Competitive Sourcing: Implementation Will Be Challenging for	 
Federal Agencies (24-JUL-03, GAO-03-1022T).			 
                                                                 
In May 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a
revised Circular A-76, which represents a comprehensive set of	 
changes to the rules governing competitive sourcing--one of five 
governmentwide items in the President's Management Agenda.	 
Determining whether to obtain services in-house or through	 
commercial contracts is an important economic and strategic	 
decision for agencies, and the use of Circular A-76 is expected  
to grow throughout the federal government. In the past, however, 
the A-76 process has been difficult to implement, and the impact 
on the morale of the federal workforce has been profound.	 
Concerns in the public and private sectors were also raised about
the timeliness and fairness of the process for public-private	 
competitions. It was against this backdrop that the Congress	 
enacted legislation mandating a study of the A-76 process, which 
was carried out by the Commercial Activities Panel, chaired by	 
the Comptroller General of the United States. This testimony	 
focuses on how the new Circular addresses the Panel's		 
recommendations reported in April 2002, the challenges agencies  
may face in implementing the new Circular A-76, and the need for 
effective workforce practices to help ensure the successful	 
implementation of competitive sourcing in the federal government.
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-03-1022T					        
    ACCNO:   A07674						        
  TITLE:     Competitive Sourcing: Implementation Will Be Challenging 
for Federal Agencies						 
     DATE:   07/24/2003 
  SUBJECT:   Federal procurement				 
	     Procurement regulations				 
	     Strategic planning 				 
	     Competitive procurement				 
	     Procurement policy 				 
	     Procurement practices				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** 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-03-1022T

Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management,
the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia, Committee on
Governmental Affairs, U. S. Senate

United States General Accounting Office

GAO For Release on Delivery Expected at 9: 30 a. m. EDT July 24, 2003
COMPETITIVE SOURCING

Implementation Will Be Challenging for Federal Agencies

Statement of David M. Walker Comptroller General of the United States

GAO- 03- 1022T

The revised Circular A- 76 is generally consistent with the Commercial
Activities Panel*s principles and recommendations, and should provide an
improved foundation for competitive sourcing decisions in the federal
government. In particular, the new Circular permits greater reliance on
procedures in the Federal Acquisition Regulation* which should result in a
more transparent and consistently applied competitive process* as well as
source selection decisions based on trade- offs between technical factors
and cost. The new Circular also suggests the potential use of alternatives
to the competitive sourcing process, such as public- private and public-
public partnerships. However, implementing the new Circular will likely be
challenging for many

agencies. Foremost among the challenges that agencies face is setting and
meeting appropriate goals integrated with other priorities, as opposed to
arbitrary quotas. Additionally, there are potential issues with the
streamlined cost comparison process and protest rights. The revised
streamlined process lacks a number of key features designed to ensure that
agency sourcing decisions are sound, including the absence of an appeal
process. Finally, the right of in- house competitors to file a bid protest
at GAO challenging the sourcing decisions in favor of the private sector
remains an open question.

For many agencies, effective implementation will depend on their ability
to understand that their workforce is their most important organizational
asset. Agencies will need to aid their workforce in transitioning to a
competitive sourcing environment. For example, agencies will need a
skilled workforce and adequate infrastructure and funding to manage
competitions; to prepare the in- house offer; and to oversee the cost,
quality, and performance of whichever service provider is selected. In May
2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a revised
Circular A- 76, which represents a comprehensive

set of changes to the rules governing competitive sourcing* one of five
governmentwide items in the President*s Management Agenda. Determining
whether to

obtain services in- house or through commercial contracts is an important
economic and strategic

decision for agencies, and the use of Circular A- 76 is expected to grow
throughout the federal

government. In the past, however, the A- 76 process has been difficult to
implement, and the impact on the

morale of the federal workforce has been profound. Concerns in the public
and private sectors were also raised about the timeliness

and fairness of the process for public- private competitions. It was
against this backdrop that the Congress enacted legislation mandating a
study of the A- 76 process, which was carried out by the Commercial
Activities Panel, chaired by the Comptroller General of the United States.

