Department of the Interior: Status of Achieving Key Outcomes and
Addressing Major Management Challenges (15-JUN-01, GAO-01-759).
This report reviews the Department of the Interior's fiscal year
2000 performance report and fiscal year 2002 performance report
plan required by the Government Performance and Results Act.
Specifically, GAO discusses Interior's progress in achieving the
following four outcomes: (1) maintaining the health of federally
managed land, water, and renewable resources; (2) ensuring
visitors' satisfaction with the availability, accessibility,
diversity, and quality of national parks; (3) meeting the federal
government's responsibility to preserve and protect Indian trust
lands and resources; and (4) ensuring the safe and
environmentally sound development of mineral resources. GAO found
that it cannot judge the agency's progress in promoting the
health of federally managed land, water, and renewable resources
because the goals Interior has reported that are associated with
this outcome do not foster a broad or departmentalwide approach
to measuring progress. Although the Park Service's strategies for
continuing to meet and exceed its visitor satisfaction and
visitor education goals appear clear and reasonable, the agency's
fiscal year 2002 performance plan does not provide information on
the strategic human capital management strategies to achieve this
outcome. GAO cannot judge the Bureau of Indian Affair's progress
in protecting Indian trust lands and resources because the annual
goals it has established are output-related and do not assess
progress toward the outcome. The Minerals Management Service has
had mixed results in meeting its mineral development goals, and
its goals for meeting its fiscal year 2002 goals seem reasonable.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-01-759
ACCNO: A01060
TITLE: Department of the Interior: Status of Achieving Key
Outcomes and Addressing Major Management Challenges
DATE: 06/15/2001
SUBJECT: Indian lands
Land management
Performance measures
Personnel management
Program evaluation
Public lands
Reporting requirements
Strategic planning
Government Performance and Results Act
GPRA
MMS Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas
Leasing Program
Pacific Northwest Forest Plan
South Florida Ecosystem Restoration
Initiative
******************************************************************
** 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-01-759
Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.
S. Senate
United States General Accounting Office
GAO
June 2001 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Status of Achieving Key Outcomes and
Addressing Major Management Challenges
GAO- 01- 759
Page i GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes Letter 1
Results in Brief 2 Background 5 Assessment of the Department of the
Interior?s Progress and
Strategies in Accomplishing Selected Key Outcomes 7 Comparison of Interior?s
Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Reports
and Fiscal Year 2002 Performance Plans With the Prior Year?s Reports and
Plans for Selected Key Outcomes 12 Interior?s Efforts to Address Its Major
Management Challenges
Identified by GAO 14 Scope and Methodology 15 Agency Comments 16
Appendix I Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges 18
Appendix II GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 30
Tables
Table 1: Major Management Challenges 19
Figures
Figure 1: Department of the Interior Onshore Lands 6
Abbreviations
BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs BLM Bureau of Land Management BOR Bureau of
Reclamation FWS Fish and Wildlife Service GPRA Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 MMS Minerals Management Service OIG Office of the
Inspector General OMB Office of Management and Budget OSM Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Contents
Page 1 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
June 15, 2001 The Honorable Fred Thompson Ranking Minority Member Committee
on Governmental Affairs United States Senate
Dear Senator Thompson: As you requested, we reviewed the Department of the
Interior?s fiscal year 2000 performance report and fiscal year 2002
performance plan required by the Government Performance and Results Act of
1993 to assess Interior?s progress in achieving selected key outcomes that
you identified as important mission areas for the Department. 1 Interior has
10 plans in total, including 1 departmental overview report and plan and 9
agency reports and plans. 2 We reviewed the same four selected key outcomes
we addressed in our June 2000 review of Interior?s fiscal year 1999
performance report and fiscal year 2001 performance plan to provide a
baseline by which to measure Interior?s performance from year to year. 3 The
selected outcomes are that
the health of federally managed land, water, and renewable resources is
maintained; visitors safely enjoy and are satisfied with the availability,
accessibility,
diversity, and quality of national park facilities and services; the
federal government effectively meets its trust responsibilities to
protect and preserve Indian trust lands and trust resources; and safe and
environmentally sound mineral development occurs on the
Outer Continental Shelf, for which the public receives fair value. 1 This
report is one of a series on the 24 Chief Financial Officers Act agencies?
fiscal year 2000 performance reports and fiscal year 2002 performance plans.
2 The nine agencies are the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land
Management, Bureau of Reclamation, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Minerals
Management Service, National Park Service, Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, U. S. Geological Survey, and Office of Insular
Affairs. The Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians did not
produce a separate report for fiscal year 2000 or a plan for fiscal year
2002. The Office discussed its progress and provided fiscal year 2002 goals
in the Department?s overview. 3 Observations on the Department of the
Interior?s Fiscal Year 1999 Performance Report and Fiscal Year 2001
Performance Plan (GAO/ RCED- 00- 204R, June 30, 2000).
United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548
Page 2 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
The first outcome is broader than the three others in that it relates to one
of Interior?s departmentwide goals and covers activities conducted by
multiple agencies within Interior. For this reason, we would expect
Interior?s overview to capture the progress being made toward this outcome
for the entire Department, and we used Interior?s overview report to assess
progress toward the outcome rather than reviewing each of the agency reports
and plans. The last three outcomes relate directly to goals in the reports
and plans of the National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and
Minerals Management Service, and for this reason, we reviewed the agencies?
reports and plans to assess progress toward the outcomes. As agreed, using
the selected key outcomes for Interior as a framework, we (1) assessed the
progress Interior has made in achieving these outcomes and the strategies it
has in place to achieve them and (2) compared Interior?s fiscal year 2000
performance reports and fiscal year 2002 performance plans with its prior
year performance reports and plans for these outcomes. Additionally, we
agreed to analyze how Interior has addressed the major management
challenges, including the governmentwide high- risk areas of strategic human
capital management and information security, which we and Interior?s
Inspector General identified. 4 Appendix I provides detailed information on
how Interior has addressed these challenges.
Interior?s reports indicate mixed progress in achieving its key outcomes. In
general, Interior?s strategies for achieving these key outcomes appear to be
clear and reasonable.
Planned outcome: The health of federally managed land, water, and
renewable resources is maintained. As we reported last year, we cannot judge
the progress the agency has made in achieving this outcome because the goals
Interior has reported that are associated with this outcome do not foster a
broad or departmentwide approach to measuring progress. Interior?s
strategies for meeting its fiscal year 2002 goals appear to be clear and
reasonable. For example, the agency is partnering with nonprofit
organizations to reclaim damaged land.
