National Science Foundation: External Assignments Under the	 
Intergovernmental Personnel Act's Mobility Program (24-SEP-01,	 
GAO-01-1016).							 
								 
The Intergovernmental Personnel Act's (IPA)mobility program	 
authorizes the temporary assignment of employees between federal 
agencies and state and local governments, universities, Indian	 
tribal governments, and other nonfederal groups. These		 
assignments, which may last up to four years, are intended to	 
increase cooperation between the federal government and the	 
non-federal entity. The National Science Foundation (NSF)	 
temporarily assigned 45 of its employees to nonfederal		 
organizations between 1995 and 2000, making NSF one of the most  
active users of the IPA program among federal agencies. NSF	 
assigned 29 participants to universities, one to a local	 
government, and 15 to other nonfederal organizations, such as	 
research institutions or professional associations. NSF's	 
implementation of the IPA program conformed to applicable laws	 
and regulations. Although the partnering institutions nearly	 
always made some financial contribution to these assignments, NSF
paid an estimated 78 percent of the total costs associated with  
the 45 assignments that GAO reviewed. The estimated total cost of
these assignments to NSF was about $7.2 million for the six-year 
period GAO covered. NSF's external IPA assignments benefit not	 
only the assignees but also the partnering institutions and NSF, 
according to NSF officials.					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-01-1016					        
    ACCNO:   A01628						        
    TITLE:   National Science Foundation: External Assignments Under  
             the Intergovernmental Personnel Act's Mobility Program           
     DATE:   09/24/2001 
  SUBJECT:   Government employees				 
	     Temporary employment				 
	     Cost analysis					 
	     Personnel management				 
	     NSF Intergovernmental Personnel Act		 
	     Mobility Program					 
								 

******************************************************************
** 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-01-1016
     
Report to the Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., House of
Representatives

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

September 2001 NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

External Assignments Under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act?s Mobility
Program

GAO- 01- 1016

Page i GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs Letter 1

Results in Brief 2 Background 3 NSF Has Been a Major User of the IPA Program
4 NSF?s Use of the IPA Program Conformed With Applicable Laws

and Regulations 7 While NSF and Partnering Institutions Have Shared Program
Costs,

NSF Paid the Vast Majority 9 NSF Believes That the IPA Program Provides
Significant Benefits,

but It Does Not Routinely Measure or Document Final Results 12 Conclusion 14
Recommendation for Executive Action 14 Agency Comments 14

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 16

Appendix II Comments From the National Science Foundation 18

Appendix III Comments From the Office of Personnel Management 19

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 20

Tables

Table 1: Length of NSF IPA Assignments, January 1995 Through December 2000 5
Table 2: Activities to Be Performed in NSF IPA Assignments,

January 1995 Through December 2000 6 Table 3: Purposes of External IPA
Assignments Approved by NSF,

January 1995 Through December 2000 7 Table 4: Total Estimated Costs for
External IPA Assignments,

January 1995 Through December 2000 10 Table 5: NSF?s Share of Salary and
Benefits Costs for External IPA

Assignments, January 1995 Through December 2000 10 Contents

Page 1 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

September 24, 2001 The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. House of
Representatives

Dear Mr. Sensenbrenner: In your earlier capacity as the Chairman of the
House Science Committee, you asked us to review how the National Science
Foundation (NSF) was using the Intergovernmental Personnel Act?s (IPA)
mobility program. You expressed concern about NSF?s conduct of the program
for employees detailed to external institutions. 1 The act authorizes the
temporary assignment of employees between federal agencies and state and
local governments, universities, Indian tribal governments, and other
nonfederal organizations. These assignments, which may last up to 4 years,
are intended to facilitate cooperation between the federal government and
the nonfederal entity through the temporary assignment of skilled personnel.
They may serve a variety of purposes, such as providing opportunities for an
employee?s career enrichment, offering technical and program expertise to
partnering organizations, or encouraging interaction among federal agencies,
universities, and other institutions.

Specifically, with respect to NSF?s assignment of its employees to external
organizations, you asked us to (1) determine the extent of NSF?s use of the
program, (2) determine whether the NSF program complies with applicable laws
and regulations, (3) identify the program?s costs to NSF and its partnering
institutions, and (4) describe the benefits that NSF has identified from
participating in the program. To obtain this information, among other steps,
we reviewed the program files for each NSF employee who participated in the
program from January 1995 through December 2000. We also interviewed the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) officials who are responsible for
developing governmentwide regulations and policies for the IPA program. A
complete description of our scope and methodology is contained in appendix
I.

