![](media/image1.png){width="1.25in" height="0.8465277777777778in"}

[]{.mark}

[]{.mark}

[]{.mark}

[]{.mark}

[]{.mark}

U.S. General Services Administration

Personal Property Asset Management Study

[[Findings and Recommendations]{.underline}]{.smallcaps}

[Initial Draft]{.smallcaps}

[February 1, 2005]{.smallcaps}

Table of Contents

[1. Executive Summary 1](#executive-summary)

[1.1 Introduction 1](#introduction)

[1.2 Summary of Key Findings 1](#summary-of-key-findings)

[1.3 Asset Management Recommendations
2](#asset-management-recommendations)

[1.4 Next Steps 3](#next-steps)

[2. Asset Management Recommendations
4](#asset-management-recommendations-1)

[2.1 Future State 4](#future-state)

[2.2 Core Recommendation - Comprehensive Asset Management System
10](#core-recommendation---comprehensive-asset-management-system)

[2.3 Complementary Recommendations 10](#complementary-recommendations)

[3. Asset Management Current State 18](#asset-management-current-state)

[3.1 High-Level Overview of Asset Management Current State
18](#high-level-overview-of-asset-management-current-state)

[3.2 Key Findings 23](#key-findings)

[4. Technology That Supports Comprehensive Asset Management
30](#technology-that-supports-comprehensive-asset-management)

[4.1 Introduction 30](#introduction-1)

[4.2 Systems that Support Asset Management
30](#systems-that-support-asset-management)

[4.3 Enabling Technology 32](#enabling-technology)

[4.4 Technical Asset Management Initiatives in the Public Sector
32](#technical-asset-management-initiatives-in-the-public-sector)

[Appendices 34](#__RefHeading___Toc95042341)

[1. Asset Management Study Methodology
34](#asset-management-study-methodology)

[1.1 Methodology Overview 34](#methodology-overview)

[1.2 Research Phase 34](#research-phase)

[1.3 Documentation Phase 37](#documentation-phase)

[2. Glossary Of Terms 38](#__RefHeading___Toc95042346)

[3. List of Acronyms 42](#list-of-acronyms)

[4. Document References 44](#document-references)

[5. Asset Management Team Members 47](#asset-management-team-members)

List of Tables

[Table 1 - Asset Management Recommendations
3](#__RefHeading___Toc95042350)

[Table 2 -- Asset Management Issue Analysis Summary
23](#__RefHeading___Toc95042351)

[Table 3 -- Contact Plan Participants 35](#__RefHeading___Toc95042352)

[Table 4 -- FAME Team Members 47](#__RefHeading___Toc95042353)

[Table 5 - BearingPoint Team Members 47](#__RefHeading___Toc95042354)

List of Figures

[Figure 1 - Future State Asset Management Business Processes and
Supporting Technology 4](#__RefHeading___Toc95042355)

[Figure 2 - Enabling Technology that Supports Integrated Business
Processes 8](#__RefHeading___Toc95042356)

[Figure 3 -- Asset Management Life Cycle Current State
18](#__RefHeading___Toc95042357)

[Figure 4 -- Current State: Acquisition Phase
18](#__RefHeading___Toc95042358)

[Figure 5 -- Current State: Use Phase 19](#__RefHeading___Toc95042359)

[Figure 6 -- Current State: Utilization & Donation Phase
20](#__RefHeading___Toc95042360)

[Figure 7 -- Current State: Sale Phase 21](#__RefHeading___Toc95042361)

[Figure 8 -- Current State: Abandonment and Destruction Phase
22](#__RefHeading___Toc95042362)

[Figure 9 -- Comprehensive Asset Management -- Technology
30](#__RefHeading___Toc95042363)

[Figure 10 -- Ishikawa Diagram Example 36](#__RefHeading___Toc95042364)

[Figure 11 -- Value and Prioritization Matrices
37](#__RefHeading___Toc95042365)

# Executive Summary

## Introduction

In 2003, the Federal Asset Sales team, under an e-government
Presidential Priority initiative, conducted a study on personal property
Utilization and Donation (U&D) and identified multiple recommendations
to improve the program. The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA)
Office of Governmentwide Policy (OGP) is responsible for implementing a
number of these recommendations. One of the breakthrough recommendations
identified was to conduct a study of the personal property asset
management life cycle to identify Government-wide areas of improvement.
As a result, OGP formed the Federal Asset Management Evaluation (FAME)
team to lead this initiative. The FAME team, supported by BearingPoint
(hereinafter referred to as "the team"), conducted in-depth research and
analysis of all phases of the asset management life cycle, including
Acquisition, Use, U&D, Sale, and Abandonment and Destruction. The team
interviewed representatives of private-sector companies, state
governments, asset management software vendors, technology providers,
and Federal agencies to capture industry best practices. The results of
this research are presented in this report.

Furthermore, this report offers business process and systems
recommendations for Federal agencies to conduct life cycle asset
management. In addition to these recommendations, the report includes an
overview of, the proposed future state of comprehensive asset management
and the technology available to support asset management, as well as an
appendix that consists of the following:

-   Asset Management Study Methodology (Appendix 1)

-   Glossary of Terms (Appendix 2)

-   List of Acronyms (Appendix 3)

-   Document References (Appendix 4)

-   Asset Management Team Members (Appendix 5)

This section provides an executive summary of the report that includes a
summary of key findings, asset management recommendations, and next
steps.

## Summary of Key Findings

During the research phase, the team identified personal property asset
management business challenges that confront Federal agencies. These
issues impact the program in the following areas: unneeded procurement,
maximizing asset utility, data handoff, maintenance and administration
costs, life cycle costs and consequences, and performance measurement.
These issues are summarized below and are further analyzed in Section
[3.2]{.mark}.

*Unneeded Procurement.* Federal agencies spend procurement dollars on
property that is not needed, and they do not emphasize excess as the
first source of supply.

*Maximizing Asset Utility.* Agency-owned property or property under
contractor control is not being used to its fullest extent during its
useful life, because data necessary to make informed re-utilization and
disposal decisions is not captured.

*Data Handoff.* Asset management data is not leveraged throughout all
phases of the property's useful life. For example, asset-specific data
critical for effective asset management is not systematically captured
at the acquisition stage. Also, the maintenance history for property is
not retained in an agency's asset management system (or supporting
system) and is, therefore, not made available during the U&D phase.

*Maintenance and Administration Costs.* Unnecessary property maintenance
and administration costs are incurred during all stages of the life
cycle, due to challenges in tracking warranty and maintenance costs and
in incurring warehousing and custody costs for assets that are not
re-utilized.

*Life Cycle Costs and Consequences.* The potentially negative affects of
owning the property at each stage of its life cycle are not considered
before the property is acquired. For example, costs of disposition of
certain hazardous assets are not consistently planned or applied.

*Performance Measurement.* Performance measurement processes throughout
the life cycle are not consistently defined and used by each agency to
measure the effectiveness of their asset management program.

## Asset Management Recommendations

Interviews held with research phase participants as well as research
conducted by the team revealed multiple opportunities for improvement
within the program. As a result, the team identified recommendations to
address program issues and devised two matrices to prioritize the
recommendations. The team evaluated and prioritized each recommendation
based on business criticality, operational benefit, financial benefit,
and ease of execution. Finally, the team consolidated these
recommendations under two categories-core and complementary
recommendations-as described in Table 1.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042350 .anchor}Table 1 - Asset Management
Recommendations

  ------------------------------------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- -----------
  Recommendation Description                                       Lead                 Document
                                                                   Agency               Reference

  Core Recommendation: Critical for achieving the                                       
  future state, a comprehensive asset management                                        
  program.                                                                              

  Federal agencies should implement a               Inter-agency              Section   
  software-based asset management system that       Working Group             2.2       
  effectively integrates with the agencies'                                             
  Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), financial,                                        
  and procurement systems and is seamlessly linked                                      
  with GSAXcess.                                                                        

  Complementary Recommendations: Support the core                                       
  recommendation and will assist agencies move                                          
  towards comprehensive asset management.                                               

  Develop comprehensive personal property asset     GSA OGP                   Section   
  management regulations and systems.                                         2.3.1     

  Identify a personal property executive at each    Office of                 Section   
  agency who is responsible for overseeing his/her  Management and            2.3.2     
  agency's comprehensive asset management program.  Budget (OMB)                        

  Integrate property data from the Federal agency's GSA Federal               Section   
  asset management system to GSAXcess.              Supply Service            2.3.3     
                                                    (FSS)                               

  Advertise available property in GSAXcess in a     GSA FSS                   Section   
  central repository that will allow Federal                                  2.3.4     
  agency's acquisition system to automatically                                          
  identify excess before comparable property is                                         
  purchased.                                                                            

  Identify Federal Supply Classes having no         GSA FSS                   Section   
  historical re-utilization value for direct                                  2.3.5     
  donation via State Agencies for Surplus Property.                                     

  Pursue sales and exchange sale proceed reform     GSA OGP                   Section   
  options.                                                                    2.3.6     

  Implement the following changes to the            GSA OGP                   Section   
  Non-Federal Recipient Report: enforce annual                                2.3.7     
  submission and differentiate special authority                                        
  transfers.                                                                            
  ------------------------------------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- -----------

## Next Steps

It is important that actions be taken immediately to implement the
proposed recommendations. The high-level steps that must take place are
listed below.

1.  GSA OGP, FAME, and other meeting participants review this report and
    its proposed recommendations.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  GSA OGP approves recommendations and identifies next steps.

2.  The team develops an implementation plan that identifies tasks and
    sub-tasks, task owners and stakeholders, and timelines for each
    approved recommendation.

3.  GSA OGP reviews implementation plan and identifies next steps for
    each recommendation with the lead agency.

# Asset Management Recommendations

## Future State

Comprehensive asset management will maximize the value of the
government's portfolio of personal property assets. The team defines
comprehensive asset management as the business processes, supporting
systems, and enabling technologies that are required to accomplish the
following:

-   Procure assets strategically

-   Track and manage assets throughout their useful lives

-   Dispose of assets appropriately and efficiently based on acquisition
    and use phase information and data

The proposed future state of comprehensive asset management will foster
the re-use of excess property. It will provide asset visibility
throughout its useful life and will improve asset usage and disposition
decision-making through better data capture. Furthermore, it will drive
efficiency in the disposition of assets once they are no longer needed
by the acquiring program.

### Business Processes

As seen in Figure 1, asset management consists of three high-level
business processes: the acquisition of an asset, the use of an asset
during its life, and the disposition of an excess asset. Importantly, in
the future state, these three business processes should be integrated,
and they should include inputs and outputs from other systems and
processes, as well.

