[Audit of the National Park Service's Recording of Facility Maintenance Expenditures]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Report No. C-IN-NPS-0013-2004
Title: AUDIT OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE�S RECORDING OF FACILITY
MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES
Date: January 26, 2005
****************************************DISCLAIMER*****************************
This file contains an ASCII representation of an OIG report. No attempt has been made to display graphic images or illustrations. Some tables may be included, but may not resemble those in the printed version. A printed copy of this report may be obtained by referring to the PDF file or by calling the Office of Inspector General, Division of Acquisition and Management Operations at (202) 219-3841.
****************************************************************************
Subject: AUDIT OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE�S
RECORDING OF FACILITY MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES (No. C-IN-NPS-0013-2004)
AUDIT REPORT
THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE�S
RECORDING OF FACILITY MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
WHY WE DID THIS AUDIT
In 1998, the Department of the Interior�s Planning, Design, and Construction Council reported that it was difficult, if not impossible, to track and account for facility maintenance expenditures when facility operations and facility maintenance funds were contained in one account. Accordingly, in its FY 2000 budget request, the National Park Service (NPS) separated facility operations and facility maintenance. The objective of the audit was to determine if the NPS has been accurately reporting its facility maintenance costs since establishing the separate budget categories.
WHAT WE FOUND
The National Park Service (NPS) did not accurately capture or report its facility maintenance costs. Consequently, NPS does not know how much was or is being spent on facility maintenance activities. For fiscal years (FYs) 2001, 2002, and 2003, NPS requested and received $341 million more than it recorded as spent on facility maintenance activities.
Prior to FY 2000, NPS facility operations and maintenance funds were contained in one account and the funds were used interchangeably. For FY 2000, NPS began requesting separate funding for facility operations and facility maintenance and subsequently provided general guidance related to the need to account for the funds separately. However, NPS did not sufficiently emphasize the requirement, and the individual parks generally continued to use the operations and maintenance funds interchangeably. Specifically, we found that park officials were generally ill informed about the need to account for facility maintenance separately, how facility maintenance activities were defined, and the processes needed to accurately capture the costs.
We also found that while NPS had the information that indicated facility maintenance costs were not being accurately recorded NPS took no discernable action to remedy the situation.
RECOMMENDATIONS
We recommend the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks ensure that the Director of the National Park Service:
> Require parks to comply with the policy developed by the NPS Comptroller.
> Disseminate the definitions of facility operations and facility maintenance to the park level.
> Require parks to provide training to employees on how to classify work efforts as either facility operations or facility maintenance.
> Require parks to use time input documents to capture facility maintenance efforts accurately in the time accounting system.
> Establish a monitoring process to ensure that facility maintenance expenditures are being accurately captured and reported.
> Hold park managers accountable for ensuring that facility maintenance expenditures are reported accurately.
> Realign the budget request to more closely reflect the actual facility operations and facility maintenance obligations within the facility operations and maintenance sub-activity based on actual expenditures.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION 1
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 2
RESULTS OF AUDIT 3
TIME ACCOUNTING 4
GUIDANCE 5
MONITORING 6
REALIGNING THE BUDGET 6
RECOMMENDATIONS 7
NPS RESPONSE AND OIG REPLY 8
APPENDICES
1. CLASSIFICATIONS OF PARK UNITS 9
2. SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 11
3. PERCENT OF FACILITY OPERATIONS AND FACILITY MAINTENANCE
FUNDS REPORTED AS FACILITY MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES
BY PARK UNIT, FISCAL YEAR 2003 13
4. RANGE OF TOTAL FACILITY OPERATIONS AND FACILITY
MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEAR 2003 19
5. NPS� NOVEMBER 17, 2004 RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT AUDIT REPORT 21
6. STATUS OF AUDIT REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 23
PHOTO CREDITS 25
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
INTRODUCTION
ILLUSTRATING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
OPERATIONS
Roads operations include snowplowing at parks which experience significant snowfall, in some places in excess of 400 inches.
MAINTENANCE
Roads maintenance includes activities such as grading roads, asphalt overlays, patching potholes, and filling cracks.
