resolution of identified hazards and violations, is most
critical. We request one FTE to serve as a compliance officer, to
provide consistent monitoring of abatement of hazards, assure timely
abatement of OSH hazards identified in the OSH biennial inspections and
requestor-initiated inspections, and ensure compliance with OSH-related
citations.
In our fiscal year 2007 budget request, the Office explained its
need for a management analyst to perform the administrative tasks that
our inspectors once performed at a much higher cost. This need became
so apparent that, while we awaited congressional consideration of our
request, the Office engaged in a reorganization. Sacrificing the
support of administrative staff, we reorganized positions and
reprogrammed contractor funds to allow the duties of the management
analyst to be performed immediately. As a result of the reorganization,
inspector efficiency has increased; however, the Office still suffers
from a lack of clerical/administrative support. We are requesting
funding to add a 0.5 FTE position to ensure that the attorneys and
inspectors are able to focus on the substantive nature of their work,
as opposed to performing accompanying administrative tasks. The
function of the remaining half of this position is addressed below.
The large number of findings in our 109th biennial inspections
contemplates the notion that there may exist deficiencies in the safety
and health plans and programs of the legislative branch. In an effort
to be a resource to our covered community, the Office seeks to provide
technical assistance to member offices as well as employing offices. As
mentioned in our strategic plan, the Office is prepared to review and
analyze the covered community's safety plans to determine whether the
plans meet OSHA requirements. We are requesting funds in support of
this initiative with the hope that our early technical assistance might
prevent the occurrence of future hazards.
Similarly, the Office is committed to providing early assistance to
State offices as well. The lack of funding has prevented the Office
from conducting in-person inspections of covered facilities in State
offices, as mandated by the CAA. However, we are developing a plan by
which we can assist Congress in assuring worker safety in State
offices. Through collaboration with stakeholders, we plan to develop
and pilot self-certification check lists to provide to State offices in
an effort to educate them on OSHA requirements, and to better equip
them in assuring that the responsible party (e.g., GSA, private
landlords) corrects any identified hazards.
In addition, the anticipated opening of the Capitol Visitor Center
during fiscal year 2008 has impacted our office as well. The Office
stands ready to provide preliminary assistance in assessing the safety
of the CVC prior to its occupancy. Once the CVC is occupied and it is
added to the Office's inspection cycle, it will add approximately .7
million square feet to the Office's area of inspection. Thus, we are
seeking funding to sustain the increased workload.
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
The Office is mandated by Congress to ``carry out a program of
education for members of Congress and other employing authorities of
the legislative branch of the Federal Government respecting the laws
made applicable to them and a program to inform individuals of their
rights under laws made applicable to the legislative branch of the
Federal Government. . . .'' 2 U.S.C. 1381(h)(1). The Office continues
to carry out this core mandate of the act through various educational
and outreach activities.
In line with the Office's initiative to act as a resource to
legislative branch employees and employers, the Office has begun major
efforts to disseminate a baseline survey to its constituents. We have
devised a survey instrument to apply initially to House and Senate
offices, with the intent of applying the same instrument to another
large group of our constituents in the current fiscal year. The survey
has been designed to gauge the community's general knowledge of the
Office, their rights and responsibilities under the CAA, and their
general satisfaction with the Office. This initiative ultimately will
result in the first comprehensive evaluation of the Office's education
efforts and services. The Office anticipates that this initial survey,
followed by focus groups and additional surveys, will result in
feedback and pointed data to allow the Office to perform a concentrated
effort to improve and streamline and more precisely target services to
fit the needs of the community. With your assistance, we have been able
to fund phases I and II in the past 2 fiscal years. We are seeking
additional funding for phase III of our survey activities to establish
the baseline against which we will measure our success in achieving our
educational statutory mandate.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
The Office's employment dispute resolution program provides a
mechanism for employing offices and employees to address issues
involving ten different laws of the CAA, ranging from alleged
discrimination to the alleged failure to pay required overtime. The
successes of the dispute resolution program remain largely unnoticed
because of the confidential nature of its administrative phases:
counseling, mediation, and hearing processes conducted by the Office.
Hundreds of disputes in nearly all legislative branch agencies, as well
as in offices of members and committees of both chambers have quietly
been addressed through our administrative dispute resolution system
since the Office's inception in 1996. The assistance to employing
offices and employees provided by this confidential service is
reinforced through well-trained staff who provide exemplary services to
employees and through the expertise of contract mediators and hearing
officers who remain accomplished in their field.
The need for contracted legal expertise is anticipated to continue
in fiscal year 2008. Currently, the Office has received a large number
of complaints which have proceeded to hearing and may proceed to the
administrative appellate stage before the Office's board of directors.
During the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, there were pending before
the board five cases for appellate review. The preparation of these
decisions, to include legal research, legal writing, and legal
analysis, requires expert assistance in order to render sound board
decisions in a timely fashion. The Office currently has staff dedicated
to this program requirement; however, because complaints continue to be
filed at a steady pace, and because the Office does not foresee a
decrease in the number of appeals of hearing officers' decisions,
assistance from a contract attorney will aid the office in providing
timely board decisions.
MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
As mentioned above, the Office of Compliance makes extensive use of
service vendors and personal services contractors to provide many of
our vital functions, including employment dispute resolution and OSH
inspections. In general, this practice provides significant cost
savings and allows this small agency to maintain capacities on an ``as-
needed'' basis. However, some core internal control functions are
currently also under-served or contracted out due to our limited FTE
authorization, which at 17 is two less than the agency was authorized
in fiscal year 1998.
The Office has just two FTE's dedicated to all IT, HR, general
administrative support and fiscal management functions. This situation
has resulted in inefficiencies, work load overages, and the necessity
to contract out core functions, such as accounts payable. Accounting
staff is necessary to ensure that a separation of functions can be
maintained in our fiscal management. HR/project management staff is
necessary to further the Office's commitment to best practices,
allowing program managers to concentrate on their areas of expertise.
General administrative staff is necessary to address workload issues of
staff who have to perform administrative duties instead of duties in
their own subject matter areas. As mentioned in our fiscal year 2007
budget request, we are requesting one analyst FTE to address our HR and
project management deficit, and an accounting technician FTE to bring
our basic accounting and other fiscal responsibilities on staff. The
cost of these FTE's will be partially offset by a reduction in
contractor expenses. In addition, we are requesting a half-time FTE to
complete the part-time receptionist position, so that our remaining
staff can concentrate on performing the duties of their respective
substantive areas.
CONCLUSION
There are a number of other requests in our budget submission which
we commend for your consideration. The ones referenced herein are
presented to highlight a portion of the endeavors which our office
hopes to undertake with your assistance. On behalf of the board of
directors, the appointees and the entire staff of the Office of
Compliance, I thank you for the committee's support of the efforts of
this agency. I assure you that the Office is committed to the most
efficient and prudent use of taxpayer money. I respectfully request
that the committee respond favorably to the Office's fiscal year 2008
budget request. We will be happy to respond to any questions which you
may have.
______
Prepared Statement of Barbara Camens
Madam Chair and members of the subcommittee, good morning. I am
Barbara Camens, and I represent the Board of Directors of the Office of
Compliance. I am honored to be here today to join Acting Executive
Director Tamara Chrisler in testifying on behalf of the Office's fiscal
year 2008 budget request.
Madam Chair, the Board would first like to commend the work of Ms.
Chrisler, Peter Eveleth, and the entire staff in achieving so many
goals in the past few years. We now have a new strategic plan for
fiscal year 2007-2009, with a line of sight to individual work plans.
We have established and continue to develop protocols to enable us
better to partner with the agencies for which we have employment law
and safety and health jurisdiction. We are negotiating a settlement
agreement of our first safety and health complaint, involving the
utility tunnels which, if approved, will prevent the matter from
reaching federal court, will conserve substantial resources, and will
ensure the immediate and ongoing abatement of the underlying safety
hazards.
This record of improvement is the result of the hard work and
dedication of the four statutory officers who are appointed by the
Board, and the dedicated staff they have assembled. While the Board
wholeheartedly supports the entire budget request, we wish to
underscore the need which the agency has to increase its FTE complement
to 21. Right now the FTE complement of 17 is two less than the 19 the
Office was afforded in fiscal year 1998. Over the past several years,
the agency has concentrated its available resources on enhancing its
service delivery, particularly in the OSH area. Consequently, there is
a compelling need for basic operational support staff. I can assure you
that the Office of Compliance will continue to make the most efficient
use of every dollar which is appropriated by this committee.