![](media/image3.png){width="6.492361111111111in"
height="3.6979166666666665in"}

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042355 .anchor}Figure 1 - Future State Asset
Management Business Processes and Supporting Technology

2.1.1.1 Acquisition

Initially, an office within a Federal agency with a property requirement
to be fulfilled identifies the need for an asset. For capitalized assets
(i.e., an asset whose value is equal to or exceeds the agency's
capitalization threshold and, therefore, needs to be accounted for
during its lifetime), agency property-using staff, logistics staff, and
procurement staff should work collaboratively to []{.mark}further define
the need and plan the acquisition of the asset. The collaboration should
include the determination of the following:

-   Type of asset to be procured

-   Alternative asset types to be considered

-   Any necessary components or services that will be needed to set up
    the asset

-   Any budgetary or legal constraints

-   Costs related to maintenance and disposal for the asset

-   Training requirements for property users

-   Warranty and maintenance schedules for the asset

-   Whether there are any special shipping, receiving, and storage
    issues or any delivery circumstances (e.g., are the building's
    doorways large enough to accommodate a large piece of equipment?)

-   Whether there are any environmental, hazardous waste, or other
    issues related to the use and disposition of the asset

The procurement staff will use the data and asset-specific information
to acquire the asset.

Clearly, there are other agency systems that need to be integrated with
the agency's procurement system.[^1] The agency's financial system will
need to record when the asset is acquired and will need to generate the
relevant financial transactions, such as paying an invoice for the asset
and establishing its depreciation schedule. The agency's procurement
system should be integrated with GSAXcess so that the property-using
staff and procurement staff can easily determine whether there is excess
property to meet the program's identified need.

Insertion Stage

At the insertion stage, the agency receives the asset from a supplier,
and it is inserted into use by the agency's appropriate program office.
Previously, during the acquisition process, a skeleton asset record was
created in the agency's procurement system. At this stage, once the
asset is received by the agency, the original asset record is updated in
the agency's asset management system to capture the information needed
to manage the asset throughout its lifetime. Depending on the type of
asset procured, the following information may be necessary:

-   Manufacturer

-   Model number

-   Serial number or other identifier (such as a Vehicle Identification
    Number)

-   Picture

-   Acquisition cost

-   Estimated useful life

-   Warranty information

-   Maintenance schedule

-   Condition of asset

-   Location

-   Custody assignment

Capturing data electronically sets the stage for strong asset management
during the useful life of the asset.

2.1.1.2 Use

During this process, the asset's records are updated to capture relevant
asset activity. For example, maintenance records should be updated to
reflect repairs, calibration, or other maintenance activities. Users
should be able to easily check to see if an asset is under warranty in
order to avoid unnecessary repair costs. Further, it should be easy for
users to initiate repairs under warranty. Property managers, or other
appropriate personnel, should initiate inventory audits, so that the
agency can determine whether the asset exists and whether it is being
used. Any such activity should be reflected in the agency's property
management system.

Similar to the acquisition process, the systems that support this
process need to be integrated. For example, the financial system will
need to pay for maintenance, and it should calculate depreciation only
for assets that are in use and have not been donated, sold, or
destroyed.

Retirement Stage

Once the acquiring program no longer needs an asset, the asset
management system should support intra-agency screening to determine
whether other programs within that agency could use that asset. If the
agency was granted legislatively created "special authority" to transfer
un-needed assets to a non-Federal recipient, such transfers take place
at this stage. The asset management system plays two roles during the
retirement stage. First, it provides asset usage information so that
recipients, whether they are within the agency or through special
authorities, have the asset-specific data necessary to make an informed
decision to obtain the asset. Second, the asset management system needs
to capture the disposition results so that custody, ownership, and
financial records can be updated as appropriate.

2.1.1.3 Disposal

When the acquiring agency no longer has a use for the asset - and it has
not been transferred within the agency or via special authority - the
asset is considered "excess" and transitions to the U&D process.
Relevant asset usage information, such as location, condition, and
maintenance records, should be seamlessly transferred into GSAXcess so
that other Federal agencies can screen the asset for re-utilization. If
there are no Federal agencies that can utilize the asset, it will be
available for state and local governments and nonprofit organizations
through the donation process. That same asset-specific data that allows
Federal agencies to make informed decisions regarding the re-utilization
would also benefit donation recipients.

Improved asset management processes, where agencies learn from previous
activity, can drive efficiencies in the U&D program. For example, if
there are asset classes or Federal Supply Classes (FSCs) that are rarely
(if ever) re-utilized, those assets should be able to bypass the
utilization process and be sold or donated via the State Agencies for
Surplus Property. The agencies' cost to warehouse the asset and to
administer the utilization program would be eliminated.

Again, the systems that support these processes need to be integrated.
For example, GSAXcess should be integrated with the agency's asset
management system so that the agency knows when the asset has been
re-utilized or donated and that its custody responsibilities are over.
In an asset sale scenario, the agency will have to process the financial
transactions, including the recovery of its direct costs for the sale.
The financial records of the agency would then need to be updated to
indicate that the agency no longer owns the asset.

As noted throughout this section of the document, integration of systems
that support the business processes is critical. An agency's procurement
system needs to integrate with both the asset management system and the
agency's ERP financial management system. GSAXcess is a critical
integration link, as well, in order to facilitate the usage of excess as
the first source of supply. The asset management system will need to be
updated on a real-time basis to reflect the various asset management
tasks as they occur. Also, the asset management system needs to
seamlessly transfer pertinent asset information into GSAXcess to drive
efficiencies in the U&D programs and to provide potential buyers with
full information so they can purchase with confidence.

Clearly, GSAXcess is a federalized shared service model where GSA
performs a number of U&D tasks on behalf of Federal agencies. Further,
asset management could operate under a shared service model, similar to
the OMB e-Government Financial Management Line of Business initiative.

### Supporting Technology for Comprehensive Asset Management

As depicted in Figure 2, technology, including Radio Frequency
Identification (RFID), Unique Identification (UID), and bar codes and
readers, support integrated business processes when based on Electronic
Data Interchange (EDI) and Extensible Markup Language (XML).

![](media/image4.png){width="6.492361111111111in"
height="3.8131944444444446in"}

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042356 .anchor}Figure 2 - Enabling Technology
that Supports Integrated Business Processes

Acquisition Phase

At acquisition, agencies should obtain property either through eCatalogs
or through electronic transactions with suppliers. These transactions
would be based on ANSI-12 EDI or XML standards, which enable the
automated transfer of purchasing and receiving information between
sellers and buyers. This asset-specific information would flow into the
agency's ERP system, which may include integrated inventory management,
fixed asset management, financial management, and acquisition/receiving
modules. The record for a specific asset is created in the procurement
system at the point that the supplier ships the asset to the agency.

The shipment information is captured by the agency, either through RFID
or bar code labels, and can identify the specific agency program or
warehouse location where the equipment is to be delivered. RFID and bar
code data should be automatically fed into the asset management system,
setting the stage for asset management during the asset's useful life.

Use Phase

RFID and bar codes can also be leveraged during the use phase of the
life cycle in order to conduct audits of agency assets and assess
whether the assets are being utilized or whether they can be classified
as excess. This technology is much quicker than manual processes, and it
helps to minimize human error. While bar codes may not be optimal for
all types of assets, the efficiency and data capture capabilities make
them attractive for many asset types. RFID technology will become
increasingly accepted to track assets during their useful lives, both as
the cost of the application deceases (as standards become mainstreamed)
and as interfaces between suppliers and customers become seamless.

The following are critical success factors for comprehensive asset
management:

-   ***Accelerate the migration from paper to EDI/XML procurement
    transactions.*** The ability to electronically capture critical
    asset data at the acquisition stage is the basis for integrated
    asset management. The advent of EDI transactions, which rely on
    ANSI-12 standards that govern purchase orders and shipment
    documents, allows for the automated population of asset management
    systems. XML standards are also used to standardize communication
    between supplier and agency systems.

-   ***Improve the acceptance and use of eCatalogs.*** The adoption of
    this practice helps to standardize the acquisition stage of the
    asset management life cycle, since the data captured would be
    uniform across agencies. Maximizing the use of eCatalogs is an
    important early step in adopting a unified taxonomy for Federal
    personal property.

-   ***Facilitate data capture at the asset receiving stage using RFID
    and bar codes.*** This factor, which complements the first factor,
    drives the efficiency by which an agency can conduct asset
    management. The critical data elements necessary to populate an
    asset management system can be contained and captured through RFID
    or bar codes. Populating asset management systems with
    asset-specific data through bar code readers and RFID transmissions
    would eliminate the inherently time-consuming and error-prone manual
    entry of asset information at the beginning of an asset's life
    cycle.

-   ***Standardize data elements and adopt best practices related to
    comprehensive asset management.*** Federal agencies should
    standardize the data elements needed to conduct asset management in
    order to facilitate the disposition process through GSAXcess.
    Agencies also need to identify the asset management best practices
    that are relevant to their personal property needs and adopt those
    practices that will support integrated and comprehensive asset
    management processes.

-   ***Integrate agencies' asset management and procurement systems with
    GSAXcess.*** As noted throughout this section, the integration of
    supporting systems is essential in order to conduct seamless and
    life cycle asset management. Such systems include an agency's
    procurement, ERP, financial, and asset management systems. The
    procurement and asset management systems should tie into GSAXcess,
    as well, in order to support the use of excess as the first source
    of supply and to improve the data flowing into GSAXcess so that
    potential recipients are better informed. This should result in
    higher re-utilization rates, thus avoiding unnecessary procurements.

In conclusion, a software-based asset management system is essential for
agencies to conduct life cycle asset management. The acquisition, use,
and disposal business processes need to be supported by enabling
technology, such as bar codes and RFID, in order to automate the
business processes throughout the life cycle. Asset-specific data should
be captured at the acquisition stage, and that data should be used to
plan and manage the entire asset life cycle to improve decision-making
at each stage. Some Federal agencies are aware of comprehensive asset
management and have implemented certain elements of this future state.
The future state provides a comprehensive overview of life cycle asset
management and forms the basis of the team's core recommendation
described below.

## Core Recommendation - Comprehensive Asset Management System

The future state described above should be the model for effective life
cycle asset management. This vision forms the team's core recommendation
for Federal asset management: **Federal agencies should implement a
software-based asset management system that consolidates existing asset
management legacy systems, and effectively integrates with an agency's
ERP, financial, and procurement systems and is linked to GSAXcess.** The
asset management system should support the high-level requirements
addressed in Sections 2.1 and 4.2.1. Agencies should also utilize the
technology and data standards that support the capture of critical,
asset-specific data at the procurement stage, that enable the asset to
be tracked and managed during its useful life, and that generate the
information necessary to make informed disposition decisions.

## Complementary Recommendations

Recommendations that support the core recommendation and will assist
Federal agencies move toward comprehensive asset management are
addressed in this section.