1 While the legislation establishing the IPA program authorizes assignment
of employees in both directions, this report refers only to the external (or
outgoing) IPA program under which federal agencies send their employees to
nonfederal institutions.

United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

Page 2 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

From January 1995 through December 2000, NSF had 45 of its employees
temporarily assigned to work in nonfederal organizations through the IPA
program, making NSF one of the most active users of the program among
federal agencies. Most of NSF?s participants were senior- level officials,
such as program directors or other executive staff, who represented many
scientific and professional disciplines, including engineering, physics, and
human resources. NSF assigned 29 participants to universities, 1 to a local
government, and 15 to other nonfederal organizations, such as research
institutions or professional associations. Assignment objectives included
conducting research, organizing seminars or workshops, writing, providing
executive leadership, and teaching. The 33 assignments that these NSF
employees completed as of February 2001 ranged from 4 months to 4 years in
length, with the average assignment lasting about 22 months.

NSF?s implementation of the IPA program conformed with applicable laws and
regulations. Specifically, NSF complied with program requirements regarding
documentation of cost- sharing arrangements with partnering institutions,
waivers of certain reimbursable expenses, and length of assignments.

While the partnering institutions nearly always made some financial
contribution to the assignments we reviewed, overall, NSF paid an estimated
78 percent of the total associated costs. Our examination of 45 assignments
taking place in calendar years 1995 through 2000 found the estimated total
cost of these assignments to NSF to be about $7.2 million. Total salary and
benefits costs of completed assignments averaged about $207,000. In most
instances, NSF paid 100 percent of the participants? salaries and benefits,
while the partnering institutions paid for such expenses as assignment-
related travel and logistical support, such as office space and a computer.
NSF paid on average about 75 percent of the salaries. Governmentwide,
federal agencies paid about 88 percent of salaries for external IPA
assignments, according to OPM data on the program for fiscal year 2000.

NSF?s external IPA assignments provide benefits not only to the assignees
but also to the partnering institutions and NSF, according to NSF officials.
NSF officials view the assignments as sabbaticals that allow employees to
enhance their academic and professional skills and credentials. They also
consider these assignments to be opportunities for staff to gain insights
from working first- hand with universities and other institutions in
implementing NSF?s programs and strengthening partnerships between NSF and
these institutions. Moreover, NSF officials stated that the Results in Brief

Page 3 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

partnering institutions benefit from the expertise shared by the NSF
employees. Although NSF is confident that the IPA program yields important
results, the agency does not routinely measure or document program results
or benefits. With such information on the results of these assignments, the
agency would be better able to assess the extent to which the program is
achieving its intended goals and would have more information concerning what
steps, if any, may be needed to improve the program. This report contains a
recommendation to the Director of NSF to implement procedures to routinely
document the results of the external IPA program. NSF and OPM reviewed and
commented on a draft of this report. NSF found the report to be fair and
accurate and concurred with our recommendation. OPM also agreed with our
recommendation and indicated that it would reemphasize to all agencies the
importance of assessing the results of the program.

Under the authority of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970, as
amended, federal agencies, such as NSF, 2 may temporarily assign personnel
to or receive personnel from eligible nonfederal organizations for the
mutual benefit of all participating organizations. Most IPA assignments
under this act (about 82 percent of the 1,386 agreements 3 reported for
fiscal year 2000) were incoming assignments, according to OPM, the agency
responsible for administering the program for all federal agencies. Under
incoming assignments, employees from nonfederal organizations come to work
for the federal government. The remaining assignments involve external, or
outgoing, assignments, in which federal agencies send their employees to
other organizations. According to OPM guidance, agencies may use the
mobility assignments to achieve a number of objectives, including
strengthening the management capabilities of federal agencies and partnering
institutions, transferring new technologies and approaches to solving
governmental problems, and providing program and developmental experience
that enhances assignees? job performance. Federal agencies are expected,
when appropriate, to arrange for

2 NSF is an independent federal agency that promotes and supports research
and education in science and engineering primarily through financial
assistance to educational institutions, businesses, and other research
institutions. NSF, which had a budget of about $4.4 billion in fiscal year
2001, funds about 10,000 research and education projects in science and
engineering a year.

