Small Business Administration: Enhancements Needed for Loan Monitoring
System Benchmark Study (Letter Report, 05/14/99, GAO/AIMD-99-165).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed a benchmark study
conducted by a contractor comparing the Small Business Administration's
(SBA) loan monitoring business processes to those of selected public and
private sector organizations.

GAO noted that: (1) the benchmark study was an important first step in
SBA's efforts to develop a loan monitoring system; (2) it identified
wide gaps between SBA's practices and its benchmark partners; (3)
however, the study would be more useful if it included a better
definition of processes associated with best practices, addressed
monitoring processes for important activities delegated to lenders,
collected measurement data on SBA's and the benchmark partners'
processes, identified goals for reengineering, and identified potential
outsourcing and candidate systems for purchase; and (4) SBA agreed with
this analysis and stated that it plans to act on each of these items.

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

 REPORTNUM:  AIMD-99-165
     TITLE:  Small Business Administration: Enhancements Needed for
	     Loan Monitoring System Benchmark Study
      DATE:  05/14/99
   SUBJECT:  Loan accounting systems
	     Comparative analysis
	     Small business loans
	     Private sector practices
	     Reengineering (management)
	     Performance measures

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  This text was extracted from a PDF file.        **
** Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles,      **
** headings, and bullets have not been preserved, and in some   **
** cases heading text has been incorrectly merged into          **
** body text in the adjacent column.  Graphic images have       **
** not been reproduced, but figure captions are included.       **
** Tables are included, but column deliniations have not been   **
** preserved.                                                   **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************
AI99165.book GAO United States General Accounting Office

Report to Congressional Requesters

May 1999 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Enhancements Needed for Loan Monitoring System Benchmark Study

GAO/AIMD-99-165

  GAO/AIMD-99-165

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548
Lett er

Page 1 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

GAO

Accounting Information and Management Division

B-280910 Letter May 14, 1999 The Honorable James M. Talent
Chairman Committee on Small Business House of Representatives

The Honorable Roscoe G. Bartlett Chairman Subcommittee on
Government

Programs and Oversight Committee on Small Business House of
Representatives

The Small Business Reauthorization Act of 1997 required the Small
Business Administration (SBA) to complete eight planning actions
to serve as a basis for funding the development and implementation
of a proposed loan monitoring system. At your request, we
evaluated the report produced for SBA's first planning action a
benchmark study by a contractor that compared SBA's loan
monitoring business processes to those of selected

public and private sector organizations. On April 6, 1999, we
briefed your offices on the results of our work. The briefing
slides are included in appendix I.

This report provides a high- level summary of the information
presented in the briefing, including the background, methodology
and findings of the benchmark study, and our observations on the
benchmark report. This report also presents the suggestions we
made to enhance the usefulness of

the benchmark study as well as SBA's comments. Results in Brief
The benchmark study was an important first step in SBA's efforts
to develop a loan monitoring system. It identified wide gaps
between SBA's

practices and its benchmark partners. However, the study would be
more useful if it included a better definition of processes
associated with best practices, addressed monitoring processes for
important activities delegated to lenders, collected measurement
data on SBA's and the benchmark partners' processes, identified
goals for reengineering, and identified potential outsourcing and
candidate systems for purchase. SBA agreed with this analysis and
stated that it plans to act on each of these items.

B-280910 Page 2 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Background The purpose of SBA's proposed loan monitoring systems
is to use technology and new processes to manage portfolios of
small business

loans, identify and effectively mitigate risks incurred through
loans guaranteed by SBA, implement oversight of internal and
external operations, and calculate subsidy rates. The Small
Business Reauthorization Act of 1997 required SBA to complete
eight planning actions to serve as a basis for funding the
development and implementation of the loan monitoring system. One
of these requirements was that SBA benchmark loan monitoring
business processes and systems against comparable industry
processes and, if appropriate, simplify and/ or

redefine its work processes based on these benchmarks.
Benchmarking is the comparison of core process performance with
other components of the agency (internal benchmarking) and/ or
with leading organizations (external benchmarking). Through this
comparison, best practices are identified for adaptation into the
agency's operations. Best practices include the processes,
practices, and systems that perform

exceptionally well in specific areas of public and private
organizations. Benchmarking provides a means of establishing a
compelling business case for change. It should identify more
efficient and effective processes for achieving intended results
and suggest goals for program output, product and service quality,
and process improvement.