### Develop Asset Management Regulations [^2]

*Description.* Draft and adopt a set of comprehensive personal property
asset management regulations that promotes complete visibility of asset
management data across the life cycle, incorporates best practices from
both a technical and a business process perspective, and includes the
adoption of consensus standards. The Federal Management Regulations must
be revised to include detailed regulations on the acquisition and use
processes, as well as comprehensive business processes for the entire
life cycle. These regulations and business processes include, but are
not limited to, the following:

-   Conducting a cost analysis for assets slated for A&D to determine
    whether the cost to store and maintain the property exceeds its
    projected value from a sale or U&D perspective

-   Tracking Government-furnished equipment and property under a
    contractor's control

-   Capturing property information from the manufacturers at the time of
    acquisition

-   Capturing acquisition data from all sources including, but not
    limited to, purchase orders, Government credit cards, intra- and
    inter-agency transfers, loans, and acquisition by forfeiture

*Rationale.* Detailed regulations governing asset management only exist
for the disposal stage, with limited regulations for the acquisition
stage. There are essentially no regulations for the use stage. Where
regulations are lacking, agencies have developed procedures that are not
uniform throughout the entire Federal Government. Regulations can also
be subject to misinterpretation and abuse if they lack adequate details.
One such regulation relates to the abandonment and destruction stage.
Agencies often go straight to the A&D stage without going through U&D
first simply because it is easier to abandon or destroy property than to
report it as excess and maintain the property in the meantime. There are
no explicit regulations requiring agencies to first conduct a cost
analysis of the property's value versus its maintenance and storage
costs and then to use the resulting figures to make a determination to
abandon or destroy the property.

In conjunction with the lack of regulations governing the entire asset
management life cycle, there is an absence of regulations governing the
collection of necessary data throughout various stages of the life
cycle. This results in some agencies not tracking and maintaining data
critical for comprehensive asset management, such as data on
Government-furnished equipment and property under a contractor's
control, data from manufacturers, and acquisition data from all sources.
Due to inadequate and/or inaccurate data, it is difficult for agencies
to track the location and condition of most property and to make
informed decisions throughout the life cycle.

*Benefits.* A set of comprehensive personal property asset management
regulations can promote complete visibility of all assets across the
life cycle. Furthermore, uniformity among all agencies in managing
property is established when there is a set of clearly defined
regulations and best practices.

Other benefits include the following:

-   Eliminating wasteful abandonment or destruction of property that
    still has significant value

-   Leveraging asset-specific data from the use phase to forecast
    various attributes of the property so that financially sound
    decisions can be made at the acquisition and disposition stages

### Identify a Personal Property Executive

*Description.* Identify a personal property executive at each agency who
is dedicated to overseeing the agency's comprehensive asset management
program. The personal property executive will be responsible for the
following:

-   Ensuring that property management regulations[^3] are carried out to
    the highest level.

-   Promoting communication between Federal agencies on personal
    property issues and best practices.

-   Implementing asset management best practices appropriate for the
    personal property executive's agency.

-   Establishing performance benchmarks and metrics for each phase of
    the life cycle by using resources such as the American Society for
    Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards and the Government
    Accountability Office (GAO) Government Auditing Standards (The
    Yellow Book). Strong asset management requires accountability from
    both operational and management staff; therefore, benchmarks and
    metrics must extend to these staff members' performance ratings.

-   Implementing a professional-level training program for both personal
    property managers and program managers. Specific training curriculum
    should be at the discretion of the personal property executive, and,
    again, resources such as the ASTM Standards should be leveraged to
    develop the training curriculum. ASTM has developed a curriculum of
    courses, training, and experience to achieve certain levels of
    professional certification. This curriculum can be applied by the
    personal property executive to his/her agency as suited, to meet the
    needs of their own property management objectives.

-   Identifying opportunities to use a shared services model for asset
    management processes. A shared services model already exists in
    Federal property management: GSAXcess is a shared services model for
    the disposal of excess property. GSA and agencies should explore
    whether comprehensive asset management is appropriate for a shared
    services model, similar to GSA's Financial Management Line of
    Business initiative.

-   Implementing innovative ideas, such as inventory by exception[^4] or
    statistical averaging, designed to improve the personal property
    executive's asset management program.

*Rationale.* In most cases, the number of personnel responsible for
asset management at each agency is insufficient[^5], and those personnel
may not be responsible for property management on a full-time basis.
Furthermore, agencies lack a focal point for property management
oversight and accountability. There would be benefit in naming an
executive who would be responsible for overseeing all personal property
management on a full-time basis. The other issues that can be resolved
through the responsibilities of the personal property executive are:

-   Lack of communication among agencies to share ideas on best
    practices and property issues resolution.

-   Lack of leadership to oversee the successful implementation of best
    practices for a comprehensive asset management program.

-   Lack of measurements to assess performance of each phase of the life
    cycle. Furthermore, there is no performance benchmark to use for
    comparison.

-   Lack of training among property and program managers in order to
    effectively manage and carry out the best practices for each phase
    of the life cycle.

-   Lack of shared services among agencies such that the knowledge
    agencies have of certain types of property is leveraged among all
    other agencies to ease the management of their own property through
    certain processes, such as the acquisition and disposal processes.

*Benefits.* Assigning an individual who is accountable for implementing
and enforcing regulations and best practices ensures the continued
success of an agency's asset management program. The benefits of having
a personal property executive at each agency carry out the
responsibilities outlined in this recommendation include the following:

-   Sharing ideas between agencies on best practices and solutions to
    property management problems.

-   Evaluating the effectiveness of each stage of the asset management
    life cycle using performance metrics and identifying areas for
    improvement. In order to evaluate and monitor the success of asset
    management, performance benchmarks need to be established so that
    there is an established baseline performance level for performance
    comparisons. The baseline measure can provide quantitative and
    qualitative levels of performance analysis.

-   Keeping personal property managers and program managers current with
    best practices in property management through a professional-level
    training program.

-   Acquiring and disposing of property in an appropriate and efficient
    manner by leveraging the expertise gained by those agencies that
    have significant experience in managing such property.

### Integrate Disposal Data from Asset Management System to GSAXcess

*Description.* Complete asset visibility depends on a seamless flow of
data through each phase of the life cycle. When an asset is no longer
needed by the acquiring agency, comprehensive asset information must be
automatically transferred from asset management systems to GSAXcess.
Critical elements of this recommendation include the following:

-   Developing a standardized taxonomy for all asset information that
    flows to GSAXcess.[^6] The standardized taxonomy could follow
    existing guidelines such as the United Nations Standard Product and
    Services Classification.

-   Determining whether agencies must either conform to the new
    standards and update their asset management systems appropriately or
    if they should be required to publish their standardized taxonomy,
    allowing GSAXcess to translate that data before insertion.

-   Integrating agency systems with GSAXcess to allow for the seamless
    transfer of data.

-   Enhancing GSAXcess to require users to follow the guidelines of the
    new taxonomy when adding new assets through the GSAXcess user
    interface.

*Rationale.* Standardized naming convention for the various data
elements of an asset has been a well-known problem for Federal agencies
and, unfortunately, little has been done to address it. The lack of a
consistent naming taxonomy has made it difficult to search for excess as
the first source of supply. Furthermore, inadequate property
descriptions are commonly inserted into GSAXcess.[^7]

Two methods to load excess property information into GSAXcess are
available to agencies-the user interface and batch file submission. The
user interface is an adequate option for agencies that report minimal
amounts of excess; however, this option is not feasible for agencies
that report a large amount of excess. To address this, some agencies
transfer their excess property by submitting it in a flat file to a
network directory. GSAXcess imports the flat file through a nightly
batch process. The required flat file is extremely complex and is
susceptible to failure. When these flat files do fail to import, the
agency and GSA administrators must work together to cleanse the file.

*Benefits.* The following immediate Government-wide benefits can be
achieved by implementing this recommendation:

-   Enable agencies to easily and accurately search for excess property.

-   Simplify the integration between asset management systems and
    GSAXcess by following industry standards, such as web services
    architecture, which promotes system-to-system communication.

-   Standardize asset information into a common taxonomy before it is
    inserted into GSAXcess.

-   Promote the sharing of asset information among Federal agencies.

-   Alleviate the tedious process of cleansing flat files and reduce the
    number of resources that support the process, as well as the number
    of data errors that may occur during the cleansing process.

-   Improve asset descriptions and data in GSAXcess.

### Advertise Disposal Data

*Description.* Approximately \$8.8 billion[^8] of excess property passes
through GSAXcess each year. This system contains valuable data and
functionality that should be made available to agencies' asset
management and procurement systems. Agencies' procurement systems should
be capable of accessing available property in GSAXcess, so logistics and
acquisition staff can easily identify excess property before new assets
are purchased. Furthermore, asset management systems must be able to
automatically update the retirement status of property disposed of in
GSAXcess.

*Rationale.* Excess property is made available to agencies through the
GSAXcess user interface. Today, GSAXcess is not capable of direct
communication with other systems, which prevents agencies' systems from
accessing disposal information in a real-time fashion. GSAXcess is only
capable of importing an agency's disposal data through a batch process.
Legacy systems, such as GSAXcess, that contain mission-critical data
useful to multiple Federal agencies must provide flexible and
customizable interfaces for accessing their functionality.

Quite often it is difficult for logistics or acquisition staff to
identify whether excess property meets a purchasing requirement.
Examples of problems these staff members experience include the
following:

-   Data elements in GSAXcess are not standardized, which complicates
    the process of identifying property in the system.

-   Training on GSAXcess is only available through agency's request at
    their expense. Without the necessary training, it is difficult for
    agencies to identify excess property in the system.

It is difficult for Federal agencies to manually update their asset
management systems with an asset's retirement status. An asset's
retirement status is important when it comes to comprehensive disposal
analysis. Also, when an asset is retired, that notification needs to be
reflected in the agency's financial system. Without some type of
automation or notification, these processes can be easily neglected.

*Benefits.* Implementing this recommendation will increase efficiency
and decrease unneeded procurement by simplifying the process to screen
excess property to prevent unnecessary purchases.

Considering the large reduction in the number of asset management
personnel over the last decade, it is important that technology is
leveraged to reduce manual business processes and minimize the risk of
manual data entry errors. Implementing this recommendation will provide
an efficient way for logistics and acquisition staff to identify excess
property. Moreover, program personnel will be relieved of updating the
asset management system with an asset's retirement status.

Giving the appropriate staff a simplified approach for excess
identification will promote the use of excess as the first source of
supply.

### Federal Supply Classes with No Historical Re-utilization Value[^9]

*Description.* Federal property is classified based on Federal Supply
Classes (FSCs) that identify categories of assets. Certain FSCs (for
example, office supplies[^10]) are rarely re-utilized through intra- or
inter-agency transfers or sales. Agencies are still required to report
these assets as excess and to warehouse and maintain them during the
utilization screening process. Agencies holding excess property under
FSCs that have no historical re-utilization value should be given the
option to bypass the formal utilization process and go directly to
donation via the State Agency for Surplus Property (SASP).