4 We designated strategic human capital management as a governmentwide high-
risk issue in January 2001 because human capital issues have been a long-
standing problem for many federal agencies. The inclusion of human resources
in performance plans has been required as part of the Government Performance
and Results Act process since 1999. In addition, OMB Circular A- 11 contains
instructions to all federal agencies to include human resources in their
performance plans. Results in Brief
Page 3 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Planned outcome: Visitors safely enjoy and are satisfied with the
availability, accessibility, diversity, and quality of national park
facilities and services. The Park Service reported that it made progress in
achieving this outcome because it met or exceeded its three goals- visitor
satisfaction, safety, and education- related to this outcome in fiscal year
2000. However, in the past we have reported concerns about the completeness
of data related to the goal that deals with visitor safety. The Park
Service?s strategies for continuing to meet and exceed its visitor
satisfaction and visitor education goals appear clear and reasonable,
although its fiscal year 2002 performance plan does not provide information
on the strategic human capital management strategies to achieve this
outcome. Planned outcome: The federal government effectively meets its
trust
responsibilities to protect and preserve Indian trust lands and trust
resources. We cannot judge the progress the Bureau of Indian Affairs has
made in achieving this outcome because the annual goals it has established
are output- related and do not assess progress toward the outcome. Because
the Bureau?s goals are output- oriented, the strategies are self-
explanatory and easier to implement than the strategies would be for
outcome- oriented goals. As a result, the Bureau?s strategies to achieve the
goals appear to be clear and reasonable. Planned outcome: Safe and
environmentally sound mineral development
occurs on the Outer Continental Shelf, for which the public receives fair
value. The Minerals Management Service reported that it is making progress
in achieving the goals associated with this outcome because it met two
(environmentally sound development and fair market value) of the performance
goals it has established. The Service believes it did not meet its third
goal of safety because more accurate data- which were previously
understated- were provided. Because of such data verification and validation
issues, the Service continues to reevaluate each of its performance
indicators. Overall, the Service?s strategies appear reasonable and clearly
discuss how it plans to meet its fiscal year 2002 goals. For example, it is
developing a new environmental index that will focus on Service- permitted
activities that it believes will alleviate some data collection problems.
Although Interior has additional work to do on two of the four outcomes we
reviewed, this year?s reports and plans, compared with the prior year?s
reports and plans, reflect continued improvement. Interior has continued to
incorporate changes that are based on our recommendations and
recommendations made by its Inspector General and others. In particular,
this year?s reports and plans contain more thorough discussions of data
verification and validation efforts. For example, the Bureau of Indian
Page 4 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Affairs reported that it will use a checklist to document trust evaluations,
which will help verify the number of trust transactions it will perform.
Also, Interior plans to continue to improve its performance reports and
plans by identifying specific areas in which it needs strategic human
capital management and by providing information on efforts to deal with
potential information technology issues. Although Interior has shown
improvement, it can continue to improve its reports and plans in the future
by adjusting some of its strategies for achieving its goals, particularly if
it misses performance targets. For example, the Park Service has not yet
revised its strategy to gather better data on fire safety, even though we
reported this deficiency last year.
Interior has taken a number of actions to address five of the six major
management challenges that we have identified. It reported some progress for
the high- risk area of strategic human capital management but did not report
progress for the high- risk area related to information security.
Recognizing the importance of strategic human capital management, Interior
indicated that it plans to begin workforce planning in fiscal year 2002 and
is currently working to provide the Office of Management and Budget with a
workforce analysis by June 29, 2001. However, Interior has not yet
substantially addressed how it will use human capital to achieve its goals.
In the area of information technology, Interior began implementing national
security criteria this year. Interior has generally made progress in fiscal
year 2000 toward improving the management of national parks, Indian trust
funds, ecosystem restoration efforts, and its expanded land base. The
actions it has taken include setting performance goals in its annual
performance plans and identifying strategies for improving management of
programs. For example, Interior and its agencies are monitoring progress
toward addressing facility maintenance backlogs with annual goals and
measures to repair a certain number of facilities. In addition, Interior and
some of its agencies are working to better establish the actual amount of
funding needed for facilities management.
Interior chose to meet with us to provide oral comments on a draft of this
report. While Interior officials generally agreed with the report, they
raised a concern that the governmentwide high- risk area of strategic human
capital management was identified by us in January 2001, which was after
Interior had completed much of its planning and reporting for fiscal year
2000. We revised the report to include this date and to clarify our
inclusion of the human capital management high- risk area.
Page 5 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) is intended to shift the
focus of government decisionmaking, management, and accountability from
activities and processes to the results and outcomes achieved by federal
programs. New and valuable information on the plans, goals, and strategies
of federal agencies has been provided since federal agencies began
implementing GPRA. Under GPRA, annual performance plans are to clearly
inform the Congress and the public of the (1) annual performance goals for
agencies? major programs and activities, (2) measures that will be used to
gauge performance, (3) strategies and resources required to achieve the
performance goals, and (4) procedures that will be used to verify and
validate performance information. These annual plans, issued soon after
transmittal of the president?s budget, provide a direct linkage between an
agency?s longer- term goals and mission and its day- to- day activities. 5
Annual performance reports are to subsequently report on the degree to which
performance goals were met. The issuance of the agencies? performance
reports, due by March 31, represents a new and potentially more substantive
phase in the implementation of GPRA- the opportunity to assess federal
agencies? actual performance for the prior fiscal year and to consider what
steps are needed to improve performance and reduce costs in the future. 6
The Department of the Interior has jurisdiction over about 450 million acres
of land- about one- fifth of the total U. S. landmass- and about 1.76
billion acres of the Outer Continental Shelf. Figure 1 shows the location of
the majority of onshore lands under Interior?s jurisdiction.
5 The fiscal year 2002 performance plan is the fourth of these annual plans
under GPRA. 6 The fiscal year 2000 performance report is the second of these
annual reports under GPRA. Background
Page 6 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Figure 1: Department of the Interior Onshore Lands
Note: Not included in this map are the 1. 76 billion acres of lands on the
Outer Continental Shelf over which Interior has jurisdiction.
Source: Library of Congress, 2001.
As the guardian of these resources, Interior is entrusted with preserving
the nation?s most awe- inspiring landscapes, such as the Grand Canyon,
Yosemite, and Denali national parks; significant historic places, such as
Independence Hall and the Gettysburg battlefield; and such revered national
icons as the Statue of Liberty and the Washington Monument. At the same
time, Interior is to provide for the environmentally sound
Page 7 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
production of oil, gas, minerals, and other resources found on the nation?s
public lands; honor the nation?s obligations to American Indians and native
Alaskans; protect habitat for fish and wildlife; help manage water resources
in western states; and provide scientific and technical information to allow
for sound decision- making about resources. In fiscal year 2001, the
Congress provided more than $10 billion to carry out these responsibilities.
With these resources, Interior employs about 67, 000 people in its major
agencies and bureaus at over 4,000 sites around the country.
This section discusses our analysis of Interior?s performance in achieving
the selected key outcomes, as well as the strategies it has in place,
particularly strategic human capital management and information technology
strategies, for accomplishing these outcomes. 7 In discussing these
outcomes, we have also provided information drawn from our prior work on the
extent to which Interior has provided assurance that the performance
information it is reporting is credible.