Methodology and Findings of the Benchmark Study

SBA's contractor used a seven- step benchmarking process to
evaluate SBA business gaps with similar organizations for five
loan management functions. The functions benchmarked included risk
management, lender

oversight, guaranty procedures, subsidy rate calculation, and
asset sales. These functions were benchmarked against the
practices at 11 federal and private sector organizations. The
benchmark report, issued in December 1998, showed a significant
gap between SBA's and benchmark partners' practices for each of
the management functions. The report also suggested that senior
management needs to buy into the reengineering process,
communications plans need to be developed, system requirements
should be preliminary defined, and training plans should be
examined.

B-280910 Page 3 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Observations on the Benchmark Report

In general, the benchmarking methods used were consistent with
accepted practices and the benchmarking methodology was followed
at a high level. The benchmark report identified standard industry
or good' practices. It also pointed out wide gaps between SBA's
practices and those of and its benchmark partners. The benchmark
study was an important first step in SBA's efforts to develop a
loan monitoring system. However, there were areas where
enhancements would make the benchmark study report more useful as
SBA decides which processes it will reengineer and proceeds with
the reengineering. The report would be more useful if it included
the criteria used to determine and validate best- in- class
processes, 1  the monitoring processes, practices, and systems for
activities delegated

to lenders for preventing delinquencies, mitigating losses on
delinquencies, and liquidating defaulted loans,  candidates for
the outsourcing of functions and the extent of outsourcing by
benchmark partners, and

 quantative measurements of SBA's and benchmark partners'
processes, measurable improvement goals, and guidelines and
parameters for the reengineering of processes.

Suggested Actions and Agency Comments

We suggested that SBA  define processes associated with best
practices and relate these to SBA's

current processes,  address activities delegated to lenders and
develop monitoring processes concerning lenders to prevent
delinquencies, mitigate losses on delinquencies, and liquidate
defaulted loans,

 collect measurement data to allow comparisons between SBA's
current processes and the processes of benchmark partners,  set
stretch goals for reengineering, and  identify from benchmark
partners potential outsourcing and candidate systems for purchase.

1 According to SBA, the contractor used criteria to select
benchmark partners and determine best practices but did not
present this information in the benchmark report. SBA plans to
have the report modified to specify these criteria.

B-280910 Page 4 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

SBA agreed with our analysis of the benchmark study and stated
that it plans to implement these suggested actions. Appendix II
contains the agency comments.

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Our objective was to determine if SBA had completed the
benchmarking activities required by the Small Business
Reauthorization Act of 1997 in accordance with generally accepted
practices. We analyzed SBA's benchmark report to determine if it
was completed in accordance with the principles specified by the
Council for Continuous Improvement 2 and our business process
reengineering (BPR) guidance. We performed our work between
January 1999 and March 1999 in accordance with generally

accepted government auditing standards. We are sending copies of
this report to The Honorable Nydia M. Velazquez, Ranking Minority
Member of the Committee on Small Business; The Honorable Aida
Alvarez, Administrator, Small Business Administration;

The Honorable Jacob J. Lew, Director, Office of Management and
Budget; and other interested parties. Copies will also be made
available to others upon request. If you have any questions on
matters discussed in this report, please contact me at (202) 512-
6253 or James Hamilton, Assistant Director, at (202) 512- 6271.
Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.

Joel C. Willemssen Director, Civil Agencies Information Systems

2 The Council is a nonprofit consortium of companies whose purpose
is to develop a comprehensive system for implementing continuous
product and process improvement using state- of- the- industry
methods and tools.

Page 5 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Page 6 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Contents Letter 1 Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for
SBA's Loan Monitoring System

8 Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

38 Appendix III Major Contributors to This Report

48

Abbreviations

BPR business process reengineering SBA Small Business
Administration

Page 7 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Page 8 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System Appendi x I

Accounting and Information Management Division

Small Business Administration's Loan Monitoring System

Briefing on the Benchmark Study

April 6, 1999

Presented to the House Committee on Small Business and its
Subcommittee on Government Programs and Oversight.

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 9 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

2

Briefing Purpose & Outline

 Briefing purpose is to present results of our review of a
benchmark report on the development of Small Business
Administration's (SBA) loan monitoring system (LMS).