*Rationale.* Holding agencies experience significant warehousing and
administration costs when excess property does not efficiently move
through the disposal process. Furthermore, searching for property in
GSAXcess is a difficult process when large quantities of property exist
for a certain FSC that historically has not been re-utilized by other
agencies.

Benefits. If this recommendation is implemented, agencies will realize
benefits in the areas of efficiency, social value, and costs. Bypassing
the intra- and inter-agency utilization phase will expedite the disposal
process for assets with no historical re-utilization value. SASPs will
be given first priority for these types of assets, which will increase
the quantity of property available for state and local governments and
nonprofit organizations. This will be a considerable benefit for the
communities the SASPs represent. Cost benefits will be realized by
eliminating warehousing and custody expenses for non-re-utilized assets.

### Pursue Sales and Exchange/Sales Proceeds Reform Options 

*Description.* This recommendation includes (1) an assessment of the
benefits of allowing agencies to retain a larger portion of property
sales proceeds, (2) increasing the flexibility in the exchange/sale
authority, and (3) a continuous review of the prohibited list for
possible reinstatement into the exchange/sale program as the needs of
Federal agencies and state Governments change.

*Rationale.* Currently, agencies are not allowed to retain proceeds from
the sale of their excess property, except the portion that covers the
direct costs associated with preparing the property for sale. Allowing
agencies to retain sales proceeds would provide a strong incentive to
maximize sales proceeds and otherwise increase the efficiency of the
sales program. If agencies were allowed to retain full proceeds from the
sale, then the exchange/sale program would cease to exist.

Currently, if agencies wish to apply the exchange/sale authority, then
they can only exchange their property for the same type and number of
property in return. If agencies sell the property under the
exchange/sale authority, they can only apply the sales proceeds toward
the purchase of the same type and number of property. The proposed
recommendation would allow, for example, agencies to sell 10 vehicles
and use the proceeds to purchase 5 new vehicles, or to use the sales
proceeds to purchase extended vehicle warranties. Even though the latter
choice would require new legislation this type of flexibility, rather
than the current one-to-one requirement, would improve the effectiveness
of the program.

The restrictive nature of the regulations surrounding the retention of
sales proceeds and the use of exchange/sale authority can cause these
processes to be de-emphasized which may not be the optimal asset
management course of action. Furthermore, during the acquisition
process, property that could have been acquired from exchange or
procured using proceeds from sales is currently being procured using new
dollars.

*Benefits.* If agencies can retain at least a portion of the proceeds
from the sale of their excess property, excluding the portion that
covers sale costs, then they will have an incentive to sell the property
in lieu of abandoning or destroying it after the U&D stage. Similarly,
agencies may be more inclined to use the exchange/sale authority if they
have more options to the types of property, proceeds, or service they
receive in return.

### Implement Changes to the Non-Federal Recipient Report and Its Process 

*Description.* The Non-Federal Recipient Report is an annual report
submitted by each agency to GSA that lists the personal property
furnished in any manner in that year to non-Federal recipients,
including special authority transfers. The report, which is required by
Congress, identifies how much property is donated through various means,
such as grants and contracts. The Non-Federal Recipient Report is sent
to GSA OGP and must contain the following:

-   Names of the non-Federal recipients

-   Status of the recipients (such as contractor, cooperative, or
    project grantee)

-   Total original acquisition cost of property furnished to each
    recipient by FSC group

GSA submits a summary of these Non-Federal Recipient Reports to
Congress, as requested.

The team's recommended change to the Non-Federal Recipient Report
process is to hold the personal property executive accountable for
submitting her/his agency's report to GSA on an annual basis.
Furthermore, the team recommends that the format of the report be
changed in order to differentiate the special authority transfers from
other donations in the report.

*Rationale.* Even though the regulations specify that the Non-Federal
Recipient Reports be submitted annually to GSA, this requirement is not
enforced by each agency, and, therefore, not all agencies submit every
year. Furthermore, all donations are currently reported in the
Non-Federal Recipient Report, including special authorities. However,
the donations are all listed together and special authority transfers
are not differentiated from the other donations. Since special authority
transfers make up a significant part of the disposal of some agencies'
personal property, it is important to be able to account for these types
of transfers.

*Benefits.* Both the enforcement of annual submission along with the
indication of special authority transfers on the report would contribute
to the vision of total asset visibility. This second change would also
provide an important first step in evaluating the effectiveness of
special authority programs. Moreover, the data collected on the
Non-Federal Recipient Report can be leveraged later for reviewing and
improving the donation program.

# Asset Management Current State 

## High-Level Overview of Asset Management Current State

The asset management life cycle, as depicted in Figure 3, consists of
five phases: acquisition, use, utilization and donation, sale, and
abandonment and destruction. Common business practices that occur in
these five phases are covered at a high level in this section.

![](media/image5.png)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042357 .anchor}Figure 3 -- Asset Management Life
Cycle Current State

### Acquisition 

Figure 4 identifies the high-level processes that occur during the
acquisition phase.

![](media/image6.png)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042358 .anchor}Figure 4 -- Current State:
Acquisition Phase

The asset management life cycle begins with the identification of a need
within an agency. Before acquiring new property, all agencies must, to
the maximum extent practicable, use existing agency property or obtain
excess property from other Federal agencies. This practice maximizes the
return on Government dollars spent and minimizes expenditures for new
procurement.

The following criteria must be met when evaluating the use of excess
property:

-   There must be an authorized requirement.

-   The cost of acquiring and maintaining the excess property does not
    exceed the cost of purchasing and maintaining new material.

-   The sources of spare parts or repair/maintenance services to support
    the property are readily accessible.

-   The supply of excess parts acquired must not exceed the life
    expectancy of the equipment supported.

-   The excess property will fulfill the required need with reasonable
    certainty without sacrificing mission or schedule.

-   The agency must not acquire excess property with the intent to sell
    or trade for other assets.

If procurement is necessary, GSA provides personal property that can
fulfill the requirements of the agency through programs such as GSA
Global Supply and GSA Advantage. If an agency determines that
alternative sources are more favorable, procurement from other sources
can be authorized. Therefore, in submitting requisitions for similar
items obtainable from either GSA sources or from other sources, agencies
shall use the lowest cost source that will serve the functional end-use
purpose.

Each agency's procurement staff collaborates with the program and
logistics staff to plan the procurement. To obtain maximum benefit from
the Government funds available for procurement of property, each agency
shall:

-   Ensure that property currently on hand is being utilized to its
    fullest extent prior to procurement

-   Procure the minimum quantity and quality of property that is
    required to support the mission of the agency and to satisfy the
    function for which the property is required

-   Limit procurement of different varieties, types, sizes, colors, etc.
    of required items to those essential to satisfy the intended purpose

### Use 

Figure 5 identifies the high-level processes that occur during the use
phase.

![](media/image7.png)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042359 .anchor}Figure 5 -- Current State: Use
Phase

Once the property is in the agency's custody, the agency must do the
following:

-   Establish and maintain a system for property accountability

-   Protect the property against hazards such as fire and theft

-   Perform the care and handling of the property

-   Maintain appropriate inventory levels

-   Monitor the property to assure maximum use and develop and maintain
    a system to prevent and detect nonuse, improper use, and
    unauthorized disposal or destruction

-   Enforce agency policy for lost, damaged, and destroyed (LDD)
    property using agency-developed performance measures

-   Offer the property for use elsewhere within the agency when it is no
    longer needed for the activity for which it was first acquired

If the property is not needed by any activity within the agency, then,
under provisions of a special authority, an agency may release the
property to an outside activity and thereby bypass the U&D process.
Eligible recipients contact agencies to determine availability of
property. The agency then transfers available property directly to the
recipient. The agency and recipient must complete the appropriate
internal or program-specific documentation to record the transfer. All
special authority transfers and other non-Federal transfers should be
reported to GSA annually in the Non-Federal Recipient Report.

Agencies should have a system to keep track of warranty information and
use warranties to the fullest extent practicable when property is in
need of routine maintenance or repair. Maintenance and repair
information, regardless of the warranty status, should be maintained as
a quality history file for use throughout the asset management life
cycle.

### Utilization and Donation 

Figure 6 identifies the high-level processes that occur during the U&D
phase.

![](media/image8.png)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042360 .anchor}Figure 6 -- Current State:
Utilization & Donation Phase

When the property is no longer needed by any activity within the agency,
the property enters the U&D stage. The agency declares the property
excess and reports it to GSA for possible transfer to Federal agencies
first and eligible non-Federal recipients second. Reporting excess
property promotes reuse by the Government to enable Federal agencies to
benefit from the continued use of property already paid for with
taxpayers' money, thus minimizing new procurement costs. Federal
agencies and entities authorized to participate in the donation program
may screen property concurrently. If GSA determines that there is no
Federal interest in the property, it becomes surplus property and is
available for donation to state and local public agencies and other
eligible non-Federal activities.

The Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 requires
that surplus property be distributed to eligible recipients by an SASP.
A SASP's responsibilities in the donation of surplus property are to:

-   Determine whether an entity seeking to obtain surplus property is
    eligible for donation as a public agency, nonprofit educational or
    public health institution, or program for older individuals

-   Distribute surplus property fairly, equitably, and promptly to
    eligible recipients in the state

-   Enforce compliance with the terms and conditions imposed on donated
    property

### Sale

Figure 7 identifies the high-level processes that occur during the sale
phase.

![](media/image9.png)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042361 .anchor}Figure 7 -- Current State: Sale
Phase

Surplus property not selected for donation is offered for sale to the
public in a competitive marketplace. The holding agency may conduct the
sale of its surplus property or have GSA or another executive agency
conduct the sale on behalf of the holding agency. The holding agency is
responsible for adjusting its financial records to reflect the final
disposition. Property may be sold to anyone of legal age, including
state and local governments, unless there is a compelling reason to
believe the person or entity should not purchase the property. Any
method of sale may be used provided the sale is publicly advertised and
the property is sold with full and open competition.

Methods of sale may include sealed bid sales, in which bid prices are
kept confidential until bid opening; spot bid sales, in which bids are
examined, and awards are made or bids rejected on the spot immediately
following the offering of the item; English auctions or open outcry
auctions, in which the bid amounts of different bidders are disclosed as
they are submitted, providing bidders the option to increase their bids
if they choose; or negotiated sales, in which the selling price is
arrived at between the seller and the buyer. The agency must allow for
an electronic or physical inspection of the property to be sold. The
length of the inspection period allowed depends upon whether the
inspection is done electronically or physically. Normally, the agency
should provide at least seven calendar days to ensure that potential
buyers have the opportunity to perform needed inspections.

The agency may retain that portion of the sales proceeds equal to the
direct costs and reasonably related indirect costs incurred in selling
the property. The agency may retain all sales proceeds only when:

-   The agency has statutory authority to do so.

-   The property was acquired with non-appropriated funds.

-   The property was in the custody of a contractor or subcontractor and
    the contract or subcontract provisions authorize the proceeds of
    sale to be credited to the price or cost of the contract or
    subcontract.