This testimony focuses on how the new Circular addresses the Panel*s
recommendations reported in April 2002, the challenges agencies may face
in implementing the new Circular A- 76, and the need for

effective workforce practices to help ensure the successful implementation
of competitive sourcing in the federal government.

www. gao. gov/ cgi- bin/ getrpt? GAO- 03- 1022T. To view the full product,
including the scope and methodology, click on the link above. For more
information, contact William T. Woods at (202) 512- 8214 or woodsw@ gao.
gov. Highlights of GAO- 03- 1022T, a testimony

before the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce, and the District of Columbia, Committee on Governmental
Affairs, U. S. Senate

July 24, 2003

COMPETITIVE SOURCING

Implementation Will Be Challenging for Federal Agencies

Page 1 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing Chairman Voinovich, Ranking
Member Durbin, and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to participate in the subcommittee*s hearing
on competitive sourcing, one of five governmentwide initiatives in the
President*s Management Agenda. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
recently released a new Circular A- 76, which represents the most

comprehensive set of changes to the rules governing competitive sourcing
since the initial Circular A- 76 was issued in 1966. As agencies implement
the revised Circular and the initiative outlined in the President*s
Management Agenda, they will need to develop strategies to address the
challenges they inevitably will face in implementing this significant
change in their operations.

Today*s hearing occurs at a critical and challenging time for federal
agencies. They operate in an environment in which new security threats,
demographic changes, rapidly evolving technologies, increased pressure for
demonstrable results, and serious and growing fiscal imbalances demand
that the federal government engage in a fundamental review, reassessment,
and reprioritization of its missions and operations. Federal agencies are
increasingly relying on enhanced technology and a range of technical and
support services to accomplish their missions. Consequently, it is
important for agencies to consider how best to acquire and deliver such
capabilities* including, in some cases, who the service

provider should be. Determining whether to obtain services in- house,
through contracts with the private sector, or through a combination of the
two* in other words, through insourcing, outsourcing, or, in some cases,
cosourcing* is an

important economic and strategic decision for agency managers. In the
past, however, the government*s competitive sourcing process* set forth in
OMB Circular A- 76* has been difficult to implement. The impact of the A-
76 process on the morale of the federal workforce has been profound, and
there have been concerns in both the public and private sectors about the
timeliness and fairness of the process and the extent to which there is a
*level playing field* for conducting public- private competitions. While

Circular A- 76 competitions historically have represented only a small
portion of the government*s service contracting dollars, competitive
sourcing is expected to grow throughout the federal government.

Page 2 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing It was against this backdrop
that the Congress enacted legislation mandating a study of the
government*s competitive sourcing process. 1 This

study was carried out by the Commercial Activities Panel, which I chaired.
My comments today will focus on how the new Circular addresses the Panel*s
recommendations with regard to providing a better foundation for
competitive sourcing decisions and the challenges that agencies may face
in implementing the new Circular A- 76. I will also highlight the need for
effective workforce practices to help ensure successful implementation of
competitive sourcing.

In April 2002, following a yearlong study, the Commercial Activities Panel
reported its findings on competitive sourcing in the federal government.
The report lays out 10 sourcing principles and several recommendations,
which provide a road map for improving sourcing decisions across the
federal government. Overall, the new Circular is generally consistent with
these principles and recommendations.