3 This total does not include more than 850 special purpose IPA agreements
approved in fiscal year 2000 by the Department of Health and Human Services?
Indian Health Service. Special conditions apply to this program that
distinguish these assignments from other IPA assignments. Background

Page 4 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

partnering organizations to share the costs of IPA assignments. IPA
assignments are finalized through written agreements signed by the federal
agency, the partnering institution, and the employee. Initial IPA
assignments may last for up to 2 years and agencies can extend them for up
to another 2 years. The act and OPM?s regulations require as a condition of
accepting an IPA assignment that a federal employee agree to return to
federal service for a period equal to the length of the assignment. If the
employee fails to carry out this agreement, he or she must reimburse the
federal agency for its share of the costs of the assignment (exclusive of
salary and benefits). The act, regulations, and OPM guidance state that
federal agency officials may waive this requirement ?for good and sufficient
reason.? For example, federal agencies often waive this requirement when an
employee retires at the end of an IPA assignment, according to OPM
officials.

According to OPM data, NSF has been one of the most active users of the IPA
program among those federal agencies sending employees on temporary
assignments to universities, state and local governments, or other
nonfederal organizations. From January 1995 through December 2000, 45 NSF
employees participated in such external assignments. The average assignment
lasted about 22 months. Nearly two- thirds (29) of the participants went to
universities, 1 to a local government, and the other 15 to other nonfederal
organizations, such as research institutions like Philanthropic Research,
Inc., or professional associations like the American Sociological
Association. Most of the participants were seniorlevel officials who
represented numerous scientific and professional disciplines. The
assignments offered NSF staff, among other things, the opportunity to
conduct research, teach, or update their professional knowledge and skills
in their fields of expertise. The assignments also afforded participants the
opportunity to share NSF expertise with others, to implement NSF programs,
and to help potential grant applicants better understand how NSF evaluates
proposals.

With 45 NSF employees on external IPA assignments during our review period,
NSF has been one of the most active users of the program among federal
agencies in recent years. According to OPM data, 37 agencies participated in
the external IPA program in fiscal year 2000. 4 Of those, only four had more
external assignments and each of them had many more

4 According to OPM IPA program managers, the 37 reporting agencies include
25 departments and independent agencies and 12 components of the Department
of Defense. NSF Has Been a

Major User of the IPA Program

Page 5 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

employees than NSF. 5 During any calendar year, NSF had anywhere from 13 to
22 employees on external IPA assignments for at least part of the year,
representing between 1 and 2 percent of NSF?s employees. Nearly two- thirds
(29) of the 45 participants were temporarily assigned to universities, 1 to
a local government, and the other 15 to other nonfederal organizations,
including research institutions and professional associations.

As of February 2001, 33 of these 45 assignments had been completed and 12
were ongoing. The 33 completed assignments ranged from 4 months to 4 years
in length: two- thirds (22) of the completed assignments lasted 2 years or
less, while one- third (11) lasted more than 2 years. (See table 1.) Of the
completed assignments, the average lasted about 22 months.

Table 1: Length of NSF IPA Assignments, January 1995 Through December 2000
Length of assignment Number of

completed assignments Percentage of completed assignments

1 year 13 39.4 >1 year but 2 years 9 27.3 >2 years but 3 years 4 12.1 >3
years but 4 years 7 21.2

Total 33 100.0

Source: Developed by GAO from data provided by NSF.

Most of NSF?s IPA participants were senior- level officials, such as program
directors or other executive staff, who represented a wide variety of
academic and professional backgrounds. Fourteen participants were members of
the Senior Executive Service. On average, the participants had been employed
by NSF for about 15 years before they began their assignments. At least one
participant came from each of NSF?s seven

5 The four agencies are the Environmental Protection Agency (with about 18,
000 employees), the Department of the Army (with about 216,000 civilian
employees), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (with about
19, 000 employees), and the Department of Health and Human Services (with
about 64, 000 employees). In contrast, NSF had about 1,200 employees.
Another agency- the Department of Veterans Affairs (with more than 200,000
employees)- may also have had more external IPA assignments, but we and OPM
were unable to determine this number because the Department did not provide
data to OPM in accordance with OPM?s instructions for coding incoming and
external assignments.

Page 6 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

major organizational units, such as the Social, Behavioral, and Economic
Sciences Directorate or the Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate.
Nine of the participants came from NSF professional staff offices, including
the Office of the General Counsel and the Office of Information and Resource
Management.

