COOPERATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE

SUPPORT UNIT PROGRAM

EXECUTIVE REPORT

AN ASSESSMENT BY USERS AND LOCAL OFFICIALS 
RICHARD P. KUSSEROW 
INSPECTOR GENERAL 
OAI-06-89-00860  JUNE 1989  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
PURPOSE 
The pricipal purose of this study was to conduct a qualitative user evaluation of the Cooper
ative Admstrative Support Unit (CASU) Program. A secondar objective was to analyze 
the perspectives of CASU management and governing offcials on the strngths and 
weakesses of the CASU concept and its implementation. This report was prepared at the re
quest of the national CASU board and staf. 
BACKGROUND 
Progr 
The CASU  is a Government-wide program, sponsored by the President s Council on 
Management Improvement (PCMI, which operates under authority of Section 601 of the 
Progr 
Economy Act of 1932. At the national level, the PCMI established 'a CASU  Na
tional Board of Directors which sets policy, provides guidance, approves lead agencies and 
charers CASUs. In addition, a national interagency sta was organized to serve as a focal 
point for day-to-day operations of the national CASU Program. The local CASU support strc
tur includes policy diction from a tenant board of directors, and managerial diection from 
a lead agency. The day-to-day operations of the local CASU ar supervised by a local CASU 
dictor. 
Progr 
The CASU  was established under the concept that local Federal agencies could coop
eratively combine their resoures to share common administrtive services at reduced costs 
and with better service quality. Under the CASU concept, building tenants jointly shar in es
tablishig and managing an administrative support unit that provides, on a reimbursable basis, 
admistrative services commonly needed by its members. 
METHODOLOGY 
This inspection is based on a mail survey, onsite strctured interviews and selected back
ground and inonnational materials provided by the national CASU staff. Our findings are 
based on a tota of 155 respondents, including 34 CASU management and governing offcials, 
80 curent and fonner CASU users, and 41 potential users at 13 of the 14 currently charered 
CASUs which were operational or projected to be operational by the end of the second quarr 
(F) 
of Fiscal Year  1989. 
FINDINGS 
CASU User Satisfaction Is High 
The CASU users are very satisfied with the services they ar receiving and rate service 
quality high.
 The CASU users are very pleased with their participation and expect to continue with the 
CASU. 
The CASU service effectiveness indicators are positive. Overall, 91 percent of the users 
say the CASU has effectively handled their needs. Most users (about 4 of 5) say the 
CASU promptly handles and effectively resolves service complaints. 
The Extent Of Cost Savings Is Uncertain 
Both users and CASU offcials think cost savings are very importt but neither have a 
goo grsp of the extent to which dollar or full time equivalent (FT) sta savings 
being realized by CASUs. 
Users And Local Offcials See Local CASU Management As Effective, But Annual Evalua
tions And Periodic Audits Are Needed 
The CASU users give high marks to the general management provided by CASU diec
tors, lead agencies and tenant boards. 
Users ar generally pleased with CASU management of marketing, customer communica
tions and biling procedurs. 
However, evaluations and audits deserve more emphasis. Current policy requirements for 
user evaluations of service delivery and periodic fiscal audits 
ar somewhat unclear. Rela
tively few CASU evaluations or audits have been conducted or planned. 
Local Offcials View National CASU Policies And Program Management As Basically 
Sound, But Local Managers Need More Implementation Help And Suggest Other Changes 
progr 
Local offcials believe national CASU policies, guidelines and  assumptions are 
sound and workable. Local offcials view the national CASU board and staf as generaly 
effective. How ver, they desire some changes to strngthen the perfonnance of both the 
board and sta. Local managers express a strong need for more implementation help 
from the national staf in becoming successfully operational. 
Overal, local offcials see the CASU Program as successful, despite its implementation is
sues. They are somewhat uncertain about the currnt implementation pace and goals 
the CASU Program. Nevenheless, they say the program is successful and has significant 
cost saving potential.  RECOMMENDATIONS 
Annual User Evaluations and Periodic Fiscal Audits 
The national CASU staf and board should 1) fonnalize policy to require annual evalua
tions of CASU service delivery and user satisfaction, as well as periodic fiscal audits by 
the lead agency inspector general or audit agency, and 2) develop suggested simple and 
practical protocols for conducting these evaluations and audits. 