The Commercial Activities Panel held 11 meetings, including three public
hearings in Washington, D. C.; Indianapolis, Indiana; and San Antonio,
Texas. At these hearings, the Panel heard repeatedly about the importance
of competition and its central role in fostering economy, efficiency, and
continuous performance improvement. Panel members heard first- hand about
the current process* primarily the cost comparison process conducted under
OMB Circular A- 76* as well as alternatives to that process. Panel staff
conducted extensive additional research, review, and analysis to
supplement and evaluate the public comments. Recognizing

that its mission was complex and controversial, the Panel agreed that a
supermajority of two- thirds of the Panel members would have to vote for
any finding or recommendation in order for it to be adopted. Importantly,
the Panel unanimously agreed upon a set of 10 principles it believed
should guide all administrative and legislative actions in competitive

sourcing. The Panel itself used these principles to assess the
government*s existing sourcing system and to develop additional
recommendations.

1 Section 832, Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2001, P. L. 106- 398 (Oct. 30, 2000). New Circular

Provides an Improved Foundation for Competitive Sourcing Decisions

Page 3 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing A supermajority of the Panel
agreed on a package of additional recommendations. Chief among these was a
recommendation that

public- private competitions be conducted using the framework of the
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). Although a minority of the Panel did
not support the package of additional recommendations, some of these

Panel members indicated that they supported one or more elements of the
package, such as the recommendation to encourage high- performing
organizations (HPO) throughout the government. Importantly, there was a
good faith effort to maximize agreement and minimize differences between
Panel members. In fact, changes were made to the Panel*s report and
recommendations even when it was clear that some Panel members seeking
changes were highly unlikely to vote for the supplemental package of
recommendations. As a result, on the basis of Panel meetings and my
personal discussions with Panel members at the end of our deliberative
process, I believe the major differences between Panel members were few in
number and philosophical in nature. Specifically, disagreement centered
primarily on (1) the recommendation related to the role of cost in the new
FAR- type process and (2) the number of times the Congress should be
required to act on the new FAR- type process, including whether the
Congress should authorize a pilot program to test that process for a
specific time period.

Page 4 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing As I noted previously, the new
Circular A- 76 is generally consistent with the Commercial Activities
Panel*s sourcing principles and

recommendations and, as such, provides an improved foundation for
competitive sourcing decisions in the federal government. In particular,
the new Circular permits:  greater reliance on procedures contained in
the FAR, which should

result in a more transparent, simpler, and consistently applied
competitive process, and  source selection decisions based on trade- offs
between technical factors

and cost. The new Circular also suggests the potential use of alternatives
to the competitive sourcing process, such as public- private and public-
public partnerships and high- performing organizations. It does not,
however, specifically address how and when these alternatives might be
used.

If effectively implemented, the new Circular should result in increased
savings, improved performance, and greater accountability, regardless of
the service provider selected. However, this competitive sourcing
initiative is a major change in the way government agencies operate, and
successful

implementation of the Circular*s provisions will require that adequate
support be made available to federal agencies and employees, especially if
the time frames called for in the new Circular are to be achieved.

Implementing the new Circular A- 76 will likely be challenging for many
agencies. Our prior work on acquisition, human capital, and information
technology management* in particular, our work on the Department of
Defense*s (DOD) efforts to implement competitive sourcing 2 *provides a
strong knowledge base from which to anticipate challenges as agencies
implement this initiative.

2 U. S. General Accounting Office, Best Practices: Taking a Strategic
Approach Could Improve DOD*s Acquisition of Services, GAO- 02- 230
(Washington, D. C.: Jan. 18, 2002); U. S. General Accounting Office,
Information Technology: DOD Needs to Leverage Lessons Learned from Its
Outsourcing Projects, GAO- 03- 37 (Washington, D. C.: Apr. 25, 2003); U.
S. General Accounting Office, A Model of Strategic Human Capital
Management,

GAO- 02- 373SP (Washington, D. C.: Mar. 15, 2002); and U. S. General
Accounting Office, Acquisition Workforce: Status of Agency Efforts to
Address Future Needs, GAO- 03- 55 (Washington, D. C.: Dec. 18, 2002).
Challenges in

Implementing Competitive Sourcing

Page 5 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing Foremost among the challenges
that agencies face is setting and meeting appropriate goals that are
integrated with other priorities. Quotas and arbitrary goals are
inappropriate. Sourcing goals and targets should

contribute to mission requirements and improved performance and be based
on considered research and sound analysis of past activities. Agencies
will need to consider how competitive sourcing relates to the strategic
management of human capital, improved financial performance, expanded
reliance on electronic government, and budget and performance integration,
consistent with the President*s Management Agenda. At the request of
Senator Byrd and this subcommittee, we recently initiated work to look at
how agencies are implementing their competitive sourcing programs. Our
work is focused on goal setting and implementation strategies at several
large agencies.