In 1998, the Department of the Interior�s Planning, Design, and Construction Council (Interior Council) issued its report �Facilities Maintenance Assessment and Recommendations� and the National Research Council (NRC) issued its report �Stewardship of Federal Facilities � A Proactive Strategy for Managing the Nation�s Public Assets�. Both studies made recommendations to improve the facility maintenance process.
The Interior Council and the NRC found that it is difficult, if not impossible, to track and account for maintenance expenditures when facility operations and maintenance funds are contained in one account. The Interior Council and the NRC also concluded facility maintenance funds that are not appropriately segregated from operational funds allowed managers to defer maintenance in order to augment operational activities.
In that regard, the Department directed the NPS to request separate funding for facility operations and facility maintenance starting in its FY 2000 Budget Justification. In its budget justification, NPS defined facility operations as those activities relating to the normal performance of the functions for which the facility or equipment is used. Facility maintenance was defined as the upkeep of facilities, structures, and equipment necessary to realize the originally anticipated useful life of a fixed asset.
In order to prepare its FY 2000 budget, NPS surveyed selected park units1 to estimate its facility operations and facility maintenance budget requirements. Based on this survey, NPS decided to split the funding 50/50 between facility operations and facility maintenance within the operations and maintenance sub-activity. After the first year, NPS intended to use data from the accounting system to adjust the budget requests for each area. To date, NPS has not adjusted the 50/50 split to reflect actual expenditures.
NPS� official accounting records show that between FYs 2001 and 2003 NPS requested and received $341 million more than it recorded spending for facility maintenance activities. OMB noted this discrepancy and expressed concern that NPS might be using facility maintenance money for other purposes.
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
Based on our analysis of NPS� facility maintenance and facility operations expenditures for FY 2003, we selected park units for site visits. At those locations, we reviewed the processes and procedures used to record and report facility maintenance costs. To accomplish this, we reviewed documents used to request and record work efforts, including:
> Work orders
> Employee time sheets
> Maintenance management reports
> Accounting and payroll records
> Budget documents
We limited our testing to labor costs which comprised more than 75 percent of total facility maintenance and operation expenditures at the park units we visited. We also performed fieldwork at the NPS Intermountain Region, the NPS headquarters, the Department, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Our audit included an examination of prior audit reports, Government Performance and Results Act goals, OMB initiatives, and NPS budget and accounting processes. We evaluated the various best practices recommendations made by the National Research Council and the Interior Council. We did not find prior audit coverage related to our specific objective. Also, there were no performance goals that were specifically related to our objective.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. (See Appendix 2 for more details on scope and methodology and a list of sites visited.)
RESULTS OF AUDIT
We concluded that NPS did not accurately report its facility maintenance expenditures. There was little or no relationship between the facility maintenance work being done and labor costs being charged to facility maintenance. Consequently, it was not possible to determine how much was, or currently is, spent on facility maintenance efforts. NPS reported that it spent $341 million less on facility maintenance than was provided for FYs 2001 through 2003.
Fiscal Years 2001 � 2003
Enacted
Expended
Difference
Facility
Operations
$ 556,496,000
$ 824,505,000
($268,009,000)
Facility Maintenance
$ 689,324,000
$ 348,401,000
$340,923,000
Total
$1,245,820,000
$1,172,906,000
$ 72,914,000
Our initial analysis showed wide disparities in the ratio between facility operations and facility maintenance expenditures reported by the various park units2. For example,
> 125 park units reported total facility operations expenditures of $85,100,201 but reported no facility maintenance expenditures.
> Conversely, 21 park units reported total facility maintenance expenditures of $10,310,383 but reported no facility operations expenditures.
The failure to accurately capture facility maintenance expenditures has resulted in a perception that funds intended for maintenance were used for other purposes. However, we believe the problem is one of inaccurate data collection or recording rather than non-performance of maintenance.
We identified four specific areas where NPS needs to make significant improvements so it can accurately report facility maintenance efforts. These areas are:
> Accounting for time
> Providing guidance
> Monitoring facility maintenance reporting
> Realigning the budget
TIME ACCOUNTING
NPS did not accurately capture and report the time employees spent on facility maintenance. This is important because, at the park units we visited, labor costs made up more than 75 percent of the total facility maintenance costs.
The principle reason for the inaccuracy is the long-standing practice at the park units of assigning a particular facility operations or facility maintenance accounting code to each specific function within the park.
