    Freedom of Information Act: Processing Trends Show Importance of
    Improvement Plans (30-MAR-07, GAO-07-441).

    The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) establishes that federal
    agencies must provide access to their information, enabling the
    public to learn about government operations and decisions. To
    help ensure proper implementation, the act requires that agencies
    report annually to the Attorney General, giving specific
    information about their FOIA operations, such as numbers of
    requests received and processed and median processing times.
    Also, a recent Executive Order directs agencies to develop plans
    to improve FOIA operations, including decreasing backlog. For
    this study, GAO was asked to examine the status and trends of
    FOIA processing at 25 major agencies as reflected in annual
    reports, as well as the extent to which improvement plans contain
    the elements emphasized by the Executive Order. To do so, GAO
    analyzed the 25 agencies' annual reports and improvement plans.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-07-441
        ACCNO:   A67575
      TITLE:     Freedom of Information Act: Processing Trends Show
    Importance of Improvement Plans
         DATE:   03/30/2007
      SUBJECT:   Executive orders
    	     Federal agencies
    	     Federal Information Processing Standards
    	     Federal law
    	     Freedom of information
    	     Government information
    	     Government information dissemination
    	     Information disclosure
    	     Reporting requirements
    	     Reports management

    ******************************************************************
    ** 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-07-441

         * [1]Report to Congressional Requesters

              * [2]March 2007

         * [3]FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

              * [4]Processing Trends Show Importance of Improvement Plans

         * [5]Contents

              * [6]Results in Brief
              * [7]Background

                   * [8]The FOIA Process at Federal Agencies
                   * [9]The Privacy Act Also Provides Individuals with Access
                     Rights
                   * [10]Roles of OMB and Justice in FOIA Implementation
                   * [11]Annual FOIA Reports Were Established by 1996 Amendments
                   * [12]Executive Order Required Agencies to Take Several
                     Actions to Improve FOIA Operations

              * [13]Status of FOIA Processing Appears Similar to Previous Years,
                but Limitations in Annual Report Data Present Challenges

                   * [14]Not All Data from USDA's Farm Service Agency Are
                     Reliable, but Its Improvement Plan Provides Opportunity to
                     Address This Weakness
                   * [15]Except for SSA, Increases in Requests Received and
                     Processed Are Generally Slowing
                   * [16]Most Requests Are Granted in Full
                   * [17]Processing Times Vary, but Broad Generalizations Are
                     Limited
                   * [18]Agency Pending Cases Continue to Increase
                   * [19]No Regular Mechanism Is in Place for Aggregating Annual
                     Report Data

              * [20]Agency Improvement Plans Generally Included Areas of
                Improvement Emphasized by the Executive Order

                   * [21]All Agencies Addressed Reducing Backlog, and Most Set
                     Measurable Goals and Milestones
                   * [22]Most Agencies Plan to Increase Public Dissemination of
                     Records through Web Sites
                   * [23]Most Agency Plans Included Improving Status
                     Communications with FOIA Requesters
                   * [24]Agencies Generally Plan to Rely on FOIA Reference Guides
                     to Increase Public Awareness of FOIA Processing

              * [25]Conclusions
              * [26]Matters for Congressional Consideration
              * [27]Recommendations for Executive Action
              * [28]Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

         * [29]Scope and Methodology
         * [30]Comments from the Department of Agriculture
         * [31]Comments from the Department of Justice
         * [32]Comments from the Department of the Treasury
         * [33]Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs
         * [34]Comments from the Agency for International Development
         * [35]Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency
         * [36]Comments from the National Science Foundation
         * [37]Freedom of Information Act Exemptions
         * [38]Median Processing Times Reported

              * [39]Agency for International Development
              * [40]Central Intelligence Agency
              * [41]Department of Homeland Security
              * [42]Department of Commerce
              * [43]Department of Defense
              * [44]Department of Energy
              * [45]Department of the Interior
              * [46]Department of Justice
              * [47]Department of Labor
              * [48]Department of Transportation
              * [49]Department of Education
              * [50]Environmental Protection Agency
              * [51]General Services Administration
              * [52]Department of Health and Human Services
              * [53]Department of Housing and Urban Development
              * [54]National Aeronautics and Space Administration
              * [55]Nuclear Regulatory Commission
              * [56]National Science Foundation
              * [57]Office of Personnel Management
              * [58]Small Business Administration
              * [59]Social Security Administration
              * [60]Department of State
              * [61]Department of the Treasury
              * [62]Department of Veterans Affairs

         * [63]GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

    Report to Congressional Requesters

    March 2007

    FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

    Processing Trends Show Importance of Improvement Plans

    Contents

    Tables

    Figures

    Abbreviations

    March 30, 2007 Letter

    The Honorable William Lacy Clay
    Chairman
    Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives
    Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
    House of Representatives

    The Honorable Todd Platts
    House of Representatives

    The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)^1 establishes that federal agencies
    must provide the public with access to government information, thus
    enabling them to learn about government operations and decisions. Specific
    requests by the public for information through the act have led to
    disclosure of waste, fraud, abuse, and wrongdoing in the government, as
    well as the identification of unsafe consumer products, harmful drugs, and
    serious health hazards.

    To help ensure appropriate implementation, the act requires that agencies
    provide annual reports on their FOIA operations to the Attorney General;
    these reports include information as specified in the act, such as how
    many requests were received and processed in the previous fiscal year, how
    many requests were pending at the end of the year, and the median times
    that agencies or their components took to process requests.^2 Since 2001,
    we have provided the Congress with periodic analyses of the contents of
    these annual reports.^3

    In December 2005, the President issued an Executive Order aimed at
    improving agencies' disclosure of information consistent with FOIA.^4
    Among other things, this order required each agency to review its FOIA
    operations and develop improvement plans;^5 by June 14, 2006, each agency
    was to submit a report to the Attorney General and the Director of the
    Office of Management and Budget (OMB) summarizing the results of the
    agency's review and including a copy of its improvement plan. These plans
    were to include specific outcome-oriented goals and timetables, by which
    the agency head is to evaluate the agency's success in implementing the
    plan.

    The Executive Order directs agencies in their FOIA improvement plans to
    focus on ways to

    oeliminate or reduce any backlog of requests;

    oincrease reliance on public dissemination of records including through
    Web sites;

    oimprove communications with requesters about the status of their
    requests; and

    oincrease public awareness of FOIA processing.

    In July 2006, we testified before the Subcommittee on Government
    Management, Finance, and Accountability, House Committee on Government
    Reform, providing preliminary results of our ongoing analyses of the 2005
    annual reports as well as of the improvement plans required by the
    Executive Order.^6 This report provides the final results of our
    analyses.^7

    As agreed, our objectives were to determine (1) the status of agencies'
    processing of FOIA requests as reflected in their annual reports for
    fiscal years 2002 through 2005, highlighting any trends in these reports
    since 2002, and (2) to what extent the agency FOIA improvement plans
    contain the elements emphasized by the Executive Order.

    To describe statistics on the processing of FOIA requests, we analyzed
    annual report data for fiscal years 2002 through 2005 from 25 major
    agencies (herein we refer to this scope as governmentwide). We examined
    data from the 24 agencies covered by the Chief Financial Officers Act,
    plus the Central Intelligence Agency. However, we eliminated one of the 25
    agencies--the Department of Agriculture--from our analysis because one of
    its major components reported that not all its data were reliable. As a
    result, our statistical analysis for this report was based on data from a
    total of 24 agencies' annual reports.^8

    To determine to what extent the agency plans contained the elements
    emphasized by the order, we analyzed the plans for all 25 agencies to
    determine whether they addressed each area of improvement that was
    emphasized and contained goals and timetables for each.^9 We evaluated the
    versions of plans submitted as of December 15, 2006. We also reviewed the
    Executive Order itself, implementing guidance issued by OMB and the
    Department of Justice, other FOIA guidance issued by Justice, and our past
    work in this area. A more detailed description of our scope and
    methodology is provided in appendix I.

    We conducted our review in accordance with generally accepted government
    auditing standards. We performed our work from May 2006 to January 2007 in
    Washington, D.C.

    Results in Brief

    Based on data reported by 24 major agencies in annual FOIA reports from
    2002 to 2005,^10 the public continued to submit more requests for
    information from the federal government through FOIA. Despite increasing
    the numbers of requests processed, many agencies did not keep pace with
    the volume of requests that they received. As a result, the number of
    pending requests carried over from year to year has been steadily
    increasing. According to agency reports:

    oRecently the rate of increase in requests received and processed has
    flattened. Except for one agency--the Social Security Administration
    (SSA)^11--these increases were only about 3 and 2 percent from 2004 to
    2005 (compared to 29 and 27 percent from 2002 to 2005).

    oFor most requests processed in fiscal year 2005, responsive records were
    provided in full. The percentage (87 percent) is about the same as in
    previous years.

    oMedian times to process requests varied greatly. These ranged from less
    than 10 days for some agency components to more than 100 days at others
    (sometimes much more than 100).

    oNumbers of pending requests carried over from year to year continue to
    increase. Also, the rate of increase is growing.^12

    Our ability to generalize in one of these areas--FOIA processing times--is
    limited by the form in which the statistics are reported: that is, as
    required by the act, agencies report median processing times, not
    averages.^13 Working with median data only, it is not statistically
    possible to combine results from different agencies to develop broader
    generalizations (such as a governmentwide statistic based on all agency
    reports, or an agencywide statistic based on separate reports from all
    components of the agency).^14 This limitation on aggregating data impedes
    the development of broader pictures of FOIA operations, which would be
    helpful both for public accountability and for effectively managing agency
    FOIA programs. Further, we omitted from our statistical analysis data from
    the Department of Agriculture because of the unreliability of data
    reported by a major component (the Farm Service Agency, which appeared to
    account for about 80 percent of the department's data). Providing annual
    report data that are generalizable and accurate is important to meeting
    the act's goal of providing visibility into government FOIA operations.
    Finally, in the absence of a requirement that data from the annual reports
    be summarized or aggregated (a function that the Department of Justice, in
    its FOIA oversight role, has performed in the past), the public and the
    Congress have no consistent means of obtaining a governmentwide picture of
    FOIA processing.

    The 25 agencies submitted improvement plans that mostly included goals and
    timetables addressing the four areas of improvement emphasized by the
    Executive Order. Based on the results of agencies' reviews of their FOIA
    operations, the plans also included other improvement activities (such as
    improving automation and increasing staff training) that are expected to
    contribute to achieving the goals of the Executive Order. Out of 25 plans,
    20 provided goals and timetables in all four areas. In some cases,
    agencies did not set goals for a given area because they determined that
    they were already strong in that area. All agencies with reported backlog
    developed plans to reduce backlog, and (with minor exceptions) all
    included both measurable goals and milestones. Except for one department,
    agencies also generally set milestones for the other areas of improvement
    emphasized by the Executive Order (that is, increasing public
    dissemination, improving status communications, and increasing public
    awareness of FOIA processing); for example, to increase public awareness,
    agencies generally planned to ensure that their FOIA reference guides were
    comprehensive and up to date. The exception was the Department of the
    Treasury, whose review and plan was focused on backlog reduction and
    omitted the other three areas of improvement; if the department does not
    review these areas and, as appropriate, establish and report on goals and
    timetables for them, it will not have assurance that it has taken
    appropriate steps to address increasing public dissemination, improving
    status communications, and increasing public awareness of FOIA processing.

    We suggest that the Congress consider improving the usefulness of the
    agency annual FOIA reports by requiring agencies to report statistics in
    addition to processing times, including averages. In addition, we are
    recommending that Justice provide aggregated statistics and summaries of
    the annual reports. Finally, we are making recommendations to the
    Departments of Agriculture and the Treasury aimed at improving annual FOIA
    reports and agency improvement plans.

    We provided drafts of our report for comment to OMB and all 25 agencies
    reviewed. All the agencies generally agreed with our findings and
    recommendations or had no comment, except for the Department of the
    Treasury; Treasury partially disagreed with our assessment and conclusions
    regarding its improvement plan and disagreed with our recommendation.
    Written comments from the Departments of Agriculture, Justice, the
    Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, along with the Agency for International
    Development, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Science
    Foundation, are provided in appendixes II through VIII; other comments
    were provided orally. In addition, six agencies (OMB, the Office of
    Personnel Management, and SSA, and the Departments of the Interior,
    Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development) provided technical
    comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.

    More specifically:

    oThe Department of Justice concurred with our assessment and
    recommendation and described plans to implement the recommendation.

    oThe Department of Agriculture provided additional information on actions
    to improve FOIA processing and to ensure that data from the Farm Service
    Agency are reliable.

    oExcept for Treasury, other agencies providing written comments generally
    provided additional information on their FOIA programs or provided
    suggestions on the draft.

    oIn written and e-mail comments, the Department of the Treasury stated
    that it will be evaluating its improvement plan and taking action to
    improve its FOIA administration. It indicated a general agreement with the
    conclusion that Treasury's plan needs to more thoroughly integrate the
    Executive Order, and noted that the plan is a living, dynamic document
    that will accommodate changing circumstances. However, the department
    partially disagreed with our assessment of its improvement plan,
    indicating that we did not take into sufficient consideration activities
    that it had been carrying out before the issuance of the Executive Order
    (such as improvements to automation). Further, it disagreed with our
    recommendation that it review its FOIA operations in certain areas
    emphasized by the Executive Order and modify the plan as appropriate to
    address these areas. The department considered that its plan's emphasis on
    backlog reduction was in accordance with the emphasis placed on it by the
    Executive Order and Justice guidance, that its plan went well beyond
    discussing backlog reduction, and that actions that were not included in
    the plan implemented other elements in the letter and spirit of the
    Executive Order.

    Although we agree that the Executive Order and Justice guidance placed
    great emphasis on backlog reduction, we do not agree that the plan and the
    other actions described fully address all the areas emphasized in the
    order. For example, although the improvements to automation described by
    the department may contribute to (for example) improved communication with
    requesters, without goals and milestones tying these automation
    improvements to that objective, neither Treasury management nor the public
    will be well placed to judge whether the department has succeeded in
    achieving the objective. We note, however, that Treasury in its comments
    indicates that it does plan to continue to reevaluate its improvement plan
    and modify it to accommodate changing circumstances. If future
    modifications specifically address external communications, particularly
    with requesters, the goal of our recommendation may be achieved.