I would like to call your attention to two statutory changes that
are of significant interest to Susan Robfogel, the Chair of the Board
of Directors, as well as the entire Board. The first has to do with
internal promotion within the Office of Compliance. The Congressional
Accountability Act requires the Office's statutory appointees to be
individuals who have not worked within the legislative branch during
the previous 4 years. This provision makes it impossible to promote
from within; for example, from Deputy Executive Director to Executive
Director. Since the Board could be actively contemplating such a
promotion, we have an immediate interest in changing the prohibitive
section of the CAA. We have contacted, and plan to work with the
appropriate oversight committees of both Chambers to expedite this
change, and would greatly appreciate the support of this subcommittee
in this effort.
In addition, the Office has recently contracted with a human
resources consulting firm that has begun assessing our human capital
needs. The contractor's report makes recommendations for how various
office functions could be more efficiently and effectively performed.
One of the contractor's preliminary recommendations is for ``the Board
of Directors (to) consider the feasibility of seeking legislative
change to allow the establishment of senior executive positions in the
Office of Compliance where these responsibilities warrant.'' We are
requesting your assistance in enacting this change for the positions of
Executive Director and General Counsel of the Office of Compliance, and
if you consider it appropriate for each of the five members of the
Board of Directors. Please provide us any guidance you deem advisable
to effect this change in compensation levels.
I am available to address any questions.
Senator Landrieu. Let me just begin with questions, if I
could, to Mr. Walker. Let me say that, although my experience
on this subcommittee is rather brief, my experience in
Government is not, and I've been in public office for, now,
almost 30 years, having started in my own legislature, and then
working up as State treasurer, and then, of course, being 10
years in the Senate. I realize, while there are a lot of people
who spend a lot of time bashing Government, I believe
Government can do a lot of good, does a lot of good every day.
I am proud of the fact that this is the finest Government,
democracy, in the world. It's what many of the issues that
we're dealing with here and abroad are all about. And, while
some of your agencies don't get the time and attention they
need, because they're sort of the mechanical part of making it
work, it does not go without my notice of the importance of
what you do every day to just keep the trains running on time
and to keep this Government operating efficiently,
transparently, and professionally, which is so rare in the
world today.
So, I would think, particularly for the Comptroller's
office and the Congressional Budget Office, Peter, that you all
really are the muscle that makes possible a trim and fit
Government, and we want to run a trim and fit Government to
meet all the goals and objectives, from the Constitution to
every law that's written, to fulfill the dreams and hopes of
the country. So, I hope that people in the room understand that
this is not just a mechanical accounting exercise for me. I
really look forward to learning more about your offices. My
background is not in auditing or investigation. But I would say
that I really am a true believer in Government working well.
And--as much as I can help you do your jobs well--I think our
subcommittee will be making a significant contribution.
GAO deg.JUSTIFICATION FOR INCREASED FUNDING IN THE GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Mr. Walker, Some in Congress are going to be quite suspect
and hesitant--as you know, about fighting for extra money. It
is not going to be easy----
Mr. Walker. No, I realize that.
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Currently, we've got a
tremendous amount of extremely important calls on funding, both
domestically and internationally. So, would you spend another
minute or two, giving your three or four best arguments to the
skeptics that say, ``What you do is not that important, and we
don't need to increase your budget.'' Seeing this graph that
you submitted sort of tells the story. But if you'd add
something to that.
Mr. Walker. I'll be happy to provide something for the
record. And thank you for the opportunity, Madam Chair.
[The information follows:]
Need for Increased Funding
In recent years, GAO has worked cooperatively with the
Appropriations Committees to submit modest budget requests.
Adjusting for inflation, GAO's budget authority has declined by
3 percent in constant fiscal year 2006 dollars since fiscal
year 2003. These modest budget results do not adequately
recognize the return on investment that GAO has been able to
generate. In fact, these modest increases have hampered our
progress in rebuilding from the downsizing (40 percent
reduction in staffing levels) and mandated funding reductions
that occurred in the 1990s.
With your support, GAO has become more results-oriented,
partnerial, and client focused. We have made strategic
investments; realigned the organization; streamlined our
business processes; modernized our performance classification,
compensation, and reward systems; enhanced our ability to
attract, retain and reward top talent; enhanced the technology
and infrastructure supporting our staff and systems; and made
other key investments. These transformational efforts have
allowed GAO to model best practices, lead by example, and
provide significant support to Congressional hearings, while
achieving record results and very high client satisfaction
ratings without significant increases in funding.
We have taken a number of steps to deal with funding
shortfalls in the past few years; however, we cannot continue
to employ the same approaches. Our staff has become
increasingly stretched and we are experiencing backlogs in
several areas of critical importance to the Congress (e.g.,
health care, homeland security, energy and natural resources).
In addition, we have deferred key initiatives and technology
upgrades (e.g., engagement and administrative process upgrades)
for several years and it would not be prudent to continue to do
so. These actions are having an adverse effect on employee
morale, our ability to produce results, and the return on
investment that we can generate.
There is a need for fundamental and dramatic reform to
address what the government does, how it does business, and who
will do the government's business. Our support to the Congress
will likely prove even more critical because of the pressures
created by our nation's current and projected budget deficit
and growing long-term fiscal imbalance. Also, as we face
current and projected supply and demand imbalance issues and a
growing workload over the coming years across a wide spectrum
of issues, GAO will be unable to respond to congressional
demands without a significant investment in our future. We have
exhausted the results that we can achieve based on prior
investments. Our ability to continue to produce record results
and assist the Congress in discharging its Constitutional
responsibilities relating to authorization, appropriations,
oversight, and other matters will be adversely impacted unless
we take action now.
GAO deg.LINKING RESOURCES TO RESULTS
Mr. Walker. We're in the business of improving the
performance of the Federal Government and ensuring its
accountability for the benefit of the American people. We
provide oversight, insight, and foresight work. We help the
Congress discharge its constitutional responsibilities with
regard to appropriations, authorization, reauthorization,
oversight, et cetera.
The best case I would give you, Madam Chair, is, I think
the U.S. Government does not do a very good job of linking
resources to results. We are a shining exception to that
general rule. We generated, last year, a $105 return in
financial benefits for every dollar invested in our agency.
Number two in the world is around 24 to 1. The Congress needs
to do a better job, in my view, of recognizing that the
baselines of all budgets are not equal. I'm talking in general,
not about the legislative branch, but throughout Government.
The Government needs to start doing a better job of analyzing
what makes sense and what doesn't make sense for tomorrow, and
are we targeting our resources to where we're getting results.
If the Congress does that, our case is clear and
compelling, and I have no concerns. But if the Congress doesn't
do that, and if the Congress takes a baseline approach to say,
``Well, this is where we were last year, and this is how much
money we have this year,'' and, if it doesn't delve in, get the
facts, and differentiate, then I'm very concerned, because what
happens is, agencies like ours, who try to ask for very modest
budget requests, and to lead by example----
Senator Landrieu. Get penalized.
Mr. Walker [continuing]. Get penalized. There are very
perverse incentives in that. I know you believe, as I do, that
we need to transform what Government does and how Government
does business. We are an ally to this Congress in getting that
done. But we need to have a reasonable level of resources in
order to be able to do our job.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
GAO deg.HIRING IN A COMPETITIVE JOB MARKET
Let me just ask you to comment about the tensions that
you're finding, or the difficulties, in hiring based on the
competitiveness of the private market. I'm going to ask you the
same, Mr. Turri, and also Peter. Because the region that we're
in here is very competitive. Are you seeing it scale up pretty
substantially, or has it been this way for several years?
Mr. Walker. It varies, Madam Chair. Basically, for GAO,
we're deemed to be an employer of choice. We're deemed to be
one of the best places to work in the Federal Government. We're
deemed to be a preferred professional services organization.
So, in general, we have a lot more people who want to work for
GAO than we have positions. There are, however, exceptions. We
experience real supply and demand imbalances in hiring Ph.D.
economists, healthcare professionals, and information
technology professionals. Even in areas such as financial
management and auditing, because of Sarbanes-Oxley and a
variety of other issues, there are selected areas in which we
are increasingly competing for talent and having difficulties
in being able to attract the number of people with the type of
education and experience that we want. But, in general, we're
okay. Those areas where we have challenges, but we need to meet
those challenges, because some of these areas are the ones that
represent the greatest challenges for Government--healthcare,
for example.
Senator Landrieu. And do you think you have the
flexibility, based on the current authorization laws, to allow
you to make those differentials in pay that are required to
attract and retain that kind of talent?
Mr. Walker. We have more flexibility than most agencies in
Government, thanks to the actions of the Congress. On three
different occasions--1980, 2001, and 2003--the Congress has
given us initial authorities, which we have aggressively used.
I can assure you that I will not hesitate to let you know if we
think we need more authorities. I would like to note for the
record, as is included in my statement, we are planning to
submit a legislative proposal to our oversight and authorizing
committees, this year, that does deal with certain human
capital issues.