NPS has close to 100 accounting codes, called primary work elements (PWEs), to account for its employees� facility operations and facility maintenance work efforts. For example, there are accounting codes for:
> Facility Operations � buildings
> Facility Operations � trails
> Facility Maintenance � buildings
> Facility Maintenance � trails
Park units have generally selected and assigned a single PWE for use by an entire function. Every employee within that function charges all of their hours to that PWE for the entire fiscal year no matter what tasks they actually accomplish. This practice of pre-assigning PWEs has resulted in inaccurate data. In a June 20, 2003 memorandum, the NPS Comptroller advised against using this practice. This advice was reiterated by the NPS Comptroller in an August 15, 2003 memorandum.
Despite the memoranda, data remained inaccurate in FY 2004. We examined work orders, work sheets, or other forms used to assign and document work. We found little or no correlation to the data reported in the accounting system and the work being performed. For example:
> As of April 2004, one park unit had charged 100 percent of its FY 2004 facility operations and maintenance labor efforts to operations accounting codes. Conversely, in FY 2003 the same park unit had charged all of its facility operations and maintenance labor efforts to maintenance accounting codes. Our tests of current activity showed that maintenance is being performed and should be captured against maintenance accounting codes. We concluded the park unit�s decision to charge all operations and maintenance efforts to one category of accounting codes was arbitrary.
> At another park unit, a maintenance crew of three completed a specific maintenance task. Each employee recorded the same amount of time for performing this task. Two of the three employees recorded their time against maintenance accounting codes, the remaining employee recorded his time against an operations accounting code. This happened because these accounting codes were preassigned to each employee on an annual basis.
We found similar practices at eight of the nine park units we visited or contacted, indicating that data reported in NPS� accounting system was not based on the actual work performed.
Some park units can accurately capture facility maintenance work effort using the Facility Management Software System (FMSS). However, FMSS does not interface with the existing payroll system and is not yet implemented at all of the park units. NPS can accurately capture facility maintenance work effort without waiting for FMSS to be fully implemented or interfaced. This can be accomplished through the use of time input documents, which capture each work effort that an employee performs.
GUIDANCE
NPS has not adequately emphasized the need to accurately record facility maintenance efforts. We found that park officials were generally ill informed about the need to separately account for facility operations and maintenance. For example,
> A manager at one park asked why it was important to distinguish facility operations and maintenance and who used the information.
> The managers at two additional park units stated that they were not aware of the need to account for facility operations and maintenance separately.
Furthermore, NPS has not adequately communicated the difference between facility operations and facility maintenance work efforts. At the park level, we found that there was some confusion as to which work efforts should be defined as facility operations and which efforts should be facility maintenance. Park officials generally expressed frustration with the lack of clear guidance concerning these definitions.
It is critical that park officials understand and apply the definitions to achieve accurate facility maintenance reporting. The definitions provide the link to the PWE necessary to accurately capture the work effort in the accounting system.
Accordingly, in order to improve park officials� understanding of the need for and the ability to separately account for facility operations and maintenance, NPS needs to:
> Reinforce its policy regarding separately accounting for facility operations and maintenance.
> Disseminate the definitions and provide training to employees on how these definitions relate to individual tasks at the parks.
However, reinforcing policy and providing training alone will not solve the problem.
MONITORING
The facility maintenance expenditures reported over the past several years clearly show that there was a huge disconnect between what was asked for and what was reported as being spent. Furthermore, the facility maintenance expenditures reported on a park-unit by park-unit basis were illogical. NPS had this information but took no effective action. If NPS wants to ensure accurate reporting, it must monitor what is happening at the park units. Further, NPS must take appropriate action if a park unit fails to properly account for its facility maintenance efforts.
REALIGNING THE BUDGET
Prior to FY 2000, there was no distinction in NPS� budget requests between facility operations and facility maintenance funds. In its FY 2000 budget request, NPS split facility operations and facility maintenance into two areas. The amounts requested for each area were estimated based on limited information. NPS intended to adjust subsequent budget requests once actual costs became available. The NPS has not yet realigned its budget request for facility maintenance funds based on data from its accounting system. However, at this point, any adjustment to the budget request would be premature due to NPS' inaccurate accounting for facility maintenance efforts. We believe that NPS must have one fiscal year of accurate information about its facility maintenance obligations before attempting to realign the budget.