-   The agency sold property to obtain replacement property under the
    exchange/sale authority.

-   The agency sold property related to waste prevention and recycling
    programs.

Any sales proceeds that are not retained must be deposited as
miscellaneous receipts in the agency-specific General Fund of the U.S.
Treasury.

There are two sales reports that agencies must submit to GSA every year.
The first is a listing and description of all negotiated sales with an
estimated fair market value in excess of \$5,000. The second is a
summary of transactions conducted under the exchange/sale authority.

Agencies should use the exchange/sale authority to reduce the cost of
replacement property. If an agency has property that needs to be
replaced, they can exchange or sell that property and apply the exchange
allowance or sales proceeds to reduce the cost of replacement. Another
reason agencies use the exchange/sale authority is to avoid costs, such
as administrative and storage, that may be incurred when processing it
through the normal disposal process.

An agency may use the exchange/sale authority only if it meets all of
the following conditions:

-   The property exchanged or sold is similar to the property acquired.

-   The property exchanged or sold is not excess or surplus, and the
    agency has a continuing need for that type of property.

-   The number of items acquired must equal the number of items
    exchanged or sold.

-   The property exchanged or sold was not acquired for the principal
    purpose of exchange or sale.

-   The agency documents that the exchange allowance or sale proceeds
    will be applied to the acquisition of replacement property.

### Abandonment and Destruction

Figure 8 identifies the high-level processes that occur during the
abandonment and destruction phase.

![](media/image10.png)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042362 .anchor}Figure 8 -- Current State:
Abandonment and Destruction Phase

Property may be disposed of by abandonment or destruction without
reporting it to GSA when a written determination is made that the
property has no commercial value or the estimated cost of its continued
care and handling would exceed the estimated proceeds from its sale. The
agency must provide public notice of intent to abandon or destroy excess
property and include in the notice an offer to sell. The public notice
is not needed if the value of the property is so little that it is not
economical to even advertise its sale or if abandonment/destruction is
required for health, safety, or security reasons.

The following are restrictions and alternatives to the use of
abandonment/destruction procedures:

-   Property must not be abandoned or destroyed in a manner that is
    detrimental or dangerous to public health or safety.

-   If the agency becomes aware of an interest from an entity in
    purchasing the property, the agency must implement sales procedures
    in lieu of abandonment/destruction.

-   Agencies may donate excess property that has been determined
    appropriate for abandonment/destruction to a public body without
    going through GSA.

-   If the agency becomes aware that an eligible nonprofit organization
    that is not a public body has an interest in acquiring the property,
    the agency must contact GSA and implement donation procedures.

##  Key Findings

During the research phase, the team identified specific issues
surrounding the asset management program that impact various stages of
the life cycle. Causes were identified for each issue and were organized
into five categories: policies, people, skills, suppliers, and systems.
The issues and their associated causes are described in this section.

Table 2 summarizes the six issues and their associated causes by
category.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042351 .anchor}Table 2 -- Asset Management Issue
Analysis Summary

+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| Asset     |          |          |          |          |          |
| M         |          |          |          |          |          |
| anagement |          |          |          |          |          |
| Issues    |          |          |          |          |          |
+===========+==========+==========+==========+==========+==========+
| Issue     | Policies | People   | Skills   | S        | Systems  |
|           |          |          |          | uppliers |          |
+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| Unneeded  | Few      | New is   | No       | None     | Excess   |
| Pr        | inc      | better   | training |          | property |
| ocurement | entives; | than     | and      |          | is not   |
|           |          | used;    | k        |          | easily   |
|           | Use it   |          | nowledge |          | iden     |
|           | or lose  | No       | to check |          | tifiable |
|           | it       | access   | excess   |          | during   |
|           | budget;  | in       | first;   |          | acq      |
|           |          | system   |          |          | uisition |
|           | No       | to check | No       |          | process; |
|           | enf      | for      | training |          |          |
|           | orcement | excess   | to enter |          | Lack of  |
|           | to check |          | info     |          | info on  |
|           | excess   |          | during   |          | a        |
|           | first    |          | acq      |          | vailable |
|           |          |          | uisition |          | property |
+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| Utility   | No       | Lack of  | I        | None     | I        |
| Not       | cen      | r        | nability |          | nability |
| Maximized | tralized | esources | to       |          | to track |
| During    | policy   | to       | leverage |          | property |
| Use       | for use; | oversee  | data to  |          | during   |
|           |          | usage;   | make     |          | use;     |
|           | No       |          | informed |          |          |
|           | in       | Property | d        |          | Lack of  |
|           | centives | ma       | ecisions |          | data     |
|           | to       | nagement |          |          | during   |
|           | report   | not      |          |          | use      |
|           | as       | mission  |          |          | phase;   |
|           | excess;  | c        |          |          |          |
|           |          | ritical; |          |          | Unable   |
|           | "Out of  |          |          |          | to       |
|           | sight,   | No ratio |          |          | forecast |
|           | out of   | of       |          |          | and/or   |
|           | mind";   | e        |          |          | capture  |
|           |          | quipment |          |          | pr       |
|           | No good  | vs.      |          |          | operty's |
|           | approach | p        |          |          | useful   |
|           | to       | ersonnel |          |          | life     |
|           | inve     | deter    |          |          |          |
|           | ntorying | mination |          |          |          |
+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| Poor      | No       | In       | None     | Do not   | Co       |
| Handoff   | unified  | adequate |          | provide  | ntractor |
| of Data   | property | or       |          | useful   | managed  |
| in All    | voc      | in       |          | property | prop not |
| Phases    | abulary; | accurate |          | info;    | in       |
|           |          | property |          |          | agency   |
|           | No value | inf      |          | Do not   | systems; |
|           | p        | ormation |          | support  |          |
|           | erceived | entered  |          | u        | No       |
|           | in       | in       |          | niversal | int      |
|           | tracking | system   |          | property | erfaces/ |
|           | assets;  | --       |          | naming   | systems  |
|           |          | "garbage |          | con      | to       |
|           | Non      | in,      |          | ventions | support  |
|           | -Federal | garbage  |          |          | each     |
|           | R        | out"     |          |          | phase;   |
|           | ecipient |          |          |          |          |
|           | Report   |          |          |          | D        |
|           | does not |          |          |          | ifficult |
|           | indicate |          |          |          | to       |
|           | special  |          |          |          | access   |
|           | a        |          |          |          | data due |
|           | uthority |          |          |          | to       |
|           | and no   |          |          |          | multiple |
|           | co       |          |          |          | prop     |
|           | mpliance |          |          |          | mgmt     |
|           |          |          |          |          | systems; |
|           |          |          |          |          |          |
|           |          |          |          |          | Te       |
|           |          |          |          |          | chnology |
|           |          |          |          |          | not      |
|           |          |          |          |          | l        |
|           |          |          |          |          | everaged |
|           |          |          |          |          | for      |
|           |          |          |          |          | tracking |
|           |          |          |          |          | all      |
|           |          |          |          |          | phases   |
+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| Un        | No       | Insu     | Minimal  | None     | No       |
| necessary | enf      | fficient | commu    |          | ability  |
| Ma        | orcement | r        | nication |          | to       |
| intenance | of U&D   | esources | between  |          | assess   |
| and       | tim      | to       | acq      |          | property |
| Admin     | eframes; | monitor  | uisition |          | usage;   |
| istration |          | usage;   | &        |          |          |
| Costs     | No       |          | program  |          | Data not |
|           | co       | Upgrades | mgmt;    |          | a        |
|           | mparison | not      |          |          | vailable |
|           | between  | added in | Identi   |          | to       |
|           | refur    | fin      | fication |          | compare  |
|           | bishment | ancials; | of       |          | new cost |
|           | cost &   |          | excess   |          | vs.      |
|           | cost to  | Warranty | is       |          | refur    |
|           | buy new; | &        | r        |          | bishment |
|           |          | trade-in | eactive; |          | /        |
|           | Agencies | al       |          |          | transp   |
|           | don't    | lowances | P        |          | ortation |
|           | report   | not      | ersonnel |          | costs    |
|           | excess   | fully    | not      |          |          |
|           |          | u        | trained  |          |          |
|           |          | tilized; | for      |          |          |
|           |          |          | e        |          |          |
|           |          | Good     | fficient |          |          |
|           |          | prop     | life     |          |          |
|           |          | mgmt not | cycle    |          |          |
|           |          | mission  | property |          |          |
|           |          | critical | ma       |          |          |
|           |          |          | nagement |          |          |
+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| Life      | No       | No       | Hi       | None     | Lack of  |
| Cycle     | req      | e        | storical |          | hi       |
| Costs &   | uirement | fficient | dis      |          | storical |
| Con       | to       | pr       | position |          | property |
| sequences | capture  | ocessing | info not |          | data     |
| Not       | life     | of prop  | used for |          |          |
| C         | cycle    | to next  | d        |          |          |
| onsidered | costs    | phase;   | isposal; |          |          |
| at Each   |          |          |          |          |          |
| Stage     |          | E        | No       |          |          |
|           |          | xpertise | analysis |          |          |
|           |          | for      | to       |          |          |
|           |          | asset    | d        |          |          |
|           |          | types    | etermine |          |          |
|           |          | not      | if life  |          |          |
|           |          | shared   | cycle    |          |          |
|           |          | w/other  | costs    |          |          |
|           |          | a        | are      |          |          |
|           |          | gencies; | worth    |          |          |
|           |          |          | the      |          |          |
|           |          | H        | b        |          |          |
|           |          | azardous | enefits; |          |          |
|           |          | disposal |          |          |          |
|           |          | info not | R        |          |          |
|           |          | passed   | esources |          |          |
|           |          | down     | not      |          |          |
|           |          |          | trained  |          |          |
|           |          |          | to       |          |          |
|           |          |          | consider |          |          |
|           |          |          | life     |          |          |
|           |          |          | cycle    |          |          |
|           |          |          | costs    |          |          |
+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| Asset     | G        | Not all  | Agencies | None     | Adequate |
| M         | athering | agencies | do not   |          | data are |
| anagement | data to  | have a   | have     |          | not      |
| Pe        | evaluate | sy       | fully    |          | a        |
| rformance | is       | stematic | d        |          | vailable |
| Not       | cha      | method   | eveloped |          | to       |
| Measured  | llenging | of       | capa     |          | measure  |
|           | in a     | a        | bilities |          | common   |
|           | decen    | ssigning | to       |          | metrics  |
|           | tralized | custody  | measure  |          |          |
|           | agency;  | for      | per      |          |          |
|           |          | property | formance |          |          |
|           | Custody  |          |          |          |          |
|           | policy   |          |          |          |          |
|           | for      |          |          |          |          |
|           | property |          |          |          |          |
|           | not      |          |          |          |          |
|           | e        |          |          |          |          |
|           | nforced; |          |          |          |          |
|           |          |          |          |          |          |
|           | No       |          |          |          |          |
|           | highly   |          |          |          |          |
|           | d        |          |          |          |          |
|           | eveloped |          |          |          |          |
|           | per      |          |          |          |          |
|           | formance |          |          |          |          |
|           | metrics; |          |          |          |          |
|           |          |          |          |          |          |
|           | Value of |          |          |          |          |
|           | good     |          |          |          |          |
|           | asset    |          |          |          |          |
|           | mgmt     |          |          |          |          |
|           | per      |          |          |          |          |
|           | formance |          |          |          |          |
|           | not      |          |          |          |          |
|           | re       |          |          |          |          |
|           | cognized |          |          |          |          |
+-----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+

### Unneeded Procurement

Procurement dollars are spent on property that is not needed as well as
on a level of quality that may not be required. The causes of unneeded
procurement are described below.