GAO deg.MARKET-BASED COMPENSATION AT THE GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Senator Landrieu. As I understand, there was a hearing in
the House on this, last week, that had a couple of questions
about complaints that they had received about people feeling
that they might not have been treated fairly. And, of course, I
wasn't able to read all the testimony of that hearing. Would
you like to comment, for the record----
Mr. Walker. Sure.
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. About some of those----
Mr. Walker. Yes.
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Issues?
Mr. Walker. Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity. Let
me try to provide some contextual sophistication for this,
because you just get pieces of things that are reported.
In July 2003, I testified before the Congress, and I asked
for additional legislative authorities in order to make GAO a
more market-based, skills-, knowledge-, and performance-
oriented organization with regard to classification and
compensation systems. Congress granted us that authority in
July 2004.
Later in 2004, we received the results of our first-ever
competitive compensation study for GAO personnel. It was good
news and bad news. The good news was, the vast majority of our
people were either compensated fairly, or for a material
percentage of individuals--Ph.D. economists, attorneys,
information technology specialists, and a few others--the study
found that we should raise their pay potential, raise their pay
ranges; and, in fact, we did do that. There were many more
positives than negatives. There was, however, one area that it
was not good news for some of our employees. That study said
that we had roughly 300 employees that were overpaid, as
compared to the market. As a result, one had to decide, ``What
would you do with those individuals?''
I made the determination that, while I had the authority to
freeze their pay under the law, I didn't want to do that; I
wanted to give them some performance incentives. And, in fact,
we did, and we are still giving them performance incentives,
even greater performance incentives. But I made the decision
not to provide them an automatic across-the-board pay increase,
because, in my view, doing so would be inconsistent with the
concept of equal pay for work of equal value, and inconsistent
with the concept of providing competitive compensation levels
for our people. Candidly, I never promised to give across-the-
board increases to people paid above market, nor have I ever
been asked to promise to give across-the-board increases to
people paid above market. To put this in context, in 2007 we're
talking about roughly 150 people out of 3,200, down from over
300 in 2006.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Mr. Walker. I think that was
very well stated. I guess I should say, for the record, that
I've done the exact same thing in my office. And I have the
flexibility to do that. And I believe in that kind of approach
for the 45 people that work for me. So, I don't know all the
details of this, and I'm not going to prejudge, but I most
certainly find no fault with the thought and the
professionalism in which you have addressed this. That is
exactly what I try to do within the tight budgets that we have,
to retain the very best staff that I can retain, with the
skills necessary to do the job I need to do as a Senator.
GAO deg.IMPLEMENTING A TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AT THE GOVERNMENT
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Mr. Walker, what are the critical factors in implementing a
technology assessment function at GAO? Do you see merit in
creating permanent capability within GAO to study technology
assessments?
Mr. Walker. Thank you for that question, Madam Chair.
The Congress, as you know, for several years, has been
debating whether, and to what extent, to reestablish a
technology assessment capability. We have conducted some
technology assessments, at the request of the Congress, in part
to serve as a beta to determine whether or not we might be an
appropriate agency to do that work. In my opinion, the Congress
does need some additional capability with regard to technology
assessments. Second, I think we have proven that we've got the
ability to do that work. Third, I would question whether or not
it makes sense to create a new legislative branch entity with
all the different overhead and infrastructure that would have
to come with that.
Should the Congress decide to create this capability, and
to place it at GAO, we would need a few more FTEs, and we would
need some additional funding, because we're already stretched.
But I can assure you, it would be a lot more cost beneficial to
do it at GAO than it would be to start something from scratch,
a whole new entity, with its own support structure and all the
other things that would have to come with it.
GAO deg.RELEVANCE OF EXISTING MANDATES
Senator Landrieu. And one more question. You've approached
the subcommittee regarding a number of mandates involving your
work that you believe should be repealed. Could you reiterate
those, for the record, and why you think they should be
repealed?
Mr. Walker. I'll be happy to provide a list for the record.
[The information follows:]
GAO deg.Proposed Repeal and Modification of GAO Reporting
Requirements
GAO has proposed language that would repeal or modify a number of
mandates for GAO audits and reports. Most of the mandates impose
recurring requirements on GAO. While the circumstances of each vary,
the common theme is that continued audits and reports would provide
little or no value and consume resources that could be applied to GAO
work of higher priority to the Congress. Eliminating these mandates
would conserve resources while preserving the option for congressional
committees to request GAO work in areas covered by the specific
mandates.
(a) Annual Report by GAO on Consistency of IMF Practices With
Statutory Policies.--Section 504(e) of title V of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-113--Appendix E) is repealed.
(b) Review of Proposed Changes to Export Thresholds for
Computers.--Section 314 of title III of the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-554--App. B) is repealed.
(c) Annual Reports on Waiting Times for Appointments for Specialty
Care.--Section 604(c) of the Veterans Health Programs Improvement Act
of 2004 (Public Law 108-422) is amended by striking ``the Comptroller
General of the United States'' and inserting ``the Inspector General of
the Department of Veterans Affairs''.
(d) Audit by GAO.--Paragraph (4)(A) of subsection (f) of section
4404 of Public Law 107-171 (2 U.S.C. Sec. 1161(f)(4)(A) is amended--
(1) by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''; and
(2) by striking ``annual''.
(e) Section 902(k) of the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act
of 1998 (Public Law 105-277; 8 U.S.C. 1255 note) is repealed.
(f) Local Educational Agency Spending Audits.--Section 1904 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6574) is
repealed.
(g) Audit of Financial Transactions.--Section 11 of the National
Moment of Remembrance Act (Public Law 106-579; 36 U.S.C. 116 note) is
repealed.
(h) Loss Ratios and Refund of Premiums.--Section 1882(r)(5) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ss(r)(5)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)--
(A) by striking ``(A) The Comptroller General shall
periodically, not less than once every 3 years,'' and
inserting ``The Secretary may''; and
(B) by striking ``and to the Secretary''; and
(2) by striking subparagraph (B).
(i) GAO Reports.--Section 14 of the Radiation Exposure Compensation
Act (Public Law 101-426; 42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is repealed.
proposed transfer of comptroller general authorities
The proposed language would transfer certain functions currently
performed by GAO to the Department of Labor. GAO performs purely
ministerial functions under the Davis-Bacon Act and the Contract Work
Hours and Safety Standards Act. These functions include payment to
employees and others pursuant to determinations of the Department of
Labor, and certain ministerial reporting functions. These functions are
more appropriately performed by the Department of Labor.
(a) Authority of Comptroller General to Pay Wages and List
Contractors Violating Contracts.--Section 3144 of title 40, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in the title, by striking ``of Comptroller General'';
(2) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``The Comptroller
General'' and inserting ``The Secretary of Labor''; and
(3) in subsection (b)(1), by striking, in both places,
``Comptroller General'' and inserting ``Secretary of Labor''.
(b) Reports of Violations and Withholding of Amounts for Unpaid
Wages and Liquidated Damages.--Section 3703 of title 40, United States
Code, is amended in subsection (b)(3), by
(1) striking ``The Comptroller General'' in the first
sentence and inserting ``The Secretary of Labor'' and
(2) striking ``the Comptroller General'' in the second
sentence and inserting ``The Secretary of Labor''.
(c) Health and Safety Standards in Building Trades and Construction
Industry.--Section 3704 of title 40, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(1), by
(A) striking ``Transmittal of names of repeat
violators to Comptroller General'' and inserting
``Findings of repeat violations'', and
(B) striking all words after ``effect''.
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by
(A) striking the first sentence and inserting ``Not
sooner than 30 days after giving notice of the
Secretary of Labor's finding under paragraph (1) to all
interested persons, the Secretary shall distribute each
name to all agencies of the Federal Government.'';
(B) striking ``from the date the name is
transmitted to the Comptroller General'' in the second
sentence;
(C) striking ``whose name was submitted to the
Comptroller General'' in the third sentence; and
(D) striking the fourth sentence and inserting
``The Secretary shall inform all Government agencies of
the Secretary's action''.
Mr. Walker. But here is the key concept. And it's something
that we talked about earlier. Government tends to be an
accumulation and amalgamation of various policies, programs,
functions, and activities over the years; and, in this
particular case, of mandates that have come up over the years.
Some of them make sense, some of them don't make sense; some of
them are outdated, and some of them don't pass a cost-benefit
test. So, what we've endeavored to do is, we've gone back, and
we've looked at all the mandates that currently apply to us,
and we've tried to work with the Congress in understanding
which ones are still relevant, which ones have merit, and which
ones are cost beneficial.
And so, I'll be happy to provide some more for the record,
but I--it's kind of a spring cleaning, and spring is coming
soon, and--I think a lot of people, frankly, need to have a
spring cleaning.
Senator Landrieu. My husband would most certainly agree
with you. He threatens to start one any day. I tell the
children, ``Move out of the way. You, too, will be thrown out
of this house.''