Interior?s progress in maintaining the health of federally managed land,
water, and renewable resources cannot be judged. Interior has four annual
goals that relate to this outcome, including restoring lands and maintaining
healthy natural systems. We cannot judge progress because, as we reported
last year, the goals associated with this outcome do not foster a broad or
departmentwide approach to measuring progress. Rather, Interior?s overview
contains representative goals from various agencies and goals for a few
departmental crosscutting efforts. For example, Interior uses only two
examples (South Florida ecosystem and wildland fire management) of its
ongoing efforts to maintain ecosystems to measure progress toward its goal
of maintaining healthy ecosystems, even though it is involved in several
other efforts, such as restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, the
California Bay Delta, and the Lower Mississippi Delta. While the two
examples it chose are both important efforts that represent important
aspects of Interior?s land management activities, these two
7 Key elements of modern human capital management include strategic human
capital planning and organizational alignment; leadership continuity and
succession planning; acquiring and developing staff whose size, skills, and
deployment meet agency needs; and creating results- oriented organizational
cultures. Assessment of the
Department of the Interior?s Progress and Strategies in Accomplishing
Selected Key Outcomes
Health of Federally Managed Land, Water, and Renewable Resources
Page 8 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
efforts are not sufficient to signify the progress Interior is making
overall in maintaining healthy ecosystems because many other ecosystems are
managed by Interior.
Another reason that progress cannot be judged is that in some cases,
Interior does not provide an overall goal for what is ultimately to be
achieved. For example, Interior indicates that in fiscal year 2000 it
exceeded its goal of restoring 237, 800 acres that have been disturbed or
damaged by previous uses, such as mining, farming, or timber harvesting, but
does not provide any information on how many acres in total need to be
restored. Although it does not have an overall target for its land
restoration goal, to its credit, Interior has included such information in
parts of its overview that are not related to the health of federal lands
outcome. This example illustrates the type of information that needs to be
included in the restoration goal. In reporting on its efforts to protect and
recover species listed as threatened or endangered, Interior provides data
on the total number of species that were listed a decade or more ago and
those that are now improving or stable from that list.
Interior?s strategies for achieving its fiscal year 2002 goals, including
making adjustments to address two of three performance measures that it did
not meet in fiscal year 2000, appear to be clear and reasonable. For
example, to address its fiscal year 2002 goal to reclaim damaged lands,
Interior has a strategy to partner with nonprofit organizations to implement
restoration projects. This strategy is important because, according to
Interior, agency staff are often unavailable to perform work to reclaim
damaged lands because they are involved in damage assessment cases. As a
result, partnering with nonprofit organizations will be necessary to
accomplish this goal. In addition, Interior has increased the number of
acres to be treated for buildup of fuel materials, such as dead trees and
underbrush, to deal with its failure to meet its goal in fiscal year 2000
and has developed a strategy to accomplish the higher goal. Interior?s
strategy is to incorporate fire management activities as part of its land
management and to provide additional funding to enable the responsible
agencies to treat increased acres. While it has identified partnering and
additional funding as options, Interior plans to conduct workforce planning
for all its agencies- with a particular emphasis on the wildland fire
program- in fiscal year 2002. This action could identify other strategies to
achieve Interior?s goals. Interior does not have a strategy for achieving
the third measure that it did not meet in fiscal year 2000, and its plan
does not discuss any actions to meet its unmet measure for fiscal years 1999
and 2000 to acquire lands for the South Florida ecosystem.
Page 9 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
The Park Service reported that it achieved the outcome of safely satisfying
the expectations of visitors in national parks and educating these visitors
on the relevance and importance of the park units they visit. The Park
Service has three goals, visitor satisfaction, safety, and education, all of
which it met or exceeded in fiscal year 2000. In fact, for one goal-
visitors? satisfaction with the services, facilities, and recreation and
education opportunities offered during their visits to the parks- there is
little room for improvement, as the agency has met its goal of 95 percent of
visitors being satisfied. However, in the past we have reported concerns
about the completeness of some of the data related to the goal that deals
with visitor safety. Specifically, our past work revealed that there is no
systematic process in place for reporting structural fires in national
parks. 8 Without such a process, there is no assurance that structural fires
are being consistently reported as part of the agency?s visitor safety
statistics. This is important since the agency manages over 16, 000
permanent structures, of which about a third are historic. In response to
our prior recommendations, the agency acknowledged in its report that its
structural fire program has significant deficiencies that need to be
corrected, including those involving reporting issues.
The agency?s strategies for continuing to meet and exceed its visitor
satisfaction and visitor education goals appear clear and reasonable,
although the plan does not provide information on the human capital aspects
of the strategies. The Park Service plans to continue to manage facilities
for visitors and to provide many different services for them, including
interpretive programs and concessions. However, the Park Service?s
strategies do not explicitly address its workforce needs to ensure the goals
are met. One potential problem that the Park Service leadership has
identified is that 68 percent of its concessions staff are eligible to
retire in the next 5 years. In looking for new staff, the Park Service can
take the opportunity to address problems we have found with the concessions
contracting staff. 9 In contrast to the visitor satisfaction and education
strategies, the agency?s strategy for achieving its visitor safety goal is
vague. The Park Service says it is developing a strategic plan and a new
policy for visitor safety, but this is the same strategy identified in last
year?s plan. The current plan does not contain sufficient information on
8 Park Service: Agency Is Not Meeting Its Structural Fire Safety
Responsibilities (GAO- RCED- 00- 154, May 22, 2000). 9 Park Service: Need to
Address Management Problems That Plague the Concessions Program (GAO/ RCED-
00- 70, Mar. 31, 2000). Availability, Accessibility,
Diversity, and Quality of National Park Facilities and Services
Page 10 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
what the Park Service will do for us to be able to assess the merits of the
strategy.
We cannot judge whether the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is making
progress in protecting and preserving Indian trust lands and resources
because the annual goals and performance measures it has established that
relate to this outcome are output- related and therefore these measures do
not assess progress toward the outcome. BIA has 18 goals, such as
reforesting tribal lands and restoring wetlands on tribal lands, and the
same number of performance measures for this outcome. One example of BIA?s
output- related goals is to provide support for 50 tribal fish hatchery
maintenance projects; the related performance measure is the number of
projects supported. Such a goal does not show progress toward improving the
resource. BIA recognizes the importance of developing goals that measure
results and is attempting to establish them. According to the agency, the
primary obstacle to the establishment of outcome goals for protecting and
preserving Indian trust lands and resources is the lack of readily available
data for measuring results. In other parts of its performance plan dealing
with different outcomes, BIA has developed useful outcome- oriented goals.
For example, its goal for law enforcement is to reduce violent crime on
Indian lands and one of its long- term goals for community development is to
reduce unemployment on Indian lands.
Because BIA?s goals related to the outcome we reviewed are output goals
rather than outcome goals, they are more straightforward and more easily
attainable. For example, the strategy for the reforestation goal focuses on
planting more trees. Thus, the strategies for achieving BIA?s goals are
clear and reasonable. As the agency moves toward establishing outcome-
related goals, as it has indicated it plans to do, it will need to develop
new strategies that reflect the outcomes.