Cost Savings 
The national CASU sta should seek to 1) quickly determe the extent to which verifi
able savings are being achieved in existig CASUs, 2) assur an accurate and complete 
cost baseline is established when new CASUs are added to the program, 3) establish an 
effective mechanism to track cost saving accomplishments over time, and 4) move to the 
fullest application of unit cost pricing of services in al existing and new CASUs. 
Implementation Assistance 
The national CASU staf should provide more CASU assistance for achieving successful 
operational status and overcomig implementation problems. To this end, the staff should 
develop generic technical assistance guides and "How To" implementation guidelines for 
the most common CASU core services. 
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT REPORT 
We shard the draft of this report and the supportg technical report, with the CASU Pro
gram National Board of Dirctors and the CASU national staff. They generaly agree with the 
report findigs and concur, with only minor qualifcations, with all our recommendations. 
The full text of their comments is included in the appendix. 
TECHNICAL REPORTS 
furer 
For  detals on user and local offcial assessmentS' of the CASU Program and national 
and local improvement options the reader should also examne the three companion technical 
repons: 1) "User Assessment of Services;" 2) "User and Governing Offcial Perceptions of 
Local Management;" and 3) "Local Offcial Perceptions of National Policies and Implementa
tion. "  .
  . . 
  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  ..  .. . . .
..  ..  ..  ..  ...   ...   ...   ...   ...   ...   .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    ..... .   .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    ....   ....   ....   ....   ....   ....   .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....  .  .... .   .... .   .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    .....    ....     .....    ....    ...   
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
INTRODUCTION 
PURPOSE 
BACKGROUND 
METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
FINDINGS.  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
CASU Service Patterns Vary Considerably. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
CASU User Satisfaction Is High. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . 4
The Exent Of CASU Savings Is Uncertain
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Both Users And Local Officials See Local CASU Management As 
Effective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . 7
Local Officials View National CASU Policies And Program 
Management As Basically Sound, But Local Managers Need More 
Implementation Help And Suggest Other Changes
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
RECOMMENDATIONS. 
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT REPORT....................................... 13
TECHNICAL REPORTS 
APPENDIX  COOPERATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPP..ORT UNIT PROGRAM 
COMMENTS ON OIG FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  . . . . . . . . 14 INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE 
The pricipal purose of this study was to conduct a qualitative user evaluation of the Cooper
ative Admistrative Support Unit (CASU) Program. A secondar objective was to analyze 
the perspectives of CASU management and governing officials on the 
strngths and 
weakesses of the CASU concept and its implementation. This report was prepared at the re
quest of the national CASU board and staf. 
BACKGROUND 
progr, 
The CASU Program is a Government-wide  sponsored by the President s Council on 
Management Improvement (PCMI, which operates under authority of Section 601 of the 
Economy Act of 1932. Under the CASU concept, agencies in multi-tenant, federaly occupied 
buildigs jointly shar in establishing and managing an administrative support unit that pro
vides, on a reimbursable basis, administrative services commonly needed by its members. 
In October 1985, as par of a shard services initiative, the heads of the Genera Services Ad
ministration, the Offce of Management and Budget, and the Offce of Personnel Manage
ment, issued a joint memorandum to the heads of all Federal agencies introducing and 
encouragig support for the CASU Program. 
Progr 
To ensur strong policy support at the national level, the PCMI established a CASU 
National Board of Dirctors. The national board sets policy, provides program guidace, ap
proves lead agencies and charers CASUs. A national interagency staff has also been organ
ized to serve as a focal point for day-to-day operation of the national CASU Progr. The 
staf advises the CASU board on policy and progrm issues and provides technical assistace 
in organzing and opera ing CASUs. 
The national board has established a prototye strcture for local CASUs which includes pol
icy control and diection from a tenant board comprised of CASU service users or potential 
users. A lead agency, selected by the tenant board of directors, provides admnistrtive man
agement support to the CASU in such areas as financial management, stafng, personnel ser
vices, etc. The day-to-day diection and management of the CASU staff is provided by a 
CASU diector. 