RECOMMENDATIONS
We recommend the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks require that the Director, National Park Service:
1. Direct the park units to comply with the policy developed by the Comptroller to accurately account for individual work efforts.
2. Disseminate the definitions of facility operations and facility maintenance in the NPS Budget Justifications to all NPS facility maintenance divisions and related financial program staff to facilitate greater understanding of the terms and how they should be used.
3. Require park units to use time input documents to capture facility maintenance efforts accurately in the time accounting system. Employees� time must be reported against accounting codes that accurately reflect the work effort expended.
4. Provide training to employees on how to classify work efforts as either facility operations or facility maintenance. Also, provide training to employees on how to select the appropriate accounting code for their time input documents based on these classifications.
5. Establish a monitoring process to ensure that facility maintenance expenditures are being accurately captured and reported. For example, require the regions to conduct periodic comparisons of park facility maintenance expenditures against park facility maintenance work efforts and against budget planning documents and request explanations for discrepancies.
6. Hold park managers accountable for ensuring the accuracy of their reporting including taking action against park managers who fail to properly account for facility maintenance expenditures.
7. Realign the budget request to more closely reflect the actual facility operations and facility maintenance obligations within the facility operations and maintenance sub-activity. This realignment should not be made until facility operations and facility maintenance obligations have been accurately recorded in the accounting system for at least one fiscal year.
NPS RESPONSE AND OIG REPLY
In the November 17, 2004 response to the draft report (Appendix 5), the Comptroller, National Park Service, concurred with the findings and recommendations. NPS stated that it would take immediate steps to implement Recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. NPS plans to implement Recommendation 7 once all other recommendations have been completed and if the expenditure reporting shows significant improvement in accuracy. Then, NPS will propose to the Department of the Interior, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Appropriations Committees of the Congress that the FY 2007 NPS Budget Request in February 2006 be aligned to reflect the more accurate maintenance financial information (Appendix 5). Appendix 6 shows the status of the audit recommendations.
Appendix 1
CLASSIFICATIONS OF PARK UNITS
In addition to parks, the National Park Service has other areas and facilities under its jurisdiction. A list of these types of areas and facilities with their acronyms follows. For this report we have referred to all these areas and facilities as park units.
Battlefield
BTLFD
Memorial
MEM
National Battlefield
NB
National Battlefield Park
NBP
National Historic Park
NHP
National Historic Site
NHS
National Historic Trail
NHT
National Lakeshore
NL
National Monument
NM
National Memorial
NMEM
National Military Park
NMP
National Park
NP
National Preserve
NPRES
National River
NR
National Recreation Area
NRA
National River & Recreation Area
NR&RA or NRRA
National Seashore
NS
National Scenic Riverway
NSR
National Scenic Trail
NST
Parkway
PKWY
Preserve
PRES
Scenic & Recreational River
SRR
Wild & Scenic River
WSR
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Appendix 2
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
Our audit was conducted at the Office of Management and Budget and the National Park Service (NPS) budget and accounting offices, Intermountain Region, and the following park units:
* Gateway National Recreation Area (NY, NJ)
* Yosemite National Park (CA)
* Rocky Mountain National Park, (CO)
* Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (IN)
* The Great Smoky Mountains National Park (TN and NC)
* Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (CA)
* Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (MI)
We also contacted NPS� Northeast, Southeast, and Midwest Regional offices, as well as Grand Canyon National Park and Bandelier National Monument. We reviewed the processes and procedures used to record and report facility maintenance costs. We reviewed work orders, if available; other documents used to request work; time sheets; Facility Management Software System (FMSS) documents; and other documents related to the recording and reporting of facility maintenance costs. We also analyzed facility operations and facility maintenance expenditures, which were downloaded from the official accounting records. Our analysis identified the percentage of facility maintenance reported by each park under the facility operations and maintenance sub-activity. We stratified the park units, and selected park units based on the percent of facility maintenance reported at the low, middle, and high ranges of the stratification.
Our scope included park units selected based on their FY 2003 reported facility operations and facility maintenance expenditures. Our actual tests of transactions in the park units were selected from the most recent accounting data available in FY 2004.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Accordingly, we included such tests of records and other auditing procedures as we considered necessary under the circumstances.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
PARK UNIT
%
DENALI NP
0
GATES OF THE ARCTIC NP AND PRES
0
KATMAI NP AND PRES.