DOD has been at the forefront of federal agencies in using the A- 76
process and, since the mid- to- late 1990s, we have tracked DOD*s progress
in implementing its A- 76 program. The challenges we have identified hold
important lessons that civilian agencies should consider as they implement
their own competitive sourcing initiatives. 3 Notably:

 competitions took longer than initially projected,  costs and resources
required for the competitions were underestimated,  selecting and
grouping functions to compete were problematic, and  determining and
maintaining reliable estimates of savings were difficult.

DOD*s experience also indicates that agencies will have difficulties in
meeting the time frames set out in the new Circular for completing the
standard competition process. Those time frames are intended to respond to
complaints from all sides about the length of time taken to conduct A- 76
cost comparisons* complaints that the Panel repeatedly heard in the course
of its review. The new Circular states that standard competitions shall
not exceed 12 months from public announcement (start date) to performance
decision (end date), with certain preliminary planning steps to be
completed before a public announcement. Under certain conditions, there
may be extensions of no more than 6 months. We welcome efforts to reduce
the time required to complete these studies. Even so, our studies of DOD*s
competitive sourcing have found that competitions can take much longer
than the time frames outlined in the

3 U. S. General Accounting Office, Competitive Sourcing: Challenges in
Expanding A- 76 Governmentwide, GAO- 02- 498T (Washington, D. C.: Mar. 6,
2002).

Page 6 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing new Circular. Specifically,
DOD*s most recent data indicate that competitions have taken, on average,
25 months. It is not clear, however,

how much of this time was needed for any planning that may now be outside
the revised Circular*s time frame. In commenting on OMB*s November 2002
draft proposal, we recommended that the time frame be extended to perhaps
15 to 18 months overall, and that OMB ensure that agencies provide
sufficient resources to comply with Circular A- 76. In any case, we
believe that additional financial and technical support and incentives
will be needed for agencies as they attempt to meet these ambitious time
frames.

Finally, federal agencies and OMB will be challenged to effectively share
lessons learned and establish sufficient guidance to implement certain A-
76 requirements. For example, calculating savings that accrue from A- 76
competitions, as required by the new Circular, will be difficult or may be
done inconsistently across agencies without additional guidance, which
will contribute to uncertainties over savings.

The prior version of Circular A- 76 provided for a streamlined cost
comparison process for activities with 65 or fewer full- time equivalent
(FTE) employees. Although the revised Circular also provides for a
streamlined process at comparable FTE levels, the revised streamlined
process lacks a number of key features designed to ensure that agencies*
sourcing decisions are sound.

First, the prior version of the Circular contained an express prohibition
on dividing functions so as to come under the 65- FTE limit for using a
streamlined process. The revised Circular contains no such prohibition. We
are concerned that in the absence of an express prohibition, agencies
could arbitrarily split activities, entities, or functions to circumvent
the 65- FTE ceiling applicable to the streamlined process. Second, the 10
percent conversion differential 4 under the prior Circular has been
removed for streamlined cost comparisons. The Panel viewed this
differential as a reasonable way to account for the disruption and risk
entailed in converting between the public and private sectors. Third, the
streamlined process requires an agency to certify that its performance

4 The conversion differential is the lesser of 10 percent of the most
efficient organization*s personnel- related costs or $10 million over all
the performance periods stated in the solicitation. The conversion
differential is added to the cost of performance by a nonincumbent source.
Potential Issues with