 Briefing outline:  Objective & Scope  Background  Benchmarking
methodology and findings  Suggestions  SBA comments

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 10 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

3

Objective & Scope

 Our objective is to determine if SBA is completing planning
actions required by the Small Business Reauthorization Act of 1997
in accordance with required and generally accepted system
development practices.

 This part of the review pertains to our evaluation of SBA's
benchmark report.

 We analyzed the benchmark report to determine if it was completed
in accordance with the principles specified by the Council for
Continuous Improvement and GAO's Business Process Reengineering
(BPR) guidance. We performed our work between January 1999 and
March 1999 in accordance with generally accepted government audit
standards.

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 11 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

4

Background

Purpose of LMS  Use of technology and new processes to

 manage portfolios of small business loans  identify and
effectively mitigate risks incurred through

loans guaranteed by SBA  implement oversight of internal and
external operations  calculate subsidy rates

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 12 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

5

Background

Planning actions for LMS The Small Business Reauthorization Act of
1997 required SBA to complete eight planning actions to serve as a
basis for funding the development and implementation of the loan
monitoring system  Benchmark loan monitoring business processes
and systems

against comparable industry processes and, if appropriate,
simplify and/ or redefine work processes based on these benchmarks

 Define system requirements using on- line, automated capabilities
to the extent feasible

 Identify all data inputs and outputs necessary for timely report
generation

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 13 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

6

Background

Planning actions for LMS (continued)  Determine data quality
standards and control systems for ensuring

information accuracy  Identify an acquisition strategy and work
increments to completion  Analyze the benefits and costs of
alternatives and use to

demonstrate the advantage of the final project  Ensure that the
proposed information system is consistent with the

agency's information architecture  Estimate the cost to system
completion

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 14 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

7

Background

Benchmarking definition  Benchmarking is the comparison of core
process performance

with other components of the agency (internal benchmarking) or
with leading organizations (external benchmarking). Through this
comparison, best practices are identified for adaptation into the
agency's operations.

 Best practices include the processes, practices, and systems that
perform exceptionally well in specific areas of public and private
organizations.

 Benchmarking provides a means of establishing a compelling
business case for change. It should

 identify more efficient and effective processes for achieving
intended results, and  suggest goals for program output, product
and service

quality, and process improvement.

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 15 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

8 Contractor's Benchmarking

Methodology  SBA's contractor used a seven- step benchmarking

process to evaluate SBA business gaps with similar organizations.

2 Identify Key Performance

Variables to Measure 3 Identify

Companies to Benchmark 1 Determine whichfunctions

to benchmark

5 4

6 7 Compare benchmarks/

pinpoint causes Measure performance of

own company Specify

improvement goals and monitor results Measure

performance of benchmarked

company

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final Benchmark Report, Booz Allen & Hamilton, December 1998

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 16 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

9 Lender and SBA Activities for

Guaranteed Loans

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final Benchmark Report, Booz Allen & Hamilton, December 1998
Lender and SBA

loan activities that were to be addressed in the benchmark study

SERVICING PAYMENT

IN FULL LIQUIDATION

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT & ADVOCACY

Lender Activities

 Direct potentially eligible borrowers to programs

Guarantor Activities

 Determine Credit Policy  Design lending programs  Advocate
programs to

lenders and recipients  Monitor program results

Lender Activities

 Evaluate eligibility  Evaluate credit risk  Underwrite loans
Disburse loans

Guarantor Activities

 Monitor/ approve eligibility  Capture credit risk

information and update portfolio risk management  Capture
underwriting

and eligibility information  Track disbursements

Lender Activities

 Bill recipients  Receive and process

payments  Update loan status info.  Send delinquency notices
Sell/ purchase loans

Guarantor Activities

 Monitor subsidy rate( s) against repurchases  Monitor portfolio
status

through loan updates  Take corrective action

where needed

Lender Activities

 Liquidate and collect on bad loans  Clean- up liquidation for

resale  Close loans paid in- full  Perform work- out agree ments
and refinance loans

Guarantor Activities

 Monitor liquidation  Ensure fair treatment  Re- evaluate credit
policy  Monitor program results

ORIGINATING

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 17 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