    Background

    FOIA establishes a legal right of access to government records and
    information, on the basis of the principles of openness and accountability
    in government. Before the act (originally enacted in 1966), an individual
    seeking access to federal records had faced the burden of establishing a
    right to examine them. FOIA established a "right to know" standard for
    access, instead of a "need to know," and shifted the burden of proof from
    the individual to the government agency seeking to deny access.

    FOIA provides the public with access to government information either
    through "affirmative agency disclosure"--publishing information in the
    Federal Register or on the Internet, or making it available in reading
    rooms--or in response to public requests for disclosure. Public requests
    for disclosure of records are the best known type of FOIA disclosure. Any
    member of the public may request access to information held by federal
    agencies, without showing a need or reason for seeking the information.

    Not all information held by the government is subject to FOIA. The act
    prescribes nine specific categories of information that are exempt from
    disclosure: for example, trade secrets and certain privileged commercial
    or financial information, certain personnel and medical files, and certain
    law enforcement records or information (app. IX provides the complete
    list). In denying access to material, agencies may cite these exemptions.
    The act requires agencies to notify requesters of the reasons for any
    adverse determination (that is, a determination not to provide records)
    and grants requesters the right to appeal agency decisions to deny access.

    In addition, agencies are required to meet certain time frames for making
    key determinations: whether to comply with requests (20 business days from
    receipt of the request), responses to appeals of adverse determinations
    (20 business days from filing of the appeal), and whether to provide
    expedited processing of requests (10 calendar days from receipt of the
    request). The Congress did not establish a statutory deadline for making
    releasable records available, but instead required agencies to make them
    available promptly.

    The FOIA Process at Federal Agencies

    Although the specific details of processes for handling FOIA requests vary
    among agencies, the major steps in handling a request are similar across
    the government. Agencies receive requests, usually in writing (although
    they may accept requests by telephone or electronically), which can come
    from any organization or member of the public. Once received, the request
    goes through several phases, which include initial processing, searching
    for and retrieving responsive records, preparing responsive records for
    release, approving the release of the records, and releasing the records
    to the requester. Figure 1 is an overview of the process, from the receipt
    of a request to the release of records.

    Figure 1: Overview of Generic FOIA Process

    During the initial processing phase, a request is logged into the agency's
    FOIA system, and a case file is started. The request is then reviewed to
    determine its scope, estimate fees, and provide an initial response to the
    requester (in general, this simply acknowledges receipt of the request).
    After this point, the FOIA staff begins its search to retrieve responsive
    records. This step may include searching for records from multiple
    locations and program offices. After potentially responsive records are
    located, the documents are reviewed to ensure that they are within the
    scope of the request.

    During the next two phases, the agency ensures that appropriate
    information is to be released under the provisions of the act. First, the
    agency reviews the responsive records to make any redactions based on the
    statutory exemptions. Once the exemption review is complete, the final set
    of responsive records is turned over to the FOIA office, which calculates
    appropriate fees, if applicable. Before release, the redacted responsive
    records are then given a final review, possibly by the agency's general
    counsel, and then a response letter is generated, summarizing the agency's
    actions regarding the request. Finally, the responsive records are
    released to the requester.

    Some requests are relatively simple to process, such as requests for
    specific pieces of information that the requester sends directly to the
    appropriate office. Other requests may require more extensive processing,
    depending on their complexity, the volume of information involved, the
    need for the agency FOIA office to work with offices that have relevant
    subject-matter expertise to find and obtain information, the need for a
    FOIA officer to review and redact information in the responsive material,
    the need to communicate with the requester about the scope of the request,
    and the need to communicate with the requester about the fees that will be
    charged for fulfilling the request (or whether fees will be waived).^15

    Specific details of agency processes for handling requests vary, depending
    on the agency's organizational structure and the complexity of the
    requests received. While some agencies centralize processing in one main
    office, other agencies have separate FOIA offices for each agency
    component and field office. Agencies also vary in how they allow requests
    to be made. Depending on the agency, requesters can submit requests by
    telephone, fax, letter, or e-mail or through the Web. In addition,
    agencies may process requests in two ways, known as "multitrack" and
    "single track." Multitrack processing involves dividing requests into two
    groups: (1) simple requests requiring relatively minimal review, which are
    placed in one processing track, and (2) more voluminous and complex
    requests, which are placed in another track. In contrast, single-track
    processing does not distinguish between simple and complex requests. With
    single-track processing, agencies process all requests on a
    first-in/first-out basis. Agencies can also process FOIA requests on an
    expedited basis when a requester has shown a compelling need or urgency
    for the information.

    As agencies process FOIA requests, they generally place them in one of
    four possible disposition categories: grants, partial grants, denials, and
    "not disclosed for other reasons." These categories are defined as
    follows:

    oGrants: Agency decisions to disclose all requested records in full.

    oPartial grants: Agency decisions to withhold some records in whole or in
    part, because such information was determined to fall within one or more
    exemptions.

    oDenials: Agency decisions not to release any part of the requested
    records because all information in the records is determined to be exempt
    under one or more statutory exemptions.

    oNot disclosed for other reasons: Agency decisions not to release
    requested information for any of a variety of reasons other than statutory
    exemptions from disclosing records. The categories and definitions of
    these "other" reasons for nondisclosure are shown in table 1.

    Table 1: "Other" Reasons for Nondisclosure

    Category                  Definition
    No records                The agency searched and found no record
                                 responsive to the request.
    Referrals                 The agency referred records responsive to the
                                 request to another agency.
    Request withdrawn         The requester withdrew the request.
    Fee-related reasons       The requester refused to commit to pay fees (or
                                 other reasons related to fees).
    Records not reasonably    The requester did not describe the records
    described                 sought with sufficient specificity to allow them
                                 to be located with a reasonable amount of
                                 effort.
    Not a proper FOIA request The request was not a FOIA request for one of
                                 several procedural reasons.
    Not an agency record      The requested record was not within the agency's
                                 control.
    Duplicate request         The request was submitted more than once by the
                                 same requester.

    Source: Department of Justice.

    When a FOIA request is denied in full or in part, or the requested records
    are not disclosed for other reasons, the requester is entitled to be told
    the reason for the denial, to appeal the denial, and to challenge it in
    court.

    The Privacy Act Also Provides Individuals with Access Rights

    In addition to FOIA, the Privacy Act of 1974^16 includes provisions
    granting individuals the right to gain access to and correct information
    about themselves held by federal agencies. Thus the Privacy Act serves as
    a second major legal basis, in addition to FOIA, for the public to use in
    obtaining government information. The Privacy Act also places limitations
    on agencies' collection, disclosure, and use of personal information.

    Although the two laws differ in scope, procedures in both FOIA and the
    Privacy Act permit individuals to seek access to records about
    themselves--known as "first-party" access. Depending on the individual
    circumstances, one law may allow broader access or more extensive
    procedural rights than the other, or access may be denied under one act
    and allowed under the other. Consequently, the Department of Justice's
    Office of Information and Privacy issued guidance that it is "good policy
    for agencies to treat all first-party access requests as FOIA requests (as
    well as possibly Privacy Act requests), regardless of whether the FOIA is
    cited in a requester's letter." This guidance was intended to help ensure
    that requesters receive the fullest possible response to their inquiries,
    regardless of which law they cite.

    In addition, Justice guidance for the annual FOIA report directs agencies
    to include Privacy Act requests (that is, first-party requests) in the
    statistics reported. According to the guidance, "A Privacy Act request is
    a request for records concerning oneself; such requests are also treated
    as FOIA requests. (All requests for access to records, regardless of which
    law is cited by the requester, are included in this report.)"

    Although FOIA and the Privacy Act can both apply to first-party requests,
    these may not always be processed in the same way as described earlier for
    FOIA requests. In some cases, little review and redaction (see fig. 1) is
    required, such as, for example, a request for one's own Social Security
    benefits records. In contrast, various degrees of review and redaction
    could be required for other types of first-party requests: for example,
    files on security background checks would need review and redaction before
    being provided to the person who was the subject of the investigation.

    Roles of OMB and Justice in FOIA Implementation

    OMB and the Department of Justice both have roles in the implementation of
    FOIA. Under various statutes, including the Paperwork Reduction Act,^17
    OMB exercises broad authority for coordinating and administering various
    aspects of governmentwide information policy. FOIA specifically requires
    OMB to issue guidelines to "provide for a uniform schedule of fees for all
    agencies."^18 OMB issued this guidance in April 1987.^19

    The Department of Justice oversees agencies' compliance with FOIA and is
    the primary source of policy guidance for agencies. Specifically,
    Justice's requirements under the act are to

    omake agencies' annual FOIA reports available through a single electronic
    access point and notify the Congress as to their availability;

    oin consultation with OMB, develop guidelines for the required annual
    agency reports, so that all reports use common terminology and follow a
    similar format; and

    osubmit an annual report on FOIA litigation and the efforts undertaken by
    Justice to encourage agency compliance.

    Within the Department of Justice, the Office of Information and Privacy
    has lead responsibility for providing guidance and support to federal
    agencies on FOIA issues. This office first issued guidelines for agency
    preparation and submission of annual reports in the spring of 1997. It
    also periodically issues additional guidance on annual reports as well as
    on compliance, provides training, and maintains a counselors service to
    provide expert, one-on-one assistance to agency FOIA staff. Further, the
    Office of Information and Privacy also makes a variety of FOIA and Privacy
    Act resources available to agencies and the public via the Justice Web
    site and on-line bulletins (available at [64]w
    ww.usdoj.gov/oip/index.html).

    Annual FOIA Reports Were Established by 1996 Amendments

    In 1996, the Congress amended FOIA to provide for public access to
    information in an electronic format (among other purposes). These
    amendments, referred to as e-FOIA, also required that agencies submit a
    report to the Attorney General on or before February 1 of each year that
    covers the preceding fiscal year and includes information about agencies'
    FOIA operations.^20 The following are examples of information that is to
    be included in these reports:

    onumber of requests received, processed, and pending;

    omedian number of days taken by the agency to process different types of
    requests;

    odeterminations made by the agency not to disclose information and the
    reasons for not disclosing the information;

    odisposition of administrative appeals by requesters;

    oinformation on the costs associated with handling of FOIA requests; and

    ofull-time-equivalent staffing information.

    In addition to providing their annual reports to the Attorney General,
    agencies are to make them available to the public in electronic form. The
    Attorney General is required to make all agency reports available online
    at a single electronic access point and report to the Congress no later
    than April 1 of each year that these reports are available in electronic
    form. (This electronic access point is [65]w  ww.usdoj.gov/oip/04_6.html.)

    In 2001, in response to a congressional request, we prepared the first in
    a series of reports on the implementation of the 1996 amendments to FOIA,
    starting from fiscal year 1999.^21 In these reviews, we examined the
    contents of the annual reports for 25 major agencies (shown in table
    2).^22 They include the 24 major agencies covered by the Chief Financial
    Officers Act, as well as the Central Intelligence Agency and, until 2003,
    the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In 2003, the creation of
    the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which incorporated FEMA, led to
    a shift in some FOIA requests from agencies affected by the creation of
    the new department, but the same major component entities are reflected in
    all the years reviewed.

    Table 2: Agencies Reviewed

                              Agency                             Abbreviation
    Agency for International Development                  AID
    Central Intelligence Agency                           CIA
    Department of Agriculture ^a                          USDA
    Department of Commerce                                DOC
    Department of Defense                                 DOD
    Department of Education                               ED
    Department of Energy                                  DOE
    Department of Health and Human Services               HHS
    Department of Homeland Security ^b                    DHS
    Federal Emergency Management Agency ^b                FEMA
    Department of Housing and Urban Development           HUD
    Department of Interior                                DOI
    Department of Justice                                 DOJ
    Department of Labor                                   DOL
    Department of State                                   State
    Department of the Treasury                            Treas
    Department of Transportation                          DOT
    Department of Veterans Affairs                        VA
    Environmental Protection Agency                       EPA
    General Services Administration                       GSA
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration         NASA
    National Science Foundation                           NSF
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission                         NRC
    Office of Personnel Management                        OPM
    Small Business Administration                         SBA
    Social Security Administration                        SSA

    Source: GAO.

    ^aUSDA was not included in our statistical analysis for this report
    because data from one of its major components were found to be unreliable.

    ^bFEMA information was reported separately in fiscal year 2002. In fiscal
    years 2003, 2004, and 2005, FEMA was part of DHS.

    Our previous reports included descriptions of the status of reported FOIA
    implementation, including any trends revealed by comparison with earlier
    years. We noted general increases in requests received and processed, as
    well as growing numbers of pending requests carried over from year to
    year.

    In addition, our 2001 report disclosed that data quality issues limited
    the usefulness of agencies' annual FOIA reports and that agencies had not
    provided online access to all the information required by the act as
    amended in 1996. We therefore recommended that the Attorney General direct
    the Department of Justice to improve the reliability of data in the
    agencies' annual reports by providing guidance addressing the data quality
    issues we identified and by reviewing agencies' report data for
    completeness and consistency. We further recommended that the Attorney
    General direct the department to enhance the public's access to government
    records and information by encouraging agencies to make all required
    materials available electronically. In response, the Department of Justice
    issued supplemental guidance, addressed reporting requirements in its
    training programs, and continued reviewing agencies' annual reports for
    data quality. Justice also worked with agencies to improve the quality of
    data in FOIA annual reports.

    Executive Order Required Agencies to Take Several Actions to Improve FOIA
    Operations

    On December 14, 2005, the President issued an Executive Order setting
    forth a policy of citizen-centered and results-oriented FOIA
    administration.^23 Briefly, FOIA requesters are to receive courteous and
    appropriate services, including ways to learn about the status of their
    requests and the agency's response, and agencies are to provide ways for
    requesters and the public to learn about the FOIA process and publicly
    available agency records (such as those on Web sites). In addition, agency
    FOIA operations are to be results oriented: agencies are to process
    requests efficiently, achieve measurable improvements in FOIA processing,
    and reform programs that do not produce appropriate results.