0
LAKE CLARK NP AND PRES.
0
SITKA NP
0
WRANGELL - ST ELIAS NP AND PRES.
0
YUKON - CHARLEY RIVERS NP AND PRES
0
BOOKER T WASHINGTON NM
0
CASTLE CLINTON NM
0
EDGAR ALLAN POE NHS
0
EDISON NHS
0
EISENHOWER NHS
0
ELEANOR ROOSEVELT NHS
0
FEDERAL HALL NMEM
0
FIRE ISLAND NS
0
FREDERICK LAW OLMSTED NHS
0
GATE-JAMAICA BAY DISTRICT
0
GATE-SANDY HOOK UNIT
0
GATE-STATEN ISLAND UNIT
0
GAULEY RIVER NRA
0
GENERAL GRANT NMEM
0
GEORGE WASHINGTON BIRTHPLACE NM
0
GETTYSBURG NMP
0
GLORIA DEI CHURCH NHS
0
HAMILTON GRANGE NMEM
0
HOME OF FRANKLIN D ROOSEVELT NHS
0
HOPEWELL FURNACE NHS
0
JOHN F KENNEDY NHS
0
LONGFELLOW NHS
0
MAGGIE L WALKER NHS
0
MINUTE MAN NHP
0
MORRISTOWN NHP
0
NEW BEDFORD WHALING NHP
0
ROGER WILLIAMS NMEM
0
SAGAMORE HILL NHS
0
SAINT CROIX ISLAND INTL HS
0
SAINT PAUL'S CHURCH
0
SALEM MARITIME NHS
0
SARATOGA NHP
0
SAUGUS IRON WORKS NHS
0
THADDEUS KOSCIUSZKO NMEM
0
THEO ROOSEVELT BIRTHPLACE NHS
0
THOMAS STONE NHS
0
VALLEY FORGE NHP
0
VANDERBILT MANSION NHS
0
WOMEN'S RIGHTS NHP
0
ARKANSAS POST NMEM
0
ANACOSTIA PARK
0
ANTIETAM NB
0
ARLINGTON HSE/ THE ROBT E LEE MEM
0
CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO CANAL NHP
0
CLARA BARTON NHS
0
FORD'S THEATRE NHS
0
GLEN ECHO NP
0
GREAT FALLS PARK VIRGINIA
0
HARPERS FERRY NHP
0
MANASSAS NBP
0
MONOCACY NB
0
NATIONAL CAPITAL PARKS CENTRAL
0
ROCK CREEK PARK
0
AZTEC RUINS NM
0
CEDAR BREAKS NM
0
EL MALPAIS NM
0
EL MORRO NM
0
FORT BOWIE NHS
0
FOSSIL BUTTE NM
0
HUBBELL TRADING POST NHS
0
JOHN D ROCKEFELLER JR MEM PKWY
0
MONTEZUMA CASTLE NM
0
NATURAL BRIDGES NM
0
PECOS NHP
0
RAINBOW BRIDGE NM
0
RIO GRANDE WSR
0
SAND CREEK MASSACRE NHS
0
WASHITA BATTLEFIELD NHS
0
CHARLES PINCKNEY NHS
0
FORT RALEIGH NHS
0
MOORES CREEK NB
0
OBED WSR
0
TUSKEGEE AIRMEN NHS
0
WRIGHT BROTHERS NMEM
0
BUCK ISLAND REEF NM
0
AMERICAN MEMORIAL NP
0
CABRILLO NM
0
CRATER LAKE NP
0
CRATERS OF THE MOON NM
0
DEATH VALLEY NP
0
EUGENE O'NEILL NHS
0
FORT POINT NHS
0
GOLDEN GATE NRA
0
GREAT BASIN NP
0
HAGERMAN FOSSIL BEDS NM
0
JOHN DAY FOSSIL BEDS NM
0
JOHN MUIR NHS
0
JOSHUA TREE NP
0
KALAUPAPA NHP
0
KALOKO-HONOKOHAU NHP
0
KLONDIKE GOLD RUSH NHP - SEATTLE UNIT
0
LAKE ROOSEVELT NRA
0
LAVA BEDS NM
0
MANZANAR NHS
0
MUIR WOODS NM
0
NEZ PERCE NHP
0
NP OF AMERICAN SAMOA
0
OREGON CAVES NM
0
PARASHANT NM
0
PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO
0
PU'UHONUA O HONAUNAU NP
0
PUUKOHOLA HEIAU NHS
0
SAN JUAN ISLAND NHP
0
U S S ARIZONA MEMORIAL
0
WAR IN THE PACIFIC NHP
0
WHISKEY TOWN NRA
0
RICHMOND NBP
1
UPPER DELAWARE SRR
1
FREDERICK DOUGLASS HOME
1
CHAMIZAL NATIONAL MEMORIAL
1
LITTLE BIGHORN BATTLEFIELD NM
1
SALINAS PUEBLO MISSIONS NM
1
BOSTON AFRICAN-AMERICAN NHS
2
STATUE OF LIBERTY NM
2
DEVILS TOWER NM
2
SAN ANTONIO MISSIONS NHP
2
WHITMAN MISSION NHS
2
BIG THICKET N PRES
