Forest Service: Funding Allocations to Region 4 (Correspondence,
08/24/2000, GAO/AIMD-00-279R).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the
Forest Service's Washington Office funding allocations to Region 4,
focusing on: (1) funds allocated to Region 4 during fiscal years
1995-2000 for budget line items under the National Forest System (NFS)
appropriation; (2) reasons for trends and year-to-year changes in NFS'
funding allocations to Region 4; (3) how budget line item amounts in the
budget requests Region 4 submitted for fiscal years 1998-2000 differed
from the final allocations it received; and (4) funds allocated to all
regions during fiscal years 1995-2000 for the Fire Preparedness budget
line item under the Wildland Fire Management appropriation.

GAO noted that: (1) each year Congress appropriates monies to fund the
Forest Service's programs and activities as part of the appropriations
act for the Department of the Interior and related agencies; (2) in the
conference report on the Forest Service's appropriation, funds within
the NFS and the Wildland Fire Management appropriations are itemized
into budget line items; (3) the fiscal year 1999 conference report
itemized about 20 budget line items for the NFS appropriation and 2
budget line items--Fire Preparedness and Fire Operations--for the
Wildland Fire Management appropriation; (4) upon appropriation, the
Forest Service removes "off-the- top" funds needed to operate the Forest
Service's Washington Office (WO) and specifies funding that will be used
for earmarks, national commitments, technical support units, and special
projects; (5) the WO then allocates the remaining funds by budget line
item t its nine regional offices; (6) GAO prepared a schedule showing
funds allocated to Region 4 during fiscal years 1995-2000 for budget
line items under the NFS appropriation; (7) the source for these data is
the Forest Service's annual Final Planning and Budget Advice (PBA),
which is an internal budget document released to the regional offices
after passage of the Department of the Interior and related agencies
appropriations act; (8) regional offices use the funding allocations
reported in the Final PBA to finalize their program planning for the
years; (9) although GAO's review analyzed regional funding as reported
in the Final PBA, regional offices also have use of carry-over funds
from prior years and may receive additional funding during the remainder
of the fiscal year as a result of supplemental appropriations, release
of funds kept in reserve, and other factors; (10) GAO found that Region
4's funding allocations for some budget line items declined because
increased amounts were allocated for off-the-top items; (11) fundamental
changes are occurring in the Forest Service's accounting and budget
process that will affect future funding allocations to regional offices;
and (12) three of the more important changes include: (a) plans to
develop a new funding allocation response to National Academy of Public
Administration and GAO's criticisms of the current process; (b) efforts
to revise the Forest Service's budget structure by reducing and
realigning NFS budget line items; and (c) implementation of a new
process for funding projects that cut across Forest Service's
resource-specific programs.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  AIMD-00-279R
     TITLE:  Forest Service: Funding Allocations to Region 4
      DATE:  08/24/2000
   SUBJECT:  Budget administration
	     Future budget projections
	     Forest management
	     Appropriations

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO/AIMD-00-279R

Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4

United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

Accounting and Information Management Division

B- 284473 August 24, 2000 The Honorable Helen Chenoweth- Hage Chairman,
Subcommittee on Forests

and Forest Health Committee on Resources House of Representatives

Subject: Forest Service: Funding Allocations to Region 4 Dear Madam
Chairman: This letter summarizes the information provided during today's
briefing to your office. The enclosed briefing slides (see enclosure I)
highlight the results of our work on funding allocations made by the Forest
Service's Washington Office (WO) headquarters to the Intermountain Region
(Region 4). Region 4 is one of nine regional offices and covers the states
of Nevada and Utah and parts of the states of Idaho, Wyoming, and
California. Specifically, you asked us to obtain information on (1) funds
allocated to Region 4 during fiscal years 1995- 2000 for budget line items
under the National Forest System (NFS) appropriation, (2) reasons for trends
and year- to- year changes in NFS' funding allocations to Region 4, (3) how
budget line item amounts in the budget requests Region 4 submitted for
fiscal years 1998- 2000 differed from the final allocations it received, and
(4) funds allocated to all regions during fiscal years 1995- 2000 for the
Fire Preparedness budget line item under the Wildland Fire Management
appropriation.

Each year the Congress appropriates monies to fund the Forest Service's
programs and activities as part of the appropriations act for the Department
of the Interior and related agencies. In the conference report on the Forest
Service's appropriation, funds within the NFS and Wildland Fire Management
appropriations are itemized into budget line items. The fiscal year 1999
conference report itemized about 20 budget line items for the NFS
appropriation and 2 budget line items- Fire Preparedness and Fire
Operations- for the Wildland Fire Management appropriation.

Upon appropriation, the Forest Service removes “off- the- top”
funds needed to operate the WO and specifies funding that will be used for
earmarks, national commitments, technical support units, and special
projects. The WO then allocates the remaining funds (referred to as
“net available”) by budget line item to its nine regional
offices. Since fiscal year 1997, net available funds from the NFS

B- 284473 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4
Page 2 appropriation have usually been allocated to regional offices on the
basis of budget

allocation criteria the Forest Service developed for each budget line item.
For example, the criteria for allocating funds from the Recreation
Management budget line item to each region include recreation use in
millions of visitor days; developed site capacity; acres of nonwilderness
national forests and grasslands; miles of nonwilderness trails; and number
of special use permits for ski areas, marinas, and cabins. Finally, a region
may receive additional funding if projects funded from congressional
earmarks, national commitments, and special projects are located in its
region.

Since fiscal year 1980, the Forest Service has allocated Fire Preparedness
funds using a computer model that is designed to determine- on the basis of
historical data such as fire activity, weather, and suppression costs- the
most efficient funding level for a firefighting organization. This funding
level is based on a calculation that will minimize the suppression costs and
the loss of natural resources on forestlands. The Department of the
Interior's Bureau of Land Management has also used this computer model since
1986.

We prepared a schedule showing funds allocated to Region 4 during fiscal
years 1995- 2000 for budget line items under the NFS appropriation. (See
attachment 1 in enclosure I.) The source for these data is the Forest
Service's annual Final Planning and Budget Advice (PBA), which is an
internal budget document released to the regional offices after passage of
the Department of the Interior and related agencies appropriations act.
Regional offices use the funding allocations reported in the Final PBA to
finalize their program planning for the year. Although our review analyzed
regional funding as reported in the Final PBA, regional offices also have
use of carry- over funds from prior years and may receive additional funding
during the remainder of the fiscal year as a result of supplemental
appropriations, release of funds kept in reserve, and other factors.

We selected for review 10 NFS budget line items that showed trends or
noticeable year- to- year changes. Based on our review, we identified the
following factors that explain trends and year- to- year changes in funding
allocations received by Region 4: changes in budget line item structure and
funding; increases in funding for off- the- top national and agencywide
projects and earmarks; off- the- top national projects and earmarks that
benefit particular regions in certain years but not others;
“bridge” adjustments limiting funding increases or decreases
from one year to the next to generally no more than 10 percent; a shift in
funding certain centralized services, such as the National Finance Center,
from regions to WO; revisions to budget allocation criteria; and year- to-
year changes in data associated with some line item criteria.

We found that Region 4's funding allocations for some budget line items
declined because increased amounts were allocated for off- the- top items,
especially in fiscal year 2000. However, it should be recognized that off-
the- top initiatives and projects provide direct and indirect benefits to
regional offices and national forests, as shown in the three following
examples. First, some off- the- top projects are located in and carried out
by specific regions, including Region 4. Funds for these projects are

B- 284473 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4
Page 3 added to a region's criteria- based allocation. Second, some off-
the- top projects, such

as financial management initiatives, will benefit all regions by providing
the more accurate data necessary for decision- making and improved
accountability over agency assets. And, third, off- the- top funding
includes funds for certain field locations, such as the four mapping and
engineering centers, which provide technical support to all regional
offices. Furthermore, WO management emphasized that allocation criteria
alone do not always adequately reflect different, often nonquantifiable
elements in each region. Therefore, before final funding allocations are
issued to the regions, they are reviewed and adjusted, if necessary, based
upon management's judgment, as situations or circumstances warrant.