    To carry out this policy, the order required, among other things, that
    agency heads designate Chief FOIA Officers to oversee their FOIA programs,
    and that agencies establish Requester Service Centers and Public Liaisons
    to ensure appropriate communication with requesters. The Chief FOIA
    Officers were directed to conduct reviews of the agencies' FOIA operations
    and develop improvement plans to ensure that FOIA administration was in
    accordance with applicable law as well as with the policy set forth in the
    order. By June 2006, agencies were to submit reports that included the
    results of their reviews and copies of their improvement plans. The order
    also instructed the Attorney General to issue guidance on implementation
    of the order's requirements for agencies to conduct reviews and develop
    plans. Finally, the order instructed agencies to report on their progress
    in implementing their plans and meeting milestones as part of their annual
    reports for fiscal years 2006 and 2007, and required agencies to account
    for any milestones missed.

    In April 2006, the Department of Justice posted guidance on implementation
    of the order's requirements for FOIA reviews and improvement plans.^24
    This guidance suggested a number of areas of FOIA administration that
    agencies might consider in conducting their reviews and developing
    improvement plans. (Examples of some of these areas are automated tracking
    capabilities, automated processing, receiving/responding to requests
    electronically, forms of communication with requesters, and systems for
    handling referrals to other agencies.) To encourage consistency, the
    guidance also included a template for agencies to use to structure the
    plans and to report on their reviews and plans.^25 The improvement plans
    are posted on the Justice Web site at [66]w
    ww.usdoj.gov/oip/agency_improvement.html.

    In a July 2006 testimony, we provided preliminary results of our analyses
    of the improvement plans for the 25 agencies in our review that were
    submitted as of the end of June; in our testimony we focused on how the
    plans addressed reducing or eliminating backlog.^26 We testified that a
    substantial number of plans did not include measurable goals and
    timetables that would allow agencies to measure and evaluate the success
    of their plans. Several of the plans were revised in light of our
    testimony, as well as in response to feedback to agencies from the
    Department of Justice in its FOIA oversight role.

    Status of FOIA Processing Appears Similar to Previous Years, but
    Limitations in Annual Report Data Present Challenges

    The data reported by 24 major agencies in annual FOIA reports from 2002 to
    2005 reveal a number of general trends. (Data from USDA, which were
    reported in our July 2006 testimony, are omitted in what follows, because
    we determined that data from a major USDA component were not reliable.)
    For example, the public continued to submit more requests for information
    from the federal government through FOIA, but many agencies, despite
    increasing the numbers of requests processed, did not keep pace with this
    increased volume. As a result, the number of pending requests carried over
    from year to year has been steadily increasing. However, our ability to
    make generalizations about processing time is limited by the type of
    statistic reported (that is, the median). Taking steps to improve the
    accuracy and form of annual report data could provide more insight into
    FOIA processing.

    Not All Data from USDA's Farm Service Agency Are Reliable, but Its
    Improvement Plan Provides Opportunity to Address This Weakness

    We omitted data from USDA's annual FOIA report because we determined that
    not all these data were reliable. Although some USDA components expressed
    confidence in their data, one component, the Farm Service Agency, did not.
    According to this agency's FOIA Officer, portions of the agency's data in
    annual reports were not accurate or complete. This is a significant
    deficiency, because the Farm Service Agency reportedly processes over 80
    percent of the department's total FOIA requests. Currently, FOIA
    processing for the Farm Service Agency is highly decentralized, taking
    place in staff offices in Washington, D.C., and Kansas City, 50 state
    offices, and about 2,350 county offices. The agency FOIA officer told us
    that she questioned the completeness and accuracy of data supplied by the
    county offices. This official stated that some of the field office data
    supplied for the annual report were clearly wrong, leading her to question
    the systems used to record workload data at field offices and the field
    office staff's understanding of FOIA requirements. She attributed this
    condition to the agency's decentralized organization and to lack of
    management attention, resources, and training. Lacking accurate data
    hinders the Farm Service Agency from effectively monitoring and managing
    its FOIA program.

    The Executive Order's requirement to develop an improvement plan provides
    an opportunity for the Farm Service Agency to address its data reliability
    problems. More specifically, Justice's guidance on implementing the
    Executive Order refers to the need for agencies to explore improvements in
    their monitoring and tracking systems and staff training. USDA has
    developed an improvement plan that includes activities to improve FOIA
    processing at the Farm Service Agency that are relevant to the issues
    raised by the Farm Service Agency's FOIA Officer, including both
    automation and training. The plan sets goals for ensuring that all agency
    employees who process or retrieve responsive records are trained in the
    necessary FOIA duties, as well as for determining the type of automated
    tracking to be implemented. According to the plan, an electronic tracking
    system is needed to track requests, handle public inquiries regarding
    request status, and prepare a more accurate annual FOIA report. In
    addition, the Farm Service Agency plans to determine the benefit of
    increased centralization of FOIA request processing.

    However, the plan does not directly address improvements to data
    reliability. If USDA does not also plan for activities, measures, and
    milestones to improve data reliability, it increases the risk that the
    Farm Service Agency will not produce reliable FOIA statistics, which are
    important for program oversight and meeting the act's goal of providing
    visibility into government FOIA operations.

    Except for SSA, Increases in Requests Received and Processed Are Generally
    Slowing

    The numbers of FOIA requests received and processed continue to rise, but
    except for one case--SSA--the rate of increase has flattened in recent
    years. For SSA, we present statistics separately because the agency
    reported an additional 16 million requests in 2005, dwarfing those for all
    other agencies combined, which together total about 2.6 million. SSA
    attributed this rise to an improvement in its method of counting requests
    and stated that in previous years, these requests were undercounted.
    Further, all but about 38,000 of SSA's over 17 million requests are simple
    requests for personal information by or on behalf of individuals.

    Figure 2 shows total requests reported governmentwide for fiscal years
    2002 through 2005, with SSA's share shown separately.^27 This figure shows
    the magnitude of SSA's contribution to the whole FOIA picture, as well as
    the scale of the jump from 2004 to 2005.

    Figure 2: Total FOIA Requests with SSA Shown Separately, Fiscal Years
    2002-2005

    Figure 3 presents statistics omitting SSA on a scale that allows a clearer
    view of the rate of increase in FOIA requests received and processed in
    the rest of the government. As this figure shows, when SSA's numbers are
    excluded, the rate of increase is modest and has been flattening: For the
    whole period (fiscal years 2002 to 2005), requests received increased by
    about 29 percent, and requests processed increased by about 27 percent.
    Most of this rise occurred from fiscal years 2002 to 2003: about 28
    percent for requests received, and about 27 percent for requests
    processed. In contrast, from fiscal year 2004 to 2005, the rise was much
    less: about 3 percent for requests received, and about 2 percent for
    requests processed.

    Figure 3: Total FOIA Requests and FOIA Requests Processed, Omitting SSA,
    Fiscal Years 2002-2005

    According to SSA, the increases that the agency reported in fiscal year
    2005 can be attributed to an improvement in its method of counting a
    category of requests it calls "simple requests handled by non-FOIA staff."
    From fiscal year 2002 to 2005, SSA's FOIA reports have consistently shown
    significant growth in this category, which has accounted for the major
    portion of all SSA requests reported (see table 3). In each of these
    years, SSA has attributed the increases in this category largely to better
    reporting, as well as actual increases in requests.

    Table 3: Comparison of SSA's Simple Requests Handled by Non-FOIA Staff to
    Totals, Fiscal Years 2002 to 2005

    Fiscal Total requests Total requests       Simple requests   Percentage of
    year         received      processed   handled by non-FOIA total processed
                                                            staff
    2005       17,257,886     17,262,315            17,223,713            99.8
    2004        1,453,619      1,450,493             1,270,512            87.6
    2003          705,280        704,941               678,849            96.3
    2002          268,488        292,884               245,877            84.0

    Sources: SSA FOIA reports (self-reported data), GAO analysis.

    SSA describes requests in this category as typically being requests by
    individuals for access to their own records, as well as requests in which
    individuals consent for SSA to supply information about themselves to
    third parties (such as insurance and mortgage companies) so that they can
    receive housing assistance, mortgages, disability insurance, and so on.^28
    According to SSA's FOIA report, these requests are handled by personnel in
    about 1,500 locations in SSA, including field and district offices and
    teleservice centers.^29 Such requests are almost always granted,^30
    according to SSA, and most receive immediate responses. SSA has stated
    that it does not keep processing statistics (such as median days to
    process) on these requests, which it reports separately from other FOIA
    requests (for which processing statistics are kept). However, officials
    say that these are typically processed in a day or less.

    According to SSA officials, they included information on these requests in
    their annual reports because Justice guidance instructs agencies to treat
    Privacy Act requests (requests for records concerning oneself) as FOIA
    requests and report them in their annual reports.^31 In addition, SSA
    officials said that their automated systems make it straightforward to
    capture and report on these simple requests. According to SSA, in fiscal
    year 2005, the agency began to use automated systems to capture the
    numbers of requests processed by non-FOIA staff, generating statistics
    automatically as requests were processed; the result, according to SSA, is
    a much more accurate count.

    Besides SSA, agencies reporting large numbers of requests received were
    the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security,
    Justice, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, as shown in table 4.^32 The
    rest of the agencies combined account for only about 5 percent of the
    total requests received (if SSA's simple requests handled by non-FOIA
    staff are excluded). Table 4 presents, in descending order of request
    totals, the numbers of requests received and percentages of the total
    (calculated with and without SSA's statistics on simple requests handled
    by non-FOIA staff).

    Table 4: Requests Received, Fiscal Year 2005

    Agency                      Total requests   Percentage of   Percentage of
                                         received total including total including
                                                       SSA line 1      SSA line 2
    SSA (all)                       17,257,886           87.00              --
    SSA (excluding simple               38,602              --            1.48
    requests handled by
    non-FOIA staff)
    VA                               1,914,395            9.65           73.17
    HHS                                222,372            1.12            8.50
    DHS                                163,016            0.82            6.23
    DOD                                 81,304            0.41            3.11
    Treas                               53,330            0.27            2.04
    DOJ                                 52,010            0.26            1.99
    DOL                                 23,505            0.12            0.90
    EPA                                 12,201            0.06            0.47
    OPM                                 12,085            0.06            0.46
    DOT                                  9,597            0.05            0.37
    DOI                                  6,749            0.03            0.26
    State                                4,602            0.02            0.18
    HUD                                  4,227            0.02            0.16
    SBA                                  3,739            0.02            0.14
    DOE                                  3,729            0.02            0.14
    CIA                                  2,935            0.01            0.11
    ED                                   2,416            0.01            0.09
    DOC                                  1,804            0.01            0.07
    GSA                                  1,416            0.01            0.05
    NASA                                 1,229            0.01            0.05
    NRC                                    371            0.00            0.01
    AID                                    369            0.00            0.01
    NSF                                    273            0.00            0.01
    Total including SSA line 1      19,835,560              --              --
    Total including SSA line 2       2,616,276              --              --

    Source: FOIA annual reports for 2005 (self-reported data).

    Note: Abbreviations are as in table 2. USDA data have been omitted, as
    data from a major USDA component were determined to be unreliable.

    Most Requests Are Granted in Full

    Most FOIA requests in 2005 were granted in full, with relatively few being
    partially granted, denied, or not disclosed for other reasons (statistics
    are shown in table 5). This generalization holds with or without SSA's
    inclusion. The percentage of requests granted in full was about 87
    percent, which is about the same as in previous years. However, if SSA's
    numbers are included, the proportion of grants dominates the other
    categories--raising this number from 87 percent of the total to 98
    percent. This is to be expected, since SSA reports that it grants the
    great majority of its simple requests handled by non-FOIA staff, which
    make up the bulk of SSA's statistics.

    Table 5: Disposition of Processed Requests for Fiscal Year 2005

                           Statistics            Statistics
                            excluding             including
                                SSA^a                   SSA
    Disposition             Number Percentage                Number Percentage
    Full grants          2,206,515       87.1            19,466,907       98.3
    Partial grants         102,079        4.0               102,354        0.5
    Denial                  19,864        0.8                20,318        0.1
    Not disclosed for      204,491        8.1               205,685        1.0
    other reasons
    Total                2,532,949                       19,795,264

    Source: FOIA annual reports for 2005 (self-reported data).

    Note: USDA data have been omitted, as data from a major USDA component
    were determined to be unreliable. Percentages do not add up to 100 percent
    because of rounding.

    ^a We exclude all SSA statistics for this comparison rather than omitting
    only simple requests handled by non-FOIA staff, because SSA's report does
    not break out this category in its statistics on disposition.

    Three of the seven agencies that handled the largest numbers of requests
    (HHS, SSA, and VA; see table 4) also granted the largest percentages of
    requests in full, as shown in figure 4. Figure 4 shows, by agency, the
    disposition of requests processed: that is, whether granted in full,
    partially granted, denied, or "not disclosed for other reasons" (see table
    1 for a list of these reasons).

    Figure 4: Disposition of Processed Requests, by Agency (Fiscal Year 2005)

    Note: Abbreviations are shown in table 2. USDA data have been omitted, as
    data from a major USDA component were determined to be unreliable.

    As the figure shows, the numbers of fully granted requests varied widely
    among agencies in fiscal year 2005. Six agencies made full grants of
    requested records in over 80 percent of the cases they processed (besides
    the three already mentioned, these include Energy, OPM, and SBA).  In
    contrast, 13 of 24 made full grants of requested records in less than 40
    percent of their cases, including 3 agencies (CIA, NSF, and State) that
    made full grants in less than 20 percent of cases processed.

    This variance among agencies in the disposition of requests has been
    evident in prior years as well.^33 In many cases, the variance can be
    accounted for by the types of requests that different agencies process.
    For example, as discussed earlier, SSA grants a very high proportion of
    requests because they are requests for personal information about
    individuals that are routinely made available to or for the individuals
    concerned. Similarly, VA routinely makes medical records available to
    individual veterans, and HHS also handles large numbers of Privacy Act
    requests. Such requests are generally granted in full. Other agencies, on
    the other hand, receive numerous requests whose responses must routinely
    be redacted. For example, NSF reported in its annual report that most of
    its requests (an estimated 90 percent) are for copies of funded grant
    proposals. The responsive documents are routinely redacted to remove
    personal information on individual principal investigators (such as
    salaries, home addresses, and so on), which results in high numbers of
    "partial grants" compared to "full grants."