The NSF employees undertook IPA assignments for numerous reasons, including
the opportunity to return to their fields of expertise to conduct research,
teach, or update their professional knowledge and skills. These assignments
were also designed to allow employees to share their NSF expertise. In some
cases, the assignments allowed NSF employees to promote or implement NSF
programs. ?Conducting research? was the most frequently cited assignment
objective. (See table 2.) Among the variety of activities described as
?other? were helping to establish a science museum and developing strategies
to increase disadvantaged minority involvement in mathematics and science.

Table 2: Activities to Be Performed in NSF IPA Assignments, January 1995
Through December 2000

Activity Number of assignments Percentage of

assignments

Conducting research 20 44 Producing books or other written materials 17 38
Organizing seminars, workshops, outreach activities, and other projects 17
38 Providing executive leadership 17 38 Teaching 9 20 Other 19 42

Note: Purpose categories are not mutually exclusive. Source: Developed by
GAO from data provided by NSF.

Assignments were typically intended to serve purposes identified in NSF?s
strategic plan, such as supporting basic science research or supporting
science and engineering education programs. A large majority of the
assignments had several purposes in common, namely, to provide developmental
opportunities for the employee, to share NSF expertise, and to support
science and engineering education programs. (See table 3.)

Page 7 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

Table 3: Purposes of External IPA Assignments Approved by NSF, January 1995
Through December 2000

Purpose of assignment Number of assignments Percentage of

assignments

Provide developmental opportunity for employee 43 96 Share NSF expertise 37
82 Support science and engineering education programs at all levels and in
all fields of science and engineering 35 78 Strengthen relations with
partnering institutions 25 56 Support NSF initiatives/ programs 25 56
Support programs to strengthen scientific and engineering research potential
23 51 Support basic science research and research fundamental to the
engineering process 19 42 Support an information base for science and
engineering appropriate for development of national and international policy

16 36 Transfer new ideas and technologies 8 18 Note: Purpose categories are
not mutually exclusive. Source: Developed by GAO from data provided by NSF.

NSF?s implementation of the external IPA program conformed with applicable
laws and regulations for the program issued by OPM. We reviewed such items
as (1) the requirement to document the rationale for cost- sharing
arrangements for individual assignments when NSF paid more than 50 percent
of the costs, (2) NSF?s procedures for determining whether to waive
employees? liability for repaying certain costs when the employees did not
return to federal service for a period equal to the length of their IPA
assignments, and (3) the requirement that assignments not exceed 4 years in
length. We found that NSF operated within the broad discretion provided by
the IPA program in approving cost- share arrangements and granting waivers
of reimbursable costs. NSF also limited IPA assignments to no more than 4
years.

NSF complied with the requirement in program guidance to document instances
when the agency paid for most of an assignment?s salary costs. OPM and NSF
guidance states that partnering agencies should share in the costs of the
assignments, as appropriate. The guidance further states that the agency
that receives the larger benefit should pay the larger share of costs. More
specifically, NSF guidance requires full documentation of the rationale when
NSF pays more than 50 percent of the salary and benefits for an assignment.
We found that NSF had paid more than 50 percent of salary and benefits in 38
of the 45 cases in our review. We reviewed each NSF?s Use of the IPA

Program Conformed With Applicable Laws and Regulations

Page 8 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

of these instances and found that in all cases the files contained
documentation to support NSF?s decision to pay the larger share.

NSF exercised its discretion in accordance with program requirements when it
approved waivers of reimbursable expenses for employees who did not return
to federal service as required. According to the act, regulations, program
guidance, and the IPA agreement( s) that each participant signed,
participants must agree to return to federal service upon completion of
their assignments for a period equal to the length of the assignments. This
provision is known as the obligated service requirement. If an IPA
participant does not return to federal service at all or does not return for
a period equal to the length of the assignment, the participant is liable to
the government for reimbursement of certain assignment- related expenses
exclusive of salary and benefits. Such reimbursable expenses may include per
diem allowances, relocation expenses, and travel.