Through marketing and intervention by the national CASU staff, the CASU Progrm recruits 
Federa agencies located in a single building or cluster of buildings to become members of a 
local CASU and to parcipate in its development, organization, and management. Recruited 
CASU sites underte a feasibilty study to detennine if a CASU could successfully operate at 
their site, what admnistrtive services their CASU should provide, and how a CASU could 
most effectively supply these services.  Once the decision to establish a CASU has been made, its prospective members establish its 
operating plans through a series of interagency memorandums of understanding. The national 
CASU board reviews these plans and, if appropriate, grants a CASU charer to the local site. 
Curnt CASUs provide such services as mail, moving and labor, physical fitness, shipping 
and receiving, photcopying, personal property management, conference and training room 
progrs. 
scheduling, child car, imprest fund and employee assistance  These services may 
be provided diectly by the CASU staff, through shared services arangements from the lead 
agency or other CASU parcipating agency or secured through private contracts. By consoli
dating services, the CASUs expect to provide less expensive, more accessible, and better qual
ity services. The CASUs also expect to standardize and share administrative systems, 
accelerate use of automation, and to improve management infonnation systems. 
Curntly, operational CASUs exist at the following locations: Anchorage, Alaska; Atlanta 
Georgia; Chicago, llinois; Cincinnati, Ohio; Cleveland, Ohio; Denver, Colorado; Fort Worth 
Texas; Jackson, Mississippi; Indianapolis, Indiana; Kansas City (12th Stret), Missour; Los 
Angeles, California; New York City (Javits Building), New York; and, Seattle, Washington. 
Additionally, five CASUs have been charered at these locations: Boston, Massachusetts; 
Fresno, Calfornia; Kansas City (South), Missouri; New York City (Varck Stret), New York; 
and, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 
METHODOLOGY 
This inspection is based on a mail survey, onsite 
strctured interviews and selected back
ground and infonnational materials provided by the national CASU staff. Our findings are 
based on a tota of 155 respondents, including 34 CASU management and governing offcials, 
80 cunent and fonner CASU users, and 41 potential  currntly charered 
users at 13 of the 14 
CASU s which were operational or projected to be operational by the end of the second quarer 
(F) 
of Fiscal Year  1989.  FINDINGS

The results of our surey show that, overall, CASU user satisfaction is high. However, there 
is uncertainty about the extent of cost savings. We also found that users and local offcials see 
local CASU maagement as effective, but that annual evaluations and periodi  audits 
needed. The surey results also showed that local offcials view national CASU policies and 
progr 
management as sound, but local managers need more implementation help and sug
gest other changes. 
What follows is a synopsis of the survey results which support the major findings above. 
CASU SERVICE PATTERNS VARY CONSIDERABLY. 
CASUs OFFER A WIDE VARIET OF SERVICES. 
A. 
The CASUs reviewed offer 28 different services. The top six services are mai, mov
ing and labor, physical fitness, shipping and receiving, photocopy, and excess per
sonal propert. The number of services each CASU offers vares widely, raging 
from 3 to 13 services, with an average of 6 offered services. 
THE EXTENT OF UTIliZATION OF CASU SERVICES ALSO VARIES

B. 
CONSIDERALY. 
The number of users at each CASU vares significantly, ranging from a low of 7 to a 
high of 35, with an average of 17 users. 
In none of the CASUs do all users paricipate in all services. 
A majority of users paricipate in all offered services in only two CASUs. 
However, in six CASUs a strong majority of users (77 to 100 percent) use at least 
one-half of the offered services. 
OF 10) SAY THEY ATTEMPT TO ASSESS THE BEST METHOD 
C.  MOST CASUs  (9 
OF SERVICE DELWERY, I.E., DIRECT STAFF PROVISION, UNDER PRIVATE 
CONTRACT OR THROUGH SHARED SERVICE, FOR THE SERVICES THEY 
OFFER.  II. 
CASU USER SATISFACTION IS HIGH. 
USERS RATE CASU SERVICE QUALIT HIGH. 
A. 
Most users (86 percent) rate the overall quality of CASU services as either excellent 
or goo. 
HOW DO YOU RATE THE OVERAL 
QUAL OF CASU SERVICES? 
Very por (1)-1.5 
Poor (1 )-1.56  0/0-%--
Fair (7)-10.
Goo 
(27)-40. 
A strong majority report the following positive ratings for the specific services they 
receive: 
high satisfaction with the CASU service; 
better service responsiveness or timeliness under the CASU; 
better servce quality under the CASU; 
improved customer convenience due to the CASU; 
goo customer control over service delivery under the CASU; and, 
improved overal service availabilty under the CASU. 