    Processing Times Vary, but Broad Generalizations Are Limited

    For 2005, the reported time required to process requests (by track) varied
    considerably among agencies. Table 6 presents data on median processing
    times for fiscal year 2005. For agencies that reported processing times by
    component rather than for the agency as a whole, the table indicates the
    range of median times reported by the agency's components.

    Table 6: Median Days to Process Requests for Fiscal Year 2005, by Track

                 Type of request processing track
        Agency                              Simple   Complex   Single   Expedited
    AID                                      --        --       55          34
    CIA                                       7        68       --          --
    DHS                                   16-61     3-242       --        2-45
    DOC                                      12        40       --           8
    DOD                                      16        85       --          --
    DOE                                   5-106    10-170       --        1-12
    DOI                                    2-43     28-89       --        1-15
    DOJ                                   0-139    12-863       --       2-185
    DOL                                    6-30     14-60       --        2-18
    DOT                                    1-30    20-134       --        5-30
    ED                                       35        66       --          24
    EPA                                   13-32     4-166       --       8-109
    GSA                                      --        14       --          --
    HHS                                   10-26    60-370    5-173      14-158
    HUD                                   21-65    35-160       --        9-70
    NASA                                     19        49       --          15
    NRC                                      12        75       --          20
    NSF                                      --        --       14          --
    OPM                                      --        --       14           1
    SBA                                      --        --        7          --
    SSA                                      15        39       10          17
    State                                    14       142       --         136
    Treas                                  2-86     3-251       --           1
    VA                                       --      1-60       --        1-10

    Source: FOIA annual reports for fiscal year 2005 (self-reported data).

    Note: For agencies that reported processing times by component, the table
    indicates the range of reported component median times. A dash indicates
    that the agency did not report any median time for a given track in a
    given year. USDA data have been omitted, as data from a major USDA
    component were determined to be unreliable.

    As the table shows, seven agencies had components that reported processing
    simple requests in less than 10 days (these components are parts of the
    CIA, Energy, the Interior, Justice, Labor, Transportation, and the
    Treasury); for each of these agencies, the lower value of the reported
    ranges is less than 10. On the other hand, median time to process simple
    requests is relatively long at some organizations (for example, components
    of Energy and Justice, as shown by median ranges whose upper end values
    are greater than 100 days).

    For complex requests, the picture is similarly mixed. Components of four
    agencies (EPA, DHS, the Treasury, and VA) reported processing complex
    requests quickly--with a median of less than 10 days. In contrast, other
    components of several agencies (DHS, Energy, EPA, HHS, HUD, Justice,
    State, Transportation, and the Treasury) reported relatively long median
    times to process complex requests, with median days greater than 100.

    Six agencies (AID, HHS, NSF, OPM, SBA, and SSA) reported using
    single-track processing. The median processing times for single-track
    processing varied from 5 days (at an HHS component) to 173 days (at
    another HHS component).

    The changes from fiscal year 2004 to 2005 also vary. For agencies that
    reported agencywide figures, table 7 shows how many showed increased or
    decreased median processing times. Table 8 shows these numbers for the
    components that were reported separately.

    Table 7: Changes in Median Processing Times Reported by Agencies for
    Different Processing Tracks

               Agencies   Agencies          Agencies
                 with       with              with
               increased  decreased         unchanged
                median     median            median
                 times      times             times
    Processing Number of     Number Percent           Number Percent  Number Percent
      track     agencies
                   using
                    this
                   track
    Simple             7          3    42.9                3    42.9       1    14.3
    Complex            8          5    62.5                2    25.0       1    12.5
    Single             5          3    60.0                2    40.0       0     0.0
    Expedited          5          2    40.0                3    60.0       0     0.0

    Sources: Annual FOIA reports, GAO analysis.

    Table 8: Changes in Median Processing Times Reported by Components for
    Different Processing Tracks

    Processing  Number of  Components         Components        Components
    track      components        with               with              with
               using this   increased          decreased         unchanged
                    track      median             median            median
                                times              times             times
                               Number Percent            Number    Percent  Number Percent
    Simple            107          48    44.9                41       38.3      18    16.8
    Complex            94          49    52.1                39       41.5       6     6.4
    Single              9           3    33.3                 2       22.2       4    44.4
    Expedited          38          22    57.9                11       28.9       5    13.2

    Sources: Annual FOIA reports, GAO analysis.

    Note: A total of 204 components are listed in the FOIA reports. Not all
    the components processed requests or used all the tracks.

    In general, these tables show that no trend emerges across tracks and
    types of reporting, and the numbers of agencies and components involved
    vary from track to track. The picture that emerges is of great variation
    in processing times according to circumstances.

    To allow more insight into the variations in median processing times, we
    provide in appendix X tables of median processing times as reported by
    agencies and components in the annual FOIA reports in fiscal years 2004
    and 2005. This attachment also includes information on the number of
    requests reported by the agencies and components, which provides context
    for assessing the median times reported.

    Our ability to make further generalizations about FOIA processing times is
    limited by the fact that, as required by the act, agencies report median
    processing times only and not, for example, arithmetic means (the usual
    meaning of "average" in everyday language). To find an arithmetic mean,
    one adds all the members of a list of numbers and divides the result by
    the number of items in the list. To find the median, one arranges all the
    values in the list from lowest to highest and finds the middle one (or the
    average of the middle two if there is no one middle number). Thus,
    although using medians provides representative numbers that are not skewed
    by a few outliers, they cannot be summed. Deriving a median for two sets
    of numbers, for example, requires knowing all numbers in both sets. Only
    the source data for the medians can be used to derive a new median, not
    the medians themselves.

    As a result, with only medians it is not statistically possible to combine
    results from different agencies to develop broader generalizations, such
    as a governmentwide statistic based on all agency reports, statistics from
    sets of comparable agencies, or an agencywide statistic based on separate
    reports from all components of the agency.

    In rewriting the FOIA reporting requirements in 1996, legislators declared
    an interest in making them "more useful to the public and to the Congress,
    and [making] the information in them more accessible."^34 However, the
    limitation on aggregating data imposed by the use of medians alone impedes
    the development of broader pictures of FOIA operations. A more complete
    picture would be given by the inclusion of other statistics based on the
    same data that are used to derive medians, such as means and ranges.
    Providing means along with the median would allow more generalizations to
    be drawn, and providing ranges would complete the picture by adding
    information on the outliers in agency statistics. More complete
    information would be useful for public accountability and for effectively
    managing agency FOIA programs, as well as for meeting the act's goal of
    providing visibility into government FOIA operations.

    Agency Pending Cases Continue to Increase

    In addition to the governmentwide increase in number of requests
    processed, many agencies (10 of 24) also reported that their numbers of
    pending cases--requests carried over from one year to the next--have
    increased since 2002.^35 In 2002, pending requests governmentwide were
    reported to number about 138,000, whereas in 2005, about 200,000--45
    percent more--were reported. (In addition, the rate of increase grew in
    fiscal year 2005, rising 24 percent from fiscal year 2004, compared to 13
    percent from 2003 to 2004.) Figure 5 shows these results, illustrating the
    accelerating rate at which pending cases have been increasing.

    These statistics include pending cases reported by SSA, because SSA's
    pending cases do not include simple requests handled by non-FOIA staff
    (for which SSA does not track pending cases). As the figure shows, these
    pending cases do not change the governmentwide picture significantly.

    Figure 5: Total FOIA Requests Pending at End of Year, 2002-2005

    Trends for individual agencies show mixed progress in reducing the number
    of pending requests reported from 2002 to 2005--some agencies have
    decreased numbers of pending cases, while others' numbers have increased.
    Figure 6 shows processing rates at the 24 agencies (that is, the number of
    requests that an agency processes relative to the number it receives).
    Eight of the 24 agencies (AID, DHS, the Interior, Education, HHS, HUD,
    NSF, and OPM) reported processing fewer requests than they received each
    year for fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005; 8 additional agencies
    processed less than they received in 2 of these 3 years (Defense, Justice,
    Transportation, GSA, NASA, NRC, SSA, and VA).

    In contrast, two agencies (CIA and Energy) had processing rates above 100
    percent in all 3 years, meaning that each made continued progress in
    reducing their numbers of pending cases. Fourteen additional agencies were
    able to make at least a small reduction in their numbers of pending
    requests in 1 or more years between fiscal years 2003 and 2005.

    Figure 6: Agency Processing Rate for 25 Agencies

    Notes: Abbreviations are as in table 2.

    The agency processing rate is defined as the number of requests processed
    in a given year compared with the requests received, expressed as a
    percentage.

    In 2002, FEMA data were used, and for 2003, 2004, and 2005, DHS data were
    used.

    No Regular Mechanism Is in Place for Aggregating Annual Report Data

    Legislators noted in 1996 that the FOIA reporting requirements were
    rewritten "to make them more useful to the public and to the Congress, and
    to make the information in them more accessible." The Congress also gave
    the Department of Justice the responsibility to provide policy guidance
    and oversee agencies' compliance with FOIA.

    In its oversight and guidance role, Justice's Office of Information and
    Privacy (OIP) created summaries of the annual FOIA reports and made these
    available through its FOIA Post Web page (
    www.usdoj.gov/oip/foiapost/mainpage.htm ). In 2003, Justice described
    its summary as "a major guidance tool."^36 It pointed out that although it
    was not required to do so under the law, the office had initiated the
    practice of compiling aggregate summaries of all agencies' annual FOIA
    report data as soon as these were filed by all agencies. These summaries
    did not contain aggregated statistical tables, but they did provide prose
    descriptions that included statistics on major governmentwide results.
    However, the most recent of these summaries is for fiscal year 2003.^37
    According to the Acting Director of OIP, she did not know why such
    summaries had not been made available since then. According to this
    official, internally the agency found the summaries useful and was
    considering making them available again. She also stated that these
    summaries gave a good overall picture of governmentwide processing.

    Aggregating and summarizing the information in the annual reports serves
    to maximize their usefulness and accessibility, in accordance with
    congressional intent, as well as potentially providing Justice with
    insight into FOIA implementation governmentwide and valuable benchmarks
    for use in overseeing the FOIA program. Such information would also be
    valuable for others interested in gauging governmentwide performance. The
    absence of such summaries reduces the ability of the public and the
    Congress to consistently obtain a governmentwide picture of FOIA
    processing.

    Agency Improvement Plans Generally Included Areas of Improvement
    Emphasized by the Executive Order

    As required by the Executive Order, all the 25 agencies submitted
    improvement plans based on the results of reviews of their respective FOIA
    operations, as well as on the areas emphasized by the order. The plans
    generally addressed these four areas, with 20 of 25 plans addressing all
    four. In particular, for all but 2 agencies with reported backlog, plans
    included both measurable goals and timetables for backlog reduction.
    Further, to increase reliance on dissemination, improve communications on
    the status of requests, and increase public awareness of FOIA processing,
    agencies generally set milestones to accomplish activities promoting these
    aims. In some cases, agencies did not set goals for a given area because
    they determined that they were already strong in that area.

    All Agencies Addressed Reducing Backlog, and Most Set Measurable Goals and
    Milestones

    The Executive Order states that improvement plans shall include "specific
    activities that the agency will implement to eliminate or reduce the
    agency's FOIA backlog, including (as applicable) changes that will make
    the processing of FOIA requests more streamlined and effective." It
    further states that plans were to include "concrete milestones, with
    specific timetables and outcomes to be achieved," to allow the plan's
    success to be measured and evaluated. In addition, the Justice guidance
    suggested a number of process improvement areas for agencies to consider,
    such as receiving or responding to requests electronically, automated FOIA
    processing, automated tracking capabilities, and multitrack processing. It
    also gave agencies considerable leeway in choosing "means of measurement
    of success" for improving timeliness and thus reducing backlog.^38

    All agency plans discussed avoiding or reducing backlog, and most (22 out
    of 25) established measurable goals and timetables for this area of focus.
    One agency, SBA, reported that it had no backlog, so it set no goals. A
    second agency, NSF, set no specific numerical goals for backlog reduction,
    but it had minimal backlog (in fiscal year 2005, NSF reported 273 requests
    received and 17 pending at the end of the reporting period),^39 and its
    median processing time in fiscal year 2005 was 14.26 days.^40 Its plan
    includes activities to increase efficiency (such as improving its ability
    to process requests electronically and investigating the acquisition of an
    improved automated tracking system) and to monitor and analyze backlogged
    requests to determine whether systemic changes are warranted in its
    processes. Given NSF's minimal backlog and other improvement activities
    planned, the treatment of backlog reduction in its plan seems reasonable.
    A third agency, HUD, set a measurable goal for reducing backlog, but did
    not include a date by which it planned to achieve it. However, it achieved
    this goal, according to agency officials, by November 2006.^41

    The goals chosen by the 22 remaining agencies varied considerably (which
    is consistent with the flexibility in choosing measures that Justice
    provided in its implementation guidance). Some agencies linked backlog
    reduction to various different measures. For example, EPA's goal was to
    reduce its response backlog to less than 10 percent of the number of new
    FOIA requests received each year. Energy set a goal of achieving a 50
    percent reduction by June 2007 in the number of pending FOIA cases that
    were over 1 year old. NRC chose to focus on improving processing times,
    setting percentage goals for completion of different types of requests
    (for example, completing 75 percent of simple requests within 20 days).
    Labor's plan sets goals that aim for larger percentages of reduction for
    the oldest categories of pending requests (75 percent reduction for the
    oldest, 50 percent reduction for the next oldest, and so on). A number of
    agencies included goals to close their oldest 5 to 10 requests (Justice,
    the Treasury, Education, Commerce, Defense, GSA, NASA, SSA, and VA).
    According to the Attorney General's report to the President, in
    concentrating on their oldest requests, many agencies followed Justice's
    lead.^42

    OPM and DHS plan to eliminate their backlogs, Transportation is planning
    to substantially reduce previous fiscal year backlogs, and several
    agencies chose goals based on a percentage of reduction of existing
    backlog (for example, CIA, Commerce, Education, Defense, the Interior,
    Justice, SSA, the Treasury, and USDA). Some agencies also described plans
    to perform analyses that would measure their backlogs so that they could
    then establish the necessary baselines against which to measure progress.
    For example, Labor's plan includes activities to monitor and determine the
    department's oldest pending requests. The plan states that Labor will use
    as its baseline the number of requests that it identifies as pending for
    various lengths of time as of December 31, 2006. Similarly, Defense's plan
    included activities to establish backlog levels and use these as the basis
    for its objective of reducing backlog by 10 percent annually.