We compared Region 4's fiscal years 1998- 2000 budget requests with
headquarters' final allocations to Region 4 for those years. (See attachment
2 in enclosure I.) The region generally received less than it requested,
especially in fiscal year 2000. However, for several reasons, the
comparisons are of limited value in evaluating the extent to which the
apparent reduced level of funding allocated to Region 4 is meeting the
funding needs indicated by its budget request. In particular, in fiscal
years 1998- 2000, the budget line item funding levels included in Region 4's
budget request were developed not by the region but by WO. During these
years, the Forest Service used a “top- down” approach for
preparing its budget. Under this approach, regional input to the budget
process described how the budget line item funding levels provided by WO
would affect the region's ability to meet performance targets.

We obtained data from the Forest Service on allocations made to all regional
offices from fiscal years 1995- 2000 for the Fire Preparedness budget line
item. (See attachment 3 in the enclosure I.) Allocations for Fire
Preparedness are made by a computer- based model-- the National Fire
Management Analysis System (NFMAS)- that performs a cost/ benefit analysis
of different funding levels and determines the most efficient level (MEL) of
preparedness. Regions enter their data, such as the cost of firefighting
equipment and the value per acre of land damaged by fire, into the model.
The Forest Service has used NFMAS since 1980, and the Bureau of Land
Management has also used it since 1986. Like NFS allocations, Fire
Preparedness allocations to regional offices are reported in the Final PBA.

Finally, fundamental changes are occurring in the Forest Service's
accounting and budget processes that will affect future funding allocations
to regional offices. Three of the more important changes include (1) plans
to develop a new funding allocation process in response to National Academy
of Public Administration and our criticisms of the current process, 1 (2)
efforts to revise the Forest Service's budget structure by reducing and
realigning NFS budget line items, and (3) implementation of a new process
for funding projects that cut across Forest Service's resource- specific
programs.

1 Restoring Managerial Accountability to the United States Forest Service,
Report by a Panel of the National Academy of Public Administration for the
United States Forest Service (Aug. 1999), and Forest Service: A Framework
for Improving Accountability( GAO/ RCED/ AIMD- 00- 2, Oct. 13, 1999).

B- 284473 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4
Page 4

Agency Comments

We requested comments on a draft of this letter and the attached briefing
slides from the Chief of the Forest Service. Responding for the agency, the
Forest Service's Chief Financial Officer stated that the report accurately
portrays the existing process for allocating funds to regional offices. In
addition, as she requested, we have added a statement to this letter making
it clear that WO management has stressed that oversight and review are an
important element of the funding allocation process. (The Forest Service's
comments are presented in enclosure II.)

Scope and Methodology

To obtain information on funds allocated to Region 4 for budget line items
under the NFS appropriation, we (1) reviewed the process the Forest Service
uses to allocate funds to its regional offices and (2) recorded funds
allocated to Region 4 as reported in the Forest Service's annual Final PBA
for fiscal years 1995- 2000.

To determine the reasons for trends and year- to- year changes in NFS'
funding allocations to Region 4, we selected 10 budget line items that
showed noticeable trends and changes, obtained supporting documentation on
allocation criteria and methodology used to compute annual allocations to
Region 4, analyzed trends and year- to- year changes in Region 4's funding
to identify reasons for these trends and changes, and discussed those
reasons with budget coordinators who are responsible for administering the
allocation process.

To determine how the budget line item amounts in Region 4's budget requests
differed from final allocations received by Region 4, we obtained Region 4's
budget requests and final allocations for fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 2000;
compared amounts for each budget line item included in Region 4's budget
request with final amounts allocated to Region 4; and discussed the
differences with Region 4 and headquarters budget and accounting staff.

To obtain information on amounts allocated to all regions under the Fire
Preparedness budget line item, we reviewed the process the Forest Service
uses to allocate Fire Preparedness funds to its regional offices and
obtained data on funds allocated to all regions for fiscal years 1995- 2000
from the budget coordinator responsible for administering this allocation
process.

We conducted our work in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards from January 2000 through early August 2000.

----- As we arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce its
contents earlier, we plan no further distributions of this report until 30
days from the date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies of this
letter to the Honorable Adam Smith, the Ranking Minority Member of your
Subcommittee; appropriate congressional committees; Senator Mike Crapo; the
Honorable Daniel R. Glickman, Secretary of

B- 284473 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4
Page 5 Agriculture; the Honorable Mike Dombeck, Chief, Forest Service; and
other

interested parties. We will make copies available to others upon request. If
you or our staff have any questions about this letter or the briefing,
please contact me at (202) 512- 9508 or McCoy Williams, Assistant Director,
at (202) 512- 6906. Lou Schuster was a major contributor to this report.

Sincerely yours, Linda M. Calbom Director, Resources, Community,

and Economic Development, Accounting and Financial Management Issues

Enclosures

Page 6 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4

Enclosure I

Forest Service Funding Allocations to Intermountain Region 4

Briefing to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health

House Committee on Resources August 24, 2000

Enclosure I Page 7 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service
Region 4

2 Objectives

The Subcommittee asked us to obtain information on: Funds allocated to
Forest Service's Intermountain Region

(Region 4) during fiscal years 1995- 2000 for budget line items under the
National Forest System (NFS) appropriation.

Reasons for noticeable trends and year- to- year changes in NFS' funding
allocations to Region 4.

How budget line item amounts in Region 4's budget requests for fiscal years
1998- 2000 differed from final allocations it received.

Funds allocated to all regions for fiscal years 1995- 2000 for the Fire
Preparedness (FP) budget line item under the Wildland Fire Management
appropriation.

Enclosure I Page 8 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service
Region 4

3 Table of Contents

Scope and Methodology 4 Background 9 NFS' Funding Allocations to Region 4 14
Reasons for noticeable trends and changes

in NFS' funding allocations 20 Region 4's budget requests compared with its
final

allocations 34 Amounts allocated to all regions for the Fire

Preparedness appropriation 38 Fundamental changes occurring in Forest
Service's

accounting and budget systems and processes 40

Enclosure I Page 9 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service
Region 4

4 Scope and Methodology

To obtain information on funds allocated to Region 4 for budget line items
under the NFS appropriation, we

reviewed the process the Forest Service uses to allocate funds to its
regional offices and

scheduled data on funds allocated to Region 4 as reported in the Forest
Service's annual Final Planning and Budget Advice (Final PBA) for fiscal
years 1995- 2000.

Enclosure I Page 10 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

5 Scope and Methodology

To determine the reasons for noticeable trends and year- to- year changes in
NFS' funding allocations, we

selected 10 budget line items that showed noticeable trends and changes,

obtained supporting documentation on allocation criteria and methodology
used to compute annual allocations to each region,

analyzed year- to- year changes to identify reasons for trends and changes,
and

discussed reasons for trends and changes with budget coordinators
responsible for administering the allocation process.

Enclosure I Page 11 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

6 Scope and Methodology

To determine how the budget line item amounts in Region 4's budget requests
differed from final allocations it received, we

obtained Region 4's budget requests and final allocations for fiscal years
1998, 1999, and 2000;

compared amounts for each budget line item included in Region 4's budget
request with final amounts allocated to Region 4; and

discussed the differences with Region 4 and headquarters budget and
accounting staff.

Enclosure I Page 12 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

7 Scope and Methodology

To obtain information on amounts allocated to all regions under the Fire
Preparedness budget line item, we

reviewed the process the Forest Service uses to allocate Fire Preparedness
funds to its regional offices and

obtained data on funds allocated to all regions for fiscal years 19952000
from the budget coordinator responsible for administering the allocation
process.

Enclosure I Page 13 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

8 Scope and Methodology

We obtained and incorporated agency comments as appropriate. We conducted
our work in accordance with generally accepted

government auditing standards from January 2000 through August 2000.

Enclosure I Page 14 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

9 Background

NFS is the largest Forest Service appropriation. It has totaled about $1.3
billion annually in recent years. It has been divided into 20 or more budget
line items that fund nine

Forest Service programs. (Budget line items are intended to provide a
meaningful representation of the operations financed by the appropriations.)