*Policies*

-   There are few positive or negative incentives to procure wisely.

-   There is no consistent enforcement by each agency to check excess as
    the first source of supply.

-   There is a lack of rigorous capital expenditure oversight.

-   If agencies do not spend their entire allotted budget for the year,
    then they lose the remainder of their budget. This may also affect
    their budget for next year, as their budget may decrease.

*People*

-   It is human nature for people to prefer new property to used.

-   Personnel responsible for procurement may not have access in the
    appropriate system(s) to check for excess.

*Skills*

-   Procurement staff may lack the training and knowledge to check
    excess as the first source of supply.

-   Staff may lack the training necessary to enter adequate property
    information into the system at the time of acquisition.

*Systems*

-   Excess property is not easily identifiable during acquisition.

-   There may be a lack of information on the available intra-agency
    property.

### Utility Not Maximized During Use

Personal property is not being used to its fullest extent. The causes of
not maximizing utility are described below.

*Policies*

-   There is no centralized policy governing the use stage.

-   Property that is no longer used is not reported as excess due to the
    lack of incentives to do so.

-   Strong oversight is difficult for agencies with a decentralized
    asset management program.

-   No systematic usage assessment is made to detect whether a property
    is no longer needed and can be reported as excess.

*People*

-   The number of resources available to oversee usage is inadequate.

-   Property management is not viewed as a mission-critical activity for
    most agencies.

-   Absence of equipment-to-personnel ratio determination results in
    abundance of property.

*Skills*

-   Staff has received insufficient training in order to use historical
    data to make informed property usage decisions.

*Systems*

-   Ability to efficiently track property during use stage is not
    readily available in some agencies' systems.

-   Historical data are not always available in order to make informed
    decisions, such as the ability to forecast a property's useful life.

### Poor Handoff of Data in All Phases

Collected property data are not leveraged throughout all phases of the
property's useful life. The causes of poor handoff of data are described
below.

*Policies*

-   There is no standard taxonomy of asset information among agencies.

-   Agencies do not perceive value in tracking assets in each stage.

-   The Non-Federal Recipient Report does not indicate the special
    authority transfers and compliance is questionable.

*People*

-   Inadequate or inaccurate property information is entered in the
    system.

*Suppliers*

-   Suppliers may not always provide useful property information.

-   Suppliers do not support universal property naming conventions.

*Systems*

-   Data for government-furnished equipment or property in a
    contractor's control is stored in the contractor's systems and may
    not be readily available to the Government agency.

-   There is a lack of interfaces and/or systems to support each phase
    of the life cycle.

-   Multiple property management systems make it difficult to access
    required data.

-   Technology is not leveraged to track property across all phases.

### Unnecessary Maintenance and Administration Costs

Unnecessary property maintenance and administration costs are incurred
during all stages of the life cycle. The causes of unnecessary
maintenance and administration costs are described below.

*Policies*

-   U&D procedural timeframes are not enforced and there are no
    incentives for compliance.

-   Agencies may not report property as excess when it is no longer used
    because they may not know which property should be reported as
    excess, or they may have no incentives to do so.

-   Financial analysis to compare the refurbishment cost of a used
    property versus the cost to buy new property may not be conducted.

*People*

-   There are insufficient resources to monitor property usage.

-   Value of upgraded property may not be reflected in its financial
    record.

-   Warranties, rebates, and trade-in allowances are not fully utilized.

-   Efficient property management is not viewed as mission critical
    within agencies.

*Skills*

-   Minimal communication takes place among acquisition, logistics, and
    program management staff to make proper purchasing decisions.

-   Cost-reduction techniques, such as checking excess property as the
    first source of supply, are not enforced.

-   Personnel are inadequately trained for comprehensive asset
    management.

*Systems*

-   Systems lack the ability to assess property usage.

-   Historical data to compare the cost of buying new versus
    refurbishing, as well as the costs of moving the property, are not
    readily available.

### Life Cycle Costs and Consequences Not Considered at Each Stage

The potentially negative affects of owning the property at each stage of
its life cycle are not considered at the time of acquisition. The causes
of life cycle costs and consequences are described below.

*Policies*

-   There are no requirements to capture life cycle costs.

*People*

-   There is a lack of efficient processing of property into the next
    phase of the life cycle.

-   Acquisition and disposal expertise gained for asset types is not
    shared with other agencies or program areas.

-   Personnel responsible for acquisition or logistics may not pass down
    important information, such as the disposal of hazardous property,
    to program areas.

*Skills*

-   Historical disposal information is not leveraged to improve the
    disposal process.

-   Minimal analysis is conducted to determine whether the associated
    life cycle costs for property are worth the benefits it provides.

-   Resources are not trained to consider costs and consequences at each
    stage of the life cycle.

*Systems*

-   There is a lack of historical property data, including maintenance
    and warranty information, which can be used for the acquisition
    planning process.

### Asset Management Performance Not Measured

Performance measurement processes throughout the life cycle are not
consistently defined and used by each agency to measure the
effectiveness of their asset management program. The causes of asset
management performance not measured are described below.

*Policies*

-   It is challenging to gather all the necessary data to evaluate
    performance in a decentralized agency.

-   No policy is enforced that establishes custody for an agency's
    property, and, therefore, it can be difficult to determine who is
    responsible for the property during performance measurement.

-   Agencies do not have highly developed life cycle performance
    metrics, due in part to the lack of a standard performance
    benchmark.

-   Agencies do not recognize the full value of good asset management
    performance.

*People*

-   Not all agencies have a systematic method of assigning custody for
    property.

*Skills*

-   Agencies do not have fully developed capabilities to measure
    performance.

*Systems*

-   Adequate data are not available to measure common metrics.

#  {#section .unnumbered}

# Technology That Supports Comprehensive Asset Management

## Introduction

Systems and enabling technology are the backbone of an agency's
comprehensive asset management program. Systems that support asset
management, enabling technology to automate business processes, and
current technical asset management initiatives in the public sector are
described in this section.

## Systems that Support Asset Management

Based on the team's research, the following four systems play a role in
obtaining complete visibility of assets throughout their life cycle:

-   Asset Management System

-   ERP Modules (Acquisition, Financials)

-   Data Warehouse

-   GSAXcess (GSA's Disposal System)

Figure 9 identifies these systems and the flow of data among them.

![](media/image11.png){width="6.427083333333333in"
height="2.6041666666666665in"}

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042363 .anchor}Figure 9 -- Comprehensive Asset
Management -- Technology

### Asset Management System

The asset management system is the backbone of the program. There are a
number of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions available on the
market that offer a broad range of functionality to support an agency's
program. The team's research and meetings with leading solution vendors
identified certain important characteristics related to solution
flexibility, business process automation, and historical data.

####  {#section-1 .unnumbered}

Solution flexibility can be defined as how easily the system can conform
to an agency's program with only minor system configuration. A good
example of this is a data dictionary, which defines the required and
optional data elements of a personal property asset. The system must be
flexible and allow an agency to easily establish and maintain a data
dictionary that meets their mission requirements.

####  {#section-2 .unnumbered}

Business process automation is a critical element of an asset management
system and can significantly reduce manual or repetitive tasks executed
by property-using staff. Solution providers typically define business
process automation as workflow. A simple example of this may be a
notification to property-using staff that an asset's warranty period is
about to expire. Again, the system must be flexible and allow workflows
to be established with minimal modification to the system. Some COTS
solutions allow workflows to be defined through the user interface by an
advanced user, so that the system can more easily meet specific needs.

Data in the system contribute to the success of an agency's asset
management program. Without adequate data, it is difficult for agencies
to measure the effectiveness of their program. In addition to product
information, the system must be capable of updating and storing the
following information:

-   Maintenance: scheduled maintenance, work orders, and history

-   Warranty information

-   Asset transaction history including activities that occur during the
    use, U&D, sale, and A&D phases

-   Documents associated with an asset

-   Location, and custody point of contact

Having this information readily available will allow property-using
staff to easily conduct forecasting and trend analysis, as well as
identifying areas of improvement to their program, such as using
maintenance records to inform future purchasing decisions.

### ERP Modules: Acquisition & Financial Management Systems

In addition to the asset management system, the acquisition and
financial systems are key contributors to comprehensive asset
management. These systems are typically modules of an agency's ERP
package.

Unneeded procurement is a significant problem for most agencies' asset
management programs. While agencies are required to use excess property
as their first source of supply, it is often difficult for agencies to
easily screen excess assets. Procurement systems should be capable of
accessing GSAXcess data to identify whether similar property is
available before new property is purchased. This approach will decrease
the amount of time it takes to check for excess as well as enforce a
checkpoint before new property is purchased.

When excess property is not available and procurement is required,
agencies must leverage asset information in the procurement system and
share that information with the asset management system. For example, at
the time of procurement, the procurement system should create a skeleton
record and send it to the asset management system that contains detailed
product information directly from the supplier. When the agency receives
the asset, a trigger must be sent to the asset management system,
indicating the skeleton record is now an active asset. This approach
will significantly reduce data entry and improve the accuracy of asset
data.

To align with an agency's financial management system, costs and
depreciation associated with an asset will typically be stored in the
financial system. Considering that asset financial activities will take
place in both the acquisition and asset management system, it is
important that these two systems are fully integrated.

### Data Warehouse

A data warehouse is used for complex business reporting and typically
stores key information from appropriate systems across an agency's
technical infrastructure. Property-using staff and management must have
the ability to report on asset information that resides in the asset
management, financial, or procurement systems. The data warehouse will
allow these users to accomplish this task by creating ad hoc reports or
generating standard reports on asset data across these systems.

### GSAXcess

At the end of an asset's useful life within an agency, it is made
available to other Federal agencies and state and local governments
through GSA's Government-wide disposal system, GSAXcess. Data in
GSAXcess must be accessible not only through a user interface, but also
by an agency's asset management and procurement systems.

Today, users can check available excess property through GSAXcess's user
interface. When an asset is declared excess, agencies will either enter
asset information through GSAXcess or send a batch file from their asset
management system to a network directory accessible by GSAXcess.
Currently, data in GSAXcess cannot be accessed directly by an agency's
system. Furthermore, standardized asset taxonomy has not been
established in GSAXcess and has resulted in nonstandard classification
of asset data.