3
BISCAYNE NP
3
HAWAII VOLCANOES NP
3
LASSEN VOLCANIC NP
3
SAINT-GAUDENS NHS
4
BRYCE CANYON NP
4
CHACO CULTURE NHP
4
CORONADO NMEM
4
SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME NHP
4
JAMES A GARFIELD NHS
5
CANYON DE CHELLY NM
5
BUFFALO NR
6
AMISTAD NRA
6
LITTLE RIVER CANYON NPRES
6
TUSKEGEE INSTITUTE NHS
6
VIRGIN ISLANDS NP
6
JOHNSTOWN FLOOD NMEM
7
FORT LARNED NHS
7
CARLSBAD CAVERNS NP
7
APPOMATTOX COURT HOUSE NHP
8
DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE NHP
8
HORSESHOE BEND NMP
8
AGATE FOSSIL BEDS NM
9
PEA RIDGE NMP
9
BENT'S OLD FORT NHS
9
CANYONLAND NP
9
DINOSAUR NM
9
ORGAN PIPE CACTUS NM
9
ZION NP
9
KENNESAW MOUNTAIN NBP
9
CANAVERAL NS
9
GRAND PORTAGE NM
10
SCOTTS BLUFF NM
10
DRY TORTUGAS NP
10
SAINT CROIX NSR
11
APOSTLE ISLANDS NL
12
HARRY S TRUMAN NHS
12
PRICE WILLIAM FOREST PARK
12
HOPEWELL CULTURE NHP
13
JEFFERSON NATL EXPANSION MEM NHS
13
CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER NRA
13
YOSEMITE NP
13
CUYAHOGA VALLEY NRA
14
GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER NM
14
NICODEMUS NHS
14
ULYSSES S GRANT NHS
14
ROCKYMOUNTAIN NP
14
KNIFE RIVER INDIAN VILLAGE NHS
15
TALLGRASS PRAIRIE NPRES
15
LAKE MEAD NRA
15
THEODORE ROOSEVELT NP
16
CUMBERLAND ISLAND NS
16
SAN JUAN NHS
16
BIG CYPRESS NPRES
16
BLUE RIDGE PKWY
16
CHANNEL ISLANDS
16
MOUNT RAINIER NP
16
MARTIN VAN BUREN NHS
17
LEWIS & CLARK NHT
17
FLORISSANT FOSSIL BEDS NM
18
PETROGLYPH NM
18
SEQUOIA AND KINGS CANYON NP
18
ARCHES NP
19
CAPITOL REEF NP
19
CHIRICAHUA NM
19
DE SOTO NMEM
20
KEWEENAW NHP
21
OZARK NSR
21
MESA VERDE NP
21
CHRISTIANSTED NHS
21
HOMESTEAD NM OF AMERICA
22
WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT NHS
22
FORT DAVIS NHS
22
PETERSBURG NB
23
CONGAREE SWAMP NM
23
EVERGLADES NP
24
NATCHEZ TRACE PKWY
24
NINETY SIX NHS
24
EFFIGY MOUNDS NM
25
BIG BEND NP
25
FORT UNION NM
25
LAKE MEREDITH NRA
25
JIMMY CARTER NHS
25
RUSSELL CAVE NM
25
VICKSBURG NMP
25
OLYMPIC NP
25
MINUTEMAN MISSILE NHS
26
VOYAGEURS NP
26
KLONDIKE GOLDRUSH NHP
27
BROWN V BOARD OF EDUCATION NHS
27
FORT STANWIX NM
28
FORT UNION TRADING POST NHS
28
LITTLE ROCK CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL NHS
28
YELLOWSTONE NP
28
CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NM
28
FORT CLATSOP NMEM
28
INDEPENDENCE NHP
29
CAPE HATTERAS
29
COWPENS NB
29
GEORGE ROGERS CLARK NHP
30
CHICKASAW NRA
30
KENAI FJORDS NP
32
LOWELL NHP
32
MOJAVE NPRES
32
WUPATKI NM
33
FORT SUMTER NM
33
ANDERSONVILLE NHS
33
BOSTON NHP
34
FREDERICKSBURG & SPOTSYLVANIA
BTLFD MEM NMP
34
MARSH-BILLINGS-ROCKEFELLER NHP
34
FORT DONELSON NMP
34
KINGS MOUNTAIN NMP
34
TIMPANOGOS CAVE NM
35
FORT PULASKI NM
35
FORT SMITH NHS
36
GRAND TETON NP
36
CAPE LOOKOUT NS
36
FORT VANCOUVER NHS
36