The annual conference report on the Forest Service's appropriation itemizes
the NFS total appropriation among budget line items.

Although the budget line item amounts designated in the conference report
are not in the appropriation act, the Forest Service told us that it honors
the intent of the conferees with respect to funding priorities in dollar
amounts expressed in the conference report.

Enclosure I Page 15 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

10 Background

Wildland Fire Management (WFM) is the second largest Forest Service
appropriation.

In FY 1999 and FY 2000, it totaled about $560 million, excluding emergency
appropriations.

It includes two budget line items: Fire Operations and Fire Preparedness.

Fire Operations covers actions taken to control and extinguish wildfires.

Fire Preparedness covers planning and purchasing activities taken before the
onset of a fire season.

The annual conference report itemizes the WFM total appropriation between
Fire Operations and Fire Preparedness.

Enclosure I Page 16 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

11 Background

Although funding for Fire Operations and Fire Preparedness is designated in
the conference report and not in the appropriation act, the Forest Service
told us that it honors the intent of the conferees with respect to funding
priorities in dollar amounts expressed in the conference report.

In line with the requester's objectives, we obtained allocation data only
for Fire Preparedness.

Enclosure I Page 17 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

12 Background

Following passage of its appropriation act, the Forest Service headquarters-
the Washington Office (WO)- allocates Fire Preparedness and NFS funds by
budget line item to itself, nine regional offices, and various research
facilities in a budget document called the Final Planning and Budget Advice
(PBA).

Regional offices use the funding allocations reported in the Final PBA to
finalize their program planning for the year.

Regional offices also have use of carry- over funds from prior years.
Available budget line item amounts may change after release of the

Final PBA as a result of supplemental appropriations, release of funds kept
in reserve, and other factors.

Enclosure I Page 18 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

13 Background

In addition to the cost of headquarters' personnel and operations, monies
allocated to WO fund:

Technical support facilities in field locations, such as the Boise
Interagency Fire Center and the Remote Sensing Applications Center in Salt
Lake City.

National initiatives, such as implementation of the new Foundation Financial
Information System.

Centralized agency costs, such as rent, communications, and payroll and
accounting processing at USDA's National Finance Center.

Region 4- the Intermountain Region- is one of nine Forest Service regions
and covers the states of Nevada and Utah and parts of Idaho, Wyoming, and
California.

Enclosure I Page 19 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

14 NFS Allocations to Region 4

NFS' Budget Line Item Allocations to Region 4 for Fiscal Years 19952000. See
attachment 1. The following three slides explain the basic process that the
Forest

Service uses to allocate the NFS appropriation among budget line items and
illustrate how the Forest Service applied the process to the Recreation
Management budget line item in FY 1999.

Enclosure I Page 20 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

15 NFS Allocations to Region 4

Basic allocation process for NFS' budget line items: Start with the fiscal
year conference report's itemization of the NFS

appropriation for each budget line item. Less “off- the- top”
items:

WO management and overhead, national initiatives, special projects,
technical support, and funds held in reserve.

Earmarks and conference report's funding priorities. Balance is called
“net available.” Net available is allocated to regions based on
criteria developed

for each budget line item (referred to as “criteria- based”
allocation).

Funding for region- specific projects included in off- the- top items are
added to the criteria- based allocation to arrive at a region's total budget
line item allocation.

Enclosure I Page 21 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

16 NFS Allocations to Region 4

We selected the Recreation Management budget line item to illustrate the
Forest Service's allocation process.

Criteria are selected to represent program variables. For Recreation
Management, criteria include

recreation use in millions of visitor days, by region; developed site
capacity in persons at one time, by region; acres of nonwilderness national
forests and grasslands, by region; existing miles of nonwilderness trails,
by region; and number of special use permits for ski areas, marinas, cabins,
etc.,

by region. Criteria are weighted to reflect cost, complexity, and/ or
relative

importance of each criterion. The above criteria resulted in a FY 1999
criteria- based allocation rate of

13% to Region 4 for Recreation Management.

Enclosure I Page 22 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

17 NFS Allocations to Region 4

FY 1999 Recreation Management Allocation to Region 4

Recreation Management Amount from conference report $ 144, 953,000 1

Less WO Overhead, Management, & Internal Projects (4,683,000) Less WO
External Offices & Projects (4,173, 000) Less National Commitments (4,090,
000) Less Reserve (500,000) Less Director Priorities (3,762, 000) Less
Earmarks and Conferees' Funding Priorities (3,630, 000) Add Back Earmarks
and Funding Priorities “Within Allocation” 2,100, 000 Net
Available for Regional Allocation $ 126,215,000

13% Criteria- based Allocation for Region 4 16,408, 000 Add Off- the- Top
Funding for Region 4 Projects 155,000 Miscellaneous Adjustments 50,000 Total
Recreation Management Funds to Region 4 $ 16,613,000 1

Prior to FY 2000, Forest Service program managers had the flexibility to
include amounts for certain earmarks and funding priorities either in the
“off- the- top” category or “within” the net
available for regional allocation.

1 Amounts taken from FY 1999 columns in attachment I.

Enclosure I Page 23 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

18 NFS Allocations to Region 4

Examples of Off- the- Top Initiatives and Projects

National Commitments Financial management projects Agencywide license for
IBM software

Director's Priorities National Cave Coordinator in Region 3 National
Avalanche Center in Region 4

WO External Offices Four field engineering centers WO Internal Projects

Printing of Golden Passports for field offices Conference Report's Funding
Priorities

$2 million for the aspen program in Colorado $500,000 for spruce budworm
work on the Gifford Pinchot

national forest

Enclosure I Page 24 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

19 NFS Allocations to Region 4

Forest Service program managers recognize that their allocation criteria
cannot always adequately reflect different, often nonquantifiable, elements
in each region. Therefore, regional criteria- based allocations can be
adjusted based on management's judgment as situations or circumstances
warrant.

Off- the- top initiatives and projects have direct and indirect benefits for
Forest Service regions and field offices.

Some off- the- top projects are located in specific regions. Funds for these
projects are added to a region's criteria- based allocation.

Some off- the- top projects, such as financial management initiatives,
benefit all regions.

The WO allocation includes funds for certain field locations, such as the
four engineering centers, which provide technical support to all regional
offices.

Enclosure I Page 25 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

20 Reasons for Funding Changes

Based on our review of 10 budget line items, we identified the following
factors that explain trends and year- to- year changes in funding
allocations received by Region 4:

changes in budget line item structure and funding, increases in funding for
off- the- top national and agencywide

projects and earmarks, off- the- top national projects and earmarks that
benefit particular

regions in certain years but not in others, “bridge” adjustments
limiting funding increases or decreases from

one year to the next to generally no more than 10 percent, shift in funding
certain centralized services from regions to WO, revisions to criteria, and
year- to- year changes in data associated with some budget line

item criteria.

Enclosure I Page 26 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

21 Reasons for Funding Changes

Factors considered in selecting budget line items for our review: noticeable
trends or year- to- year changes in budget line item dollar

amounts or percentage share allocated to Region 4; trends or changes that
result in both increases and decreases in

allocations made to Region 4. road, facility, and trail maintenance budget
line items specifically

requested by Subcommittee; budget line items selected should account for at
least 60% of total

NFS allocation to Region 4 in FY 2000; and variety of program areas. Focused
more on recent years- FYs 1998- 2000.

In initial stages of our work, we noted that documents and knowledge on
details of allocations made in earlier years appeared limited.

The criteria- based allocation methodology was not fully phased in until
fiscal year 1997.

Enclosure I Page 27 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

22 Reasons for Funding Changes

Budget line items selected for our review: Land Management Planning
Inventory and Monitoring Recreation Management Watershed Improvements
Minerals and Geology Management Road Maintenance, Non- Recreation- Facility
Maintenance,

Recreation Facility Maintenance, and Trail Maintenance General
Administration Budget line items selected accounted for 60% of total funding
allocation

received by Region 4 in FY 2000 for budget line items shown on the schedule
in attachment 1.