Mr. Turri, we will move now to you. The 49-percent increase
in your budget is quite substantial. Now, I understand the
whole argument about starting from a baseline that's too low to
do the mission, and so a 5 percent or 6 percent isn't going to
make any difference. But, still, that's fairly significant. So,
would you mind trying to explain a little bit more in detail
about that?
GPO deg.GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE FINANCES
Mr. Turri. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just for clarification, GPO is unique in the way it is
funded. Of all the revenue that we have in our operation, about
80 percent of it actually is nonappropriated. It's based on a
revolving fund that receives most of its revenue from procured
printing, Federal Register printing, the printing of passports,
and other products. That area actually funds 80 percent of what
the agency is all about.
Senator Landrieu. And how much does that generate annually?
Mr. Turri. We expect, this year, our total revenue to be
around $880 million. So, the balance of the 20 percent or so is
appropriated funds. Of that particular amount, congressional
printing and binding is a significant part of that operation.
And this year, what we're asking for is about $21 million plus
to bring that budget up to where it belongs. In 2005, we were
appropriated about $88 million for congressional printing and
binding. That particular year, we were very close to that
appropriation. It kind of bumped right up to it. In 2006, we
actually exceeded the appropriated number by $3 million. We
actually had to use transfers to fund that shortfall.
This year, with a continuing resolution, we project we are
going to be in excess of $12 million over the appropriation--
the flat funding that we've had for the last couple of years.
About $5 million of that is for the U.S. Code. The rest of it
is for the fact that this year Congress will have increased
days in session, the fact that we have wage increases that are
mandatory, and materials costs have increased. Those particular
items all add up to, as I say, an increased amount. And the
volume of work that Congress is doing each year has increased,
and those same arguments will apply to the budget of 2008, once
again looking at probably about a $9 million increase. Just to
bring us up to where we belong and the amount of money that we
are mandated to spend by the work that we do every day, will
bring our congressional printing and binding budget up by $21
million. That is something we really have no control over. We
are just obliged, obviously, every day to print that work.
Senator Landrieu. Can I ask you this? You have been with
this office for a short period of time?
Mr. Turri. I actually have been with the GPO approximately
4 years as the deputy to Mr. James. In January, I took over as
Acting Public Printer, as the search for a new Public Printer
continues.
Senator Landrieu. Has the agency ever gone through a
comprehensive review--since you're generating about 80 percent
of your funding--which is very substantial? I know some of that
are fees set by Congress for what a passport costs, et cetera--
but have you ever had a review--since you are in sort of a
business that can actually produce revenue? Is there any
thought that you could actually produce more than you need and
get your 80 percent up to 100 or 110 or 120?
Mr. Turri. Are you talking about----
Senator Landrieu. Like an outside review of what you do to
suggest additional revenues without driving up the cost of
these documents for the users to a point where it would be
counterproductive?
Mr. Turri. In my tenure, we haven't undertaken anything
like that, but it's certainly something, Madam Chair, that----
Senator Landrieu. We might want to----
Mr. Turri [continuing]. We could possibly consider.
GPO deg.SPECIAL DOCUMENTS
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Are all of the new documents
that are being printed, designed, thought of, for homeland
security weighing on your office at all?
Mr. Turri. It's really separate and complete. It's----
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Just for homeland security?
Mr. Turri. No. I would say homeland security, on its own,
is not necessarily having any significant impact on our
business.
Senator Landrieu. You're required to update the U.S. Code
every 6 years, so that's part of this request?
Mr. Turri. It's part of this, Madam Chair. We were notified
that it looks like it might be pushing more into 2008. We
thought we were going to be required to print it this year, but
currently, we're still printing supplements for the last U.S.
Code this year. But, as I say, printing it in 2008 won't
decrease our overall budgetary needs. It just will push the
funding requirement into 2008.
GPO deg.PASSPORTS
Senator Landrieu. Okay. And can you give us the status of
the electronic passport?
Mr. Turri. Yes, Madam Chair, I'd be delighted to do that.
The new passport had just begun to be designed when I
arrived there, about 4 years ago. The last few years have been
spent in the process of designing and building a system that
would produce a biometric passport. In February, or just about
1 year ago, we began to get the realization from the State
Department that this particular quantity of passports that we
had been producing, which were about 9 million a year, was
beginning to jump at a fairly rapid rate, to the point of where
now it looks they're expecting, this year, to get about 17
million requests for new passports. That number, as you can
imagine, is a significant increase over what was expected.
Madam Chair, in the particular area of passports, we went
from 30 to 80 employees in the passport division just in the
last 12 months, which obviously, as you can imagine, requires a
significant amount of ingest and training into that particular
operation. We have added eight brand new pieces of equipment,
which are not pieces of equipment that come off assembly lines,
they're all predesigned specifically to produce the biometric
passport. I'm happy to say, though, this particular month that
we're in, as things ramp up and continue, we will be producing
approximately 1 million e-Passports along with still producing
the legacy passports of around 500,000. This will give us about
1\1/2\ million passports this month, which would take care of
the 17 million passport requests that----
Senator Landrieu. Requirement.
Mr. Turri [continuing]. Might be coming this year. And I'm
very proud of what we have accomplished, because even in a
ramp-up mode, we are producing four times as many e-Passports
as any country in the world. And we expect this to continue.
GPO deg.PRODUCTION FACILITY
Senator Landrieu. Now, where is this work being done? What
physical facility?
Mr. Turri. Currently it is being done in a building
separate from our regular GPO offices. It's actually across the
street from our regular buildings.
Senator Landrieu. And since I don't know where your regular
building is, help me.
Mr. Turri. I'm sorry. It's----
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Your regular building?
Mr. Turri [continuing]. It's actually down the street,
Madam Chair, at 732 North Capitol, not----
Senator Landrieu. I know where that is.
Mr. Turri [continuing]. Far from here. We'd love to have
you come down and visit our operation sometime.
Senator Landrieu. I want to come see the main building, on
North Capitol.
Mr. Turri. Right.
Senator Landrieu. I'm reminded now of where that is. And
this other location is right----
Mr. Turri. Right across the----
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Across the street.
Mr. Turri. It's in a separate building.
Senator Landrieu. And do you find your facilities adequate?
Aren't you trying to do some repairs or restoration?
Mr. Turri. Well, that particular building is the newest of
our buildings. The essential repairs and restoration that we're
requesting money for are really needed across the street in our
regular buildings. What we're looking for, for passports, is a
remote site facility for security and increased production
reasons. The idea of having passports produced in one place is
not----
Senator Landrieu. Ideal.
Mr. Turri [continuing]. Correct. We have been searching.
And we are getting very close, we hope, to identifying
someplace that may be very close to your home State.
Senator Landrieu. That would be good.
It's close to my home State.
Mr. Turri. Well, close enough that they can come across the
line.
Senator Landrieu. But let me say, I know, from the other
committees that I serve on, there is great deal of interest,
from many different angles, about these new passports and how
people are going to get them.
Mr. Turri. Yes.
Senator Landrieu. Who gets them, and--et cetera.
Mr. Turri. Yes.
Senator Landrieu. I think I would like to plan a field trip
to the office and----
Mr. Turri. Well----
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. I'll take a couple of
other--try to bring a few Senators with me that are actually
either on this committee or the Homeland Security Committee,
because there's a lot of concern about all of this new
paperwork and documentation that we're going through to try to
make our borders more secure without hampering travel, et
cetera. So, I think this is going to be an issue some of the
Senators are going to be interested in.
And----
Mr. Turri. That would----
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Finally----
Mr. Turri. That would be great, Madam Chair. We'd love to
have you down there.
GPO deg.FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM
Senator Landrieu. And the Federal Depository Library
Program, can you tell me where you see this going, because of
electronic information?
Mr. Turri. Yes. Part of our request this year is for the
Federal Depository Library Program. We are requesting an
increase of approximately $12 million over last year's funding
for this program. Two million dollars of that is for mandatory
pay and price increases. A little over $3 million of it is for
the U.S. Code, printing and distribution, and IT support.
The balance of the $7 million, Madam Chair, is for projects
for data migration, data processing, data storage,
authentication, cataloging, and indexing, along with web
harvesting. We also have started a program, which we are
continuing, of what's called outreach, which basically is a
review for libraries, to go out and see that they're
maintaining the level of operation that they need to do for
user satisfaction.
But every one of these things that I have mentioned, as far
as the data migration, data storage, et cetera, are all
necessary for ingest into the future digital system that we're
requesting budgets for. Without that particular input into the
future digital system, it would be like having a home without
any sinks or furniture. So, the two go hand in hand, quite
frankly.
Senator Landrieu. Okay. Thank you very much.
Mr. Turri. You're welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair.