Streamlined Cost Comparison Process

Page 7 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing decision is cost- effective. It
is not clear from the revised Circular, however, whether the term *cost-
effective* means the low- cost provider or

whether other factors may be taken into account (such as the disruption
and risk factors previously accounted for through the 10 percent
conversion differential). Finally, the revised Circular has created an
accountability gap by

prohibiting all challenges to streamlined cost comparisons. Under the
prior Circular, both the public and the private sectors had the right to
file appeals to ad hoc agency appeal boards. That right extended to all
cost

comparisons, no matter how small or large (and to decisions to waive the
A- 76 cost comparison process). The new Circular abolishes the ad hoc
appeal board process and instead relies on the FAR- based agency- level
protest process for challenges to standard competitions, which are
conducted under a FAR- based process. While we recognize that streamlined
cost comparisons are intended to be inexpensive, expeditious processes for
relatively small functions, we are nonetheless concerned

that the absence of an appeal process may result in less transparency and
accountability.

Another accountability issue relates to the right of in- house competitors
to challenge sourcing decisions in favor of the private sector* an issue
that the Commercial Activities Panel addressed in its report. While both
the public and the private sectors could file appeals to the ad hoc agency
appeal boards under the prior Circular, only the private sector had the

right, if dissatisfied with the ruling of the agency appeal board, to file
a bid protest at GAO or in court. Under the previous version of the
Circular, both GAO and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held
that federal employees and their unions were not *interested parties* with
the standing to challenge the results of A- 76 cost comparisons. The Panel
heard many complaints from federal employees and their representatives

about this inequality in protest rights. The Panel recommended that, in
the context of improving the federal government*s process for making
sourcing decisions, a way be found to level the playing field by allowing
in- house entities to file a protest at GAO, as private- sector
competitors have been allowed to do. The Panel noted, though, that if a
decision were made to permit the public- sector competitor to protest A*
76 procurements, the question of who would have representational capacity
to file such a protest would need to be carefully considered. An important
legal question is whether the shift from the cost comparisons

under the prior Circular to the FAR- like standard competitions under the
Protest Rights

Page 8 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing new one means that the in-
house most- efficient organization (MEO) should now be found eligible to
file a bid protest at GAO. If the MEO is

allowed to protest, there is a second question: Who will speak for the MEO
and protest in its name? To ensure that our legal analysis of these
questions benefits from input from everyone with a stake in this important
area, GAO posted a notice in the Federal Register on June 13, 2003,
seeking public comment on these and several related questions. Responses
were due July 16, and we are currently reviewing the more than 50
responses that we received from private individuals, Members of Congress,
federal agencies, unions, and other organizations. We intend to reach a
conclusion on these important legal questions in the coming weeks.

For many agencies, effective implementation of the new Circular will
depend on their ability to understand that their workforce is their most
important organizational asset. Recognizing this, the Panel adopted a
principle stipulating that sourcing and related policies be consistent
with human capital practices that are designed to attract, motivate,
retain, and reward a high- performing workforce. Conducting competitions
as fairly, effectively, and efficiently as possible requires sufficient
agency capacity* that is, a skilled workforce and adequate infrastructure
and funding. Agencies will need to build and maintain capacity to manage
competitions,

to prepare the in- house MEO, and to oversee the work* regardless of
whether the private sector or MEO is selected. Building this capacity is
important, particularly for agencies that have not been heavily invested
in competitive sourcing previously. Agencies must manage this effort while
addressing high- risk areas, such as human capital and contract
management. In this regard, GAO has listed contract management at DOD, the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, and the Department of Energy as an area of high
risk. With a likely increase in the number of public- private competitions
and the requirement to hold accountable whichever sector wins, agencies
will need to ensure that they have an acquisition workforce

sufficient in numbers and abilities to manage the cost, quality, and
performance of the service provider. In our prior work* notably in
studying the lessons that state and local governments learned in
conducting competitions and in private- sector

outsourcing of information technology services* we found that certain
strategies and practices can help ensure the success of workforce
Effective Human

Capital Practices Will Be Key to Successful Implementation of Competitive
Sourcing

Page 9 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing transitions when deciding who
should provide the services they perform. 5 In general, these strategies
recognized that the workforce defines an organization*s character, affects
its capacity to perform, and represents its

knowledge base. When an agency*s leadership is committed to effective
human capital management, they view people as assets whose value can be
enhanced through investments.