Enclosure I Page 28 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

23 Reasons for Funding Changes

Land Management Planning: The allocation to Region 4 declinedby

$847,000 from FY 1999 to FY 2000 although the amount itemized in the
conference reports stayed about the same.

The primary reason for the decline in Region 4's (and other regions')
allocation was that two major new national initiatives funded in FY 2000
were taken off the top.

Rule Making Process for Protection of Roadless Areas. Land Management
Planning provided $3, 438,000 to fund this initiative.

Finalizing Forest Service Planning Regulations. Land Management Planning
provided $3, 150,000.

These two initiatives reduced the FY 2000 funding allocation to Region 4 by
about $969, 000 based on the application of allocation criteria.

Another factor that offset this reduction was a $335,000 reduction in Region
4's FY 1999 allocation as a result of a bridge adjustment. (Without the
bridge, Region 4's decline would have been $1,182,000 instead of $847,000.)
No bridge was applied in FY 2000.

Enclosure I Page 29 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

24 Reasons for Funding Changes

Inventory and Monitoring: The allocation to Region 4 declined from $9,
954,000 in FY 1999 to $8, 525,000 in FY 2000, a decline of $1, 429,000 or 14
percent. Two factors contributed to most of the decline:

Off- the- top items increased by about $4,500,000 in FY 2000, including an
additional $2, 250,000 above FY 1999 funding levels for the development and
deployment of the Natural Resource Information System, a major national
initiative. The increase in off- the- top funding reduced funding to Region
4 by $675, 000 based on Region 4's criteria- based allocation of 15 percent.

In FY 2000, funding to Region 4 for technical support provided by Forest
Service Research Stations was reduced by $528,000. WO allocated this funding
directly to the Research Stations.

Enclosure I Page 30 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

25 Reasons for Funding Changes

Recreation Management: The allocation to Region 4 declined from $20,341,000
in FY 1998 to $16,613,000 in FY 1999, a decline of $3, 728,000 or 18
percent.

Primary reason: the FY 1999 conference report's creation of two new budget
line items- Recreation Facility Maintenance and Trail Maintenance- for
activities which had been included with the Recreation Management budget
line item.

In FY 2000, the conference report moved all maintenance budget line items
out of the NFS appropriation and into a newly created Reconstruction and
Maintenance appropriation.

Enclosure I Page 31 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

26 Reasons for Funding Changes

Watershed Improvements: The allocation to Region 4 more than doubled from FY
1999 to FY 2000, from $2,515,000 to $6, 019,000. Various reasons:

The conference report increased the amount itemized for Watershed
Improvements, which resulted in an increase of $1,967,000 in the net
available for allocation to the regions. Based on its criteriabased
allocation of 14. 5 percent, Region 4 received an additional $285,000.

Region 4 obtained increased funding of $2, 740,000 from national commitments
for projects in the region. These included the Abandoned Mine Lands
Watershed Cleanup Initiative, the Hazardous Materials Management Program,
and the Watershed Restoration Project.

Enclosure I Page 32 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

27 Reasons for Funding Changes

Watershed Improvements (continued):

Revised allocation criteria were implemented in FY 1999. To limit the impact
of the revised criteria on a region's FY 1999 allocation relative to its FY
1998 allocation, a “bridge” policy was adopted and applied to
all regions. Together, the revised criteria and the bridge policy reduced
Region 4's FY 1999 allocation by $588,000.

Enclosure I Page 33 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

28 Reasons for Funding Changes

Minerals and Geology Management: Region 4's allocation for this budget line
item is larger than any other region's. The allocation to Region 4 increased
by $517,000 in FY 1999 and decreased by $697,000 in FY 2000.

The FY 1999 increase resulted primarily from an increase in Region 4's
criteria- based allocation from 19.6% to 20.7%. The percent actually
increased to 22. 4%, but a “bridge” adjustment reduced it to 20.
7%. (Although the criteria for this budget line item have not changed,
current data associated with each criterion are updated annually, which can
increase or decrease a region's percent.)

The FY 2000 decrease resulted primarily from a decrease in Region 4's
criteria- based allocation from 20.7% to 19.8% and an increase in off- the-
top funding that reduced the net available for regional allocation by
$771,000.

Enclosure I Page 34 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

29 Reasons for Funding Changes

Maintenance budget line items

Road Maintenance: The dollar amount of Region 4's allocation increased
steadily from FYs 1995- 2000, more than doubling from $5, 936,000 in FY 1995
to $12,623, 000 in FY 2000.

The conference report's amount itemized for Road Maintenance increased from
$83,860,000 in FY 1995 to $111,240, 000 in FY 2000.

Region 4's final criteria- based allocation percents increased steadily from
8. 3 % in FY 1996 to 12. 1 % in FY 2000 due, in part, to bridge adjustments
made in FY 1997 and FY 1998 and revised criteria implemented in FY 1999.

Relatively small amounts are taken off the top for Road Maintenance compared
with other budget line items.

Enclosure I Page 35 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

30 Reasons for Funding Changes

Non- Recreation- Facility Maintenance: Total percentage allocations to
Region 4 show a small steady decline from 10.4% in FY 1996 to 9.7% in FY
2000, generally due to relatively small increases in dollar amounts for off-
the- top items.

Recreation Facility Maintenance and Trail Maintenance: These two budget line
items were created in the FY 1999 conference report. The percentage of
Region 4's allocation for these two budget line items showed little change
from FY 1999 to FY 2000 because only small amounts were designated for off-
the- top items and because management's intent was to allocate funds to
regions based on their actual average FY 1996 and FY 1997 expenditures.

Enclosure I Page 36 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

31 Reasons for Funding Changes

General Administration: The allocation to Region 4 decreased from
$21,923,000 in FY 1999 to $16,523,000 in FY 2000, a decrease of $5, 400,000
or 25 percent.

The General Administration allocation decreased for all regions in FY 2000
because the Forest Service changed its funding approach for centralized
services, including accounting and computing services provided by USDA's
National Finance Center. In FY 1999, the regions' allocations included
funding for these centralized services, while in FY 2000 the services were
funded entirely out of WO's budget. The new approach reduced Region 4's
allocation by an estimated $3,500,000.

Enclosure I Page 37 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

32 Reasons for Funding Changes

General Administration (continued):

Other reasons for the decline to Region 4 and all the other regions included
off- the- top increases in addition to a decrease in the General
Administration itemization amount in the FY 2000 conference report. These
two factors reduced Region 4's allocation by an estimated $1,382, 000.

Enclosure I Page 38 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

33 Reasons for Funding Changes

Changes to allocation process:

The Forest Service plans to implement a new allocation process in FY 2002.

The National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) and GAO have criticized
the Forest Service's formula- based allocation process as not tied to agency
goals and objectives. NAPA and GAO recommended a process based on strategic
planning and agency priorities.

The FY 2000 conference report directed the Forest Service to first allocate
earmarks and funding priorities to the benefiting region( s) and then
allocate the remaining net available amount to the regions. This eliminated
the Forest Service practice of including some earmarks and funding
priorities in the regional net available amount.

Enclosure I Page 39 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

34 Budget Request v. Final Allocation

Comparison of Region 4's budget requests for FYs 1998- 2000 with WO's final
allocations for those years shows that the region generally received less
than requested. This is especially noticeable in FY 2000. (See attachment
2.)

Enclosure I Page 40 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

35 Budget Request v. Final Allocation

However, for several reasons the comparisons are of limited value in
evaluating the extent to which the apparent reduced level of funding
allocated to Region 4 is meeting its funding needs.

From FYs 1998- 2000, the budget line item funding levels included in Region
4's budget request were developed not by the region but by WO. During those
years the Forest Service used a “top- down” approach for
preparing its budget. Under this approach, Region 4's input to the budget
process described how the budget line item funding levels provided by WO
would affect the region's ability to meet performance targets.

Enclosure I Page 41 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

36 Budget Request v. Final Allocation

As discussed in our reports, 2 prior to FY 2000, budgeted amounts allocated
to regions had no relationship with how the funds were actually spent, given
the Forest Service practice in those years of charging budget line items
“as budgeted” rather than “as worked.”