The Minerals Management Service (MMS) reported that it is making progress
toward ensuring that safe and environmentally sound mineral development
occurs on the Outer Continental Shelf and that the public receives fair
market value for it. But MMS also reported weaknesses related to data
accessibility and reliability that it is working to correct. MMS has three
performance goals (environmentally sound development, fair market value, and
safety) and four performance measures related to this outcome. For fiscal
year 2000, MMS achieved two goals, but did not Responsibilities to Protect
and Preserve Indian Trust Lands and Trust Resources
Mineral Development on the Outer Continental Shelf
Page 11 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
achieve a third. 10 MMS believes that a significant reason the third goal,
safety, was not achieved is that offshore oil rig operators provided more
accurate data on property damage costs, which were previously
underestimated. MMS measures its performance for this outcome through two
indexes and two ratios, which it calculates using data from various sources,
including its own data systems and models, operators, and other agencies.
MMS continues to reevaluate its performance measures because it recognizes
that data collection and verification problems affect them. For example, MMS
changed its performance goal to no more than 10 barrels spilled per million
barrels produced (previously about 6 barrels) because this is a more
realistic goal based on historical data. MMS also realized it could not, at
this time, obtain accurate water quality data, which are needed as a
component of the environmental index. As a result, MMS eliminated that
component from its calculation until reliable data can be obtained.
The MMS plan contains clear discussions of several strategies that appear to
be reasonable approaches to maintaining performance and improving data
quality. For example, MMS is developing a new environmental index that will
focus on MMS- permitted activities, which it believes will alleviate some of
its data collection problems. Other strategies include conducting more
inspections of platforms to ensure operators observe safety procedures,
working with the Department of Transportation to facilitate industry
compliance and MMS enforcement, participating in development of industry
safety standards, developing a risk- based inspection program, and improving
data quality through revised regulations covering accident reporting by
operators and sharing information with other nations. MMS has requested
additional funding for some of these activities but does not provide
information on whether these funds will be used for hiring new staff or
training current staff.
10 MMS has two measures for the environmentally sound development goal that
require calendar year data; these results were not originally available to
be included in the fiscal year 2000 report. The results were reported in
June.
Page 12 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
For the selected key outcomes, this section describes major improvements and
remaining weaknesses in Interior?s (1) fiscal year 2000 performance reports
in comparison with its fiscal year 1999 reports and (2) fiscal year 2002
performance plans in comparison with its fiscal year 2001 plans. It also
discusses the degree to which Interior?s fiscal year 2000 reports and fiscal
year 2002 plans address concerns and recommendations by the Congress, GAO,
the Inspector General, and others.
Interior?s fiscal year 2000 reports are largely similar to last year?s
reports, although Interior and its agencies continue to make improvements in
some areas. Overall, each of the 10 reports is well- organized and useful;
in particular, the ?Goals- at- a- Glance? section of each report and plan
provides a useful way to follow the progress from year to year. The reports
generally provide excellent narrative to explain those situations in which
the actual performance significantly deviated from the performance goals.
The discussions are brief, focused, and to the point, and they provide the
reader with useful information in tracking the agency?s performance. One
significant improvement this year is Interior?s and the individual agencies?
attention to data validation and verification issues, an area that we have
Comparison of
Interior?s Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Reports and Fiscal Year 2002
Performance Plans With the Prior Year?s Reports and Plans for Selected Key
Outcomes
Comparison of Performance Reports for Fiscal Years 1999 and 2000
Comparison of Reports
* The fiscal year 2000 reports include more thorough discussions of data
validation and verification issues than the previous year?s reports.
On the other hand, Interior can improve the reporting of goals that are
dropped or revised and can discuss the impact of actual performance on the
likelihood of achieving planned performance in the current year.
Comparison of Plans
The fiscal year 2002 plans contain more appropriate explanations of goals,
measures, and crosscutting issues than the previous year?s plans. Still,
Interior can improve strategy sections to
reflect strategic human capital and information technology plans and can
improve discussions of program evaluations and the effects on performance
goals and measures.
Page 13 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
highlighted as needing improvement in our reviews of prior year performance
reports and plans. In most cases, the agencies included thorough discussions
of how they determined that their goals and measures are valid and accurate.
For example, BIA?s report includes a comprehensive discussion of data
validation and verification issues that generally provides the reader a good
understanding of the credibility of the data, the data shortcomings, and the
actions planned to improve the data. In one case, for example, BIA reported
it will use a checklist to document trust evaluations to help verify the
number it performs.
Interior can improve its future reports in two ways. First, in its overview
document, Interior can improve its reporting of goals that have been revised
in previous year?s documents. For example, in the fiscal year 2000 plan,
Interior had a goal to track progress in restoring lands in the Pacific
Northwest; this was moved to a different section in the fiscal year 2000
report. In most instances, an explanation was provided when a new goal was
added, but the absence of an explanation in this case confused efforts to
track from one year to the next. Interior also revised the section of the
report dealing with the restoration of the South Florida ecosystem to
reflect the goals contained in the strategic plan issued by the South
Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force in July 2000 in response to our
recommendation. 11 Interior plans to report on the results being achieved by
the task force in restoring the ecosystem. In addition to reporting the
results, it is important that Interior?s report reflect its contributions to
the effort. Second, Interior can report on the effect of actual performance
on the likelihood of achieving planned performance in the current year. For
example, Interior indicated that it will not change its fiscal year 2001
measure for reclaiming damaged lands, even though it did not meet its fiscal
year 2000 measure. It did not, however, state explicitly whether it could
achieve the fiscal year 2001 measure.
As with its performance reports, Interior?s performance plans continue to
improve. In most cases, the plans contain appropriate explanations of the
goals and measures. For example, last year we observed that the MMS plan did
not include an explanation of the agency?s accident index- now called the
safety index. This year?s plan has a clear, sufficient explanation of the
index, including examples of data used to calculate the index components:
the severity factor and safety risk factor. During fiscal year
11 South Florida Ecosystem Restoration: An Overall Strategic Plan and a
Decision- Making Process Are Needed to Keep the Effort on Track (GAO/ RCED-
99- 121, Apr. 22, 1999). Comparison of
Performance Plans for Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002
Page 14 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
2000, MMS had planned to establish a more comprehensive safety index and a
new baseline for use in 2001, but it explained in its plan that additional
time will be needed to develop a valid baseline. Overall, Interior?s and the
agencies? plans also contain useful explanations of management and
crosscutting issues. For example, BIA provided greater explanation of its
crosscutting issues, which is significant because practically all of its
functions are associated to some degree with one federal agency or another.