Agencies can aid their workforce in transitioning to a competitive
sourcing environment if they:  ensure employee involvement in the
transition process; for example, by

clearly communicating to employees what is going to happen and when it is
going to happen;  provide skills training for either competing against
the private sector or

monitoring contractor performance;  create a safety net for displaced
employees to bolster their support for the

changes as well as to aid in the transition to a competitive environment,
such as offering workers early retirement, severance pay, or a buyout; 
facilitate the transition of staff to the private sector or reimbursable

provider when that is their choice and assist employees who do not want to
transfer to find other federal jobs; and  develop employee retention
programs and offer bonuses to keep people

where appropriate. Recognizing the workforce as an asset also requires
agency officials to view competitive sourcing* whether it results in
outsourcing, insourcing, or cosourcing* as a tool to help ensure we have
the right people providing

services in an effective and efficient manner. The Panel recommended that
employees should receive technical and financial assistance, as
appropriate, to structure the MEO, to conduct cost comparisons, and to
create HPOs. However, it is unclear whether agencies will have adequate
financial and technical resources to implement effective competitive
sourcing programs or make needed improvements.

The administration has proposed the creation of a governmentwide fund for
performance- based compensation. However, most federal agencies lack
modern, effective, credible, and validated performance management systems
to effectively implement performance- based compensation

5 U. S. General Accounting Office, Privatization: Lessons Learned by State
and Local Governments, GAO/ GGD- 97- 48 (Washington, D. C. Mar. 14, 1997);
GAO- 02- 230; and GAO- 03- 37.

Page 10 GAO- 03- 1022T Competitive Sourcing approaches. Importantly, a
clear need exists to provide assistance both to government employees to
create MEOs that can compete effectively and to agencies to promote HPOs
throughout the federal government,

especially in connection with functions, activities, and entities that
will never be subject to competitive sourcing. Assistance is also needed
in helping to create the systems and structures needed to support the
effective and equitable implementation of more performance- based
compensation approaches. As a result, we believe consideration should be
given to establishing a governmentwide fund that would be available to
agencies, on the basis of a business case, to provide technical and

financial assistance to federal employees to develop MEOs and for creating
HPOs, including the creation of modern, effective, and credible
performance management systems.

While the new Circular provides an improved foundation for competitive
sourcing decisions, implementing this initiative will undoubtedly be a
significant challenge for many federal agencies. The success of the
competitive sourcing program will ultimately be measured by the results
achieved in terms of providing value to the taxpayer, not the size of the
in- house or contractor workforce or the number of positions competed to
meet arbitrary quotas. Successful implementation will require adequate
technical and financial resources, as well as sustained commitment by
senior leadership to establish fact- based goals, make effective
decisions, achieve continuous improvement based on lessons learned, and
provide ongoing communication to ensure that federal workers know and
believe that they will be viewed and treated as valuable assets.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I will be happy to answer any
questions you or other Members of the subcommittee may have. Conclusion

(120276)

This is a work of the U. S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm
of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of
the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of
public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
To have GAO e- mail

this list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov and select
*Subscribe to e- mail alerts* under the *Order GAO Products* heading.

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to: U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D. C. 20548 To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000

TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax: (202) 512- 6061

Contact: Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E- mail:
fraudnet@ gao. gov Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202)
512- 7470 Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512-
4800

U. S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.
C. 20548 GAO*s Mission Obtaining Copies of

GAO Reports and Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal
Programs Public Affairs
*** End of document. ***