The funding levels included in Region 4's budget submission were generally
based on the prior year's budget. The funding levels included in Region 4's
final allocation from WO are based on the current year's conference report
itemization of budget line items.

2 See Forest Service: A Framework for Improving Accountability, (GAO/ RCED/
AIMD- 00- 2, Oct. 13, 1999) and Forest Service Management: Little Has
Changes as a Result of the Fiscal Year 1995 Budget Reforms, (GAO/ RCED- 99-
2, Dec. 2, 1998).

Enclosure I Page 42 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

37 Budget Request v. Final Allocation

The funding levels included in Region 4's budget request were prepared early
in the budget process when limited information was available on funding
needs for national initiatives and other off- thetop items.

As a result, the budget request during these years assumes that relatively
small amounts are taken off the top, which results in relatively larger
shares that are available for allocation to the regions.

On the other hand, the final allocations are made following the current
year's appropriation when near- final dollar amounts for offthe- top items
are known.

In FY 1999 and FY 2000 off- the- top items increased, resulting in
relatively smaller shares being allocated to the regions.

Consequently, the final allocations tend to be less than the budget request
during those years.

Enclosure I Page 43 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

38 FP Allocations to Regions

Fire Preparedness (FP) allocations to all regions for Fiscal Years 19952000.
(See attachment 3.)

Allocations for FP are made by a computer- based model- the National Fire
Management Analysis System (NFMAS)- that performs a cost/ benefit analysis
of different funding levels and determines the most efficient level (MEL) of
preparedness. Like NFS allocations, FP allocations to regional offices are
reported in the Final Planning and Budget Advice.

Regions enter their data, such as the cost of fire- fighting equipment and
the value per acre of land damaged by fire, into the model.

As shown in attachment 3, Congress has funded less than the MEL, but each
region receives its proportional allocation.

The Forest Service has used NFMAS since 1980. The Bureau of Land Management
has also used NFMAS since 1986.

Enclosure I Page 44 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

39 FP Allocations to Regions

The Forest Service budget coordinator for FP notes the following as key
factors that significantly increased the national MEL request amounts for
FYs 1998- 2000.

In prior years, other program areas had helped fund FP resources when they
were used during the nonpeak fire- fighting season for non- fire- fighting
activities, such as trail maintenance. With limited budgets, other programs
can no longer help fund FP resources.

As the Forest Service downsized and FP staffing stayed about the same, the
relative size of FP increased. As a result, the FP must take on a greater
share of the WO overhead costs.

Region 4's share declined slightly as a result of the NFMAS analysis and
ranking of national forests MEL requirements.

Enclosure I Page 45 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

40 Changing Processes

Fundamental changes are occurring in Forest Service's accounting and budget
processes that will affect future funding allocations to regional offices.

Implementation of a new accounting system in FY 2000. Plans to develop a new
funding allocation process in response to

NAPA and GAO criticisms. Initiatives to revise the Forest Service's budget
structure by reducing

and realigning NFS' budget line items are underway. A new approach for
defining and accounting for indirect costs was

implemented during FY 2000.

Enclosure I Page 46 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

41 Changing Processes

Change in how projects that cut across Forest Service's resourcespecific
programs are funded. The change replaced the “benefiting
function” concept with the “primary purpose” principle
during FY 2000.

Under the benefiting function concept, all programs that benefit from a
project help fund that project through each program's budget line item( s).

Under the primary purpose principle, the program that is a project's primary
purpose funds the entire project through its budget line item( s).

Attachment 4 shows Region 4 FY 2000 NFS funding allocations that have been
revised to reflect implementation of the primary purpose principle.

Enclosure I

(Dollars in thousands)

 FY 1999 R- 4 Total R- 4 Total R- 4 Total R- 4
Total R- 4 Total R- 4 Total

Budget Line Item AllocationAvailable R- 4 % AllocationAvailable R- 4 %
AllocationAvailable R- 4 % AllocationAvailable R- 4 % AllocationAvailable R-
4 % Allocation Available R- 4 %

Ecosystem Planning, Inv. & Monitor. 18,968 149,815

12.7%

15,794 130,000

12.1%

15,583 130,088

12.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

Land Management Planning 0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

4,297 36,174

11.9%

4,862 40,000

12.2%

4,015 39,738

10.1%

Inventory and Monitoring 0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

9,415 91,964

10.2%

9,954 80,714

12.3%

8,525 87,771

9.7%

Subtotal: Ecosystem Management

18,968 149,815

12.7%

15,794 130,000

12.1%

15,583 130,088

12.0%

13,712 128,138

10.7%

14,816 120,714

12.3%

12,540 127,509

9.8%

Recreation Management 16,431 159,426

10.3%

18,329 164,250

11.2%

19,239 164,314

11.7%

20,341 170,318

11.9%

16,613 144,953

11.5%

17,191 158,258

10.9%

Wilderness Management 4,805 46,588

10.3%

3,373 33,250

10.1%

3,610 33,267

10.9%

4,055 34,069

11.9%

3,565 29,584

12.1%

3,546 29,953

11.8%

Heritage Resources 1,230 14,589

8.4%

1,208 13,565

8.9%

1,586 13,570

11.7%

1,616 13,906

11.6%

1,614 13,050

12.4%

1,537 13,137

11.7%

Subtotal: Recreation Use

22,466 220,603

10.2%

22,910 211,065

10.9%

24,435 211,151

11.6%

26,012 218,293

11.9%

21,792 187,587

11.6%

22,274 201,348

11.1%

Wildlife Habitat Management 2,386 30,184

7.9%

2,602 28,250

9.2%

2,420 28,263

8.6%

3,511 31,263

11.2%

3,531 32,097

11.0%

3,406 32,750

10.4%

Inland Fish Habitat Management 2,176 15,368

14.2%

1,601 14,500

11.0%

1,596 14,756

10.8%

2,238 17,787

12.6%

2,132 19,017

11.2%

2,430 23,188

10.5%

Anadromous Fish Habitat Management 1,930 24,141

8.0%

1,885 21,000

9.0%

1,798 21,029

8.6%

1,974 22,021

9.0%

2,139 22,714

9.4%

2,263 25,920

8.7%

TE& S Habitat Management 1,782 23,563

7.6%

1,782 21,750

8.2%

2,020 21,763

9.3%

2,243 25,763

8.7%

2,219 26,548

8.4%

2,323 26,755

8.7%

Subtotal: Wildlife & Fish Habitat Mgmt.