PERRY'S VICTORY & INTNL PEACE MEM
37
MAMMOTH CAVE NP
37
CANE RIVER CREOLE NHP
38
FORT NECESSITY NB
39
NATIONAL CAPITAL PARKS EAST
39
BANDELIER NM
40
PALO ALTO BATTLEFIELD NHS
40
ALLEGHENY PORTAGE RAILROAD NHS
41
FRIENDSHIP HILL NHS
41
WOLF TRAP NP FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS
41
GREAT SAND DUNES NM
41
GEORGE WASHINGTON MEM PKWY
42
GULF ISLANDS NS
43
CAPE COD NS
44
FORT LARAMIE NHS
44
TONTO NM
44
ABRAHAM LINCOLN BIRTHPLACE NHS
44
DELAWARE WATER GAP NRA
45
MOUNT RUSHMORE NMEM
45
COLORADO NM
45
LYNDON B. JOHNSON NHP
45
FORT CAROLINE NMEM
45
CASA GRANDE RUINS NM
46
SAGUARO NP
46
HERBERT HOOVER NHS
47
LINCOLN HOME NHS
47
GUADALUPE MOUNTAINS NP
47
GUILFORD COURTHOUSE NMP
47
ASSATEAGUE ISLAND NS
48
ISLE ROYALE NP
48
GLEN CANYON NRA
48
CUMBERLAND GAP NHP
48
NORTH CASCADES NP
48
COLONIAL NHP
49
PINNACLES NM
49
BIGHORN CANYON NRA
50
GRAND CANYON NP
50
FORT FREDERICA NM
50
NEW RIVER GORGE NR
52
INDIANA DUNES NL
52
WILSON'S CREEK NB
52
STEAMTOWN NHS
53
HOT SPRINGS NP
53
THE GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS NP
53
POINT REYES NS
54
CURECANTI NRA
55
CARL SANDBURG HOME NHS
55
WIND CAVE NP
58
JEAN LAFITTE NHP
59
GLACIER NP
62
PIPE SPRING NM
62
WHITE SANDS NM
62
REDWOOD NP
62
NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM, SANTA FE
63
TUMACACORI NHP
63
CHICKAMAUGA AND CHATTANOOGA NMP
63
GRANT-KOHRS RANCH NHS
66
JEWEL CAVE NM
67
BIG SOUTH FORK NRRA
67
FORT MCHENRY NM & HIST SHRINE
68
WESTERN ARCTIC NATIONAL PARKLANDS
69
PADRE ISLAND NS
71
PETRIFIED FOREST NP
72
ACADIA NP
74
SHENANDOAH NP
75
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY NHS
75
BADLANDS NP
76
OCMULGEE NM
78
CATOCTIN MOUNTAIN PARK
79
FORT SCOTT NHS
81
HAMPTON NHS
83
GLACIER BAY NP AND PRES
84
NATCHEZ NHT
84
HALEAKALA NP
84
STONES RIVER NB
87
PICTURED ROCKS NL
88
PISCATAWAY PARK
89
CAPULIN VOLCANO NM
89
SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS NRA
90
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR NHS
92
PIPESTONE NM
94
LINCOLN BOYHOOD NMEM
95
ADAMS NHP
97
GOLDEN SPIKE NHS
98
SHILOH NMP
98
WEIR FARM NHS
100
FIRST LADIES NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
100
ICE AGE NST
100
MISSISSIPPI NR&RA
100
NIOBRARA/MISSOURI NR
100
NORTH COUNTRY NT
100
SLEEPING BEAR DUNES NL
100
BLACK CANYON OF THE GUNNISON NP
100
GILA CLIFF DWELLINGS NM
100
NAVAJO NM
100
NEW ORLEANS JAZZ NHP
100
ANDREW JOHNSON NHS
100
APPALACHIAN NST
100
PACIFIC GREAT BASIN SO
100
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Appendix 4
RANGE OF TOTAL FACILITY OPERATIONS
AND FACILITY MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES
FISCAL YEAR 2003
PERCENTAGE FACILITY MAINTENANCE REPORTED (RANGE)
NO. OF PARK UNITS REPORTING IN RANGE
TOTAL FACILITY OPERATIONS EXPENDITURES