USERS ARE GENERAY PLEASED WITH CASU PARTICIPATION. 
B. 
Most users (89 percent) would stil opt to parcipate in the CASU if they had it to do 
over again. 
Most users (92 percent) say their agency 
wil likely continue paricipating in the 
CASU in the future. 
CASU SERVICE EFFECTWENESS INDICATORS ARE POSIT WE. 
C. 
Overall, 91 percent of the users say the CASU has effectively handled their service 
needs. Only five u ers indicated their agency s service needs have not been met by 
the CASU. 
Most users (about 4 of 5) report that when service issues or complaints arse, the 
CASU generally handles them promptly and resolves them effectively.  Servce accessibility since CASU establishment is improved (57 percent) or about the 
same (37 percent) for most users. 
Due to the CASU' s establishment, new or additional services became 
available to 68 percent of the users. 
The CASU services are equally available to both large and small tenants, 
according to 90 percent of the users. 
The CASU staf generally have suffcient skils and training to deliver services effec
tively, according to 90 percent of the users. 
As indicators of CASU service responsiveness, 45 percent of the users say their 
services to better serve their needs, and 34 percent re
CASU has modfied  existing 
services to better meet their needs. 
port their CASU has added  new 
III. THE EXTENT OF CASU COST SAVINGS IS UNCERTAIN 
USER PERCEPTIONS VARY WIDELY ABOUT THE CASU EFFECT ON THE 
A. 
COSTS OF SERVICES DEUVERED. 
For example: 1) 27 percent report costs decreased; 2) 27 percent report no changes 
in costs; and, 3) 38 percent report costs increased under the CASU. 
SOMEWHAT HIGHER SERVICE COSTS ARE THE TOP CONCERN USERS 
B. 
EXPRESS IN RATING THE SPECIFIC CASU SERVICES THEY RECEIVE: 
Twenty-four percent of users, or 40 of the 164 service ratings, say service costs 
either somewhat or much higher under the CASU. 
Thireen percent of users, or 21 of the 164 service ratings, say cost-effectiveness is 
either somewhat or much worse under the CASU. 
VERY FEW USERS REPORT ACHIEVING DOUAR OR FUll FIME
C. 
EQUIVALENT (FTE) STAFF SAVINGS THROUGH CASU PARTICIPATION 
Only 11 users (14 percent) indicate some dollar savings, ranging from $l OO. 
$97,  , with an average of about $18,313. 
Twenty users (26 percent) report no savir.gs have been achieved. Forty-five users, or 
59 percent, did not respond regarding dollar savings.  FT 
Only six users (8 percent) say that some  savings were achieved. However, 21 
FT 
users (28 percent) say no  savings have been realized. Forty-nine users (64 per
FT 
cent) did not respond regarding  savings. 
FT 
Most of the dollar or  savings users report are classified as "best estimates" not 
based on actual data. 
MOST CASU DIRECTORS WERE UNABLE OR CHOSE NOT TO PROVIDE 
D. 
OVERAL ESTIMATES OF DOLLA AND FlE SAVINGS ACHIEVED BY THE 
CASU FROM INCEPTION. 
Only 4 of the 10 operational CASUs were able to provide rough estimates. None 
the CASUs said their estimates were based on actual data. 
FT 
Reported total cumulative dollar and  staff savings realized at these four CASUs: 
Dollar Savings  $ 1,278,000 
FTE Savings 
IT APPEARS THAT LEAD AGENCY AND CASU INDIRECT COSTS ARE 
E. 
SOMEIIMES ABSORBED RATHER THAN BILLED TO USERS. 
While most users (62 percent) think users get biled for lead agency and CASU indi
rect costs, 11 percent of users say the lead agency or CASU sometimes absorb these 
costs and 24 percent do not know.  IV. BOTH USERS AND LOCAL OFFICIALS SEE LOCAL CASU MANAGEMENT 
AS EFFECTIVE. 
CASU GENERA MANAGEMENT AND DIRECTION ARE RATED HIGH. 
A. 
Curnt 
users give high marks to the general management and direction provided by 
CASU directors, lead agencies and tenant boards. 