8,274 93,256

8.9%

7,870 85,500

9.2%

7,834 85,811

9.1%

9,966 96,834

10.3%

10,021 100,376

10.0%

10,422 108,613

9.6%

Grazing Management 2,810 12,510

22.5%

3,695 16,000

23.1%

5,280 22,506

23.5%

5,619 27,540

20.4%

6,206 28,517

21.8%

6,086 28,792

21.1%

Rangeland Vegetation Management 789 5,995

13.2%

1,923 11,000

17.5%

2,755 15,506

17.8%

3,100 17,807

17.4%

4,668 28,533

16.4%

5,239 29,654

17.7%

Subtotal: Rangeland Management

3,599 18,505

19.4%

5,618 27,000

20.8%

8,035 38,012

21.1%

8,719 45,347

19.2%

10,874 57,050

19.1%

11,325 58,446

19.4%

Timber Sales Management 10,483 181,050

5.8%

10,363 188,582

5.5%

12,267 196,000

6.3%

10,452 209,000

5.0%

11,432 226,900

5.0%

12,084 223,060

5.4%

Forestland Vegetation Management 4,093 60,247

6.8%

3,355 51,740

6.5%

4,669 55,768

8.4%

5,301 65,765

8.1%

4,975 58,300

8.5%

5,433 62,958

8.6%

Subtotal: Forestland Management

14,576 241,297

6.0%

13,718 240,322

5.7%

16,936 251,768

6.7%

15,753 274,765

5.7%

16,407 285,200

5.8%

17,517 286,018

6.1%

Soil, Water and Air Operations 2,497 23,865

10.5%

2,409 22,000

11.0%

2,527 22,111

11.4%

2,388 25,645

9.3%

2,270 25,932

8.8%

2,945 26,755

11.0%

Watershed Improvements 1,631 24,480

6.7%

975 20,000

4.9%

1,233 20,003

6.2%

1,501 25,584

5.9%

2,515 30,165

8.3%

6,019 36,608

16.4%

Subtotal: Soil, Water and Air

4,128 48,345

8.5%

3,384 42,000

8.1%

3,760 42,114

8.9%

3,889 51,229

7.6%

4,785 56,097

8.5%

8,964 63,363

14.1%

Minerals and Geology Management 6,972 39,011

17.9%

6,075 35,000

17.4%

5,428 35,767

15.2%

6,360 36,000

17.7%

6,877 37,050

18.6%

6,180 36,956

16.7%

Real Estate Management 3,564 45,660

7.8%

4,059 43,000

9.4%

3,703 43,047

8.6%

3,683 47,047

7.8%

3,121 46,133

6.8%

3,626 47,242

7.7%

Landline Location 1,287 15,952

8.1%

919 14,000

6.6%

1,034 14,006

7.4%

1,220 15,006

8.1%

1,449 15,006

9.7%

1,457 15,367

9.5%

Subtotal: Land Ownership Mgmt.

4,851 61,612

7.9%

4,978 57,000

8.7%

4,737 57,053

8.3%

4,903 62,053

7.9%

4,570 61,139

7.5%

5,083 62,609

8.1%

Road Maintenance 5,936 83,860

7.1%

6,532 81,000

8.1%

6,926 81,019

8.5%

7,697 84,974

9.1%

{11,638} {99,884}

{11.7%}

{12,623} {111,240}

{11.3%}

Non- Recreation Facility Maintenance 2,230 26,321

8.5%

2,393 23,000

10.4%

2,329 23,008

10.1%

2,426 24,277

10.0%

2,702 27,654

9.8%

{2,790} {28,243}

{9.9%}

Recreation Facility Maintenance 0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

3,189 24,570

13.0%

{3,483} {27,404}

{12.7%}

Trail Maintenance 0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

2,159 18,445

11.7%

{2,313} {20,454}

{11.3%}

Subtotal: Infrastructure Maintenance

8,166 110,181

7.4%

8,925 104,000

8.6%

9,255 104,027

8.9%

10,123 109,251

9.3%

8,050 70,669

11.4%

21,210 187,341

{11.3%}

{Subtotal, w/ non- add BLI's}

{8,166} {110,121}

{7.4%}

{8,925} {104,000}

{8.6%}

{9,255} {104,027}

{8.9%}

{10,123} {109,251}

{9.3%}

{19,688} {170,553}

{11.5%}

{21,210} {187,341}

{11.3%}

Law Enforcement Operations

1,386 63,535

2.2%

1,323 59,591

2.2%

1,355 59,637

2.3%

1,311 63,967

2.0%

690 66,288

1.0%

691 67,960

1.0%

General Administration

22,451 295,483

7.6%

21,396 264,775

8.1%

23,015 259,353

8.9%

22,841 262,500

8.7%

21,923 256,400

8.6%

16,523 248,362

6.7%

TOTAL: NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

115,837 1,341,643

8.6%

111,991 1,256,253

8.9%

120,373 1,274,781

9.4%

123,589 1,348,377

9.2%

120,805 1,298,570

9.3%

111,519 1,261,184

8.8%

{TOTAL: w/ non- add BLI's}

{115,837} {1,341,643}

{8.6%}

{111,991} {1,256,253}

{8.9%}

{120,373} {1,274,781}

{9.4%}

{123,589} {1,348,377

{9.2%}

{132,443} {1,398,454}

{9.5%}

{132,729} {1,448,525}

{9.2%}

Source: Annual Final Planning and Budget Advice { } Non- Add BLI's. Funds
appropriated in the Reconstruction and Construction Account. PAGE 47

GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4

Attachment 1

 FY 2000 Region

4: National Forest System Final PBA Allocations vs. Total Available, FY 1995
Through FY 2000

 FY 1995------------  FY 1996---------
 FY 1997  FY 1998

Enclosure I Page 48 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

(Dollars in thousands) Final

allocation Budget Line Item (BLI) Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 1 Level 2
Level 3

Land Mgmt: Planning, Invent., & Monitor (NFEM) 15,516 16,836 19,542 13,712
(1, 804) (3, 124) (5, 830) Recreation Management (NFRM) 17,769 19,887 20,720
20,341 2,572 454 (379)

Wilderness Management (NFWM) 3,296 3,682 5,045 4,055 759 373 (990) Heritage
Resources (NFHR) 1,172 1,320 1,476 1,616 444 296 140

Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. (NFWL) 2,406 2,660 2,660 3,511 1,105 851 851 Inland
Fish Habitat Mgmt. (NFIF) 1,561 1,750 2,092 2,238 677 488 146

Anadromous Fish Habitat Mgmt. (NFAF) 1,627 1,822 2,565 1,974 347 152 (591)
TE& S Habitat Mgmt. (NFTE) 2, 092 2,488 3,525 2,243 151 (245) (1, 282)

Grazing Mgmt. (NFRG) 4,229 5,414 7,403 5,619 1,390 205 (1, 784) Rangeland
Vegetation Mgmt. (NFRV) 1,522 1,743 3,168 3,100 1,578 1,357 (68)

Timber Sales Mgmt. (NFTM) 9, 312 10,425 10,532 10,452 1,140 27 (80)
Forestland Vegetation Mgmt. (NFFV) 3, 268 3,656 4,275 5,301 2,033 1,645
1,026

Soil, Water, and Air Operations (NFSO) 2,008 2,278 3,705 2,388 380 110 (1,
317) Watershed Improvements (NFSI) 1, 071 1,193 1,446 1,501 430 308 55

Minerals and Geology Mgmt. (NFMG) 5, 925 5,925 7,160 6,360 435 435 (800)
Real Estate Mgmt. (NFLA) 3, 512 3,990 3,990 3,683 171 (307) (307)

Landline Location (NFLL) 797 797 1,127 1,220 423 423 93 Road Maintenance
(NFRD) 6,457 7,194 8,071 7,697 1,240 503 (374)

Facility Maintenance (NFFA) 1, 957 1,956 2,994 2,426 469 470 (568) Law
Enforcement Operations (NFLE) 1,257 1,323 1,495 1,311 54 (12) (184)

General Administration (NFGA) 20,326 23,192 26,863 22,841 2,515 (351) (4,
022)

Total

107,080 119,531 139,854 123,589 16,509 4,058 (16,265) Source: FY 1998 Final
Planning and Budget Advice and Region 4's FY 1998 Budget Request

Note: Forest Service's WO designated three budget levels as follows: Level 1
is FY96 Final Appropriation minus 10%. Level 2 is FY96 Final Appropriation
Level. Level 3 is about 15% Level 2.