According to the OPM officials responsible for IPA program oversight and
General Services Administration officials responsible for federal travel
policy, federal agencies governmentwide use discretion when approving
waivers in certain instances, such as an employee?s retirement at the end of
an IPA assignment. Under the act, regulations, and OPM guidance, agencies
have discretion to waive such reimbursements for good and sufficient reason.
We found that 14 of the 33 participants who had completed their IPA
assignments by the time of our review did not complete the obligated service
requirement and were no longer NSF employees. Another three participants
were still NSF employees but had not yet completed the service requirement.
Of the 14 participants, 7 had received payments from NSF that were
potentially reimbursable. NSF received full repayment of the per diem
allowance on behalf of one of these seven participants. NSF approved full or
partial waivers for five other participants totaling about $60,000. In the
five cases for which NSF documented the amounts of the waivers, the waivers
ranged from $6,440 to $16,772. The sixth participant received a waiver for
an unspecified amount of travel costs. Of these six employees who received
waivers, three received them upon retirement. The other three received
waivers when they resigned from federal service.

The length of assignments approved by NSF conformed to the program?s
authorizing legislation, program regulations, and OPM?s guidance. According
to these sources, assignments cannot exceed a total of 4 years. None of the
33 completed NSF assignments we reviewed exceeded

Page 9 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

4 years. Seven of the completed assignments exceeded 3 years, with two of
these lasting 4 years.

We estimate the total cost of the 45 assignments to be about $9.3 million. 6
We estimate that NSF paid 77.5 percent of the total costs while the
partnering institutions paid 22.5 percent. We also estimate that NSF paid,
on average, about 77 percent of salaries and benefits, the largest
components of assignment costs. NSF also typically paid most of the costs
incurred for household moves or per diem expenses and for travel to and from
assignment locations. In 41 of the 45 assignments, the partnering
institution made at least some contribution to the costs of the assignments.
The partnering institutions frequently paid some or all of the costs of
logistical support and assignment- related travel.

NSF spent about $7.2 million on 45 IPA assignments that were ongoing from
January 1995 through December 2000. On average, NSF paid about 77 percent of
the salary and benefits costs, the largest components of assignment costs.
(See table 4.) Governmentwide data are not available on the total costs of
IPA assignments or on the combined costs of salaries and benefits for
participants. However, such data are available for IPA salaries alone. Using
data collected for the 45 NSF assignments we reviewed, we calculated, on
average, that NSF paid about 75 percent of salary costs. This is smaller
than the average that other federal agencies paid for salaries (about 88
percent), which we calculated by analyzing OPM?s data for fiscal year 2000.
7

6 Total estimated costs do not include travel and logistical support costs.
These types of costs are not included in the IPA agreements. 7 We were
unable to include data for the Department of Veterans Affairs? program
because that department did not provide data to OPM in accordance with OPM?s
instructions for coding incoming and external assignments. While NSF and

Partnering Institutions Have Shared Program Costs, NSF Paid the Vast
Majority

Page 10 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

Table 4: Total Estimated Costs for External IPA Assignments, January 1995
Through December 2000

Dollars in thousands

Type of cost NSF costs NSF percentage Partner

costs Partner percentage Total costs

Salary $5,988 75.3 $1,962 24.7 $7,950 Benefits 1, 070 89.4 127 10.6 1, 197
Per diem/ relocation 182 94.4 11 5. 6 193

Total $7,240 77.5 $2,100 22.5 $9,340

Source: Developed by GAO from data provided by NSF.

NSF paid all salary and benefits costs in 25 of the 45 assignments. NSF and
its partnering institutions shared salary and benefits costs for 19 of the
other 20 assignments; in the remaining case, the partnering institution paid
all salary and benefits costs. (See table 5.) On average, the salary and
benefits costs of the 33 completed assignments totaled about $207,000.

Table 5: NSF?s Share of Salary and Benefits Costs for External IPA
Assignments, January 1995 Through December 2000

Share of salaries and benefits paid by NSF Number of

assignments Percentage of assignments

100% 25 56 >50% but <100% 13 29 > 0% but 50% 6 13 0% 1 2

Total 45 100

Source: Developed by GAO from data provided by NSF.