    In addition to setting backlog targets, agencies also describe activities
    that contribute to reducing backlog. For example, the Treasury plan, which
    states that backlog reduction is the main challenge facing the department
    and the focus of its plan, includes such activities (with associated
    milestones) as reengineering its multitrack FOIA process, monitoring
    monthly reports, and establishing a FOIA council.

    The agency plans thus provide a variety of activities and measures of
    improvement that should permit agency heads, the Congress, and the public
    to assess the agencies' success in implementing their plans to reduce
    backlog.

    Most Agencies Plan to Increase Public Dissemination of Records through Web
    Sites

    The Executive Order calls for "increased reliance on the dissemination of
    records that can be made available to the public" without the necessity of
    a FOIA request, such as through posting on Web sites. In its guidance,
    Justice notes that agencies are required by FOIA to post frequently
    requested records, policy statements, staff manuals and instructions to
    staff, and final agency opinions. It encourages agencies not only to
    review their activities to meet this requirement, but also to make other
    public information available that might reduce the need to make FOIA
    requests. It also suggests that agencies consider improving FOIA Web sites
    to ensure that they are user friendly and up to date.

    Agency plans generally established goals and timetables for increasing
    reliance on public dissemination of records, including through Web sites.
    Of 25 agencies, 24 included plans to revise agency Web sites and add
    information to them, and 12 of these are making additional efforts to
    ensure that frequently requested documents are posted on their Web sites.
    For example, Defense is planning to increase the number of its components
    that have Web sites as well as posting frequently requested documents.
    Interior is planning to facilitate the posting of frequently requested
    documents by using scanning and redaction equipment to make electronic
    versions readily available.

    Agencies planned other related activities, such as making posted documents
    easier to find, improving navigation, and adding other helpful
    information. For example, besides reviewing its Web site to verify and add
    links, AID plans to establish an "information/searching decision tree" to
    assist Web site visitors by directing them to agency public affairs staff
    who may be able to locate information and avoid the need for visitors to
    file FOIA requests. Besides adding frequently requested documents, CIA
    plans to improve navigation and review its site quarterly. HUD plans
    activities to anticipate topics that may produce numerous FOIA requests
    ("hot button" issues) and post relevant documents. Education is planning
    to use its automated tracking technology to determine when it is receiving
    multiple requests for similar information and then post such information
    on its Web site.^43 Based on its FOIA review, NRC determined that it would
    be helpful to requesters for the agency to provide examples of the types
    of information in NRC documents that might be covered by FOIA exemptions,
    and it established goals to achieve this.

    The Treasury plan does not address increasing public dissemination of
    records. Treasury's plan, as mentioned earlier, is focused on backlog
    reduction. It does not mention the other areas emphasized in the Executive
    Order, list them among the areas it selected for review, or explain the
    decision to omit them from the review and plan. Treasury officials told us
    that they concentrated in their plan on areas where they determined the
    department had a deficiency: namely, a backlog consisting of numerous
    requests, some of which were very old (dating as far back as 1991). By
    comparison, they did not consider they had deficiencies in the other
    areas. With regard to increasing dissemination, they noted that their Web
    sites currently provide frequently requested records. However, without a
    careful review of the department's current dissemination practices or a
    plan to take actions to increase dissemination, Treasury does not have
    assurance that it has identified and exploited available opportunities to
    increase dissemination of records in such a way as to reduce the need for
    the public to make FOIA requests, as stressed by the Executive Order.

    Most Agency Plans Included Improving Status Communications with FOIA
    Requesters

    The Executive Order sets as policy that agencies shall provide FOIA
    requesters ways to learn about the status of their FOIA requests and
    states that agency improvement plans shall ensure that FOIA administration
    is in accordance with this policy. In its implementation guidance, Justice
    reiterated the order's emphasis on providing status information to
    requesters and discussed the need for agencies to examine, among other
    things, their capabilities for tracking status and the forms of
    communication used with requesters.

    Most agencies (22 of 25) established goals and timetables for improving
    communications with FOIA requesters about the status of their requests.
    Goals set by these agencies included planned changes to communications,
    including sending acknowledgement letters, standardizing letters to
    requesters, including information on elements of a proper FOIA request in
    response letters, and posting contact information on Web pages. Both NASA
    and Interior planned to establish toll free numbers for requesters to
    obtain status information. NASA also included plans to acquire software
    that would allow a requester to access and track status of his or her
    request. Interior planned to develop and post frequently asked questions
    to provide requesters with information about where to submit their
    requests, processing times, fees charged, and how to check on the status
    of their requests. HUD's plan included posting information on its Web
    site, providing training on customer service, and gauging progress through
    public forums at which it can receive comments on improving FOIA
    performance.

    Three agencies did not include improvement goals because they considered
    them unnecessary. In two cases (Defense and EPA), agencies considered that
    status communications were already an area of strength.

    Defense considered that it was strong in both customer responsiveness and
    communications. Defense performed extensive surveys of the opinions and
    practices of its FOIA staff and Public Liaisons^44 and concluded that
    "FOIA personnel routinely contact requesters to try to resolve problems
    and to better define requests." Defense's Web site provides instructions
    for requesters on how to get information about the status of requests, as
    well as information on Requester Service Centers and Public Liaisons.
    Defense officials also told us that this information is included in
    acknowledgement letters to requesters. In addition, these officials stated
    that planned revisions to Defense FOIA Web sites would promote improving
    status communications, and that the department is working to implement an
    Interactive Customer Collection tool that would enable requesters to
    provide feedback.

    Similarly, EPA officials told us that they considered the agency's
    activities to communicate with requesters on the status of their requests
    to be already effective, noting that many of the improvements planned by
    other agencies were already in effect at EPA. For example, EPA sends out
    an acknowledgment letter within a day of the request that includes a
    tracking number, the department that will be involved, and a contact name
    and telephone number. Officials also stated that EPA holds regular FOIA
    requester forums, the last held on November 1, 2006, and that EPA's
    requester community had expressed satisfaction with EPA's responsiveness.
    EPA's response to the Executive Order describes its efforts to communicate
    with requesters, including activities of staff at its FOIA Service Center
    and a FOIA hotline through which callers may receive information on the
    status of their requests. It also describes the enterprise FOIA management
    system, deployed in 2005, that provides "cradle to grave" tracking of
    incoming requests and responses.

    The third agency, Treasury, did not address improving status
    communications, as its plan is entirely focused on backlog reduction. As
    required by the Executive Order, Treasury did set up Requester Service
    Centers and Public Liaisons, which are among the mechanisms envisioned to
    improve status communications. However, because Treasury omitted status
    communications from the areas of improvement that it selected for review,
    it is not clear that this area received attention commensurate with the
    emphasis it was given in the Executive Order. Without such attention to
    communication with requesters, Treasury increases the risk that its FOIA
    operations will not be as responsive and citizen centered as the Executive
    Order envisioned.

    Agencies Generally Plan to Rely on FOIA Reference Guides to Increase
    Public Awareness of FOIA Processing

    The Executive Order states that improvement plans shall include activities
    to increase public awareness of FOIA processing, including (as
    appropriate) expanded use of Requester Service Centers and FOIA Public
    Liaisons, which agencies were required to establish by the order. In
    Justice's guidance, it linked this requirement to the FOIA Reference Guide
    that agencies are required to maintain as an aid to potential FOIA
    requesters, because such guides can be an effective means for increasing
    public awareness. Accordingly, the Justice guidance advised agencies to
    double-check these guides to ensure that they remain comprehensive and up
    to date.

    Most agencies (23 of 25) defined goals and timetables for increasing
    public awareness of FOIA processing, generally including ensuring that
    FOIA reference guides were up to date. In addition, all 25 agencies
    established Requester Service Centers and Public Liaisons as required by
    the Executive Order. Besides these activities, certain agencies planned
    other types of outreach: for example, the Department of State reported
    taking steps to obtain feedback from the public on how to improve FOIA
    processes; GSA plans to post information about what GSA can and cannot
    release; the Department of the Interior plans to initiate feedback surveys
    on requesters' FOIA experience; and the Department of Labor is planning to
    hold public forums and solicit suggestions from the requester community.
    Defense did not set specific goals and milestones in this area; according
    to Defense, it did not do so because its FOIA handbook had already been
    updated in the fall of 2005. The department also established Requester
    Service Centers and Public Liaisons, as required. Department officials
    told us that in meeting their goals and milestones for revising FOIA Web
    sites, they expect to improve awareness of Defense's FOIA process, as well
    as public access and other objectives.

    As mentioned earlier, Treasury did not address this area in its review or
    plan. However, Treasury has established Requester Service Centers and FOIA
    Public Liaisons, as required. Treasury's Director of Disclosure
    Services^45 also told us that Treasury provides on its Web site a FOIA
    handbook, a Privacy Act handbook, and a citizen's guide for requesters. In
    addition, this official told us that Treasury had updated its FOIA
    handbook in 2005 and conducted staff training based on the update.
    However, at the time of our review, the FOIA handbook on the Web site was
    a version dated January 2000. When we pointed out that this earlier
    version was posted, the official indicated that he would arrange for the
    most recent version to be posted.

    Because Treasury did not review its efforts to increase public awareness,
    it missed an opportunity to discover that the handbook on the Web site was
    outdated and thus might not provide assurance to the public that the
    information provided was fully up to date, reducing its effectiveness as a
    communication tool. Without further attention to increasing public
    awareness, Treasury lacks assurance that it has taken all appropriate
    steps to ensure that the public has the means of understanding the
    agency's FOIA processing.

    Conclusions

    The annual FOIA reports continue to provide valuable information about
    citizens' use of this important tool to obtain information about the
    operation and decisions of the federal government. The value of this
    information clearly depends, however, on its accuracy. In the case of the
    USDA's Farm Service Agency, which is not assured of the accuracy of its
    data, the department's FOIA improvement plan is an opportunity to address
    data reliability along with other processing improvements. In addition,
    one value of the annual reports lies in the possibility they provide of
    seeing trends and drawing generalizations. However, our ability to
    generalize about processing times, whether from agency to agency or year
    to year, is limited because only median times are reported. Since
    processing times are an important gauge of government responsiveness to
    citizen inquiries, this limitation is significant. Medians are useful as
    representative numbers that are not skewed by a few outliers, but the
    addition of averages (arithmetic means) and ranges would enhance the
    ability to make useful comparisons and provide a more complete picture.
    Finally, in the absence of aggregated statistics and summaries, as
    formerly provided by the Justice Department, it is difficult to obtain a
    governmentwide picture of FOIA processing. Providing such statistics and
    summaries could increase the value of the annual reporting process for
    assessing the performance of the FOIA program as a whole.

    The Executive Order provided a useful impetus for agencies to review their
    FOIA operations and ensure that they are appropriately responsive to the
    public generally and requesters specifically. The 25 agencies submitted
    FOIA improvement plans that generally responded to elements emphasized by
    the Executive Order and form a reasonable basis for carrying out the
    order's goals. In general, all the plans show a commendable focus on
    making measurable improvements. One agency (Treasury) submitted a plan
    that could be improved by closer adherence to the other elements, besides
    backlog, specified by the Executive Order.

    Implementing the improvement plans and reporting on their progress should
    serve to keep management attention on FOIA and its role in keeping
    citizens well informed about the operations of their government. However,
    to realize the goals of the Executive Order, it will be important for
    Justice and the agencies to continue to refine the improvement plans and
    monitor progress in their implementation.

    Matters for Congressional Consideration

    To improve the usefulness of the statistics in agency annual FOIA reports,
    the Congress should consider amending the act to require agencies to
    report additional statistics on processing time, which at a minimum should
    include average times and ranges.

    Recommendations for Executive Action

    To provide a clearer picture of FOIA processing both in a given year and
    over time, we recommend that the Attorney General direct Justice's Office
    of Information and Privacy to use data from annual reports to develop
    summaries and aggregate statistics (as appropriate) for categories of
    agencies (such as major departments), as well as governmentwide.

    To ensure that USDA data in FOIA annual reports are accurate and complete,
    we recommend that the Secretary of Agriculture direct the Chief FOIA
    Officer for the department to revise the department's FOIA improvement
    plan to include activities, goals, and milestones to improve data
    reliability for the Farm Service Agency and to monitor results.

    To ensure that its plan includes an appropriate focus on communicating
    with requesters and the public, we recommend that the Secretary of the
    Treasury direct the department's Chief FOIA Officer to review its FOIA
    operations in the other areas emphasized in the Executive Order
    (increasing reliance on public dissemination of records, improving
    communications with FOIA requesters about the status of their requests,
    and increasing public awareness of FOIA processing) and, as appropriate,
    revise the improvement plan for fiscal year 2007 to include goals and
    milestones in these areas.

    Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

    We provided a draft of this report to OMB and the 25 agencies for review
    and comment. All but one agency (the Department of the Treasury) generally
    agreed with our assessment and recommendations or had no comment.^46 Seven
    agencies provided written comments: the Departments of Agriculture,
    Justice, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, along with AID, EPA, and NSF
    (printed in apps. II through VIII). In addition, OMB, the Interior,
    Transportation, HUD, OPM, and SSA provided technical comments, which we
    incorporated as appropriate.

    The Acting Director of Justice's Office of Information and Policy
    concurred with our assessment and stated that Justice agrees with our
    recommendation and plans to implement it (see app. III). The Acting
    Director stated that the office plans to resume compiling summaries of the
    annual reports, beginning with those for fiscal year 2006.