To further improve the plans, Interior can integrate discussions of
strategic human capital management issues and technology improvements with
their strategies for achieving performance goals. In some cases, these
issues have already been included in discussions of strategies- for example,
Interior identified a lack of personnel and the need to work with nonprofit
organizations to achieve its land reclamation goals. Also, MMS identified a
general need to use information technology to improve its efficiency. In
other cases, such as potential succession planning difficulties in the Park
Service concessions program, these issues are not yet part of the discussion
of strategies. Furthermore, Interior and its agencies can continue to make
program evaluations a more integral part of the plans in future years
because the results of the newly developed program evaluations can lead to
changes in programs and performance goals and measures. For example, MMS
used program evaluations, including two fiscal year 2000 Inspector General
audits and the annual Inspector General financial management reviews, to
measure past performance and used other studies of information and data
validity, including an environmental monitoring study of industry
compliance, to establish performance measures. The Park Service, however,
missed the opportunity to improve upon its last year?s plan by not fully
disclosing the data limitations we had identified for its safety goal and by
not identifying specific steps to address the limitations.
GAO has identified two governmentwide high- risk areas: strategic human
capital management and information security. Interior reported some progress
in resolving the strategic human capital challenge in fiscal year 2000,
having completed workforce planning guidelines in June 2000. Also, Interior
and its agencies identified some areas in which they have human capital
concerns. For example, Interior indicated that staffing levels could limit
the effectiveness of the wildfire program and set a goal to conduct
workforce planning in the wildland fire program in fiscal year 2002.
Interior indicated that it will undertake human capital planning for all its
agencies in fiscal year 2002 and is accelerating its planning to respond to
an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) bulletin instructing federal
Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges Identified by GAO
Page 15 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
agencies to conduct a workforce analysis by June 29, 2001, but it did not
substantially address how it intends to use human capital to achieve its
goals. Interior did not have fiscal year 2000 goals to address progress in
the information security area and, as a result, did not discuss progress in
this area. Interior did include a goal and related measures for fiscal year
2002 to achieve specific improvements in this area; however, it did not
indicate what steps it would take to effectively correct previously
identified security weaknesses.
In addition, GAO has identified four other major management challenges
facing Interior. Interior?s performance reports included goals and measures
for three of these challenges- improving the management of the Park Service,
Indian trust funds, and ecosystem restoration efforts- some of which the
agency met or exceeded, and others it did not meet. For the remaining
challenge- improving the management of expanding amounts of land for which
it is responsible- Interior did not have performance goals or measures.
Interior and the relevant agency, the Bureau of Land Management, did discuss
the strategies the agency would use to meet this challenge, including
improving program management with a national- level task force. Appendix I
discusses the responses of Interior and its agencies to the management
challenges identified by both GAO and Interior?s Inspector General.
Interior has 10 reports and plans, 9 for its individual agencies and 1
departmental overview. For three of the selected key outcomes- park
visitation, Indian trust assets, and Outer Continental Shelf development- we
reviewed the agency- level reports and plans to assess progress toward the
outcomes. The outcome on federal land management is broad, however, with
multiple agencies performing the work and contributing to the goals. For
this reason, we used Interior?s overview report to assess progress toward
the outcome. Although the individual agencies have goals that relate to the
outcome, we did not review their reports and plans because we believe the
overview should provide a comprehensive look at the agencies? progress.
As agreed with your staff, our evaluation was generally based on the
requirements of GPRA, the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, guidance to
agencies from OMB for developing performance plans and reports (OMB Circular
A- 11, Part 2), previous reports and evaluations by us and others, our
knowledge of Interior?s operations and programs, our identification of best
practices concerning performance planning and reporting, and our
observations on Interior?s other GPRA- related efforts. We also discussed
our review with agency officials and with Interior?s Office of Inspector
Scope and
Methodology
Page 16 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
General. The agency outcomes that were used as the basis for our review were
identified by the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Governmental Affairs
Committee as important mission areas for the agency and do not reflect the
outcomes for all of Interior?s programs or activities. The major management
challenges confronting Interior, including the governmentwide high- risk
areas of strategic human capital management and information security, were
identified by GAO in our January 2001 performance and accountability series
and high- risk update and by Interior?s Office of Inspector General in
December 2000. We did not independently verify the information contained in
the performance reports and plans, although we did draw from our other work
in assessing the validity, reliability, and timeliness of Interior?s
performance data. We conducted our review from April 2001 through June 2001
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
We provided a draft of this report to the Department of the Interior for its
review and comment. Interior chose to meet with us to provide oral comments,
and we met with the Director of the Office of Planning and Performance
Management and other officials from Interior on June 1, 2001, to discuss
these comments. While the officials generally agreed with the report?s
findings, they raised a concern that the governmentwide highrisk area of
strategic human capital management- which we reviewed in the management
challenges section of this report- was first identified by us in January
2001, after Interior had completed much of its planning and reporting for
fiscal year 2000. Interior noted that it has included a goal in its fiscal
year 2002 plan to begin workforce planning and that it is accelerating its
planning in response to an OMB directive to gather data on workforce numbers
by June 29, 2001.
We agree with Interior officials that the issue of strategic human capital
management was identified by us as a high- risk area in January 2001 when,
according to Interior officials, it had finished most of its planning and
reporting for fiscal year 2000. To address their concern, we revised the
report to underscore this date when we first mention the high- risk issues
in the report. We also noted, however, human capital issues have been a
long- standing problem for many federal agencies and that the inclusion of
human resources in performance plans has been required as part of the GPRA
process since 1999, when the first performance plans were developed. In
addition, OMB Circular A- 11 contains guidance to federal departments to
discuss strategies, including the planned use of human resources, to achieve
goals in their annual performance plans. Agency Comments
Page 17 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
The Interior officials also provided technical clarifications, which we made
as appropriate.
As arranged with your office, unless you announce its contents earlier, we
plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after the date of
this letter. At that time, we will send copies to the Chairman of the Senate
Committee on Governmental Affairs, the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member
of the House Committee on Government Reform, the Secretary of the Interior,
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and other interested
congressional committees. This report will also be available on GAO?s home
page at http:\\ www. gao. gov.
If you or your staff have any questions, please call me at (202) 512- 3841.
Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix II.
Sincerely yours, Barry T. Hill Director, Natural Resources
and Environment
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 18 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Table 1 identifies the major management challenges confronting the
Department of the Interior, which include the governmentwide high- risk
areas of strategic human capital management and information security.
Interior has 10 performance reports/ plans, including 1 that serves as a
departmental overview, 1 each for the 8 major bureaus within the Department,
and 1 for the Office of Insular Affairs. The first column of the table lists
the management challenges that we and the Department of the Interior?s
Office of Inspector General (OIG) have identified. The second column
discusses the progress Interior has made in addressing these major
management challenges, as discussed in its fiscal year 2000 performance
report. The third column discusses the extent to which Interior?s fiscal
year 2002 performance plan includes performance goals and measures to
address the management challenges that we and Interior?s OIG have
identified.