CBO deg.HEALTHCARE COSTS
Senator Landrieu. Dr. Orszag, I understand that Senator
Conrad has a lot of confidence in your ability, and we'll be
looking forward to working closely with you. And I know that
you've worked with Senator Gregg as part of the Budget
Committee, as well. Your efforts in honing down on some of
these healthcare costs is commendable, because it's a serious
problem in our own general budget and a real issue with
businesses, large and small. And it's, in my view, something we
just can't sustain, and we have to change course. And finding
that course has been elusive, to date. But are you going to,
and how are you going to, coordinate with your sister agencies?
Or is there any coordination at all? Are you all just striking
off on your own with this effort?
Dr. Orszag. Senator, there's a lot of coordination.
Clearly, GAO does some work in health. MedPAC offers advice and
options specifically on Medicare. And what we're going to try
to do is play a role in broader healthcare issues, because I
believe, and most analysts believe, that it is not possible,
over the long term, to slow the growth in Medicare and Medicaid
unless there is overall slower cost growth in the health
sector, as a whole. And embedded in that, though, is the
opportunity--because a variety of evidence suggests that we
could take costs out of the system without actually harming
American's health. And I think trying to capture that
opportunity is the central fiscal challenge facing the Federal
Government, and we will be working with any agency that is
motivated and interested in the same thing, to be putting
forward options for you to consider.
Senator Landrieu. And I know that your focus is right here
in the capital, as it should be, with the Federal Government,
but I know that you're aware that there are counterparts of
yours in all 50 States, and some exceedingly professional
people in those States that do for the States what you do for
the Federal Government. Is there any formal or informal
exchange of information, at any level, that you all go through
with State fiscal officers or budget folks at the State levels?
Dr. Orszag. I'm aware of a variety of informal
interactions. For example, on the Medicaid and SCHIP programs,
our analysts are in touch with people at the State level,
because that's what you need to do in order to fully understand
those programs. And, also, there are, whenever folks come to
Washington, opportunities for interactions. We have much less
time, resources, and ability to go out to the States, but there
is also a little bit of that.
GAO deg.COORDINATION OF FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
Senator Landrieu. Well, I'm going to think through this a
little bit. But, you know, as I said, I was a member of the
Appropriations Committee in the House, where I served for 8
years, and it occurred to me there, people in Washington don't
realize that. It reminds me of a slogan that I read once that
said, ``You don't stop dancing with a gorilla until the gorilla
stops dancing.'' And the Federal Government is a gorilla out
there. And where we are 50 percent of State budgets now, 60
percent of State budgets, it's hard for them to get a handle on
their budget when they don't control 50 to 60 percent of it. At
least that was the case in Louisiana when I left to come here.
And I think that sometimes we don't realize--maybe it's
because we all get this Beltway mentality sometimes, to a
certain degree or another. And it might be very interesting for
you to think through that. And I'm going to talk with some of
the Senators about this and see. It can be done informally. It
doesn't have to be done formally. But you might be very
surprised at the ideas that you might find out there.
And, Mr. Walker, I don't know if you have anything----
Mr. Walker. Yes, if I might add--it might be helpful to you
and to Peter. Obviously, they're a lot smaller operation than
we are. Obviously, they're based solely in Washington, DC,
whereas we're in 12 cities. But a couple of thoughts.
One, I totally agree with Peter that the largest fiscal
challenge for the Federal Government, State governments, and
the private sector--is healthcare. He and I get along very
well. We've already started to coordinate efforts. It's going
to be critical that we coordinate in this healthcare area. As
you know, I appoint all the MedPAC members, and we do quite a
bit of healthcare work, too. But I'm confident we'll work
together on that.
With regard to Federal, State, and local, you raise an
excellent point. I chair something called the Intergovernmental
Audit Forum, which are all the inspector generals, all the
State auditors, and all the county and city auditors. We also
have something on an international basis, the International
Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions. I didn't pick the
name.
Senator Landrieu. Quite fancy.
Mr. Walker. There's a lot to be learned here, through
coordinating efforts, and we've, in fact, enhanced that
significantly during my tenure. So, I think you're onto
something.
Senator Landrieu. Well--I appreciate that, because I just
think that that's a whole area that we--you know, our Governors
should get together with Senators and the House Members, and,
of course, we have other exchanges. But I think the more staff
level exchanges, the better.
Dr. Orszag. If I could add just one other thing, we also
have responsibility for identifying mandates that are contained
in legislation that are imposed on State and local governments.
So, we have people who are actively scouring legislation for
Federal changes that impose mandates on State and local
governments.
CBO deg.OPERATING UNDER THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION
Senator Landrieu. Okay. Could you just comment on how your
agency is coping with the continuing resolution, which was
funded below the 2006 level?
Dr. Orszag. We're making do, as we--you know, as you need
to in such situations. But I would identify two things. One is
information technology. We have delayed investments in
computers and the normal cycle of replacing equipment, to a
degree that's not sustainable over time. And the second thing
is something that you had asked about earlier--again, with
regard to recruiting, retaining, and motivating our people--the
current situation, we can get by with for 1 year or maybe, you
know, a short period of time, but there is this underlying
pressure, which is that, out of our roughly 235 people, 218 are
professional or management, and 39 percent of them are Ph.D.'s,
and 38 percent have a master's degree. The market for those
people in academia, at the Federal Reserve, and let alone the
private sector, has taken off over the past several decades.
And we're obviously operating under a different structure. So,
that puts pressure on us. And the more that we have very tight
funding, the more pressure we're under. And we, therefore, have
to live off of--you know, we're lucky that we have a really
great reputation and a lot of people want to come work for us,
and that--despite my kids calling it the ``Congressional Boring
Office''--most people in Washington think--seem to think it's a
very exciting place to work. So, we will continue to try to
uphold that.
Senator Landrieu. I wish I could share with you what my
kids say about my job.
We won't even go there.
Senator Landrieu. Ms. Chrisler, I don't have any particular
questions. Actually, I do, but do you want to add anything
before I get to them? And your testimony was excellent, but is
there anything you can think you would like to add?
OOC deg.WORKLOAD DUE TO CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you for the opportunity. One thing that
I did not mention that I appreciate being given the opportunity
to mention at this point is the Capitol Visitor Center. And our
Office has been involved in the construction of the Capitol
Visitor Center, and we're appreciative of the opportunity to
provide technical assistance and technical advice, at this
point in the construction, prior to occupancy. Once occupancy
does take place, the Capitol Visitor Center is going to add 0.7
million square feet of inspection jurisdiction to our Office,
and there is a portion in our budget request to respond to that
increased workload.
So, I thank you for allowing me to present that.
OOC deg.FIRE ALARM TESTING IN THE CAPITOL VISITOR CENTER
Senator Landrieu. Do you believe that the amount of testing
deemed necessary by the Architect of the Capitol and the fire
marshal for the CVC is adequate? Have you been looking at that,
the testing for the fire threat?
Ms. Chrisler. Thank you for the question. We--our Office
has been involved in discussions regarding the fire testing and
the fire issues with respect to the Capitol Visitor Center. Our
General Counsel, Peter Eveleth, is with me today, and he has
been directly involved in those conversations. And, if I may
ask your indulgence, I would ask that he be allowed to
specifically respond to your question.
Senator Landrieu. Okay, that would be terrific. And then,
if your board member wants to come forward and just speak for a
couple of minutes that would be terrific. You all could just
pull up two additional chairs, if you'd like, or however. Y'all
have the smallest budget and most people.
So, David, if you all will just bear with them just for a
minute. Give them a minute. Just because they're little doesn't
mean they're not important.
Mr. Eveleth. Good morning, Madam Chair. My name is Pete
Eveleth. I'm the General Counsel of the Office of Compliance.
With respect to the testing of fire alarms and the other
systems in the CVC, we've been working closely with the fire
marshal, and we have been reviewing various regulations that
impact that. And we support the efforts of the fire marshal in
that regard, that there should be complete 100-percent
testing--acceptance testing of those alarm systems, given,
particularly, the location of the facility, because it is
underground, and a failure of any kind of systems would--could
result in a catastrophe, given the number of people----
Senator Landrieu. And we think that's going to take about 6
months of complete testing? Is that what I've heard?
Mr. Eveleth. I couldn't tell you exactly how much that's
going to be. It may be--it may depend on how much pretesting is
done in advance of the acceptance testing.
Senator Landrieu. Okay.
Ms. Camens. Madam Chair, good morning. I'm Barbara Camens,
and I appreciate the opportunity to speak on behalf of the
board of directors of the Office.
I have two brief comments, both of which have to do with
statutory changes which are sought by the board of directors.