10 Loan Management Functions

Benchmarked  Risk management -- use captured information to
determine

optimal underwriting criteria and portfolio exposure  Lender
oversight -- use captured information to ensure lenders

are acting in the best interest of the SBA  Guaranty procedures --
approve loan guaranties and collect

origination and servicing data  Subsidy rate calculation -- use
captured information to predict

accurately future cash flows  Asset sales -- use captured
information to determine optimal

value for a portfolio of loans and guaranties

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final Benchmark Report, Booz Allen & Hamilton, December 1998

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 18 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

11 Organizations Selected as

Benchmarking Partners

ORGANIZATION LENDER OVERSIGHT

RISK MANAGEMENT

LENDING PROCEDURES

SUBSIDY RATE

ASSET SALES

Freddie Mac XX XX XX

Fannie Mae XX XX XX

NationsBankCorp XX XX

FirstUnionCorp. XX XX

CitibankCorp. XX XX

HiberniaCorp. XX XX

The Money Store XX

Federal Housing Authority

XX XX

VeteransAdministration XX XX XX

Comptrollerof Currency XX XX

Office of Management AndBudget

XX XX DenotesBestPractices Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/
Financial Assistance Program, Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen&
Hamilton, December1998

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 19 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

12 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Risk Management

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

DIMENSION Below Average

Average Above Average

COMMENTS Definition of Risk Management l s  No definition has been
agreed

upon within the organization Understanding Different Risks l s
Risk are understood only by

responsible parties Strategies For Defined Risks l s  No
Strategies exist to measure,

monitor or mitigate risks Point at which risk is Incurred l s
Risk is incurred when guaranties

are purchased from lenders

Organizational Placement of Risk Management Function l s  Risk
Management group has

been loosely defined Risk Management Coordinator l s  A
coordinator has been assigned

but risks have not been defined Power to Induce Change l s
Management has authorized

power but it has not been tested

How Much Information is Collected & When? l s  Information is
gathered at time of

guaranty purchase

Is Information Used to Mitigate Risk? l s  Possible risks are not

understood until they materialize

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 20 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

13 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Risk Management (continued)

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

DIMENSION Below Average

Average Above Average

COMMENTS Risk Information Used in Program Development l s  Risk
Information is not

available for use Program Eligibility l s  Comprehensive data on

eligibility is not collected Underwriting Criteria l s
Origination data is not

collected from lenders Guaranty Fee Calculations l s  Fees are
based on public

policy only Program Subsidy Rate l s  Subsidy Rate is based on

historical data

Information Used in Developing Program Strategy l s  Lack of
information makes it

difficult to develop strategies Additional Risks in Regions
Explained l s  Regional risks are understood

but not quantified Overall Effectiveness of Program l s
Indicators are not managed

but are used for performance

Seamless and Consistent Transfer of Information l s  Information
is mainly paper

based with some use of online transfers

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 21 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

14 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Lender Oversight

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

DIMENSION Below Average

Average Above Average

COMMENTS Communication to Lenders l s  The lender review process

has been communicated effectively to the lenders Program Goals l s
Program goals and

objectives are communicated regularly Program Procedures l s
Procedures can be easily

found on the Internet

Effective Lender Review Process l s  Lender review process does
not review all aspects of a lenders operations Process
Communicated l s  Lenders have no say in

determining optimal schedule Understanding & Compliance l s
Lenders comply with the

process but do not provide extra assistance Includes All Lenders l
s  Only PLP lenders are

included in the process

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 22 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

15 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Lender Oversight (continued)

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap DIMENSION Below

Average Average Above

Average COMMENTS

Ensuring SBA's Best Interests l s  Lender Oversight attempts to
balance SBA needs while protecting lender operations Timely &
Efficient l s  Reviews are done efficiently

by an independent team on an annual basis for PLP only Lenders'
Treatment of Loans l s  Only SBA loans are reviewed Procedure
Review l s  Underwriting, servicing and

liquidating are reviewed Credit Analysis Review l s  Reviewers
rely on

examination of historical data

Reason For Lender Inclusion l s  Only PLP lenders are included in
review process Portfolio Analysis l s  Past portfolio performance
is

used to determine if an onsite review will occur

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 23 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

16 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Lender Oversight (continued)

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

DIMENSION Below Average

Average Above Average

COMMENTS

Current Lending Process l s  Loan information is only reviewed at
the annual review for PLP lenders