NSF documented one or more reasons in instances when it assumed the majority
of assignment costs. For example, according to documentation in the IPA
files, NSF paid greater than 50 percent of the costs in 16 cases where it
considered the assignment developmental for the employee, in 14 cases where
it determined that the assignment supported its mission, and in 11 cases
where the partnering institution had limited financial resources. Also, NSF
paid most of the costs in three cases where the assignments were designed to
benefit a broader audience, such as several institutions or a nationwide
constituency. For example, in one of these three cases, the assignment was
intended to help NSF?s partnering institution and other nearby colleges
expand their engineering programs and attract more women and minority
undergraduates. The IPA participant was to help establish a coalition of
institutions whose

Page 11 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

resources could be shared to improve education programs and reduce costs. In
another assignment, the director of NSF?s Division of Undergraduate
Education was sent on an IPA assignment, the overall purpose of which was to
accelerate and solidify improvements nationwide in undergraduate science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology education. This assignment
included, among other things, collaborating with various scientific and
educational societies to raise attention to the issue of undergraduate
education and organizing regional workshops to promote educational reform.
In this case, NSF paid all of the assignment costs except logistical
support.

Partnering institutions frequently contributed to participants? expenses for
travel and logistical support (such as providing office or laboratory space
and computer equipment). Although NSF?s IPA files did not indicate the
dollar amounts spent in these categories, the files did specify which entity
paid travel costs. NSF typically paid for any travel during the assignment
that was associated with an assignee?s permanent job responsibilities at
NSF, according to NSF officials responsible for the IPA program. However,
for 27 of the 38 assignments with IPA files that mentioned travel costs
associated with carrying out the assignments, the partnering institution
paid at least some of these costs. We also reviewed information pertaining
to logistical support, which OPM guidance indicates that federal agencies
should not pay. We found that in 23 of the 24 cases in which such costs were
mentioned, the partnering institution paid the total cost. The other file
indicated that NSF and the partnering institution shared these costs. 8

NSF paid most of the additional costs associated with sending 19 employees
on ?non- local? IPA assignments. 9 The additional costs of nonlocal
assignments included such expenses as moving an employee?s household goods
to and from the assignment location; payments (also known as per diem
allowances) to help cover the costs of lodging, meals, and incidental
expenses for employees who chose not to receive relocation benefits; and
travel expenses at the beginning and end of the

8 In this atypical case, the NSF employee worked out of his home during a
portion of his IPA assignment rather than at the partnering institution,
which, in this case, was in Phoenix, Arizona. NSF paid for equipment, fax,
reproduction, and secured telephone service to enable him to work at home.

9 These assignments were not within commuting distance of NSF?s Arlington,
Virginia, headquarters.

Page 12 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

assignment. Of the 19 employees on non- local assignments, 3 relocated and
NSF paid for these household moves. Relocation costs averaged $6,888 per
employee. Of the 16 employees on non- local assignments who did not
relocate, 13 received per diem allowances from NSF averaging $12,389 per
employee and 1 received per diem of $10,800 from the partnering institution.
The other two employees did not receive per diem allowances.

According to NSF officials, the agency?s active participation in the
external IPA program provides both tangible and intangible benefits to NSF,
the assignees, and the partnering institutions. Moreover, in some instances,
the program?s results extend even further. For example, NSF intended some
assignments to benefit several universities or to benefit universities
nationwide. Despite NSF?s significant commitment to this program, the agency
does not routinely identify the final results and benefits of external IPA
assignments. Nor have OPM or others independently analyzed the results of
NSF?s external IPA program. Neither the program?s authorizing legislation
nor its implementing regulations contain a specific requirement for analysis
of the program?s results. However, the Government Performance and Results
Act places a broad responsibility on federal agencies to focus on the
results of activities they undertake, to improve the effectiveness of
federal programs, and to increase agencies? accountability to the public.

Certain benefits are common to most IPA assignments, if not all, according
to NSF officials. First, through the efforts of the IPA assignee, the
partnering institution (as well as other institutions that the assignee may
interact with during the assignment) becomes better informed about NSF?s
programs and practices. This information can help the partner in subsequent
dealings with NSF, such as in submitting grant proposals or participating in
NSF programs. The NSF employee on assignment often benefits from career
development opportunities and intellectual enrichment. Moreover, NSF
officials believe that the opportunity to participate in the IPA program
helps NSF attract and maintain a highly skilled workforce. They stated that
NSF also often benefits from the partnering institution?s increased
familiarity with NSF programs and procedures. They also believe that the
sustained interaction between assignees and the participating institutions
heightens NSF?s credibility in the research community and builds
partnerships between NSF and the participating university, nonprofit
organization, or local government. NSF Believes That the

IPA Program Provides Significant Benefits, but It Does Not Routinely Measure
or Document Final Results