    The Chief FOIA Officer of Agriculture provided additional information on
    actions that the department has taken to improve FOIA processing, as well
    as actions that the Farm Service Agency is taking to ensure that its data
    are reliable (see app. II).

    Except for Treasury, other agencies providing written comments generally
    provided additional information on their FOIA programs or provided
    suggestions on the draft.

    oEPA and NSF offered additional information about their FOIA operations.

    oBoth VA and AID stated their view that ample time should be given to
    accommodate reporting changes.

    oVA also suggested including cases both received and processed in our
    discussion of the increase in pending requests. We augmented the section
    on pending requests to include a reference to statistics on cases received
    and processed.

    In written and e-mail comments, the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
    Headquarters Operations indicated that the department generally agreed
    with our premise that Treasury's plan needs to more thoroughly integrate
    the Executive Order and noted that the plan is a living, dynamic document
    that will accommodate changing circumstances. (Treasury's written comments
    are provided in app. IV.) The Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary stated
    that the department will be evaluating its improvement plan and taking
    action to improve its FOIA administration. However, Treasury also
    partially disagreed with our assessment, and it disagreed with our
    recommendation.

    According to Treasury, our assessment and recommendation minimize the
    importance of reducing backlog in the Executive Order and Justice guidance
    and do not give sufficient weight to other aspects of its improvement
    plan, such as the establishment of a FOIA council to improve FOIA
    administration, the establishment of FOIA Requester Service Centers and
    Public Liaisons, and its compliance with the e-FOIA amendments'
    requirement that frequently posted records be posted on agency Web sites.
    Further, Treasury considered that our assessment does not sufficiently
    recognize the activities and programs that the department already had in
    place (beyond backlog reduction) before the order was issued, which were
    not included in its plan (such as technology improvements to upgrade the
    department's FOIA tracking system in 2005 and to upgrade IRS databases).

    We do not believe that we minimize the importance of reducing backlog; our
    report indicates that this is a major focus of the Executive Order.
    However, it was not the only focus of the Executive Order, which also
    emphasized a citizen-centered approach to FOIA implementation. The three
    areas of emphasis that we suggest would benefit from further attention are
    all related to a citizen-centered approach in that they focus on
    communication with the public and especially with requesters. It may be
    that Treasury's FOIA council will provide this focus; however, this was
    not clear from the agency's plan, which included no milestones or goals in
    these areas to guide the council's future activities.

    We also disagree with Treasury's view that we do not give sufficient
    weight to the activities that the plan included or that Treasury officials
    indicated were already in progress. Although we took these into account,
    they did not provide evidence that Treasury was already giving or planned
    to give the level of attention to the three areas of emphasis that was
    envisioned by the Executive Order. For example, although Treasury's
    compliance with the 1996 e-FOIA amendments is important, the Executive
    Order asks agencies to look for opportunities to go beyond complying with
    legal requirements to disseminate records. Similarly, although the
    technology improvements that Treasury described have the potential to
    improve FOIA processing (including improvements in the three areas of
    emphasis), the plan did not tie these improvements and actions to goals or
    milestones in the three areas. As a result, we did not change our
    assessment. However, we have clarified the language of the report to
    emphasize that our assessment is based on meeting the level of attention
    emphasized in the Executive Order.

    We note, however, that Treasury in its comments indicates that it does
    plan to continue to reevaluate its improvement plan and modify it to
    accommodate changing circumstances. If future modifications specifically
    address external communications, particularly with requesters, the goal of
    our recommendation may be achieved.

    We are sending copies of this report to the Attorney General, the Director
    of the Office of Management and Budget, and the heads of departments and
    agencies we reviewed. Copies will be made available to others on request.
    In addition, this report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web
    site at www.gao.gov.

    If you should have questions about this report, please contact me at (202)
    512-6240 or via e-mail at koontzl@gao.gov . Contact points for
    our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on
    the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to
    this report are listed in appendix XI.

    Linda D. Koontz
    Director, Information Management Issues

    Appendix I
    Scope and Methodology

    To gauge agencies' progress in processing requests, we analyzed the
    workload data (from fiscal year 2002 through 2005) included in the 25
    agencies' annual FOIA reports to assess trends in volume of requests
    received and processed, median processing times, and the number of pending
    cases. All agency workload data were self-reported in annual reports
    submitted to the Attorney General.

    To assess the reliability of the information contained in agency annual
    reports, we interviewed officials from selected agencies and assessed
    quality control processes agencies had in place. We selected 10 agencies
    to assess data reliability: the Departments of Agriculture (USDA),
    Defense, Education, the Interior, Labor, and Veterans Affairs, as well as
    the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science
    Foundation, Small Business Administration, and Social Security
    Administration. We chose the Social Security Administration and Veterans
    Affairs because they processed a majority of the requests. To ensure that
    we selected agencies of varying size, we chose the remaining 8 agencies by
    ordering them according to the number of requests they received, from
    smallest to largest, and choosing every third agency. These 10 agencies
    account for 97 percent of the received requests that were reported in the
    25 agencies' annual reports.

    Of the 10 agencies that were assessed for data reliability, we determined
    that the data for USDA's Farm Service Agency were not reliable; these data
    account for over 80 percent of the reported USDA data. We therefore
    eliminated USDA's data from our analysis. Because of this elimination, our
    analysis was of 24 major agencies^1 (herein we refer to this scope as
    governmentwide). Table 9 shows the 25 agencies and their reliability
    assessment status.

    Table 9: Agencies Reviewed

    Agency                                       Abbreviation Data reliability
                                                                 assessment
    Agency for International Development         AID          Not assessed
    Central Intelligence Agency                  CIA          Not assessed
    Department of Agriculture                    USDA         Not reliable
    Department of Commerce                       DOC          Not assessed
    Department of Defense                        DOD          Reliable
    Department of Education                      ED           Reliable
    Department of Energy                         DOE          Not assessed
    Department of Health and Human Services      HHS          Not assessed
    Department of Homeland Security ^a           DHS          Not assessed
    Federal Emergency Management Agency ^a       FEMA         Not applicable
    Department of Housing and Urban Development  HUD          Not assessed
    Department of the Interior                   DOI          Reliable
    Department of Justice                        DOJ          Not assessed
    Department of Labor                          DOL          Reliable
    Department of State                          State        Not assessed
    Department of the Treasury                   Treas        Not assessed
    Department of Transportation                 DOT          Not assessed
    Department of Veterans Affairs               VA           Reliable
    Environmental Protection Agency              EPA          Not assessed
    General Services Administration              GSA          Not assessed
    National Aeronautics and Space               NASA         Reliable
    Administration
    National Science Foundation                  NSF          Reliable
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission                NRC          Not assessed
    Office of Personnel Management               OPM          Not assessed
    Small Business Administration                SBA          Reliable
    Social Security Administration               SSA          Reliable

    Source: GAO.

    ^aFEMA information was reported separately in fiscal year 2002. In fiscal
    years 2003, 2004, and 2005, FEMA was part of DHS.

    To determine to what extent the agency improvement plans contain the
    elements emphasized by the order, we first analyzed the Executive Order to
    determine how it described the contents of the improvement plans. We
    determined that the order emphasized the following areas to be addressed
    by the plans: (1) reducing the backlog of FOIA requests, (2) increasing
    reliance on public dissemination of records (affirmative and proactive)
    including through Web sites, (3) improving communications with FOIA
    requesters about the status of their requests, and (4) increasing public
    awareness of FOIA processing including updating an agency's FOIA Reference
    Guide. We also analyzed the improvement plans to determine if they
    contained specific outcome-oriented goals and timetables for each of the
    criteria. We then analyzed the 25 agencies' (including USDA) plans to
    determine whether they contained goals and timetables for each of these
    four elements.^2  We evaluated the versions of agency plans available as
    of December 15, 2006.

    We also reviewed the Executive Order itself, implementing guidance issued
    by OMB and the Department of Justice, other FOIA guidance issued by
    Justice, and our past work in this area.

    We conducted our review in accordance with generally accepted government
    auditing standards. We performed our work from May 2006 to January 2007 in
    Washington, D.C.

    Appendix II
    Comments from the Department of Agriculture

    Appendix III
    Comments from the Department of Justice

    Appendix IV
    Comments from the Department of the Treasury

    Appendix V
    Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs

    Appendix VI
    Comments from the Agency for International Development

    Appendix VII
    Comments from the Environmental Protection Agency

    Appendix VIII
    Comments from the National Science Foundation

    Appendix IX
    Freedom of Information Act Exemptions

    The act prescribes nine specific categories of information that is exempt
    from disclosure:

    Exemption number Matters that are exempt from FOIA
    (1)              (A) Specifically authorized under criteria established by
                        an Executive Order to be kept secret in the interest of
                        national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact
                        properly classified pursuant to such Executive Order.
    (2)              Related solely to the internal personnel rules and
                        practices of an agency.
    (3)              Specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other
                        than section 552b of this title), provided that such
                        statute (A) requires that matters be withheld from the
                        public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the
                        issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for
                        withholding or refers to particular types of matters to
                        be withheld.
    (4)              Trade secrets and commercial or financial information
                        obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.
    (5)              Inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters which
                        would not be available by law to a party other than an
                        agency in litigation with the agency.
    (6)              Personnel and medical files and similar files the
                        disclosure of which would constitute a clearly
                        unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
    (7)              Records or information compiled for law enforcement
                        purposes, but only to the extent that the production of
                        such law enforcement records or information
    (A)              could reasonably be expected to interfere with
                        enforcement proceedings;
    (B)              would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or
                        impartial adjudication;
    (C)              could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted
                        invasion of personal privacy;
    (D)              could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of
                        a confidential source, including a State, local, or
                        foreign agency or authority or any private institution
                        which furnished information on a confidential basis, and,
                        in the case of a record or information compiled by a
                        criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a
                        criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a
                        lawful national security intelligence investigation,
                        information furnished by confidential source;
    (E)              would disclose techniques and procedures for law
                        enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would
                        disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or
                        prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be
                        expected to risk circumvention of the law; or
    (F)              could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or
                        physical safety of an individual.
    (8)              Contained in or related to examination, operating, or
                        condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the
                        use of an agency responsible for the regulation of
                        supervision of financial institutions.
    (9)              Geological and geophysical information and data,
                        including maps, concerning wells.

    Source: 5 U.S.C. S 552(b)(1) through (b)(9).

    Appendix X
    Median Processing Times Reported

    The attached tables present median processing times as reported by
    agencies in their annual FOIA reports in fiscal years 2004 and 2005. To
    provide context, we include numbers of requests processed for each agency
    or component. We also indicate (in columns headed "+-") whether the median
    days to process rose (+), fell (-), or remained unchanged (=). (We also
    use "~" to indicate other types of changes, such as the establishment of a
    new component.)

    Agencies report median processing times according to processing tracks:
    that is, some agencies divide requests into simple and complex categories
    and process these in separate tracks, whereas others use a single track.
    Accordingly, the tables show these tracks where applicable. In addition,
    agencies are required to subject some requests to expedited processing,
    and these are reported as a separate track.

    Tables for the agencies are presented in the following order, which
    corresponds to the order generally used in the figures and tables provided
    in the statement:

    AID               Agency for International Development
    CIA               Central Intelligence Agency
    DHS               Department of Homeland Security
    DOC               Department of Commerce
    DOD               Department of Defense
    DOE               Department of Energy
    DOI               Department of the Interior
    DOJ               Department of Justice
    DOL               Department of Labor
    DOT               Department of Transportation
    ED                Department of Education
    EPA               Environmental Protection Agency
    GSA               General Services Administration
    HHS               Department of Health and Human Services
    HUD               Department of Housing and Urban Development
    NASA              National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    NRC               Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    NSF               National Science Foundation
    OPM               Office of Personnel Management
    SBA               Small Business Administration
    SSA               Social Security Administration
    State             Department of State
    Treas             Department of the Treasury
    VA                Department of Veterans Affairs

    Agency for International Development

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

               Single      Expedited
                No.                  Days         No.           Days
    Agency    2004 2005           2004 2005 +-     2004 2005      2004 2005 +-
    AID        209  196             54   55  +        3    1        13   34  +

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Central Intelligence Agency

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

           Simple      Complex      Expedited
            No.         Days           No.       Days        No.   Days
    Agency   2004 2005         2004      2005 +-       2004  2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    CIA       501  577            7         7  =      2,834 2,533    63   68  +     1    0    10  n/a

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of Homeland Security

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                   Simple         Complex      Expedited
                     No.           Days           No.       Days         No.    Days
    Component         2004   2005         2004      2005 +-        2004   2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Office of the      279    604           19        16  -          98    134    66  102  +    48    1     9   11  +
    Secretary/
    Privacy Office
    Office of the      n/a      0          n/a       n/a             21     14    44   91  +     0    3   n/a    5
    Inspector
    General
    Office of the      (a)      0          (a)       n/a  ~         (a)      1   (a)  222  ~   (a)    0   (a)  n/a  ~
    General
    Counsel
    Information        n/a      0          n/a       n/a            n/a     51   n/a   30  ~   n/a    0   n/a  n/a
    Analysis &
    Infrastructure
    Protection
    Emergency          101    186           14        61  +         128    345    48  178  +    28   14     9   45  +
    Preparedness &
    Response
    Science &          (a)      1          (a)        30  ~         (a)      1   (a)  210  ~   (a)    0   (a)  n/a  ~
    Technology
    U.S. Coast       6,735  6,035           13        16  +         638    608    21   21  =    30   11    11    2  -
    Guard
    U.S. Secret          0      0          n/a       n/a            912    701   111  149  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Service
    U.S.           105,567 85,307           16        45  +      27,850 19,532    31   55  +   580   95     8   15  +
    Citizenship &
    Immigration
    Services
    US-VISIT           (a)     14          (a)        17  ~         (a)      1   (a)   60  ~   (a)    0   (a)  n/a  ~
    Border &
    Transportation
    Security
    CBP              2,317  3,174           20        17  -       1,986  3,815    30   12  -     4  890     3   17  +
    TSA                828     11            8        16  +       1,307  1,199    29   13  -     2    2    45   28  -
    ICE              1,124    661           84        35  -         n/a    881   n/a  242  ~   n/a    0   n/a  n/a
    FLETC              n/a      0          n/a       n/a  ~       1,451  1,834     5    3  -     0    0   n/a  n/a

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    ^aComponent did not exist.