The first has to do with the issue of internal promotion
within the Office. Our statute, the Congressional
Accountability Act, requires that the four statutory positions
that are appointed by the board be held by individuals who have
not previously worked within the legislative branch during the
previous 4 years. This provision essentially makes it
impossible for any internal promotion within our Office. Our
Acting Executive Director, Ms. Chrisler, was originally
appointed by the board to the Deputy Executive Director
position, and, given that fact, and given the current statutory
language, the board is precluded from considering her for
permanent appointment, notwithstanding the confidence that we
have in her performance. And the issue is broader. Obviously,
it has an impact on our entire Office staff. The board of
directors is seeking a statutory change to give us the ability
to fully access and utilize and reward, through internal
promotion, the talent and accumulated experience which has been
developed within our Office. And we do seek your support.
Second, we are seeking some additional flexibility, in
terms of compensation within our Office. Specifically, we're
seeking an amendment to our statute to permit the establishment
of two senior Executive Service positions, with regard to the
Executive Director and the General Counsel. Our Office has
recently undergone a comprehensive human capital needs study,
and the conclusion of the outside consultant was that these two
top manager positions share many attributes of SES positions in
other agencies, and yet, we have a statute which imposes a
salary cap. We are seeking a legislative change to allow the
establishment of these SES positions. And we think it's
crucial, both to the recruitment and the retention of the
individuals of the high caliber that we need, the sense of
leadership, the sense of vision that is necessary for leading
our Office into the future.
Thank you.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
My questions have all been answered.
Do you all have anything else that you want to add for the
record? And, of course, the record is open, and you can submit
anything in writing.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to David M. Walker
Questions Submitted by Senator Mary L. Landrieu
STAFFING
Question. I understand you would like to increase GAO staffing to
3,750 over the next 5 or 6 years. Please explain how you arrived at
this staffing level as the optimal level for GAO, what specific areas
additional staff would be deployed to, and the results you would
anticipate.
Answer. Our initial estimate of this FTE level has been informed by
(1) the recent update of our Strategic Plan for serving the Congress
for fiscal years 2007-2012, (2) what we believe would be sufficient to
minimize the existing and anticipated backlog in areas where we are
experiencing supply and demand imbalances, and (3) address other
critical needs. Our Strategic Plan for serving the Congress is updated
through continuous consultations with the Congress.
Our request for FTE's is then based on a systematic assessment of
the workforce that we will need to achieve the strategic goals and
objectives outlined in our Strategic Plan in support of the Congress
and the American people. Annually, we develop a workforce plan that
results from a detailed analysis of staffing considerations. Our
workforce needs assessment is an essential element in our strategic
approach to managing GAO--an approach that links human capital and
performance management with strategic planning, budgeting, and
performance accountability.
Specifically, our FTE request is based on a thorough assessment of
a number of factors including: Congressional requests and interests,
statutory mandates, strategic priorities, emerging issues, current
staffing data (FTE usage, attrition, consultant and contract usage,
staff distribution by level and type), identified skill shortages,
succession and knowledge retention issues, results achieved with staff
resources, and budgetary considerations. As part of our workforce
planning process, GAO managers identify the types of skills and
experience and the level and numbers of employees needed to accomplish
our anticipated workload. Relative to current and projected staffing
data, our managers assess whether GAO has too few or too many staff
working in each strategic area. Having received this input from our
managers, the GAO leadership team makes fact-based decisions about our
FTE needs and the optimal deployment of our staff resources to most
efficiently accomplish our work.
The 3,750 represents a preliminary estimate and a not to exceed
number based on existing and expected workloads. It also assumes an
increasing role for GAO in a range of areas addressed in our strategic
plan and our 21st Century Challenges report of February 2005. For
example, an increase in GAO's staffing level over the next 6 years is
needed to allow us to address critical needs including supply and
demand imbalances in areas such as health care, homeland security, the
global ``war on terrorism,'' energy and natural resources, and forensic
auditing, technology assessments, and other areas in need of
fundamental reform. Also, additional staff are needed to support GAO
efforts to be able to render our opinion on the consolidated financial
statements of the U.S. government and the Department of Defense's
financial management and related systems.
HUMAN CAPITAL ISSUES
Question. Over the past few Congresses, you have received
additional human capital flexibilities through two pieces of targeted
legislation. How have these pieces of legislation helped GAO to become
a model federal agency? Given some of the challenges you have faced
within your agency over the past few years, what else do you believe
needs to be done in order to improve upon your human capital situation?
Answer. The GAO Personnel Flexibilities Act of 2000 (Public Law
106-303), and the GAO Human Capital Reform Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-
271), are the two recent pieces of legislation that were enacted by
Congress on behalf of GAO. GAO sought this legislation in order to help
to reshape its workforce and recruit and retain staff with needed
technical skills. The Comptroller General was granted permanent
authority to offer voluntary early retirement and separation incentive
payments to realign the workforce to meet budgetary constraints while
reducing high-grade, managerial or supervisory positions and correcting
skill imbalances. In fiscal years 2001 through 2006, GAO has granted
voluntary early retirement to a total of 177 employees. These early
retirements helped GAO reshape its workforce by providing retirement to
mostly high-graded staff and allowed GAO to address succession planning
and skill imbalance issues in addition to increasing the numbers of
entry-level staff who can be hired. GAO was also able to establish
senior level scientific, technical and professional positions with the
same pay and benefits applicable to the Senior Executive Service. This
authority has been used to employ GAO's Chief Actuary, Chief
Statistician and Chief Economist. Another authority in the law allowed
GAO to provide certain key employees with less than 3 years' service to
earn 160 hours of annual leave each year rather than 104 hours. This
has given GAO the ability to recruit individuals with significant work
experience who might not have otherwise considered joining the federal
workforce. GAO has just recently recruited 2 individuals under the
Executive Exchange Program provided for in section 7 of Public Law 108-
371. This partnership will assist us in drawing on the expertise of
individuals from accounting firms, information technology firms,
consulting groups and other organizations to develop solutions to
current and emerging issues. These innovative human capital management
flexibilities have been instrumental in enabling GAO to become a world-
class professional services organization.
We have other human capital challenges for which we may seek
additional assistance from Congress to address:
--Ensure that the bonus portion of our annual performance based
compensation counts for retirement as long as employee's total
basic pay plus performance based compensation is below the
maximum for his or her position. GAO has implemented a
performance-based compensation system that is designed to
enhance performance and accountability while helping the agency
maintain a competitive advantage in attracting, motivating,
retaining, and rewarding a high performing and quality
workforce. As part of this modern system, an employee's
performance-based compensation is distributed between a base
pay increase and a bonus. This latter payment is currently not
considered in calculating an employee's basic pay for purposes
of his/her annuity.
--Eliminate GS-15, step 10, cap to allow the Comptroller General to
pay employees up to the rate for Executive Level III based on
the results of our periodic market pay studies. GAO has a
highly diversified and skilled workforce that performs work of
the highest level and importance. Presently, employees other
than those in the Senior Level or Senior Executive Service are
limited by statute to a pay rate that cannot exceed GS-15, step
10. According to recent market surveys commissioned by GAO,
some of GAO's professionals, such as economists and attorneys,
cannot be compensated commensurate with market rates because of
this statutory limitation. This is problematic, since GAO must
compete for its staff with the private sector and other public
agencies that can pay more. For example, the Departments of
Defense and Homeland Security, and the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation and other agencies concerned with
financial matters are not subject to the GS-15 limit.
--Eliminate the prohibitive cost associated with buyouts by amending
Public Law 106-303 to remove the requirement, consistent with
the rest of the federal government, that GAO make additional
contributions to retirement funds in the case of voluntary
separation incentive payments (VSIP) to GAO employees. This
payment renders this flexibility virtually unusable, especially
in these times of budget constraint.
Question. In 2005 and 2006, GAO conducted a restructuring of Band
II staff and placed employees in one of two pay levels. What was the
impetus for this effort? What are you doing to address the concerns
that have been raised?
Answer. As part of our overall human capital transformation
efforts, GAO has developed and implemented a validated competency-based
appraisal system and modern market-based and skills, knowledge, and
performance-oriented compensation system. When developing the Analysts'
competency-based performance system, some Band II staff responded that
certain activities associated with staff leadership were critical to
their jobs and others did not. This bimodal response indicated that
different roles and responsibilities were being performed by staff
within the band. As a next step in its human capital transformation,
GAO proceeded to develop a compensation system that would:
--Enable GAO to attract and retain top talent;
--Result in equal pay for work of equal value over time;
--Reflect the roles and responsibilities that staff are expected to
perform;
--Be reasonable, competitive, performance-oriented; and based on
skills, knowledge and roles;
--Be affordable and sustainable based on current and expected
resource levels; and
--Conform to applicable statutory limits.
The purpose of restructuring the Band II position was to clearly
distinguish between the roles and responsibilities of those analysts
who are generally individual contributors and/or sometimes provide
overall leadership on selected engagements and those who are expected
to consistently take on a leadership role for a broad range of
engagements over time. When comparing Band II roles, responsibilities
and pay to the market, a Watson Wyatt market based compensation study
supported the CG decision that these two roles should have different
pay ranges. By better linking roles and responsibilities to the
appropriate market-based pay ranges, senior analysts will be more
equitably compensated.