Region 4: Comparison of FY 1998 Budget Request With Final Allocation Budget
request Final allocation less

Attachment 2

Enclosure I Page 49 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

(Dollars in thousands) Final

allocation Budget Line Item (BLI) Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 1 Level 2
Level 3

Land Mgmt: Planning, Invent., & Monitor (NFEM) 14,387 15,939 16,795 14,816
429 (1, 123) (1, 979) Recreation Management (NFRM) 16,565 19,003 19,416
21,479 4,914 2, 476 2,063

Wilderness Management (NFWM) 3, 852 4,391 5, 914 4,048 196 (343) (1, 866)
Heritage Resources (NFHR) 1,151 1, 318 1,441 1, 614 463 296 173

Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. (NFWL) 2, 378 2,697 2, 707 3,531 1, 153 834 824
Inland Fish Habitat Mgmt. (NFIF) 1,573 1, 814 2,145 2, 132 559 318 (13)

Anadromous Fish Habitat Mgmt. (NFAF) 1,235 1, 420 1,909 2, 139 904 719 230
TE& S Habitat Mgmt. (NFTE) 2,248 2, 746 3,852 2, 219 (29) (527) (1, 633)

Grazing Mgmt. (NFRG) 5,296 6, 729 7,277 6, 206 910 (523) (1, 071) Rangeland
Vegetation Mgmt. (NFRV) 2,445 2, 831 3,201 4, 668 2,223 1, 837 1,467

Timber Sales Mgmt. (NFTM) 8,910 10,180 10,215 11,432 2,522 1, 252 1,217
Forestland Vegetation Mgmt. (NFFV) 3, 916 4,472 5, 123 4,975 1, 059 503
(148)

Soil, Water, and Air Operations (NFSO) 2,980 3, 443 4,937 2, 270 (710) (1,
173) (2, 667) Watershed Improvements (NFSI) 4, 653 5,290 6, 298 2,515 (2,
138) (2, 775) (3, 783)

Minerals and Geology Mgmt. (NFMG) 3, 962 4,329 4, 825 6,877 2, 915 2,548 2,
052 Real Estate Mgmt. (NFLA) 3, 087 3,583 3, 596 3,121 34 (462) (475)

Landline Location (NFLL) 1,544 1, 623 1,653 1, 449 (95) (174) (204) Road
Maintenance (NFRD) 7,231 8, 211 9,037 11,638 4,407 3, 427 2,601

Facility Maintenance (NFFA) 2,282 2, 358 3,062 2, 702 420 344 (360) Law
Enforcement Operations (NFLE) 1,220 1, 349 1,558 690 (530) (659) (868)

General Administration (NFGA) 21,219 24,318 27,105 21,923 704 (2, 395) (5,
182)

Total

112, 134 128, 044 142, 066 132, 444 20,310 4,400 (9, 622) Source: FY 1999
Final Planning and Budget Advice and Region 4's FY 1999 Budget Request

Level 1 is FY97 Final Appropriation minus 10%. Level 2 is FY 97 Final
Appropriation Level. Level 3 is FY97 Final Appropriation plus 15%.

Note: NFWMFinal Allocation includes $483 for recreation trails in wilderness
areas

Bud get request Final allocation less

Region 4: Comparison of FY 1999 Budget Request With Final Allocation

Attachment 2 (continued) Note: NFRMFinal Allocation includes $3, 189 for
recreation facility maintenance and $1, 677 for recreation trails in
nonwilderness areas.

Enclosure I Page 50 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

(Dollars in thousands) Final

allocation Budget Line Item (BLI) Current services Agency request Current
services Agency request

Land Mgmt: Planning, Invent., & Monitor (NFEM) 13,441 14,785 12,540 (901)
(2, 245) Recreation Management (NFRM) 22,530 24,783 22,409 (121) (2, 374)

Wilderness Management (NFWM) 4,261 4,687 4,124 (137) (563) Heritage
Resources (NFHR) 1,572 1,729 1,537 (35) (192)

Wildlife Habitat Mgmt. (NFWL) 3,876 4,264 3,406 (470) (858) Inland Fish
Habitat Mgmt. (NFIF) 2,669 2,936 2,430 (239) (506)

Anadromous Fish Habitat Mgmt. (NFAF) 1,795 1,975 2,263 468 288 TE& S Habitat
Mgmt. (NFTE) 2, 481 2,729 2,323 (158) (406)

Grazing Mgmt. (NFRG) 6,103 6,713 6,086 (17) (627) Rangeland Vegetation Mgmt.
(NFRV) 6,076 6,684 5,239 (837) (1, 445)

Timber Sales Mgmt. (NFTM) 11,000 12,100 12,084 1,084 (16) Forestland
Vegetation Mgmt. (NFFV) 7, 786 8,565 5,433 (2, 353) (3, 132)

Soil, Water, and Air Operations (NFSO) 3,328 3,661 2,945 (383) (716)
Watershed Improvements (NFSI) 1, 965 2,162 6,019 4,054 3,857

Minerals and Geology Mgmt. (NFMG) 6, 646 7,311 6,180 (466) (1, 131) Real
Estate Mgmt. (NFLA) 3, 600 3,960 3,626 26 (334)

Landline Location (NFLL) 1,380 1,518 1,457 77 (61) Road Maintenance (NFRD)
12,824 14,106 12,623 (201) (1, 483)

Facility Maintenance (NFFA) 2, 915 3,207 2,791 (124) (416) Law Enforcement
Operations (NFLE) 310 340 691 381 351

General Administration (NFGA) 22,910 25,200 16,523 (6, 387) (8, 677)

Total

139,468 153,415 132,729 (6, 739) (20,686) Source: FY 2000 Final Planning and
Budget Advice and Region 4's FY 2000 Budget Request

Notes: (1) Forest Service WO designated "Current Services" as equal to FY99
President's Budget and "Agency Request" as "Current Service" level plus 10%.

(2) Final allocation amounts for the Trail Maintenance BLI are divided 75%
to Recreation Management and 25% to Wilderness Management. (3) Final
allocation amounts for the Recreation Facility Maintenance BLI is included
in the Recreation Management BLI.

Region 4: Comparison of FY 2000 Budget Request With Final Allocation Budget
request Final allocation less

Attachment 2 (continued)

Enclosure I Page 51 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

1995 Final Program Budget Advice Regional

Congressional Regional allocation Regional National appropriation allocation
as a % of the

MEL MEL Congressional as a % of Regional as a % of congressional Region
request request appropriation national MEL allocation regional MEL
appropriation

1

$27.9 $311.4 $285.1 91.6% $26.8 96.1% 9.4%

2

12.1 311.4 285.1 91.6% 10.7 88.4% 3.8%

3

32.8 311.4 285.1 91.6% 29.8 90.9% 10.5%

4

27.4 311.4 285.1 91.6% 25.9 94.5% 9.1%

5

104.3 311.4 285.1 91.6% 94.5 90.6% 33.1%

6

48.7 311.4 285.1 91.6% 44.9 92.2% 15.7%

8

18.5 311.4 285.1 91.6% 17.2 93.0% 6.0%

9

8.9 311.4 285.1 91.6% 7.8 87.6% 2.7%

10

1.4 311.4 285.1 91.6% 1.4 100.0% 0.5%

Total

$282.0 $259.0 90.8%

1996 Program Budget Advice Regional

Congressional Regional allocation Regional National appropriation allocation
as a % of the

MEL MEL Congressional as a % of Regional as a % of congressional Region
request request appropriation national MEL allocation regional MEL
appropriation

1

$28.0 $328.0 $295.3 90.0% $25.8 92.1% 8.7%

2

11.2 328.0 295.3 90.0% 10.3 92.0% 3.5%

3

32.9 328.0 295.3 90.0% 29.2 88.8% 9.9%

4

29.1 328.0 295.3 90.0% 24.6 84.5% 8.3%

5

115.8 328.0 295.3 90.0% 89.7 77.5% 30.4%

6

46.7 328.0 295.3 90.0% 40.9 87.6% 13.9%

8

17.4 328.0 295.3 90.0% 17.4 100.0% 5.9%

9

6.6 328.0 295.3 90.0% 6.4 97.0% 2.2%

10

1.3 328.0 295.3 90.0% 1.3 100.0% 0.4%

Total

$289.0 $245.6 83.2%

Fire Preparedness: Final Allocations to All Regions, FY 1995 Through FY 2000
(Dollars in millions)

Enclosure I Page 52 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

Fire Preparedness Regional

Congressional Regional allocation Regional National appropriation allocation
as a % of the

MEL MEL Congressional as a % of Regional as a % of congressional Region
request request appropriation national MEL allocation regional MEL
appropriation