USER EVALUATIONS OF GENERAL MANAGEMENT AND 
DIRECTION PROVIDED BY THE CASU DIRECTOR, LEAD 
AGENCY, AND THE TENAN BOARD

excellent 
l1 good

62"1  Ii fair 
60% 
poor 
o don t know 
40% 
20%  17"1
CASU DIRECTOR  LEAD AGENCY  TENANT BOARD 
RATED GROUPS 
TOTAL RESPONSES:  CASU DIRECTOR - 44 
LEAD AGENCY - 30 
TENANT BOARD - 23 
B.  IMPROVED UNDERSTANDING OF CAW GOVERNING ENTIT ROLES AND 
RESPONSIBIUTIES IS NEEDED. 
Local officials say the CASU tenant board and lead agency roles and responsibilties 
are not always clearly defined and understood. 
IN GENERA, THE CASUs ARE EFFECTIVELY MARKETING THEIR SERVICES. 
C. 
The CASUs do a goo to excellent job of marketing, according to 82 percent of the 
currnt users.  A majority of potential users (83 percent) say they have received an explanation of 
the local CASU concept, and 77 percent say this explanation was effective to very ef
fective. 
Regarding the likelihoo of their agency paricipating in the CASU in the futue, 
most potential users say they 
wil probably or  CASU services (57 
definitely use  some 
percent). (Thirt percent are unsure; 13 percent probably wil not.) 
Most local officials say CASUs ar actively marketing their services using a wide va
riety of methods. 
Many CASUs are adding, or plan to add, new services beyond those offered 
initialy. 
CASU AND CUSTOMER COMMUNICATIONS ARE EFFECTIVE. 
D. 
The CASU communications are rated as goo to excellent by 83 percent of the users. 
Most users say th  CASU keeps them infonned through regular 
report, periodic 
meetigs or newsletters. 
E.  CASU BILLG PROCEDURES ARE FAIR, EQUITABLE AND GENERALLY 
UNDERSTOOD BY USERS. 
Most users say CASU biling procedures ar fair and equitable and that they gener
ally understand both the services 
biled and the biling procedures. 
Most users (75 percent) say they have either experienced  no biling problems  with 
the CASU or ar unawar of 
any billng problems. 
While a majority of users (70 percent) say their CASU prices its services on a unit 
cost basis, a substantial minority (  O percent) either indicate this is not the case or do 
not know. 
CASU EVALUATIONS AND AUDITS DESERVE INCREASED EMPHASIS. 
Both users and local CASU offcials appear to be somewhat confused or uninfonned 
about whether their CASU' s charer requires 1) an independent annual evaluation of 
CASU service delivery and user satisfaction, or 2) an annual fiscal audit. 
Only 32 percent of users and 44 percent of the local CASU offcials report an evalua
tion has been conducted at their CASU. Of course, in the case of newly operational 
CASUs, an evaluation might be premature.  Only four users (6 percent) and the local officials at one CASU say their CASU' 
s fis
cal records have been audited. 
v. LOCAL OFFICIALS VIEW NATIONAL CASU POLICIES AND PROGRAM 
MANAGEMENT AS BASICALLY SOUND, BUT LOCAL MANAGERS NEED 
MORE IMPLEMENTATION HELP AND SUGGEST OTHER CHANGES. 
LOCAL OFFICIALS GENERALLY BEUEVE CASU POUCIES, GUIDEUNES AND
A. 
PROGRAM ASSUMPTIONS ARE SOUND AND WORKABLE. 
Offcials' views split on whether continued reliance on voluntar initiation 
and parc
ipation in CASUs wil produce the steady CASU program growth desired. A slight 
majority (55 percent) think steady program growth wil result under voluntar parici
pation rules; 45 percent disagree. The inspection team questions whether the rate of 
growth desired by the national CASU board and staff wil be realized under volun
ta 
parcipation rules. 
All  offcials favor maintaining the current strong emphasis on local tenant board con
trol and flexibilty. 
A majority of officials agree with the basic policies governing CASU charering; 
however, there is some question on whether the national board and 
staf enforce these 
charering provisions. 
LOCAL OFFICIALS VIEW THE NATIONAL CASU MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE 
B. 
AS GENERALLY EFFECTIVE, BUT THEY DESIRE SOME CHANGES. 