While Interior?s performance reports discussed the Department?s progress in
resolving many of its management challenges, the Department did not have
goals for the management challenge dealing with information security and
therefore did not discuss progress in resolving the challenge in fiscal year
2000. Interior has been engaged in workforce planning and information
security activities during fiscal year 2001. Interior?s fiscal year 2002
performance plans provided goals and performance measures for most of its
management challenges. For Interior?s 14 major management challenges, its
performance plans had (1) goals and measures that were directly related to 9
of the challenges; (2) goals and measures that were indirectly applicable to
1 challenge; and (3) no goals and measures related to 3 of the challenges,
although strategies to address them were discussed. The last challenge
relates to Government Performance and Results Act, which is the subject of
this report and therefore was not addressed in the matrix. Appendix I:
Observations on the Department
of the Interior?s Efforts to Address Its Major Management Challenges
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 19 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Table 1: Major Management Challenges Major management challenge
Progress in resolving major management challenge as discussed in fiscal year
2000 performance report Applicable goals and measures in
fiscal year 2002 performance plan Governmentwide high- risk areas identified
by GAO
Strategic human capital management: Governmentwide, agencies are facing high
numbers of retirements and a simultaneous lack of experienced personnel to
replace lost staff. Agencies need to have succession plans in place to deal
with this gap. Key elements of modern human capital management include
strategic human capital planning; leadership continuity; acquiring and
developing staffs whose size, skills, and deployment meet agency needs; and
creating results- oriented organizational cultures.
Interior completed workforce planning guidelines in June 2000. It also
developed a new supervisory training and development program.
Interior has a goal to begin workforce planning in all Interior programs. It
also has a goal to develop and implement a new training and development
policy and framework to address human capital management needs. One area for
which we have identified the need for a human capital strategy is in
firefighting; Interior plans to focus on the wildland fire program in its
workforce planning. Two other areas that have been identified as having
human capital management issues are ecosystem management and the National
Park Service concessions program. According to Interior, inadequate staffing
prevents full performance in restoring ecosystems. Also, according to the
Park Service, concessions management is already understaffed, and 68 percent
of its full- time employees will be eligible to retire in 5 years. Finally,
the National Academy of Public Administration has identified leadership and
other human capital problems at the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 20 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Information security: Our January 2001 high- risk series update noted that
agencies? and governmentwide efforts to strengthen information security have
gained momentum and expanded. Nevertheless, recent audits continue to show
federal computer systems are riddled with weaknesses that make them highly
vulnerable to computer- based attacks and place a broad range of critical
operations and assets at risk of fraud, misuse, and disruption.
Interior?s OIG identified information security of Department systems as a
management challenge. In addition, in the Department?s fiscal year 2000
financial audit report, the OIG reported that (1) information security is a
material weakness and (2) senior management needs to emphasize the
importance of implementing an effective computer security program to ensure
an adequate security environment.
Interior did not have an information security goal in its fiscal year 2000
performance plan, and therefore the performance report does not address
progress for this challenge. However, Interior acknowledged that it has
computer security weaknesses and reported information system controls as a
material weakness in its Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act report for
2000.
Interior?s fiscal year 2002 performance plan includes a goal to achieve
compliance level 3 on the Federal Information Technology Security Assessment
Framework for all of Interior?s national critical infrastructure systems,
all of its national security information systems, and 33 percent of its
mission- critical systems. Achieving a level 3 compliance requires that
security policies and procedures are adopted, system certification
procedures are established, and a security awareness program is in place.
Interior?s overall target is to achieve a compliance level 5 by fiscal year
2005, the highest level achievable in this assessment framework. To meet the
compliance requirements for this level, an agency must establish an
enterprisewide security program.
While Interior has established a plan for assessing its information system
controls environment, it did not indicate what steps it was taking to ensure
that all previously identified security weaknesses were effectively
corrected.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 21 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major management
challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report Applicable
goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan Major management challenges identified by
GAO
Improve management of national parks: The Park Service needs to (1) place a
higher priority on gathering more scientific information on the condition of
resources, (2) gather more accurate data on its maintenance backlog, (3)
improve park managers? accountability, (4) address management problems with
its concessions? program, and (5) ensure safety of visitors and employees.
(1) The Park Service met its goals of developing or acquiring 20 percent of
2,287 natural resource data sets needed.
(2) The Park Service is developing the capability to determine and monitor
the condition of its facilities. It plans to use facility condition as a
performance indicator beginning as early as 2003. Interior did not meet its
goal of repairing 30 percent of its facilities (it achieved 22 percent). It
has developed a facility management plan that will address backlogs.
(3) In 1999, the Park Service accomplished its goal to include goal
achievement in 100 percent of performance evaluations for park
superintendents.
(4) The Park Service achieved its goal of increasing concession returns to
7. 1 percent of gross receipts (it achieved 7.3 percent). The agency has
acknowledged the need to reform how it manages its concessions program and
is currently working with a federal advisory board to do so.
(5) The Park Service exceeded its goals to reduce visitor accidents to 5. 1
per 100, 000 visitor- days (8. 82 per 100, 000 was the goal) and to reduce
lost employee time due to injuries to 4. 7 days (5. 2 per 200,000 labor
hours was the goal). In 2000, we reported concerns about the incident
reporting system for structural fires, and these concerns have not been
resolved. a The Park Service has drafted a comprehensive fire safety plan.
(1) The Park Service will develop or acquire another 20 percent of its 2,
527 needed natural resource inventories in fiscal year 2002.
(2) Interior will complete 30 percent of repair and construction projects.
The Park Service will continue to use the Facility Management Software
System at 130 parks.
(3) The Park Service no longer has a specific goal for this challenge but
states it will continue to use goal achievement as an element of park
managers? performance evaluations.
(4) The Park Service has a goal to increase concession returns to 7.5
percent of gross receipts. The agency does not have goals related to
concessions management.
(5) The Park Service will continue to increase visitor and employee safety,
lowering visitor incident/ accident rates by 10 percent and keeping injury
rates to 4. 6 per 200,000. The Park Service does not address how it will
improve its safety data. The Park Service will implement its fire safety
plan over 4 years.
a National Park Service: Agency Is Not Meeting Its Structural Fire Safety
Responsibilities (GAO/ RCED00- 154, May 22, 2000).
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 22 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Address persistent management problems in Indian trust programs: Interior
needs to ensure Indians that their assets are wellmanaged. Interior cannot
do this currently, although it is updating its trust fund management
systems.
Interior?s OIG identified this area as a challenge. Both our and OIG?s
comments are combined here, and we did not discuss this challenge separately
under the OIG challenges listed below.
The Office of the Special Trustee was created in fiscal year 1996
specifically to reform Interior?s Indian trust management. Plans for reform
are contained in the High Level Implementation Plan, which was updated in
February 2000 and currently has 11 subprojects to improve trust management.
Although the Office had a separate fiscal year 2000 plan with seven annual
performance goals, it does not have a separate fiscal year 2000 performance
report. The Office is currently deeply involved in responding to court
orders relating to a class- action lawsuit over trust fund management and
reports quarterly to the court. Interior?s fiscal year 2000 overview report
includes performance information for two of the Office?s goals. The Office
met its goal for deploying one of the plan?s accounting systems, but not
another. No information was provided on the other five performance goals in
the Office?s fiscal year 2000 plan.