Since the initial restructuring and placement of staff into the
Band IIA and IIB pay levels, GAO has conducted 2 competitive placement
opportunities resulting in the placement of additional staff into Band
IIB. To address concerns regarding compensation for Band IIA employees,
we decided for 2007 pay decisions to provide 100 percent of the
performance based compensation amount to those Band IIA staff whose
salaries were above the Band IIA maximum rate (i.e., ``transition
staff''). In 2006, Band IIA transition staff received only 50 percent
of their performance based compensation.
Question. It is our understanding that you relied upon the results
of a market based pay study to establish pay ranges for GAO staff and
to limit the compensation of those employees who were paid in excess of
these ranges. CRS has stated that these limitations have had the impact
of significantly reducing the salary and future pension benefits of
affected GAO staff. Can you share with the committee the data that GAO
relied upon to conclude that GAO's Analyst Band II staff were overpaid
and that such actions were therefore justified?
Answer. GAO has established market based compensation ranges for
major occupational groups. These ranges are based on salary surveys
conducted by Watson Wyatt Worldwide, a leading human capital consulting
firm. Watson Wyatt's process for developing the ranges entailed meeting
with GAO occupational experts to develop an understanding of GAO's
positions, linking these positions to comparable jobs in comparator
organizations, and collecting salary data from various sources for such
positions. Among the sources of salary data used by Watson Wyatt were
the following surveys: Abbot Langer Consulting and Legal, Altman Weil
Legal, Cordom Not-for-Profit, Mercer IT and Watson Wyatt Data for
Professional positions and others. We would be happy to brief the
Committee on the extensive data, if requested, and provide further
details.
Question. Federal employees in the Washington, DC area received
across-the-board and locality adjustments resulting in base pay
increases of 2.64 percent in January 2007. What increase was provided
to GAO staff? What was the basis for GAO's increase and why does it
differ from other federal employees?
Answer. In 2007, the Comptroller General authorized a 3 percent
increase in the salary ranges applicable for GAO employees within the
ranges. A 2.4 percent increase in the annual salary for all employees
performing at a satisfactory level who were within competitive
compensation limits was provided. This percentage was based on the
annual update of competitive compensation trends conducted by Watson
Wyatt. In addition, GAO employees were also eligible for performance-
based compensation (PBC) adjustments. PBC is based on individual
performance and is calculated as a percentage of the ``competitive'' or
market rate for the employee's band and location. An employee with an
average appraisal would receive a PBC amount equal to 2.15 percent of
the competitive rate for his or her position as base pay and/or as
bonus. Except for Band IIB staff subject to the speed bump who received
their entire PBC amount in the form of a bonus, 100 percent of the 2007
PBC amount was provided to all other staff as an increase to base pay
not to exceed the maximum rate applicable to the employee's position.
The Comptroller General's determination regarding the amount of the
annual adjustment was based on a consideration of the criteria set
forth in 31 U.S.C. 732(c)(3). Among the data considered by the
Comptroller General was salary survey information indicating that
consulting, professional, scientific and technical services
organizations actually adjusted ranges by an average of 2.7 percent in
2006 and projected an adjustment of 3 percent in 2007. Prior to the
passage of Public Law 108-371, GAO employees' salaries were given the
same base and locality increase as the General Schedule. As provided in
31 U.S.C. 732(c)(3), GAO employees' increases were decoupled from the
General Schedule and the authority to determine the amount of the
increase was granted to the Comptroller General.
The average across-the-board increase provided to executive branch
employees was 2.2 percent nation-wide. In addition, most executive
branch employees receive within grade increases on a regular basis and
the annual value of such an increase is approximately 1.6 percent. GAO
employees received a 2.4 percent across-the-board increase and were
eligible for additional performance based pay. An employee with an
average appraisal would receive a performance based pay amount equal to
2.15 percent of the competitive rate for his or her position.
Question. Each year, federal employees' pay adjustments are
effective the first pay period beginning on or after January 1. Our
understanding is that GAO employees did not receive their pay
adjustments in January. When did GAO provide its across the board
increase? Why is the date different than and later than other
legislative agencies, given that the entire government was subject to
the same budget uncertainties?
Answer. The effective date of GAO employees' pay adjustment was
February 18, 2007. Under 31 U.S.C. 732(c)(3), the Comptroller General
is authorized to set the date of GAO employees' pay adjustments as well
as the amount. GAO delayed the annual pay adjustment because we did not
receive the funding requested, to ensure that we would not negatively
impact our ability to operate effectively, and to avoid unpaid
furloughs of our employees.
GAO TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
Question. Mr. Walker, there is interest once again in re-funding
the old Office of Technology Assessment. In response to such interest
back in 2002, our Committee established a pilot program for GAO to
conduct technology assessment. How successful was that effort, and do
you believe GAO can continue to effectively conduct non-partisan
forward-looking technology assessment work? GAO has completed 4
technology assessment jobs in the past couple of years, which were
requested in a bi-cameral, bi-partisan fashion. Were those work-
products well-received and are the findings being utilized? Can you
describe GAO's in-house capacity for technology assessment?
Answer. In response to the committee's direction to establish a
technology assessment pilot program at GAO, we have completed four
technology assessment reports.\1\ Our products have been relevant,
timely, and well-received. For example, we testified before three
different congressional committees on our findings in our biometrics
report. As a result of one of these hearings, and using information
from our biometrics report, a bill was introduced in the House in July
2004, directing the Transportation Security Administration to establish
system requirements and performance standards for using biometrics, and
to establish processes (1) to prevent individuals from using assumed
identities to enroll in a biometric system and (2) to resolve errors.
These provisions were later included in an overall aviation security
bill and were eventually included in the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, enacted in December 2004. The
biometrics report is still relevant, even after 4 years, in examining
the numerous biometrics programs being developed in the federal
government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Technology Assessment: Using Biometrics for Border Security,
GAO-03-174 (November 15, 2002); Technology Assessment: Cybersecurity
for Critical Infrastructure Protection, GAO-04-321 (May 28, 2004);
Technology Assessment: Protecting Structures and Improving
Communications during Wildland Fires, GAO-05-380 (April 26, 2005); and
Technology Assessment: Securing the Transport of Cargo Containers, GAO-
06-68SU (January 25, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO has designated cybersecurity as a high-risk area since 1997 and
the technologies discussed in our technology assessment report on
cybersecurity play a key role in addressing this area.\2\ In 2005, we
testified on the findings of our report on technologies that can be
used to protect structures and improve communications during wildland
fires. Senator Bingaman sent a letter to the Comptroller General
thanking us for this report, stating that such studies are important
tools for understanding the technology implications of policies
considered by Congress. In March 2006, Senator Bingaman sent another
letter to the Comptroller General thanking us for our timely, thorough,
and well-received report on cargo security technologies, which he
stated will help the Congress perform its oversight functions with
regard to port and container security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-07-310 (January 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A technology assessment function in the legislative branch can be
beneficial. For congressional decision-makers, an independent
technology assessment study can make complex scientific and technical
issues more accessible by analyzing the values and tradeoffs of various
technologies and presenting them in a public policy context that can be
applied directly into the legislative process. Should the Congress
determine the need for this type of analysis and that it would be more
prudent to place the function in an existing organization rather than
create a new one, we believe that GAO is qualified to take on this
function. A GAO line of work on technology assessments would not be a
departure from its normal mission, but a process of differentiating,
defining, and implementing new work methods. GAO's focus on producing
quality reports that are professional, objective, fact-based, fair,
balanced, nonideological, and nonpartisan is consistent with the needs
of an independent legislative branch technology assessment function.
Further, GAO's work already covers virtually every area in which
the federal government is or may become involved. To accomplish this
work, GAO maintains a workforce of highly trained professionals with
degrees in many academic disciplines, including accounting, law,
engineering, public and business administration, economics, and the
social and physical sciences. More specifically, GAO's Center for
Technology and Engineering, which led our pilot program in technology
assessment, is staffed by engineers and scientists with experience in
systems engineering, software engineering, real-time systems, computer
security, cost estimation, and biological technologies. To leverage our
multidiscipline workforce, we have staffed our technology assessments
with both staff from the Center for Technology and Engineering and
analysts in our mission teams, such as Homeland Security and Justice,
Information Technology, and Natural Resources and Environment.
While GAO is capable of conducting the work, we believe there are
critical factors that need to be considered to conduct technology
assessments on a permanent basis at GAO. First, we would need to define
an operational concept for this line of work, adapted from current
tested processes and protocols. At a minimum, this capability would
require: (1) developing and maintaining relationships with relevant
congressional committees to facilitate the selection of technology
assessment topics; (2) keeping congressional committees abreast of the
results of technology assessments, meeting with members and staff, and
preparing testimony statements for relevant hearings; (3) developing
and maintaining relationships with key external experts and
organizations to remain informed about emerging technologies and
potential related public policy issues; (4) developing, documenting,
and refining processes for conducting technology assessments; (5)
consulting with independent experts and conducting peer review of
reports; (6) developing standards and procedures for issuing technology
assessment reports as distinct from our audit products; and (7)
developing metrics to measure the value of the technology assessment
capability.