Page 13 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

Although NSF officials are confident that the external IPA program yields
important results, the agency does not routinely measure or document the
program?s final results or benefits. At our request, NSF reviewed a random
sample of 15 of the 33 completed assignments from 1995 through 2000 to
determine the extent to which some mention of results of these assignments
had been documented. NSF no longer maintained records on the four
participants who had left the agency at some point after their IPA
assignments and did not have any documentation of the results of these
assignments. NSF provided some documentation of assignment results for 10 of
the 11 IPA participants still employed by NSF. This documentation included
annual performance appraisals, requests for assignment extensions, or other
sources- including progress reports that the IPA participant submitted to
NSF or feedback that the partnering institution gave to NSF about the
assignee?s performance. In 2 of the 10 cases, the only documentation
provided was prepared before the end of the IPA assignments and thus may not
have been reflective of all the results eventually realized.

The level of detail included in describing the results of these 10
assignments ranged from minimal to extensive. Some descriptions were based
on the participant?s perspective of the benefits; others were based on the
perspective of either the participant?s supervisor at the partnering
institution or his or her supervisor at NSF. In one case, the partnering
institution?s assessment of the assignee not only described the assignment?s
benefits but also offered several recommendations for increasing the
program?s usefulness. The results mentioned in these documents were
consistent with the types of objectives identified in the IPA assignment
agreements and described by NSF officials, such as increasing universities?
awareness and understanding of NSF programs; providing effective leadership,
mentoring, and teaching skills; conducting and publishing research; and
bringing new ideas back to NSF.

In addition to the documentation provided by NSF on the results of 10
assignments, we reviewed NSF?s IPA program files to identify information on
results that may have been included in requests for assignment extensions.
In 18 of the 21 assignments for which NSF approved an extension as of
February 2001, the requests mentioned the results accomplished to date. As
noted with the data on results that NSF provided us, we also found that the
documentation of results varied widely in terms of the level of detail.

Neither the IPA program?s authorizing legislation nor its implementing
regulations require that agencies determine the results of individual IPA

Page 14 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

assignments. However, the Government Performance and Results Act places a
broad responsibility on federal agencies to focus on the results of
activities they undertake, to improve the effectiveness of federal programs,
and to increase agencies? accountability to the public. Without routine
documentation or analysis of the final results of its external IPA
assignments, NSF has limited assurance that the program is accomplishing all
of what the agency expects from it. With a more complete understanding of
the results of individual assignments, the agency would have greater
assurance that its resources for this program were being well spent and that
program improvements, if needed, could be identified and implemented.

NSF views the external IPA program as an essential component of its efforts
to attract and maintain a high- quality workforce. It also considers the
program to be a key element in the agency?s ability to maintain credibility
among its stakeholder communities, which are engaged in conducting
scientific research and improving science and mathematics education. Despite
its commitment to the program, NSF does not have a procedure to routinely
evaluate the extent to which specific IPA assignments, many of which cost
the agency hundreds of thousands of dollars and divert staff from the agency
for several years, actually achieve their intended goals for the agency, the
participants, and the partnering institutions. With a better understanding
of the results of individual assignments, the agency could better assure
that its resources were being well spent and that information was collected
that could serve to improve the program, if needed.

To enable NSF to better evaluate the overall success of the IPA program and
to identify any needed program improvements, we recommend that the agency
implement procedures to consistently document the final results of the
individual assignments.

We provided copies of a draft of this report to NSF and OPM for review and
comment. NSF found the draft report to be fair and accurate. NSF concurred
with our conclusion and recommendation and indicated that it has already
begun to take steps to implement the recommendation. Specifically, NSF said
that it has amended agency policy to include a requirement that employees
document their activities and accomplishments at the conclusion of an IPA
assignment. Moreover, NSF will now require that when IPA assignments extend
more than 1 performance year, a report documenting activities and
accomplishments be completed at the time of each performance evaluation.
(See app. II.) In commenting on our draft report and its recommendation to
NSF, OPM Conclusion

Recommendation for Executive Action

Agency Comments

Page 15 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

indicated that it would, as part of a revision of its IPA program guidance,
reemphasize for all federal agencies the importance of establishing
mechanisms to assess the program?s success. (See app. III.)

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from
the date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies to appropriate
House and Senate Committees and Subcommittees; interested Members of the
Congress; the Director, NSF; the Director, OPM; and other interested
parties. We will also make copies available to others upon request.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me
at (202) 512- 3841. Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix
IV.