The Office does not have a separate fiscal year 2002 plan. Instead,
Interior?s overview plan for fiscal year 2002 includes as part of one goal
that the Office will complete 17 of the milestones for the 11 subprojects in
the High Level Implementation Plan. The High Level Implementation Plan, once
complete, is expected to provide assurance to Indians that their assets are
well- managed.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 23 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Improve management of ecosystem restoration efforts: Interior needs to
improve its management of ecosystem restoration efforts by working to
develop plans and strategies; coordinating with the multiple entities
involved, such as states and tribes; and preparing for the attrition of key
personnel related to ecosystem restoration efforts, such as fire managers.
In fiscal year 2000, Interior completed a strategic plan for the South
Florida ecosystem restoration, but it did not meet its land acquisition
goals of 26,000 acres (it acquired 36 acres). There were no fiscal year 2000
goals for the California Desert protection program, as it was added to the
plan in fiscal year 2001. Interior did not meet its wildland fire goal of
treating 1 million acres for fuels reduction (it treated over 500, 000
acres) because the fire season was one of the worst on record. We discuss
the progress toward this goal in more detail in the letter portion of this
report.
Interior no longer has annual goals for the South Florida ecosystem
restoration project because the project is long term- at least 30 years. In
fiscal year 2002, Interior will coordinate and integrate various agency
efforts for the protection and restoration of the desert tortoise in the
California Desert. Interior also plans to contain 99 percent of wildfires on
its lands, complete a baseline inventory of facilities construction
requirements, and reduce fuels near 7 percent of at- risk communities and on
1. 4 million acres of lands.
Address challenges in managing an expanding land base: Interior oversees
many land transactions. In particular, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
needs to ensure that the lands are needed and are exchanged for
approximately equal value. Once Interior gets new land, either through
exchange or acquisition, it needs to highlight the need for increased
funding to operate and maintain those lands. In particular, the Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) needs to include operations and maintenance
information in its budgets when it establishes refuges.
Interior does not address this challenge directly, but states it has made
improvements in program management. BLM?s Land Exchange Evaluation and
Assistance Team will provide technical review and oversight for all land
exchanges.
Interior does not address the need for operations and maintenance fund
information in its fiscal year 2000 report. However, FWS has a strategy to
deal with the challenge at its level. Beginning in fiscal year 2001, FWS
included in its budget a table of land that will be added during the year,
including the operation and maintenance costs needed.
While Interior does not have goals related to this challenge, it does have a
strategy. In fiscal year 2001, according to Interior officials, BLM is
conducting reviews of its land exchange program in Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming,
Montana, and California and plans to conduct similar reviews for Utah,
Arizona, and New Mexico in fiscal year 2002.
Interior does not address the need for operations and maintenance fund
information in its fiscal year 2002 plan. FWS does not have a goal to
address this, but plans to maintain an inventory of unmet operating needs
and to request funding for them.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 24 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the fiscal year 2002 performance plan Major
management challenges reported by the OIG
Financial management: Interior still needs to correct several material
internal control weaknesses in producing its financial statements. It
received an unqualified opinion on its fiscal year 2000 financial
statements, which were issued on time. However, the OIG did not express an
opinion on the Minerals Management Service (MMS) fiscal year 2000 financial
statements for appropriated funds. Other agencies, including BIA, the U. S.
Geological Survey, and FWS had material weaknesses in their statements,
although they have unqualified financial statements.
Interior tracks all material weaknesses in financial statements and
corrective actions through its management control program. Weaknesses
identified in the fiscal year 2000 financial statements will be tracked in
fiscal year 2001. Individual agencies addressed progress in the following
ways:
MMS, working with a task force and the OIG, took corrective action to
improve its internal controls in fiscal year 2000.
BIA met its fiscal year 2000 goal to get a clean audit opinion on its
financial statements.
Interior has a performance measure for timely implementation of audit
recommendations and corrections of material weaknesses. MMS and BIA have
specific strategies to address their material weaknesses:
MMS will continue to implement improvements to its financial records. It has
instituted organizational changes to clarify work assignments, realign
staff, and develop reconciliation procedures.
BIA will address three of nine internal control weaknesses in fiscal year
2002. It does not specify which of the nine it will address.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 25 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Health and safety: Interior is responsible for protecting the health and
safety of visitors and employees. The Park Service and BLM specifically need
to ensure visitors and employees are safe from fire and crime, concessions
are operated safely, and employees have safe working conditions.
Additionally, Interior needs to clean up contaminated sites on its lands,
including abandoned mine sites, oil and gas wells, and leaking tanks and
pipelines.
The Park Service?s progress is reported under the challenge ?Improve
management of national parks.?
BLM exceeded its goal to bring 59 percent of its dams into fair or good
condition (it achieved 61 percent), but it did not meet its goal to bring a
total of 87 percent of administrative buildings into fair or good condition
(it achieved 84 percent) or its goal of keeping 94 percent of bridges in
fair or good condition (it achieved 92 percent).
BLM exceeded its goals of assessing 3 percent of its roads and improving a
cumulative 60 percent of those roads (it achieved 4 and 82 percent,
respectively).
BLM exceeded its target of investigating and enforcing 47 percent of
violations on federal lands (it achieved 53 percent).
To manage and control waste on Interior lands, Interior is conducting
environmental audits. The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement (OSM) reported that it met its goal to reclaim 8, 100 acres and
missed its goal to fund 42 acid mine drainage projects (it achieved 35). BLM
exceeded its goal to clean up 135 sites (it achieved 290). It also completed
650 safety actions at abandoned mines (unplanned goal).
The Park Service?s goals are reported under the challenge ?Improve
management of national parks.?
BLM plans to increase the overall percentage of administrative buildings in
good condition to 88 percent, of dams in good condition to 61 percent, and
of bridges in good condition to 95 percent.
BLM will assess the condition of 40 percent of its roads to identify
improvement needs and will increase those improved to a cumulative 75
percent.
BLM will investigate and take enforcement action on 50 percent of reported
violations of federal laws and regulations.
Interior?s fiscal year 2002 goal is to complete initial environmental audits
of 75 percent of Interior facilities. OSM will reclaim an additional 7,000
acres of lands and fund 40 new acid mine drainage projects. BLM will
identify and correct safety hazards at 200 of 1,200 abandoned mines and
clean up 150 of 600 sites.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 26 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Maintenance of facilities: Interior has a large and aging inventory of
buildings, and the maintenance backlog for these is growing. BIA, the Park
Service, FWS, and BLM have large deferred maintenance backlogs.
According to the OIG, Interior has developed an adequate plan to correct the
backlog. The Department will measure the reduction in the backlog to
determine its success in addressing this challenge.