A second critical factor is the estimation of resources for
conducting technology assessments. To establish a basic capability to
conduct one assessment annually, GAO would require four additional
full-time staff, at an estimated cost of about $723,000 ($573,000 for
four FTEs and $150,000 to obtain contract assistance or provide
expertise not readily available within GAO). For higher demands,
additional technology assessment requests would require--depending on
economies of scale, timing, and scope of work--incremental additional
resources.
GAO OPERATIONS UNDER THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION
Question. Mr. Walker, according to your statement, GAO has had to
operate in a constrained manner this year because of resource
shortfalls under the continuing resolution. Are there significant
numbers of Congressional requests GAO is turning down, or is it taking
longer to get work done? What is your current backlog of Congressional
requests? How does this compare to previous years?
Answer. We are only a few months into the new Congress and we see
several trends which lead us to believe that Congress will be
requesting much more of GAO. For instance, our current backlog as of
March 2007 has grown above 2005 and 2006 levels. Also, during our
outreach for our upcoming strategic plan update, we have been told that
demand will likely increase. We are seeing this in the recent surge in
requests for GAO testimonies during the Congress's first few months. We
have been quite fortunate that much of this early testimony has been
based on previous work. Constraints on FTEs due to the current funding
situation for the remainder of fiscal year 2007 will likely prevent us
from being as responsive in the future as Congress begins to request
new work for the second session.
More specifically, we are currently experiencing supply and demand
imbalances in responding to congressional requests in areas such as
health care, homeland security, the global ``war on terrorism,'' energy
and natural resources, and forensic auditing. In fiscal year 2007, we
will experience a reduction of 35 FTEs--from 3,194 to 3,159--from our
fiscal year 2006 FTE level, which will exacerbate the problem. In
fiscal year 2008, we are seeking an FTE increase in teams conducting
work related to homeland security, defense, natural resources and
energy, and health care to help address these supply and demand
imbalances. We will also be seeking your commitment and support to
provide the funding needed to increase GAO's staffing to a to-be-
determined level not to exceed 3,750 over the next 6 years in order to
address critical needs, including supply and demand imbalances, high-
risk areas, 21st Century Challenges questions and other areas of the
federal government in need of fundamental reform, and technology
assessments. In addition, as we get closer to when GAO may be able to
render our opinion on the consolidated financial statements of the U.S.
government and the Department of Defense's financial management and
related systems, we will need to increase our workforce capacity.
GAO has made significant progress in reducing the very large
backlog of Congressional requests over the past several years so that
we can better support the Congress, but this has been very difficult to
achieve. We are doubtful that it will continue based on our outreach
efforts with the new Congress and the constrained resource level we
will be operating at through fiscal year 2007. As of March 31, 2007, we
had a workload imbalance of 419 requests--a growing increase over the
last two years. The general result of GAO's initiative to be more
responsive to the Congress is seen in the following table showing the
pending requests at the end of each year.
PENDING REQUESTS AS OF DECEMBER 31ST OF EACH YEAR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002....................................................... 463
2003....................................................... 390
2004....................................................... 492
2005....................................................... 358
2006....................................................... 329
2007 \1\................................................... 419
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As of March 31, 2007
Last year (fiscal year 2006), we accepted about 85-88 percent of
the requests received. Of these, roughly one-fourth (22 percent) were
delayed. Of those not accepted, some were declined, withdrawn, sent to
an Executive agency, or were pending a decision by GAO on whether we
are able to accept the request. We also have done and are doing work,
on such topics as Iraq and Katrina, under the Comptroller General's
authority because there is such broad congressional interest in them.
We believe this has also served to limit the number of requests we
would have received on these issues. Due to the increasing supply and
demand imbalances, GAO typically has been unable to accept requests
from individual members in recent years and has worked to merge
requests so that we can do related work for several requesters.
Our requested work has also been taking somewhat longer to start--
almost doubling in some areas--resulting in longer timeframes to
respond to the requester. The table below shows the average number of
months that it has taken us to start mandates (priority 1), requests
from Committee chairs and ranking members (priority 2), and requests
from members (priority 3).
AVERAGE DURATION TO INITIATE ENGAGEMENTS
[In months]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 2005 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority:
1 \1\........................ 1.82 2.49 2.74
2............................ 2.93 2.49 3.91
3............................ 2.74 4.41 6.37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prior to the update of GAO's Congressional Protocols in July 2004,
priority 1 designation included requests from committee chairs and
ranking minority members.
GAO SUPPLEMENTAL
Question. GAO is requesting $374,000 for oversight work in Iraq.
Why can't GAO absorb this relatively small amount of funding within its
$500 million budget?
Answer. Because about 80 percent of our budget provides funds to
support our staff--our most important asset--and the balance of our
budget contains many mandatory operating expenses--such as rent,
utilities, and contracts for ongoing operations--we have very limited
flexibility to make adjustments. In fiscal year 2007, we received
significantly less funding than we had requested. In order to operate
within the constraints of the fiscal year 2007 joint resolution, our
Operating Plan holds most of our budget accounts at or below fiscal
year 2006 funding levels, resulting in reduced operating levels,
deferred hiring to address succession planning challenges and skill
gaps, and delayed investments geared to further increasing productivity
and effectiveness. While we have allocated funds to address needed
oversight work in Iraq, additional funds are needed to allow us to
maintain a continuing presence in Baghdad.
Question. GAO has an extensive array of performance targets and
measures. Your testimony indicates that you met most of your
performance targets. How often do you reevaluate those measures to see
whether they are responsive to GAO and the Congress? Do you have them
evaluated by an independent party, such as during a peer review?
Answer. GAO's performance measures include those measures
traditionally used by auditing and professional services firms.
Annually, GAO reviews its performance targets and continuously
reevaluates its performance measures. In fact, it is rare for a year to
pass without some refinements in our performance indicators to help us
better manage our agency to support the Congress for the benefit of the
American people. For example, in the past few years, we have added
measures to better assess how our support units are doing their jobs;
changed our measure for determining how timely our products are by
obtaining feedback directly from our congressional clients; and
eliminated measures, such as the number of recommendations made, that
we thought were no longer useful. Further, as we continue to gain more
experience, we anticipate making additional changes so that we can
better support the Congress.
In addition to the continuous evaluations by our Office of Quality
and Continuous Improvement, we routinely receive suggestions from such
organizations as (1) GAO's Inspector General, who annually reviews some
of the measures before they are included in the annual Performance and
Accountability report, (2) an independent Audit Advisory Committee as
part of their annual review of GAO's financial statements and
performance data included in our annual Performance and Accountability
Report, and (3) independent reviewers for the Association of Government
Accountants (AGA) as part of their annual process to evaluate
Performance and Accountability Reports submitted by participating
executive branch agencies and GAO.
Specifically, staff in our Inspector General's (IG) office test our
compliance with procedures related to our performance data on a
rotating basis over a 3-year period. During fiscal year 2006, the IG
reviewed accomplishment reports totaling 96 percent of the total dollar
value reported for financial benefits, including most accomplishment
reports of $100 million or more, and found that GAO had a reasonable
basis for claiming these benefits. Their suggestions have also resulted
in policy clarifications or changes in the performance measures
reported. For example, the IG's review of fiscal year 2005 qualitative
measures led to GAO discontinuing public reporting of these measures
and retaining them for internal use. The 3-member Audit Advisory
Committee is composed of individuals who are independent of GAO and
have outstanding reputations in public service or business with
financial or legal expertise. Two members are former IRS Commissioners
and the other member is a former Controller of the Office of Federal
Financial Management in OMB. The comments we receive from the committee
members have, among other things, helped to ensure transparency in our
Performance and Accountability Report when we describe our performance
measurement processes and results. Comments that we receive as part of
the AGA's Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting program
also help improve the transparency and clarity of our performance
reporting.
GAO also recognizes that our performance measures can be
supplemented by other information. We do this by taking such actions as
outreaching for feedback on our performance to our congressional
clients on an annual basis, participating in periodic oversight
hearings of GAO's performance and operations, using our audits to
identify best practices and then applying them to GAO's operations,
listening closely to Congressional clients who provide unsolicited
comments throughout the year, and seeking continuous feedback from our
clients as part of our web-based survey to measure satisfaction with
our most significant written products and testimonies.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Landrieu. The subcommittee stands in recess. Thank
you.
[Whereupon, at 11:10 a.m., Friday, March 16, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]