GSAXcess data and functionality should be made available to agencies'
systems through a web services architecture (or similar approach), which
allows for systems to find and communicate with each other. This vision
can be achieved by undertaking these high-level steps.

-   Develop standard asset taxonomy for all data elements stored in
    GSAXcess.

-   Give agencies the option of either modifying their systems to adhere
    to the taxonomy or publishing their taxonomy so their data can be
    translated to the GSAXcess taxonomy before it is imported into the
    system.

-   Modify GSAXcess to support system-to-system communication and
    publish available assets in a central repository accessible by
    Federal agencies' systems.

These steps would enable agencies' systems to seamlessly identify
available assets, retrieve disposal results, or transfer excess
property.

## Enabling Technology 

When integrated with an asset management or procurement system, enabling
technology, such as RFID and barcode scanners and readers, increases the
efficiency of many intensive processes in asset management. A detailed
overview of enabling technology can be found in Section 2.1.2.

## Technical Asset Management Initiatives in the Public Sector

Based on research phase discussions, the majority of Federal agencies
have not fully conformed to the model described in Section 4.2. Agencies
typically run legacy asset management systems, which lack the
functionality and flexibility to successfully manage assets across their
life cycles. Moreover, some agencies are using multiple systems,
otherwise known as stovepipe systems, to manage their assets, which
results in increased system maintenance costs and difficulty analyzing
programs across an agency.

Many agencies recognize these inefficiencies, and some have already
implemented solutions or are in the process of implementing solutions
that are consistent with the model. Below is an overview of some of
these initiatives across the Government.

-   Secret Service has integrated its asset management solution,
    Sunflower Assets, with their financial and acquisition ERP modules.

-   Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has implemented
    department-specific instances of Sunflower Assets and is moving
    toward one consolidated instance. HHS has an implementation plan
    similar to the future state model and will be moving towards it
    using a phased approach.

-   National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the
    process of consolidating its stovepipe asset management systems into
    a unified SAP asset management module.

-   Department of Homeland Security (DHS), DOD, and NASA have
    successfully executed RFID pilot programs similar to what was
    described in Section 2.1.2.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042341 .anchor}Appendices

# Asset Management Study Methodology

## Methodology Overview

The team partnered with the interagency working group Federal Asset
Management Evaluation (FAME) to conduct a comprehensive study on
personal property asset management. The study was divided into two
phases: the research phase and the documentation phase. Key tasks for
each phase were the following.

Research Phase

-   Project Scope Definition

-   Current State/Best Practice Review

-   Business Issue Analysis

-   Recommendation Identification and Vetting

Documentation Phase

-   Develop Draft Report

-   Incorporate Draft Feedback

## Research Phase

The team reviewed business processes and technology for all phases of
the asset management life cycle to identify areas of improvement for
Government-wide asset management. The team evaluated business processes
and supporting systems and technology in the acquisition, use,
utilization and donation, sale, and abandonment and destruction phases.
The four key tasks of the research phase are described below.

### Project Scope Definition

To kick off the project, the team worked closely with FAME to develop a
Gantt chart that identified the project's work breakdown structure. The
Gantt chart identified the specific tasks, timeframes, accountabilities,
and task interdependencies for the project. The Gantt chart set the
course for the project and was used to measure progress throughout the
research and documentation phases.

A contact plan was created to identify stakeholders who the team would
interview during the research phase. Table 3 provides a listing of every
participant in the contact plan.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042352 .anchor}Table 3 -- Contact Plan
Participants

+--------------------------------------+-------------------------------+
| GSA                                  | Other Federal Agencies        |
+======================================+===============================+
| -   Integrated Acquisition           | -   Department of Energy      |
|     Environment                      |     (DOE)                     |
|                                      |                               |
| -   Office of Governmentwide Policy  | -   NASA                      |
|                                      |                               |
| -   Personal Property Management     | -   DHS                       |
|     Division                         |                               |
|                                      | -   DOD                       |
| -   GSAXcess                         |                               |
|                                      | -   HHS                       |
+--------------------------------------+-------------------------------+
| National Organizations               | Private Sector                |
+--------------------------------------+-------------------------------+
| -   National Property Management     | -   Lockheed Martin           |
|     Association                      |                               |
|                                      | -   Sunflower                 |
| -   National Association of State    |                               |
|     Agencies for Surplus Property    | -   Major Credit Card Company |
|                                      |                               |
|                                      | -   Tririga                   |
|                                      |                               |
|                                      | -   Oracle                    |
|                                      |                               |
|                                      | -   SAP                       |
|                                      |                               |
|                                      | -   Peregrine                 |
+--------------------------------------+-------------------------------+

### Current State/Best Practice Review

Interviews, a critical element of the research phase, consisted of
reviews of participants' asset management programs. Key topics addressed
during these meetings included:

-   Current asset management procedures

-   Technology to support asset management business processes

-   Asset management best practices

-   Enhancement ideas for Government-wide asset management

The team also conducted its own research through publications, the
Internet, web-casts, and a number of other resources.

### Business Issue Analysis

Six asset management business issues were identified during the current
state/best practice review. These issues were broad personal property
business challenges that confront Federal agencies. To analyze these
important issues and identify their root causes, the team used a
well-known methodology, Ishikawa diagramming. Not only did this
methodology provide the team with a concise way to structure business
issues, but it also provided a context to develop the recommendations.
Figure 10 is an example of a completed Ishikawa diagram for one of the
identified asset management problems.

![](media/image12.png){width="6.486111111111111in"
height="3.751388888888889in"}

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042364 .anchor}Figure 10 -- Ishikawa Diagram
Example

The diagrams were reviewed with FAME to confirm the team understands of
the issues.

### Recommendation Identification and Vetting

Over 30 recommendations were identified during research phase
interviews, independent research, and analysis of business issues. To
refine this list, the team worked closely with FAME and eliminated
recommendations that were not feasible for implementation. Furthermore,
the team used a methodology, as depicted in Figure 11, to prioritize the
remaining recommendations.

![](media/image13.png){width="6.498611111111111in"
height="2.5097222222222224in"}

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042365 .anchor}Figure 11 -- Value and
Prioritization Matrices

The FAME team prioritized the recommendations using the two matrices in
Figure 11. Each recommendation was initially evaluated based on the
extent to which it provided operational benefits and how critical it was
for the business processes in asset management. Then, the FAME team
evaluated each recommendation based on the relative ease of executing
(or implementing) the recommendation and the amount of financial benefit
that the recommendation could generate. In assessing the results of the
prioritization effort, the recommendations fell into two categories,
core and complementary.

## Documentation Phase 

The findings and recommendations developed during the research phase
were presented to the FAME Team and to GSA OGP senior management for
their review and comment. Their feedback is reflected in this report. A
draft version of this report was submitted to OGP staff and the FAME
Team for feedback in January 2005. The reviewers had 15 days to comment
on the report. The final report was submitted to GSA OGP in February
2005.

# Glossary Of Terms

**Abandonment** -- disposing of an asset by leaving it where it lies
(particularly in a foreign country) and publicly renouncing the rights
to the asset

**Acquisition** -- the procurement or otherwise attainment of personal
property by a Federal agency

**American National Standards Institute** -- a private, non-profit
organization that administers and coordinates the U.S. voluntary
standardization and conformity assessment system

**Bar Code** -- an array of bars and spaces that are arranged in a
predetermined pattern following unambiguous rules to represent elements
of data and are used to identify a particular product number, person, or
location

**Capitalization Threshold** -- a dollar threshold over which an
organization (either public sector or private sector) treats assets as
"capital" assets, which are therefore recorded on the organization's
balance sheet and need to be depreciated over their useful lives. Assets
that do not meet this capitalization threshold are expensed in the year
in which they are purchased, as opposed to being depreciated

**Cooperative** -- organization or entity that has a cooperative
agreement with a Federal agency

**Cooperative Agreement** -- legal instrument reflecting a relationship
between a Federal agency and a non-Federal recipient, made in accordance
with the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977 (31 U.S.C.
6301-6308)

**Destruction** -- disposal of an asset by throwing it away, or
destroying it in some other means, such as incineration

**Disposal** -- the stage personal property goes through after being
declared excess. Property can be disposed of by the holding agency
through inter-agency transfer, donation, sale, abandonment, or
destruction

**Donation** -- this is the transfer of surplus property to non-Federal
governmental agencies and non-profit organizations

**Electronic Data Interchange** -- the exchange of dozens of
standardized transactions in which supply chain partners use EDI
translation software to convert data from their internal business
systems into industry-standardized formats. Supply chain partners then
exchange data directly or indirectly

**Enterprise Resource Planning** -- a broad set of an agencies'
operational activities supported by multi-module application software
that helps agencies' manage the important parts of their business,
including financials, human resources, product planning, parts
purchasing, maintaining inventories, interacting with suppliers,
providing customer service, and tracking orders.

**Excess Personal Property** -- personal property under the control of
any Federal agency that is no longer required for that agency's needs,
as determined by the agency head or designee

**Exchange** -- replace personal property by trade or trade-in with the
supplier of the replacement property

**Exchange/Sale** -- exchange or sell property and apply the exchange
allowance or proceeds of sale in whole or in part payment for the
acquisition of similar property

**Exchange/Sale Property** -- property not excess to the needs of the
holding agency but eligible for replacement, which is exchanged or sold
in order to apply the exchange allowance or proceeds of sale in whole or
part payment for replacement with a similar item

**Extensible Markup Language** -- a method allowing for the creation of
common information formats which allows for sharing of information on
the Internet, Intranet, etc. Any individual(s) or companies that wants
to share information in a consistent way can use XML

**Fair Market Value** -- best estimate of the gross sales proceeds if
the property were to be sold in a public sale

**Federal Supply Classification** -- A four digit number used to
identify a class of asset, where the first two numbers identify the
"group" of assets, and the second two numbers identify a "sub-group"

**Federal Supply Service** -- An office within GSA that facilitates
property acquisition and disposition

**Financial Management Line of Business** -- one of the lines of
business consolidation initiatives by GSA and OMB to expand electronic
Government. The objectives are to establish common solutions in a shared
service model implemented through target architecture and to increase
efficiency throughout the federal government, while reducing costs

**Flat File** -- an electronic file containing records that have no
structured relationship

**Grant** -- assistance award and a legal instrument that permits a
Federal agency to transfer money, property, services or other things of
value to a grantee when no substantial involvement is anticipated
between the agency and the recipient during the performance of the
contemplated activity

**GSA Advantage** -- online shopping and ordering system that provides
access to thousands of contractors and millions of services and products

**GSA Global Supply** -- supply system providing a vast selection of
supplies for government customers anywhere in the world