1

27.8 341.0 319.3 93.6% $25.9 93.2% 8.1%

2

12.7 341.0 319.3 93.6% 10.7 84.3% 3.4%

3

32.0 341.0 319.3 93.6% 30.3 94.7% 9.5%

4

31.2 341.0 319.3 93.6% 29.0 92.9% 9.1%

5

105.0 341.0 319.3 93.6% 96.3 91.7% 30.2%

6

50.3 341.0 319.3 93.6% 45.7 90.9% 14.3%

8

21.1 341.0 319.3 93.6% 17.6 83.4% 5.5%

9

8.0 341.0 319.3 93.6% 6.6 82.5% 2.1%

10

1.3 341.0 319.3 93.6% 1.3 100.0% 0.4%

Total

$289.4 $263.4 82.5%

Regional Congressional Regional allocation

Regional National appropriation allocation as a % of the MEL MEL
Congressional as a % of Regional as a % of congressional

Region request request appropriation national MEL allocation regional MEL
appropriation 1

$39.9 $390.0 $319.3 81.9% $32.2 80.7% 10.1%

2

13.2 390.0 319.3 81.9% 12.3 93.2% 3.9%

3

40.8 390.0 319.3 81.9% 36.3 89.0% 11.4%

4

40.1 390.0 319.3 81.9% 32.0 79.8% 10.0%

5

132.0 390.0 319.3 81.9% 102.5 77.7% 32.1%

6

55.8 390.0 319.3 81.9% 47.3 84.8% 14.8%

8

22.8 390.0 319.3 81.9% 18.3 80.3% 5.7%

9

8.1 390.0 319.3 81.9% 7.4 91.4% 2.3%

10

1.4 390.0 319.3 81.9% 1.3 92.9% 0.4%

Total

$354.1 $289.6 90.7%

1998 Final Program Budget Advice 1997 Final Program Budget Advice

Attachment 3 (continued)

Enclosure I Page 53 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest
Service Region 4

1999 Final Program Budget Advice Regional

Congressional Regional allocation Regional National appropriation allocation
as a % of the

MEL MEL Congressional as a % of Regional as a % of congressional Region
request request appropriation national MEL allocation regional MEL
appropriation

1

42.8 430.0 324.9 75.6% $33.1 77.3% 10.2%

2

20.2 430.0 324.9 75.6% 14.5 71.8% 4.5%

3

46.1 430.0 324.9 75.6% 35.9 77.9% 11.0%

4

44.2 430.0 324.9 75.6% 32.3 73.1% 9.9%

5

149.2 430.0 324.9 75.6% 103.3 69.2% 31.8%

6

62.4 430.0 324.9 75.6% 48.2 77.2% 14.8%

8

27.0 430.0 324.9 75.6% 18.6 68.9% 5.7%

9

8.3 430.0 324.9 75.6% 7.2 86.7% 2.2%

10

1.5 430.0 324.9 75.6% 1.3 86.7% 0.4%

Total

$401.7 $294.4 90.6%

2000 Final Program Budget Advice Regional

Congressional Regional allocation Regional National appropriation allocation
as a % of the

MEL MEL Congressional as a % of Regional as a % of congressional Region
request request appropriation national MEL allocation regional MEL
appropriation

1

$45.7 $483.0 $359.8 74.5% $34.4 75.3% 9.6%

2

24.0 483.0 359.8 74.5% 20.2 84.2% 5.6%

3

57.8 483.0 359.8 74.5% 39.3 68.0% 10.9%

4

48.5 483.0 359.8 74.5% 33.8 69.7% 9.4%

5

157.2 483.0 359.8 74.5% 112.1 71.3% 31.2%

6

68.5 483.0 359.8 74.5% 53.1 77.5% 14.8%

8

34.5 483.0 359.8 74.5% 20.2 58.6% 5.6%

9

11.5 483.0 359.8 74.5% 8.8 76.5% 2.4%

10

1.5 483.0 359.8 74.5% 1.4 93.3% 0.4%

Total

$449.2 $323.3 89.9% Source: Final Planning and Budget Advice and additional
data provided by Fire Preparedness Budget Coordinator.

Fire Preparedness

Attachment 3 (continued)

Enclosure I

(Dollars in thousands)

R- 4 Total R- 4 Total Budget Line Item

Allocation Available R- 4 % Allocation Available R- 4 %

Ecosystem Planning, Inv. & Monitor. 0 0

0.0%

0 0

0.0%

Land Management Planning 4,015 39,738

10.1%

5,848 39,738

14.7%

Inventory and Monitoring 8,525 87,771

9.7%

8,121 87,771

9.3%

Subtotal: Ecosystem Management

12,540 127,509

9.8%

13,969 127,509

11.0%

Recreation Management 17,191 158,258

10.9%

17,415 158,258

11.0%

Wilderness Management 3,546 29,953

11.8%

3,481 29,953

11.6%

Heritage Resources 1,537 13,137

11.7%

1,567 13,137

11.9%

Subtotal: Recreation Use

22,274 201,348

11.1%

22,463 201,348

11.2%

Wildlife Habitat Management 3,406 32,750

10.4%

3,148 32,750

9.6%

Inland Fish Habitat Management 2,430 23,188

10.5%

2,151 23,188

9.3%

Anadromous Fish Habitat Management 2,263 25,920

8.7%

1,553 25,920

6.0%

TE& S Habitat Management 2,323 26,755

8.7%

2,589 26,755

9.7%

Subtotal: Wildlife & Fish Habitat Mgmt

10,422 108,613

9.6%

9,441 108,613

8.7%

Grazing Management 6,086 28,792

21.1%

6,136 28,792

21.3%

Rangeland Vegetation Management 5,239 29,654

17.7%

5,298 29,654

17.9%

Subtotal: Rangeland Management

11,325 58,446

19.4%

11,434 58,446

19.6%

Timber Sales Management 12,084 223,060

5.4%

11,830 223,060

5.3%

Forestland Vegetation Management 5,433 62,958

8.6%

5,360 62,958

8.5%

Subtotal: Forestland Management

17,517 286,018

6.1%

17,190 286,018

6.0%

Soil, Water and Air Operations 2,945 26,755

11.0%

4,386 26,755

16.4%

Watershed Improvements 6,019 36,608

16.4%

5,695 36,608

15.6%

Subtotal: Soil, Water and Air

8,964 63,363

14.1%

10,081 63,363

15.9%

Minerals and Geology Management

6,180 36,956

16.7%

5,997 36,956

16.2%

Real Estate Management 3,626 47,242

7.7%

4,917 47,242

10.4%

Landline Location 1,457 15,367

9.5%

1,569 15,367

10.2%

Subtotal: Land Ownership Mgmt.

5,083 62,609

8.1%

6,486 62,609

10.4%

Road Maintenance {12,623} {111,240}

{11.3%}

{12258} {111,240}

{11.0%}

Non- Recreation Facility Maintenance {2,790} {28,243}

{9.9%}

{2318} {28,243}

{8.2%}

Recreation Facility Maintenance {3,483} {27,404}

{12.7%}

{2892} {27,404}

{10.5%}

Trail Maintenance {2,313} {20,454}

{11.3%}

{2724} {20,454}

{13.3%}

Subtotal: Infrastructure Maintenance

21,210 187,341

{11.3%}

20,192 187,341

{10.8%}

{Subtotal: w/ non- add BLI's}

{21,210} {187,341}

{11.3%}

{20192} {187,341}

{10.8%}

Law Enforcement Operations

691 67,960

1.0%

1,103 67,960

1.6%

General Administration

16,523 248,362

6.7%

15,476 248,362

6.2%

TOTAL: NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

111,519 1,261,184

8.8%

113,640 1,261,184

9.0%

{TOTAL: w/ non- add BLI's}

{132,729} {1,448,525}

{9.2%}

{133,832} {1,448,525}

{9.2%}

{ } Non- Add EBLI's. Funds appropriated in the Reconstruction and
Construction Account. Source: Benefiting Function allocations obtained from
FY 2000 Final Planning and Budget Advice,

Page 54

Region 4: National Forest System FY 2000 Final PBA Allocations

 FY 2000  FY
2000 Under

Benefiting Function and Primary Purpose

Attachment 4

GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4 Primary
Purpose allocations obtained from Region 4's Fiscal and Budget Team.

Benefiting Function Primary Purpose

Page 55 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 279R Funding Allocations to Forest Service Region 4

Enclosure II

Now on page 3. Now on page 24.
*** End of document. ***