Frequency of Lender Review l s  PLP lenders are reviewed on an
annual basis. Non- PLP are not reviewed at all Selection of
Lenders for review l s  Only PLP lenders are chosen

and special consideration is given to lenders with high levels of
defaults Responsibility for Lender selection l s  The Lender
Oversight group

determines which lenders will be reviewed but only examine PLP
lenders Use of Review Information throughout the program

l s  There is no central repository for information obtained
during lender reviews

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 24 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

17 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Guaranty Procedures

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap DIMENSION Below

Average Average Above

Average COMMENTS

Effective Guaranty Underwriting l s  The program is effective in
determining the ability to pay but not the ability to collect
information on the borrowers Automated for large lenders l s  The
main form of communication

between the program and lenders is the fax Simple for small
lenders l s  Small program lenders are

required to perform the same tasks as large, high exposure lenders

Effective Underwriting Criteria l s  SOPs require that ability to
pay is analyzed but no specifications are found for determining
ability to pay Repayment Ability l s  Income of the business is

analyzed but the overall ability to pay is not necessarily
determined Credit Scoring l s  No Credit scores are being

tested in the LowDoc Program Other Measures & Indicators l s  Some
additional information is

captured to indicate which industries and ethnic groups are being
served by the program

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 25 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

18 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Guaranty Procedures (cont.)

DIMENSION Below Average

Average Above Average

COMMENTS Relevant Information Captured l s  Inadequate information
is

captured during the origination and loan approval process Proper
Data Collected l s  Relevant risk data from the

origination process is not captured for future use Information
Used for Tracking l s  Loan information is entered into

the accounting system for tracking purposes Data Used for Risk
Management l s  No relevant risk management

information is captured Data Used for Lender Oversight l s  No
data is captured to review

the lenders' underwriting effectiveness

Centralization of Approval & Underwriting Processes l s  The PLP,
FA$ TRAK and

LowDoc processes centralized Credit Criteria Sets Guaranty Level l
s  Guaranty levels are set through

public policy Credit Criteria Sets Guaranty Fees l s  Guaranty
fees are set through

public policy

Efficient Approval System l s  The loan approval system provides
timely approval with little underwriting of loans

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 26 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

19 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Subsidy Rate

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap DIMENSION Below

Average Average Above

Average COMMENTS

Subsidy Rate Model l s  Current model uses 10- year cohort with
estimated cash flows Structural Changes Are Considered l s
Changes are only made with

large scale program adjustments Macro- Economic Changes Are
Accounted For l s  Macro- economic changes can

not be added into the model

Risk Management & Origination Data is Used in Calculation l s  Any
risk management

information is used to determine validity of the calculation

Frequent Subsidy Rate Calculation l s  Quarterly analysis of the

calculation is possible

Comparison of Subsidy Rate to Actual Program Cash Flows l s
Examination of actual program

expenditures is done often Actions Are Taken if Program Exceeds
Budget l s  Program changes must be

approved by governing bodies Program Changes Are Timely l s
Program changes can be made

but not frequently

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 27 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

20 Gap Between SBA and Benchmark Partners'

Practices for Asset Sales

DIMENSION Below Average

Average Above Average

COMMENTS Primary Purpose l s  The Asset Sales mission has

not been clearly defined Revenue Enhancer l s  SBA is attempting
to reduce

servicing and liquidating responsibilities

Mitigate Credit Risk l s  No attempt is made to mitigate credit
risk

Underlying Assets Fairly Valued l s  SBA does attempt to value the
loans using an independent contractor

Types of Assets Sold l s  Only Loan Assets are currently in the
sale process (Disaster Loans Only) High or Low Risk l s  Risk is
not examined prior to the

sale of the assets Performing or Performing Nonl s  Loans are not
examined to

determine if they are performing or non- performing prior to sale

Asset Sales Process an Efficient Use of SBA Resources l s  The
overall value creation can

not be determined until an actual sale takes place

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final BenchmarkReport, Booz Allen& Hamilton, December1998

l Current Level s Best in Class Gap

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 28 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

21

Actions Suggested by Contractor

 Senior management needs to buy- in to the process  Communications
plans need to be developed  System requirements should be
preliminarily defined  Training plans should be examined

Source: Benchmarking Capital Access/ Financial Assistance Program,
Final Benchmark Report, Booz Allen & Hamilton, December 1998

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 29 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

22

Observations on Report

 In general, the benchmarking methods were consistent with
accepted practices.