    Department of Commerce

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

             Simple       Complex      Expedited
              No.          Days           No.       Days      No.   Days
    Agency     2004  2005         2004      2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Commerce  1,564 1,321           13        12  -       465  511    41   40  -     6    2     5    8  +

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of Defense

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

            Simple        Complex      Expedited
             No.           Days           No.       Days         No.    Days
    Agency    2004   2005         2004      2005 +-        2004   2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Defense 63,443 66,979           17        16  -      12,972 11,385    59   85  +   841  411     1    0  -

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of Energy

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                   Simple      Complex      Expedited
                    No.         Days           No.       Days      No.   Days
      Component      2004 2005         2004      2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    National          118   76           30        15  -        99  108    58  170  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Nuclear
    Security
    Administration
    Service Center
    Albuquerque
    Bonneville         54   54           12        20  +         0    0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Power
    Administration
    Carlsbad Field      0  654          n/a        20           10   14    35   57  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Office
    Chicago             0   36          n/a        21           38    0    21  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Operations
    Office
    Golden Field       21   11           14        33  +         2    1  20.5   66  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Office
    Idaho              45   46           11        13  +        34   34    41   36  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Operations
    Office
    National            9    7           20        10  -         9   26    25   30  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Energy
    Technology
    Operations
    Office of         (a)    7          (a)        10  ~       (a)    0   (a)  n/a      (a)    0   (a)  n/a  ~
    Naval Reactors
    Oak Ridge       1,012  970          158        31  -       139   42   257  112  -    30   14     7   12  +
    Operations
    Office
    Ohio               89  156          152        28  -         0    0   n/a  n/a       10    0     5  n/a  ~
    Environmental
    Management
    Consolidated
    Business
    Center
    Office of          42   71           15        19  +        29   13    60   73  +     0    0   n/a    0
    Repository
    Development
    Richland            0  190          n/a        31          115    0    18  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Operations
    Office
    Rocky Flats         0  794          n/a       106           16    0   916  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Environmental
    Management
    Consolidated
    Business
    Center
    Savannah River     65   40           61        73  +         0    0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Operations
    Office
    Office of           1    3            1        10  +         0    0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Scientific and
    Technical
    Information
    Southeastern        3    0           10       n/a            0    0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Power
    Administration
    Southwestern        5    4           10         5  -         0    2   n/a   10        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Power
    Administration
    Strategic          13   13           10        21  +         0    2   n/a   82        0    4   n/a    1
    Petroleum
    Reserve
    Western Area       35   40           10        10  =         2    4    20   15  -     0    1   n/a    5
    Power
    Administration
    Department of     395  384           81        41  -         0    0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Energy
    Headquarters

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    ^aComponent did not exist.

    Department of the Interior

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                Simple       Complex       Expedited
                 No.          Days            No.       Days      No.   Days
    Component     2004  2005          2004      2005 +-      2004 2005   2004  2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Department   4,126 6,206         3-834      2-43  ~        30  189  56-99 28-89  ~    63   25  2-64 1-15  ~
    of the
    Interior
    Office of      (a)   (a)          3-48      2-12          (a)  (a)     99    89  -   (a)  (a)    64    2  -
    the
    Secretary
    Office of      (a)   (a)           834         7  -       (a)  (a)    n/a   n/a      (a)  (a)     2    1  -
    Inspector
    General
    Office of      (a)   (a)            15        18  +       (a)  (a)    n/a   n/a      (a)  (a)   n/a  n/a
    the
    Solicitor
    Office of      (a)   (a)            21        13  -       (a)  (a)      0    55  +   (a)  (a)   n/a  n/a
    Surface
    Mining
    Minerals       (a)   (a)            22      8-20  ~       (a)  (a)    n/a    28      (a)  (a)    14  n/a
    Management
    Service
    Bureau of      (a)   (a)         13-21        23          (a)  (a)     56    57  +   (a)  (a)     5    6  +
    Land
    Management
    Fish and       (a)   (a)            35        29  -       (a)  (a)    n/a   n/a      (a)  (a)    10   15  +
    Wildlife
    Service
    National       (a)   (a)            20        19  -       (a)  (a)    n/a   n/a      (a)  (a)    10  n/a
    Park
    Service
    Bureau of      (a)   (a)            20        18  -       (a)  (a)    n/a   n/a      (a)  (a)     8    1  -
    Reclamation
    U.S.           (a)   (a)            18        14  -       (a)  (a)    n/a   n/a      (a)  (a)   n/a  n/a
    Geological
    Survey
    Bureau of      (a)   (a)           158        43  -       (a)  (a)    n/a   n/a      (a)  (a)   n/a  n/a
    Indian
    Affairs

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    ^aStatistics not broken down by component.

    Note: The Department of Interior reported the number of requests processed
    as a department, not by individual components. The Department of Interior
    reports simple, normal, and complex tracks. The range used for simple
    requests contains both simple and normal requests.

    Department of Justice

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                      Simple        Complex      Expedited
                       No.           Days           No.       Days        No.   Days
        Component       2004   2005         2004      2005 +-       2004  2005  2004  2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Office of the        401    213           17        27  +         23    35   480   362  -     2    3   135   96  -
    Attorney General
    Office of the        246    108           17        29  +         15    10   291   363  +     0    2   n/a   62
    Deputy Attorney
    General
    Office of the         52     40           44        89  +          4     0   344   n/a        1    2    47  112  +
    Associate
    Attorney General
    Antitrust            145    131           18        19  +         13    14   412   484  +     1    0    18  n/a
    Division
    Bureau of Prisons 15,047 13,243           15        16  +        680   475    28    29  +    13   25     1    3  +
    Bureau of          2,437  1,719            7         8  +          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Alcohol, Tobacco,
    Firearms, and
    Explosives
    Civil Division       859    466            9        10  +          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    1   n/a    7
    Civil Rights         473    565            8         8  =         60   100   283   359  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Division
    Community              8      2           10        10  =          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Relations Service
    Criminal Division      0      0          n/a       n/a         1,414 1,291    16    35  +     2    1    31   97  +
    Drug Enforcement       0      0          n/a       n/a         1,933 1,569    12    16  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Administration
    Environment and        0      0          n/a       n/a           177   145    40    53  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Natural Resources
    Division
    Executive Office   7,811  9,367           29        43  +        681   476    89   149  +    65   27    26   44  +
    for Immigration
    Review
    Executive Office   4,848  3,751           46        58  +          0     0   n/a   n/a       73   84   195  169  -
    for United States
    Attorneys
    Executive Office       0      0          n/a       n/a            61    65     6    19  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    for United States
    Trustees
    Federal Bureau of 10,253 10,828            6         6  =        (b)   (b)   n/a   n/a       35   14    41   42  +
    Investigation
    Foreign Claims        17      9            5         5  =          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Settlement
    Commission
    Justice            3,128  2,130            8       (c)            31    35    35   (c)        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Management
    Division
    National Drug         80     58           22        21  -          3     3    30    73  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Intelligence
    Center
    Office of            101     61           14         8  -          0     0   n/a   n/a        2    0     6  n/a
    Community
    Oriented Policing
    Services
    Office of Dispute      8      4            5         5  =          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Resolution
    Office of the         27     11            7         8  +          2     0   105   n/a        0    1   n/a    7
    Federal Detention
    Trustee
    Office of            434    443           12        13  +          1     1   397    52  -     0    1   n/a  185
    Information and
    Privacy
    Office of the        241    208           10      11.5  +          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Inspector General
    Office of             28     33            8         6  -          6    17    27    31  +     0    2   n/a   16
    Intelligence
    Policy and Review
    Office of             15      6           41        46  +          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    1   n/a   38
    Intergovernmental
    and Public
    Liaison
    Office of Justice    493    206            1         2  +         59   108    25    25  =     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Programs
    Office of Legal       55     68           10        10  =          9    16    30    30  =     0    1   n/a   40
    Counsel
    Office of Legal       47     76           37        58  +          2     3   188   863  +     0    2   n/a   28
    Policy
    Office of             58     63           84        86  +          6     9   386   330  -     0    2   n/a   67
    Legislative
    Affairs
    Office of the         40     43           29        21  -          3     0   100   n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Pardon Attorney
    Office of            129     86           19        15  -          7     9   389   334  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Professional
    Responsibility
    Office of Public      20     22          137       139  +          3     3   226   730  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Affairs
    Office of the         73     64           60        60  =          0     0   n/a   n/a        2   22     8   10  +
    Solicitor General
    Office on            (a)     14          (a)        50  ~        (a)     0   (a)   n/a  ~   (a)    0   (a)  n/a  ~
    Violence Against
    Women
    Professional          13     14            3       3.5  +          0     0   n/a   n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Responsibility
    Advisory Office
    Tax Division         226    237            0         0  =         27    26    15    28  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    U.S. Marshals      1,531    999           21        26  +         16    17   130 195.5  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Service
    U.S. National        271    184            5         6  +         10    18    24    21  -     2    3     3    2  -
    Central
    Bureau--INTERPOL
    U.S. Parole            0      0          n/a       n/a         1,351 1,011    20    12  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Commission

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    ^aComponent did not exist.

    ^bIn addition to the expedited track, the FBI maintains three tracks for
    requests: small (0 to 500 pages), medium (501 to 2,500 pages), and large
    (more than 2,500 pages). The former is reported in the "simple requests"
    category; the latter two are reported as "complex requests." Therefore
    FBI's complex requests were excluded from analysis.

    ^cJustice Management Division used average days opposed to median days, so
    it was excluded.

    Department of Labor

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                      Simple       Complex      Expedited
                       No.          Days           No.       Days        No.   Days
        Component       2004  2005         2004      2005 +-       2004  2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Occupational       8,410 7,855            7        13  +      2,695 3,431    18   45  +    34   82     4   18  +
    Safety and Health
    Administration
    Employment         6,670 6,948           17        13  -      1,057   904    23   37  +    89   73     5    9  +
    Standards
    Administration
    Mine Safety and    1,150     0           17       n/a             0 1,058   n/a   20        0    3   n/a    7
    Health
    Administration
    Employment and       480   270           15        20  +         35    94    20   30  +     1    5     2   10  +
    Training
    Administration
    Employee Benefits    367 1,456           11         7  -         65   257    40   34  -     0    2   n/a   10
    Security
    Administration
    Office of the        152   151           13        13  =         62    35    20   26  +     1    1     2    4  +
    Assistant
    Secretary for
    Administration
    and Management
    Administrative       215   206            2        10  +          0     0   n/a  n/a        0    6   n/a    3
    Law Judges
    Veterans'             71    87           27        10  -         15    19    29   39  +     2    1     8    8  =
    Employment and
    Training Service
    Office of the         71    47           30        28  -          8    28    60   50  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Inspector General
    Bureau of Labor       56    54           13        17  +          0     0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Statistics
    Office of             25    52            7         6  -          4     0    18  n/a        2    0     2  n/a
    Adjudicatory
    Services
    Womens Bureau         27    19           15        10  -          0     2   n/a   25        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Office of             12    23           20        30  +          0     0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Disability
    Employment Policy
    Office of the          3    16           25        20  -          2     1    25   60  +     1    0    25  n/a
    Assistant
    Secretary for
    Policy
    Office of              0     0          n/a       n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Congressional and
    Intergovernmental
    Affairs
    Bureau of              4    24           16         7  -          9     2    30   14  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    International
    Labor Affairs
    Office of the         12     8           10         7  -          0     0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Chief Financial
    Officer
    Office of Public       7     8            7         7  =          0     0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Affairs
    Office of Small       22    22           30        10  -          0     0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Business Programs
    Office of the         62    30           12        14  +          7     3    54   30  -     0    1   n/a    2
    Solicitor

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of Transportation

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                   Simple       Complex      Expedited
                    No.          Days           No.       Days        No.   Days
    Component        2004  2005         2004      2005 +-       2004  2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Office of the     320   150            1         1  =        394    87    82   77  -     0   10   n/a   30
    Secretary of
    Transportation
    Office of          60    50            6         8  +         46    34    51   64  +     3    0    57  n/a
    Inspector
    General
    Federal         5,162 4,401            4         3  -      2,231 2,179    31   28  -    45   46     8    9  +
    Aviation
    Administration
    Federal           331   294            9        16  +         30    31    30  134  +     0   17   n/a   13
    Highway
    Administration
    Federal             0     0          n/a       n/a           524   451    95   90  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Railroad
    Administration
    National            0     0          n/a       n/a           367   263    23   20  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Highway
    Traffic Safety
    Administration
    Federal           192   199           68        29  -          0     0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Transit
    Administration
    Saint Lawrence     36     0           18       n/a             0    33   n/a   20        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Seaway
    Development
    Corporation
    Maritime            0   124          n/a        30           155     0    30  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Administration
    Research and       85    43           19        15  -         89    75   135   40  -    11    1     5    5  =
    Special
    Programs
    Administration
    Federal Motor       0     0          n/a       n/a           778   823    58   31  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Carrier Safety
    Administration
    Bureau of          46    67            5        11  +          0     6   n/a   20        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Transportation
    Statistics

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of Education

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

              Simple       Complex      Expedited
               No.          Days           No.       Days      No.   Days
    Agency      2004  2005         2004      2005 +-      2004 2005   2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Education  1,566 1,874         0-30        35  ~       442  329  2-134   66  ~    74   16  3-21   24  ~

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Environmental Protection Agency

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                 Simple       Complex      Expedited
                  No.          Days           No.       Days      No.   Days
     Component     2004  2005         2004      2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Headquarters  2,188 1,717           19        19  =         1   42   170   58  -     6    2    16   20  +
    Region 1 New    317   249           19        18  -         0    2    29   46  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    England
    Region
    Region 2 New  2,949 1,912           27        30  +         7    2    49   40  -     1    1     9    8  -
    Jersey, New
    York, Puerto
    Rico, U.S.
    Virgin
    Islands and
    7 Tribal
    Nations
    Region 3      1,748 1,699           15        13  -         0    9   n/a    4        1    0     7  n/a
    Mid-Atlantic
    Region 4      1,034   852           21        19  -         5   71    75   41  -     1    0     6  n/a
    Southeast
    Region
    Region 5      2,011 1,920           18        18  =         2    3    70   30  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Mid-West
    Region
    Region 6        860   624           18        32  +         1    0   353  n/a        0    2   n/a  109
    South
    Central
    Region
    Region 7        651   767           23        27  +         0    2   n/a  166        0    0   n/a  n/a
    America's
    Heartland
    Region
    Region 8        387   332           13        15  +         0    0   n/a  n/a        0    0   n/a  n/a
    Mountains
    and Plains
    Region
    Region 9        725   588           16        18  +         0   39   n/a   38        1    0     6  n/a
    Pacific
    Southwest
    Region
    Region 10       454   273           20        20  =         1    0    19  n/a        1    0    27  n/a
    Pacific
    Northwest
    Region

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    General Services Administration

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

           Simple      Complex      Expedited
            No.         Days           No.       Days        No.   Days
    Agency   2004 2005         2004      2005 +-       2004  2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    GSA         0    0          n/a       n/a         1,182 1,561    14   14  =     0    0   n/a  n/a

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of Health and Human Services

    Two tables are provided for this department, because its components report
    both multitrack (simple and complex) processing and single-track
    processing.