**Hazardous Personal Property** -- property that is deemed a hazardous
material, chemical substance or mixture, or hazardous waste under the
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA) (49 U.S.C. 5101), the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. 6901-6981), or
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601-2609)

**Holding Agency** -- Federal agency having accountability for, and
generally possession of, the property involved

**Non-appropriated Fund Activity** -- activity or entity that is not
funded by money appropriated from the general fund of the U.S. Treasury,
such as post exchanges, ship stores, military officers' clubs, veterans'
canteens, and similar activities; such property is not Federal property

**Original Acquisition Cost** -- The cost of an item at the time of
original procurement

**Personal Property** -- any property, except real property or financial
instruments. The term excludes records of the Federal Government, and
naval vessels of the following categories: battleships, cruisers,
aircraft carriers, destroyers, and submarines

**Property Act** -- Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of
1949 (63 Stat. 377 and 386), as amended (codified as amended in
scattered sections of titles 40 and 41 of the United States Code), the
law that centralized Federal property management and disposal functions
under the GSA

**Public Agency** -- any State, political subdivision thereof, including
any unit of local government or economic development district; any
department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including
instrumentalities created by compact or other agreement between States
or political subdivisions; multi-jurisdictional sub state districts
established by or pursuant to State law; or any Indian tribe, band,
group, pueblo, or community located on a State reservation

**Radio Frequency Identification** -- uses small radio transponders that
are activated by a reading transmitter. The transponder can carry a
unique ID code or other information in its memory

**Replacement** -- process of acquiring property to be used in place of
property

**Sale** -- the stage in the asset management life cycle in which
surplus property is sold through full and open competition

**State Agency for Surplus Property (SASP)** -- agency designated under
State law to receive Federal surplus personal property for distribution
to eligible recipients within the State as provided for in subsection
203(j) of the Property Act (40 U.S.C. 484(j))

**Screening** -- process of physically inspecting property or reviewing
lists or reports of property to determine whether property is usable or
needed for donation purposes

**Special Authority** -- statutory provision designed to give excess
assets to groups that may use them for a particular purpose, such as
NASA's scientific equipment aiding research at universities

**Stakeholder** -- parties that have an interest, financial or otherwise
in the Personal Property Asset Management process, to include GSA,
Federal agencies, SASPs, taxpayers, and non-profit and special interest
groups

**Surplus Personal Property (Surplus Property)** -- excess personal
property not required for the needs of any Federal agency, as determined
by GSA

**Unique Identification** -- the set of data for tangible assets that is
globally unique and unambiguous, ensures data integrity and data quality
throughout life, and supports multi-faceted business applications and
users

**Use** -- utilization of an asset by the acquiring agency until it is
no longer needed

**Useful Life** -- the span of time in which the Government has custody
of the property. The useful life of a personal property starts when the
property is acquired by the acquiring agency and ends when it is
disposed of through donation, sale, abandonment, or destruction

**Utilization** -- also known as "excess", this is the process of
identifying, processing, reporting, and transfer of excess assets among
federal agencies

# List of Acronyms

**A&D** -- Abandonment & Destruction

**ANSI** -- American National Standards Institute

**ASTM** -- American Society for Testing and Materials

**DHS** -- Department of Homeland Security

**DOD** -- Department of Defense

**DOE** -- Department of Energy

**EDI** -- Electronic Data Interchange

**ERP** -- Enterprise Resource Planning

**FAME** -- Federal Asset Management Evaluation

**FEDS** -- Federal Disposal System

**FMR** -- Federal Management Regulation

**FSC** -- Federal Supply Class

**FSS** -- Federal Supply Service

**GAO** -- General Accounting Office

**GSA** -- General Services Administration

**HHS** -- Health and Human Services

**NASA** -- National Aeronautics and Space Administration

**OGP** -- Office of Governmentwide Policy

**OMB** -- Office of Management and Budget

**RFID** -- Radio Frequency Identification

**SASP** -- State Agency for Surplus Property

**U&D** -- Utilization and Donation

**UID** -- Unique Identification

**XML** -- Extensible Markup Language

# Document References

1.  Agencies Take Inventory of IT Assets. Government Computer News:
    www.gcn.com. January 10, 2005.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
4.  Albertsons Launches RFID Technology Program to Improve Merchandising
    and Supply Chain Management Efficiencies. Albertsons:
    www.albertsons.com. March 5, 2004.

5.  American Society for Testing and Materials. Standards E2131-01,
    E2132-01, E2135-04, E2219-02, E2220-02, E2221-02, E2279-03,
    E2306-03, E2379-04. July 2004.

6.  BarCode1 website: http://www.adams1.com/pub/russadam/barcode1.html.

7.  Best Buy to Benefit from RFID. RFIDinsights: www.rfidinsights.com.
    September 14, 2004.

8.  Companies Adopting RFID Despite Challenges, Survey Finds.
    RFIDinsights: www.rfidinsights.com. September 23, 2004.

9.  Defense Department Delays RFID Deadline Until At Least February.
    RFIDinsights: www.rfidinsights.com. November 12, 2004.

10. Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy website:
    <http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/UID/>.

11. Delta Turns to RFID to Cut Costs. RFIDinsights:
    www.rfidinsights.com. July 1, 2004.

12. Department of Defense RFID website:
    <http://www.acq.osd.mil/log/rfid/index.htm>.

13. DOD's IT Asset Management Initiatives Saves Money and Improves
    Mission Support. Gartner. December 20, 2004.

14. Electronic Commerce Code Management Association website:
    [www.eccma.org](http://www.eccma.org/).

15. EPC Global Idiots Guide website:
    <http://archive.epcglobalinc.org/aboutthetech_idiotsguide.asp>.

16. FDA to e-Track Popular Drugs. Government Computer News: www.gcn.com.
    November 17, 2004.

17. Federal Management Regulations. General Services Administration
    Office of Governmentwide Policy. Chapter 102, Sections 36 -- 39, 42.
    May 2004.

18. Federal Property Management Regulations. General Services
    Administration Office of Governmentwide Policy. Chapter 101,
    Sections 26, 42, 45, 48.

19. General Services Administration website:
    [www.gsa.gov](http://www.gsa.gov/).

20. Government Auditing Standards (The Yellow Book) 2003 Revision.
    United States General Accounting Office By the Comptroller General
    of the United States. June 2003.

21. Governmental Accounting Standards Board website:
    [www.gasb.org](http://www.gasb.org/).

22. GSA Wants to Revamp IT Fund. Government Computer News: www.gcn.com.
    November 8, 2004.

23. Integrate the Right Tools to Manage IT Assets Effectively. Gartner.
    April 22, 2003.

24. The International Society of Logistics website:
    <http://www.sole.org/cpl.asp>.

25. Logistics Management website: <http://www.manufacturing.net/lm/>.

26. Lowry Computer Products Case Study: Albertsons, Inc. Association for
    Automatic Identification and Mobility: www.aimglobal.org. November
    15, 2004.

27. National Property Management Association website:
    [www.npma.org](http://www.npma.org/).

28. National Retail Federation website:
    [www.nrf.com](http://www.nrf.com/).

29. New ARC Study Finds that EPC RFID ROI Is Lacking! Logistics
    Management: http://www.manufacturing.net/lm/. October 28, 2004.

30. Obtaining Endorsement and Gaining Ground in the Maritime Community.
    American Society for Testing and Materials Property Standards. 2004.

31. Personal Property Utilization and Donation Study Findings and
    Recommendations. General Services Administration Federal Asset
    Sales. December 19, 2003.

32. A Primer on RFID Technology and Processes. InformationWeek:
    www.informationweek.com. November 8, 2004.

33. Recipe for Success: Property Management in a Shared Services
    Environment. National Property Management Association. 2003.

34. RFID Flies High with Airplane Makers. RFIDinsights:
    www.rfidinsights.com. June 14, 2004.

35. RFID website: [www.rfidinsights.com](http://www.rfidinsights.com/).

36. Stanton, Thomas H. Understanding Federal Asset Management: An Agenda
    for Reform. Financial Management Series White Paper prepared by the
    Center for the Study of American Government at Johns Hopkins
    University, under a grant from the IBM Center for The Business of
    Government. July 2003.

37. Sunflower Systems webinar. Lifecycle Asset Management -- Federal
    Agencies Lead Best Practices. September 24, 2004.

38. Sunflower Systems webinar. Real and Personal Property Asset
    Reporting -- Best Practices, Systems and Tools. November 16, 2004.

39. Target Considers RFID Tags on Imported Goods. RFIDinsights:
    www.rfidinsights.com. December 14, 2004.

40. Uniform Code Council website: <http://www.uc-council.org/>.

41. Unique Identification 101 The Basics.
    http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/Docs/uid/UID%20101.pdf. November 2004.

42. United Nations Standard Products and Services Code website:
    [www.unspsc.org](http://www.unspsc.org/).

43. Users and Screeners Association -- Federal Excess Personal Property
    Inc. website: <http://www.usa-fepp.org/>.

44. When to Consider SAP Asset Management and Maintenance. Gartner. July
    3, 2003.

# Asset Management Team Members

The following individuals, listed in Table 4 and Table 5, participated
in the asset management study and contributed to this report:

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042353 .anchor}Table 4 -- FAME Team Members

  --------------------------------- -------------------------------------
  Federal Asset Management          
  Evaluation Team                   

  Name                              Agency

  Glenda Patrick                    NASA

  Gary Thompson                     GSA OGP

  Myles Schulberg                   GSA OGP

  Helene Mattiello                  DOE

  Denise Hicks                      GSA OGP

  Laurie Feld                       GSA OGP

  Jim Begis                         GSA OGP

  Robert Holcombe                   GSA OGP

  Patricia Elliott                  GSA OGP
  --------------------------------- -------------------------------------

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc95042354 .anchor}Table 5 - BearingPoint Team
Members

[^1]: Secret Service has implemented a COTS asset management system that
    has been integrated with their procurement system.

[^2]: Recommendation is subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
    approval and legislation granting authority.

[^3]: Regulations include, "property management" in 31 USC 503(b)(2)(E)
    and The Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990.

[^4]: Further defined in ASTM Standard E 2219-02 Standard Practice for
    Valuation and Management of Moveable, Durable Property.

[^5]: Most Federal agencies' personal property asset management budgets
    have decreased over the last decade.

[^6]: Recommendations 5 and 11 in the General Services Administration
    Federal Asset Sales Personal Property Utilization and Donation Study
    are similar to this recommendation.

[^7]: According to GSAXcess system administrators, approximately half of
    the Department of Defense's (DOD) property is imported into GSAXcess
    without adequate property descriptions.

[^8]: Source: General Services Administration Federal Asset Sales
    Personal Property Utilization and Donation Study.

[^9]: Recommendation 6 in the General Services Administration Federal
    Asset Sales Personal Property Utilization and Donation Study is
    similar to this recommendation.

[^10]: Source: General Services Administration Federal Asset Sales
    Personal Property Utilization and Donation Study.