Sincerely yours, Jim Wells Director, Natural Resources

and Environment Team

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Page 16 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

Concerning the external Intergovernmental Personnel Act?s (IPA) mobility
program, we were asked to provide information on (1) the National Science
Foundation?s (NSF) use of the program, (2) the NSF program?s compliance with
applicable laws and regulations, (3) the program?s costs to NSF and its
partnering institutions, and (4) the benefits that NSF has identified from
participating in the program.

To obtain information on NSF?s use of the program, we interviewed the NSF
officials responsible for implementing the agency?s IPA program. We reviewed
the program files for each NSF employee who had participated in the external
IPA program from January 1995 through December 2000. We systematically
collected data on each external IPA assignment to facilitate our analysis.
We also reviewed our past reports and testimony that relate to the IPA
program. To determine how NSF?s IPA program compared to those of other
federal agencies, we analyzed the Office of Personnel Management?s (OPM)
database on governmentwide participation in the program for fiscal year
2000. Although we performed certain data reliability tests of the database
and, working with OPM, corrected numerous inconsistencies or errors in
participation data that agencies had reported to OPM, we did not verify the
accuracy of the OPM data. In estimating the average percentage of external
IPA salary costs paid by federal agencies, we were unable to include data
for the Department of Veterans Affairs? program because that department did
not provide data to OPM in accordance with OPM?s instructions for coding
incoming and external assignments.

To assess compliance with applicable laws and regulations, we interviewed
the OPM officials who are responsible for developing governmentwide
regulations and policies for the IPA program. We also interviewed officials
from the General Services Administration?s Travel Management Policy Staff
who are responsible for travel regulations applicable to the program. We
reviewed applicable legislation, regulations, manuals and handbooks, and
other materials relating to the IPA program. We interviewed officials from
NSF?s Office of Inspector General and reviewed reports of investigations
performed by that office that dealt with either the agency?s IPA program or
any of the NSF employees who participated in the assignments in our review.
We reviewed OPM?s May 2000 audit report on NSF?s fiscal year 1999 program
operations, which included NSF?s IPA program. We also reviewed federal court
cases and Comptroller General decisions dealing with federal travel policy
and other IPA- related issues. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Page 17 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

To review IPA program costs to NSF and its partnering institutions, we
analyzed the cost- sharing arrangements for the 73 IPA agreements (initial
IPA agreements and any extensions) that were in effect between January 1995
and December 2000 for the 45 assignments in our review. To estimate total
program costs, we combined the total estimated costs for salary, benefits,
and per diem or relocation expenses as specified in the 73 IPA agreements.
We reduced these costs, as appropriate, when assignments were terminated
prior to the completion date specified in the IPA agreements. We did not
adjust these costs, however, to reflect the annual federal salary
adjustments that affected some assignments. We also did not include two
other IPA- related costs- travel expenses and logistical support- that are
generally not specified in the IPA agreements and not available from the IPA
program files.

To obtain information on results that NSF has identified from participating
in the program, we reviewed the IPA files to identify information on results
that might have been included in requests for assignment extensions. We also
asked NSF to determine, for 15 randomly selected assignments, the extent to
which documentation was also available from any other sources within the
agency, such as personnel files or performance appraisals.

We performed our review from February 2001 to September 2001 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Appendix II: Comments From the National Science Foundation

Page 18 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

Appendix II: Comments From the National Science Foundation

Appendix III: Comments From the Office of Personnel Management

Page 19 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

Appendix III: Comments From the Office of Personnel Management

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

Page 20 GAO- 01- 1016 Mobility Programs

Robin Nazzaro, (202) 512- 6246 In addition, Susan Swearingen, Charles
Hessler, Lynn Musser, Jerry Sandau, Mindi Weisenbloom, and Jonathan S.
McMurray made key contributions to this report. Appendix IV: GAO Contact and
Staff

Acknowledgments GAO Contact Staff Acknowledgments

(360033)

The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of reports are
$2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are also accepted.

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

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100 700 4 th St., NW (corner of 4 th and G Sts. NW) Washington, DC
20013

Orders by phone:

(202) 512- 6000 fax: (202) 512- 6061 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.

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an email
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

Contact one:

 Web site: http:// www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm

 E- mail: fraudnet@ gao. gov

 1- 800- 424- 5454 (automated answering system) Ordering Information

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
*** End of document. ***