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                   Simple        Complex
                    No.           Days        No.     Days
    Component        2004   2005         2004 2005 +-       2004  2005  2004 2005 +-
    Office of the       0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    Secretary
    Administration    (a)      0          (a)  n/a  ~        (a)     0   (a)  n/a  ~
    for Children
    and Families
    Administration      0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    on Aging
    Centers for    31,051 33,583            9   10  +        652   722    77   86  +
    Medicare &
    Medicaid
    Services
    Office of the      72    179           10   10  =        446   611    60   60  =
    Assistant
    Secretary for
    Public Health
    Agency for          0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    Healthcare
    Research and
    Quality
    Centers for         0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    Disease
    Control and
    Prevention
    Food and Drug  13,626 15,539           25   26  +      1,993 1,987   325  370  +
    Administration
    Health              0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    Resources and
    Services
    Administration
    Indian Health       0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    Services
    National            0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    Institutes of
    Health
    Substance           0      0          n/a  n/a             0     0   n/a  n/a
    Abuse and
    Mental Health
    Services
    Administration

                   Single          Expedited
                     No.             Days         No.     Days
      Component       2004    2005           2004 2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Office of the    1,147     934             55   69  +         1    1     2   60  +
    Secretary
    Administration     (a)     137            (a)   40  ~       (a)    4   (a)   41  ~
    for Children
    and Families
    Administration      13      22              5    5  =         0    0   n/a  n/a
    on Aging
    Centers for          0       0            n/a  n/a           11   42    66  158  +
    Medicare &
    Medicaid
    Services
    Office of the        0       0            n/a  n/a            0    0   n/a  n/a
    Assistant
    Secretary for
    Public Health
    Agency for          76      94             25   34  +         0    0   n/a  n/a
    Healthcare
    Research and
    Quality
    Centers for        977   1,134             36   36  =         2    2    52   52  =
    Disease
    Control and
    Prevention
    Food and Drug    2,921   1,007            113   86  -         0    2   n/a  100
    Administration
    Health             416     380             20   20  =         0    6   n/a   14
    Resources and
    Services
    Administration
    Indian Health  158,277 151,428             32   32  =         0    0   n/a  n/a
    Services
    National        10,583  13,382            182  173  -         0    0   n/a  n/a
    Institutes of
    Health
    Substance          132     206             38   45  +         0    0   n/a  n/a
    Abuse and
    Mental Health
    Services
    Administration

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    ^aComponent did not exist.

    Department of Housing and Urban Development

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                 Simple       Complex      Expedited
                  No.          Days           No.       Days      No.   Days
    Component      2004  2005         2004      2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    Headquarters  1,676   984           95        65  -       248  271   161  160  -    70   74    42   22  -
    Field         1,510 1,150           21        21  =        10   15    30   35  +    95  160    23   70  +
    Office of       354   254           55        45  -         0    0   n/a  n/a       15   15     9    9  =
    Inspector
    General

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

           Simple      Complex      Expedited
            No.         Days           No.       Days      No.   Days
    Agency   2004 2005         2004      2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    NASA    1,069  938           18        19  +       454  410    33   49  +    44    3    26   15  -

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

           Simple      Complex      Expedited
            No.         Days           No.       Days      No.   Days
    Agency   2004 2005         2004      2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    NRC       357  303           11        12  +        27   28    47   75  +     5   14    60   20  -

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    National Science Foundation

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

               Single      Expedited
                No.                  Days         No.           Days
    Agency    2004 2005           2004 2005 +-     2004 2005      2004 2005 +-
    NSF        309  266             20   14  -        0    0       n/a  n/a

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Office of Personnel Management

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

              Single        Expedited
               No.                    Days         No.           Days
    Agency   2004   2005           2004 2005 +-     2004 2005      2004 2005 +-
    OPM     9,310 10,900              9   14  +        0    2       n/a    1

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Small Business Administration

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

              Single       Expedited
               No.                   Days         No.           Days
    Agency   2004  2005           2004 2005 +-     2004 2005      2004 2005 +-
    SBA     1,927 3,737              5    7  +        0    0       n/a  n/a

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Social Security Administration

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

               Simple        Complex
                 No.           Days         No.     Days
    Agency     2004  2005           2004 2005 +-      2004  2005  2004 2005 +-
    SSA         397   364             19   15  -       882 1,014    37   39  +

               Single         Expedited
                 No.            Days         No.     Days
    Agency     2004   2005           2004 2005 +-      2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    SSA       1,321  1,555             14   10  -         0   31   n/a   17

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Note: The tables exclude SSA's category of "simple requests handled by
    non-FOIA staff" and "simple request for Social Security number
    applications and other Office of Earnings Operations records." The
    category SSA labels "fast track" was reported under "single track."

    Department of State

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

           Simple       Complex      Expedited
            No.          Days           No.       Days        No.   Days
    Agency   2004  2005         2004      2005 +-       2004  2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    State   1,236 1,647            6        14  +      3,710 2,216   209  142  -    17    7   184  136  -

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of the Treasury

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                   Simple       Complex      Expedited
                    No.          Days           No.       Days         No.    Days
    Component        2004  2005         2004      2005 +-        2004   2005  2004 2005 +-  2004 2005  2004 2005 +-
    The               332   307            2         2  =         782    790   172  251  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Departmental
    Offices
    Alcohol and         0   168          n/a        86            201     17    78   93  +     0    1   n/a    1
    Tobacco Tax
    and Trade
    Bureau
    Office of the     322 4,635           10         2  -       8,030    179    50   73  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Comptroller of
    the Currency
    Bureau of          69    76            4         3  -          44     12    60   31  -     1    0     5  n/a
    Engraving and
    Printing
    Financial           0     0          n/a       n/a            529    351     7   10  +     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Management
    Service
    Internal            0     0          n/a       n/a         51,985 42,533    21   21  =     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Revenue
    Service
    United States       0     0          n/a       n/a             67    316    15   15  =     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Mint
    Bureau of the       0     0          n/a       n/a             91     90     4    3  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Public Debt
    Office of           0     0          n/a       n/a          1,827  4,003    15   12  -     2    0   n/a  n/a
    Thrift
    Supervision
    Treasury            0   208          n/a         4            256    161   172   30  -     0    0    10  n/a
    Inspector
    General for
    Tax
    Administration
    Financial           0    18          n/a         6             32    122    99   95  -     0    0   n/a  n/a
    Crimes
    Enforcement
    Network

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    Department of Veterans Affairs

    The department reports all processing in one track, but it refers to this
    track as complex, rather than single track.

    No. = number of requests processed; Days = median days to process; +- =
    change from 2004 to 2005

                        Complex               Expedited
                          No.                   Days           No.     Days
        Component            2004        2005             2004 2005 +-          2004     2005  2004 2005 +-
    Acquisition &           376**       289**              4**  2.5  -           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Material
    Management
    Administration            0**     1,463**              n/a    4              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Board of Contract         0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Appeals
    Board of Veterans     1,006**     1,049**             49**   19  -           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Appeals
    Congressional &           0**         (a)              n/a  (a)  ~           0**      (a)   n/a  (a)  ~
    Legislative
    Affairs
    Diversity                 0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Management &
    Equal Employment
    Opportunity
    General Counsel          67**        65**             35**   15  -           0**      2**   n/a   10
    Human Resources          45**         1**           31.5**    4  -           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Management
    Inspector               347**       287**             10**   16  +           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    General
    Information               0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Technology
    Support Service
    Office of                 0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Management
    National Cemetery         0**        19**              n/a   15             16**      0**    18  n/a
    Administration
    Office of the             0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Assistant
    Secretary for
    Human Resources &
    Administration
    Office of the             0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Assistant
    Secretary for
    Public &
    Intergovernmental
    Affairs
    Office of the             0**         8**              n/a    1             16**      0**   1**  n/a
    Deputy Assistant
    Secretary for
    Budget
    Office of the             0**        10**              n/a    1              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Deputy Assistant
    Secretary for
    Intergovernmental
    Affairs
    Office of                58**        63**             15** 11.5  -           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Finance
    Office of                53**        72**           11.5**   51  +           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Information &
    Technology
    Office of                16**        12**              5**   10  +           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Resolution
    Management
    Office of Small &         0**         1**              n/a    1              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Disadvantaged
    Business
    Utilization
    Policy and                0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Planning
    Public Affairs            0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Security & Law            0**         (a)              n/a  (a)  ~           0**      (a)   n/a  (a)  ~
    Enforcement
    Office of the            16**         6**             45**   60  +           0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Secretary
    Veterans Benefits    93,296**    83,332**             15** 15.5  +         384**     88**   5**  4.5  -
    Administration
    Veterans Canteen          0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Service
    Veterans Health   1,699,079** 1,814,837**              4**    1  -      20,730** 13,409**   1**    1  =
    Administration
    White House               0**         0**              n/a  n/a              0**      0**   n/a  n/a
    Liaison

    + increase - decrease = no change ~ other change (change in reporting, new
    component, etc.)

    Sources: Annual FOIA report, GAO analysis.

    ^aComponent did not exist.

    Appendix XI
    GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

    GAO Contact

    Linda D. Koontz, (202) 512-6240 or koontzl@gao.gov

    Staff Acknowledgments

    In addition to the contact named above, key contributions to this report
    were made by Barbara Collier, Acting Assistant Director; Alan Stapleton,
    Assistant Director; James Ashley, Marisol Cruz; Wilfred Holloway; Vernetta
    Marquis; David Plocher; Kelly Shaw; Shawn Ward; and Elizabeth Zhao.

    (310766)

    www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-441 .

    To view the full product, including the scope
    and methodology, click on the link above.

    For more information, contact Linda Koontz at (202) 512-6240 or
    koontzl@gao.gov.

    Highlights of [73]GAO-07-441 , a report to congressional requesters

    March 2007

    FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

    Processing Trends Show Importance of Improvement Plans

    The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) establishes that federal agencies
    must provide access to their information, enabling the public to learn
    about government operations and decisions. To help ensure proper
    implementation, the act requires that agencies report annually to the
    Attorney General, giving specific information about their FOIA operations,
    such as numbers of requests received and processed and median processing
    times. Also, a recent Executive Order directs agencies to develop plans to
    improve FOIA operations, including decreasing backlog.

    For this study, GAO was asked to examine the status and trends of FOIA
    processing at 25 major agencies as reflected in annual reports, as well as
    the extent to which improvement plans contain the elements emphasized by
    the Executive Order. To do so, GAO analyzed the 25 agencies' annual
    reports and improvement plans.

    [74]What GAO Recommends

    GAO suggests that the Congress consider requiring annual reports to
    provide additional statistics, including arithmetic means. GAO also makes
    recommendations to strengthen selected improvement plans, among other
    things. The agencies reviewed generally agreed with the draft report,
    except that the Treasury partially disagreed with GAO's assessment and
    associated recommendation. GAO continues to support its assessment and
    recommendation.

    Based on data in annual reports from 2002 to 2005, the public continued to
    submit more requests for information from the federal government through
    FOIA. Despite increasing the numbers of requests processed, many agencies
    did not keep pace with the volume of requests that they received. As a
    result, the number of pending requests carried over from year to year has
    been steadily increasing (see fig.). Agency reports also show great
    variations in the median times to process requests (less than 10 days for
    some agency components to more than 100 days at others). However, the
    ability to determine trends in processing times is limited by the form in
    which these times are reported: that is, in medians only, without averages
    (that is, arithmetical means) or ranges. Although medians have the
    advantage of providing representative numbers that are not skewed by a few
    outliers, it is not statistically possible to combine several medians to
    develop broader generalizations (as can be done with arithmetical means).
    This limitation on aggregating data impedes the development of broader
    pictures of FOIA operations, which could be useful in monitoring efforts
    to improve processing and reduce the increasing backlog of requests, as
    intended by the Executive Order.

    The improvement plans submitted by the 25 agencies mostly included goals
    and timetables addressing the four areas of improvement emphasized by the
    Executive Order: eliminating or reducing any backlog of FOIA requests;
    increasing reliance on dissemination of records that can be made available
    to the public without the need for a FOIA request, such as through posting
    on Web sites; improving communications with requesters about the status of
    their requests; and increasing public awareness of FOIA processing. Most
    of the plans (20 of 25) provided goals and timetables in all four areas;
    some agencies omitted goals in areas where they considered they were
    already strong. Although details of a few plans could be improved, all the
    plans focus on making measurable improvements and form a reasonable basis
    for carrying out the goals of the Executive Order.

    Total FOIA Requests Pending at End of Year, 2002-2005

    References

    Visible links
      64. http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/index.html
      65. http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/04_6.html.
      66. http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/agency_improvement.html.
      73. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-441
    *** End of document. ***