BIA completed a 5- year maintenance and construction plan for fiscal years
2002- 06. It met its fiscal year 2000 goal of replacing 3 schools, but did
not meet its goal to improve 12 schools.
The Park Service?s progress is addressed under the challenge ?Improve
management of national parks.?
FWS exceeded its goal of having 533 (4 percent) of its water management
facilities and 179 (4 percent) of its public use facilities in fair or good
condition (its goals were 406 and 172, respectively).
BLM exceeded its goal of bringing 80 percent of facilities at 377 special
recreation areas into fair or good condition (it achieved 84 percent).
In fiscal year 2002, Interior will complete 30 percent of repair and
construction projects.
BIA will replace six schools in fiscal year 2002 and will improve nine
schools.
The Park Service?s goals are addressed under the challenge ?Improve
management of national parks.?
FWS will have, in total, 582 water management facilities and 355 public use
facilities in fair or good condition. It will implement a plan to assess
facility conditions and conduct a study of a commercial maintenance
management system at 5 to 10 field offices.
BLM will ensure that 81 percent of facilities are brought into fair or good
condition in fiscal year 2002.
Responsibility to insular areas: Insular governments have problems in
providing financial and management services and lack audit staff and
resources. Some are near financial crisis. Interior, through its OIG, has
audit authority for federal funds in all insular areas but lacks enforcement
capability.
The Department had as its goal for fiscal year 2000 that insular governments
complete one additional financial management plan for a total of five. It
achieved its goal.
The Department has a goal to complete one additional financial management
plan for insular communities. It also plans to increase the ratio of
projects completed.
The Department does not address the issue of audit authority for the insular
governments.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 27 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Resource protection/ restoration: Interior has multiple responsibilities for
protecting and restoring our natural and cultural resources. Agencies
throughout the Department need to improve their management of artifacts and
artwork. Specific agencies within Interior face other challenges. BLM needs
to improve its range management program and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR)
needs to ensure that ineligible lands are not irrigated with its water.
Interior manages an estimated 113 million museum property pieces. As of
fiscal year 1998, 36. 4 million of these were accurately documented.
The Park Service met its goal to increase the percentage of collections
meeting its standards for museum collections to 65.7 percent. It did not
meet its goal to show 46.8 percent of the 5, 960 archaeological sites are in
good condition.
FWS does not have goals related to this challenge but has worked to
inventory its museum collections. In fiscal year 2000, the agency cataloged
collections from the 1930s and fossil collections on loan to 220
institutions.
BLM exceeded its goal to restore and protect 481 of 1, 354 cultural and
paleontological sites on public lands (it achieved 519). It also met its
goal of making collections available to the public by establishing five
partnerships with nonfederal curatorial facilities.
BLM exceeded its goal to support rural western communities and maintain
healthy rangelands by renewing 3,456 grazing permits (it achieved 4,190).
BOR did not directly address this goal; the agency indicated that it came up
with alternative plans because it disagrees with the OIG recommendations.
Interior?s goal for fiscal year 2002 is to accurately inventory 2. 5 million
items to bring the total inventoried to 50. 8 million.
The Park Service will increase the percentage of collections meeting
standards to 68 percent in fiscal year 2002. The Park Service restructured
its goal for archaeological sites to show that 44 percent of sites are in
good condition.
FWS does not have an agency- specific goal for fiscal year 2002. Its work
supports the departmentwide goal.
BLM will restore and protect an additional 230 sites. It will inventory 25,
000 acres for cultural resources. It will also develop partnerships with
five additional nonfederal curatorial facilities.
BLM will issue 1, 580 grazing permits consistent with grazing regulations.
BOR did not include specific goals for this alternative.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 28 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Revenue collections: Interior collects over $8 billion in revenues each
year, but the OIG believes the agencies can enhance revenue collection.
Revenues include oil and gas royalties, fee demonstration funds, and
reclamation recovery costs.
MMS collected $8 million in additional revenue and achieved its goals of
increasing the number of Indian oil and gas leases that comply with
valuation regulations: 60 percent of gas properties using one valuation
method are in compliance, 31 percent using a second method are in
compliance, and 25 percent of oil properties are in compliance.
The Park Service reported that it did not meet its goal of increasing fee
collections 27 percent because of fires in the West.
FWS does not address this challenge in its fiscal year 2000 report.
BLM does not address this challenge in its fiscal year 2000 report.
BOR disagrees with the OIG on its recommendation to recover full irrigation
costs and points out that the current system of repayment is based on
legislative requirements. Interior has instead sent a memo to the Department
of Energy to discuss the policy implications of the proposed change in
revenue collection and its impacts on power users.
MMS will increase the number of gas properties in compliance to 71 and 57
percent for the two valuation methods, and of oil properties in compliance
to 34 percent. The amount that can be collected will, however, be decreased
by a recent Interior Board of Land Appeals decision that impacts time
periods prior to January 1, 2000.
According to Interior officials, MMS cannot set a goal to achieve a certain
level of royalties because production is industrydriven and price-
dependent.
The Park Service will increase fee demonstration funds 33 percent over 1997
levels.
FWS does not have a performance goal for fee demonstration funds in its
fiscal year 2002 plan.
BLM does not have a performance goal for fee demonstration funds in its
fiscal year 2002 plan. According to Interior officials, BLM cannot set a
goal for achieving a certain level of royalties because production is
industry- driven and pricedependent.
BOR will report to the Congress on the difference between its current
collections, which the agency believes are in accordance with legislation,
and the proposed revenue collection.
Appendix I: Observations on the Department of the Interior?s Efforts to
Address Its Major Management Challenges
Page 29 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Major management challenge Progress in resolving major
management challenge as discussed in fiscal year 2000 performance report
Applicable goals and measures in the
fiscal year 2002 performance plan
Procurement, contracts, and grants: In fiscal year 1999, the volume of
Interior?s contracts exceeded $3 billion, and grants to states and tribes
exceeded $2 billion. Programs or areas needing improvement are BIA?s
acquisition management program and Interior?s credit card program.
BIA achieved its goal of receiving unqualified financial statements in
fiscal year 2000.
Interior?s OIG initiated a departmentwide audit of the charge card program.
BIA will improve three of nine internal control weaknesses identified by the
OIG. BIA does not say whether acquisition management will be one of the
three.
Interior will make changes as appropriate, as a result of the OIG audit.
Note: Where appropriate, we identified the performance indicators that
relate to the specific challenges. We limited our discussion to the specific
agencies mentioned in the challenges and did not look for performance
improvements in the other Interior agencies.
Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
Page 30 GAO- 01- 759 Interior's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Chet Janik (202) 512- 6508 Arleen Alleman, Julie Gerkens, Susan Iott, Dave
Irvin, Lisa Knight, Mike Koury, Jeff Malcolm, Sherry McDonald, Charles
Vrabel, and Ned Woodward made key contributions to this report. Appendix II:
GAO Contact and Staff
Acknowledgments GAO Contact Staff Acknowledgments
(360062)
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. ***