TOTAL FACILITY MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES
TOTAL FACILITY OPERATIONS AND FACILITY MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES
0
125
$85,099,815
$ 386
$ 85,100,201
1-20
79
$82,799,983
$ 10,306,889
$ 93,106,872
21-40
60
$56,700,053
$ 24,001,393
$ 80,701,446
41-60
42
$34,107,873
$ 32,373,615
$ 66,481,488
61-80
22
$ 9,906,116
$ 20,604,519
$ 30,510,635
81-99
18
$ 1,615,988
$ 23,462,561
$ 25,078,549
100
21
$ 0
$ 10,310,383
$ 10,310,383
TOTALS
367
$270,229,828
$121,059,746
$391,289,574
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Appendix 6
STATUS OF AUDIT REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations
Status
Action Required
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7
Resolved; not implemented.
No further response to the Office of Inspector General is required. The recommendations will be referred to the Department�s Focus Leader for Management Accountability and Audit Follow-up for tracking of implementation.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
PHOTOS COURTESY OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
COVER
VICKSBURG VISITOR CENTER, NATIONAL MILITARY PARK, http://www.nps.gov/vick/visctr/vc.htm
MABRY MILL, BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY,
http://www.nps.gov/blri/galry03b.htm
ZION NATIONAL PARK VISITOR CENTER, UTAH, http://www.nps.gov/dsc/b--what/b--5--za--zion.htm
GLACIER NATIONAL PARK PHOTO GALLERY
IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE:
GOING-TO-THE-SUN ROAD, PLOWING PHOTOS AND VIDEOS APPROXIMATELY 1 MILE BELOW LOGAN PASS, JUNE 21, 2002, http://www.nps.gov/glac/gallery/plow2002--621.htm
GOING-TO-THE-SUN ROAD, NEAR BIRD WOMAN FALLS OVERLOOK AND BIG BEND, MAY 3, 2001, http://www.nps.gov/glac/gallery/050301.htm
ROAD REPAIRS AT THE LOOP, NOVEMBER 3, 2000, http://www.nps.gov/glac/gallery/110300.htm
VIRGIN ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK BUSINESS PLAN
OCTOBER 2, 2001, http://www.nps.gov/viis/plan/plan/natlpark.pdf
A MARINE MECHANIC REPAIRS A VESSEL
A MAINTENANCE WORKER PERFORMING ROADSIDE VEGETATION REMOVAL
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
1 Appendix 1 is a list of the types of areas and facilities under NPS� jurisdiction. In this report we refer to these as park units.
2 See Appendix 3 for a listing of the percentages of facility operations and maintenance funds reported as facility maintenance by park unit for FY 2003 and Appendix 4 for the range of total facility operations and maintenance expenditures for FY 2003.
??
??
??
??
iv
27
PERCENT OF FACILITY OPERATIONS AND FACILITY MAINTENANCE FUNDS REPORTED AS FACILITY MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES BY PARK UNIT
FISCAL YEAR 2003