 The benchmarking methodology was followed at a high level.

 The benchmark report identified standard industry or good'
practices.

 The report pointed out wide gaps between SBA's practices and its
benchmark partners.

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 30 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

23

Observations on Report (continued)  Selecting benchmark partners

 No evidence on how partners were selected  No validation that
partners had best- in- class processes

 Determining best practices  No criteria specified  No criteria
cited to compare between practices-- only a

determination of whether or not SBA uses the practices This
benchmarking effort was an important first step.

There are a number of areas where enhancements would have made the
report more useful.

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 31 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

24

Observations on Report (continued)  Addressing activities
delegated to lenders - the study

did not address the processes, practices, and information systems
for

 preventing delinquencies  mitigating losses such as follow- up
actions on

delinquencies  liquidating defaulted loans

 Outsourcing functions  criteria for outsourcing were not
specified  candidates for outsourcing functions were not
identified  the extent of outsourcing by benchmark partners was
not

identified

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 32 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

25

Observations on Report (continued)  Using measurements

 quantitative measurements of SBA and benchmark partners were not
presented  measurable improvement goals for operational services
and

products were not cited  guidelines and parameters for
reengineering were not

defined

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 33 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

26

Suggested Actions

 SBA should define processes associated with best practices and
relate to SBA's current processes.

 In its benchmarking and reengineering, SBA should address
activities delegated to lenders and develop monitoring processes
concerning lender actions to

 prevent delinquencies,  mitigate losses such as follow- up
actions on delinquencies,

and  liquidate defaulted loans.

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 34 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

27

Suggested Actions (continued)  SBA should collect measurement data
to allow

comparisons between SBA's current processes and the processes of
benchmark partners.

 Measurement of current SBA operations can enable a clear
demonstration of the benefits of adopting best practices and
reengineering  Measurement of benchmark partners' processes to

compare and select among alternatives  SBA should set stretch
goals for reengineering.

 Goals for each loan monitoring activity  Goals to serve as
objectives of reengineering  Goals based on measurement data

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 35 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

28

Suggested Actions (continued)  SBA should identify from benchmark
partners

potential outsourcing and candidate systems for purchase.

 business activities  information processing services  commercial-
off- the- shelf software

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 36 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

29

Agency Comments

SBA agreed with our analysis of the benchmark study and plans to
implement the suggested actions. SBA plans to

 Review the benchmark project information to identify those
organizations with best practices for critical loan monitoring
processes and contact them to request a continuation of the
benchmark process to collect measurement data.

 Identify improvement goals for loan guaranty procedures and
lender oversight processes.

 Define and document processes of benchmark partners to assist in
comparing and selecting new processes that best meet SBA's
business needs.

Appendix I Briefing on the Benchmark Study for SBA's Loan
Monitoring System

Page 37 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

30

Agency Comments (continued)  Specifically address outsourcing as
SBA performs

quantitative analysis of the benchmark information. SBA plans to
identify and evaluate information systems for purchase while
completing the benchmark and business process reengineering.

 Contact other government agencies to identify their lender
oversight procedures for loan servicing, loss mitigation, and
liquidations actions, and address these during business process
reengineering efforts.

Page 38 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration
Appendi x I I

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 39 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 40 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 41 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 42 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 43 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 44 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 45 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 46 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix II Comments From the Small Business Administration

Page 47 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Page 48 GAO/AIMD-99-165 SBA Benchmark Study

Appendix III Major Contributors to This Report Appendi x I I I

Accounting and Information Management Division, Washington, D. C.

E. Randolph Tekeley, Technical Assistant Director Anh Q. Le,
Senior ADP/ Telecommunications Analyst John T. Christian, Senior
Business Process Analyst

(511471) Let t er

Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report and
testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be
sent to the following address, accompanied by a check or money
order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary,
VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are
discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail: U. S. General Accounting Office P. O. Box 37050
Washington, DC 20013

or visit: Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)
U. S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512- 6000 or by using
fax number (202) 512- 6061, or TDD (202) 512- 2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and
testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any
list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512- 6000 using a
touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how
to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, send
an e- mail message with info in the body to: info@ www. gao. gov
or visit GAO's World Wide Web Home Page at: http:// www. gao. gov

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548-
0001

Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid GAO Permit No. GI00

*** End of document. ***