Offcials rate the national board as effective. They suggest the board: 1) strngthen 
the sta's capacity to assist CASUs after charering, both before and during opera
tional star-up; and, 2) redouble their efforts to educate the agencies about the CASU 
progr 
at the national level. 
Local offcials say national CASU staff leadership is effective but can be improved 
by 1) developing a more stable and specialized staff and 2) focusing more effort on 
operational assistance and less on charering more CASUs. Local managers express 
a strong need for more implementation help from the national staff in becoming suc
cessfullyoperational. 
Loal offcials believe the national board and staff playa vital role in program expan
sion and in how well CASUs wil survive or thrive. 
The adequacy of national. CASU reporting mechanisms should be reassessed. Sev
eral indicators from local offcials suggest the need to consider improvements in the 
Prgram Activity Report and CASULINK.  C.  OVERALL, WCAL OFFICIALS SEE THE CASU PROGRAM  AS  SUCCESSFUL 
DESPITE ITS NUMEROUS IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES. 
Local officials are somewhat uncertain about the current implementation pace and 
goals of the CASU program. 
A majority of local officials do not consider the national staff FY 1989 goal 
of increasing the number of charered CASUs from 14 to 36 as realistic and 
feasible. 
Officials split on whether the CASU staff FY 1989 goal of increasing the 
number of operational CASUs from 8 to 26 is realistic and feasible. 
A majority of offcials do not know (60 percent) if it is realistic to expect 
the 
CASU Program to yield cost savings in excess of $100 milion by the end of 
FY 1992. (Only 17 percent say yes; while 23 percent say no. 
Overall, local officials say the CASU program is successful and has significant cost 
saving potential. Offcials characterize as moderate to major the potential cost sav
ings that wil be realized by the individual CASUs and the overall CASU Program 
over the next 2 years. 
Loal offcials believe the CASU Program is successfully achieving its two basic 
aims, although they perceive  improving service delivery and qual
grater success in 
ity than in achieving cost savings. 
Very  Somewhat 
Successful  Successful 
Improving the Delivery 
and Quality of Services  64%  32% 
25%  64%  RECOMMENDATIONS 
Recovery of Operating Costs 
Progr 
The CASU  should adopt a policy of full recovery of all operating costs, including in
dict 
costs, though charges to users. 
It would appear to serve the best long-tenn interests of both users and the CASU Program to 
seek a full identification and recovery of the total costs of CASU operations through user bil
mgs. 
Cost Savings 
The CASU staf should seek to 1) quickly identify verifiable savings being achieved in exist
ing CASUs, 2) assure that an accurate and complete cost baseline is established when any 
new CASUs are added to the progrm, 3) establish an effective mechanism to track cost
. sav
ing accomplishments over time, and 4) move to the fullest application of unit cost pricing of 
services in al existing and new CASUs. 
Comparative Assessments of Service Delivery Sources 
The national CASU board and staff should promote comparative assessments of the most prac
tical and cost-effective means of delivering CASU services, both among existing CASUs and 
in new CASUs to be fonned. 
Standard Role Descriptions for CASU Governing Officials 
To enhance cooperation and shared expectations, all CASUs should be encouraged to adopt a 
standad descrption of the roles and responsibilties of key CASU governing officials, such as 
that developed as par of the Seattle evaluation. 
Unit Cost Pricing 
The CASU staf should encourage the broadest, appropriate application of unit cost pricing of 
services in al new and existing CASUs. This should 
enhance user understanding and aid in 
analysis of service cost trends and cost comparsons of alternative service sources.  Annual User Evaluations and Periodic Fiscal Audits 
The National CASU staff and board should: 
1. Fonnalize CASU policy to require a) annual user evaluations of CASU service delivery 
and user satisfaction, and b) periodic fiscal audits by the lead agency inspector general or 
audit agency. 
2. Develop, cooperatively with operational CASUs, suggested practical protocols for 
conduct
ing CASU evaluations and audits. Regarding the evaluation protocol, we suggest use of 
simple evaluation tools. 
Implementation Assistance 
Drawing on the experience of operational CASUs, the national staff should begin developing: 
1. Generic technical assistance guides to aid developing CASUs in achieving operational
status in such areas as: 
organizing, staffing and trining CASU personnel 
forecasting workloads and developing budgets, 
alternative techniques for pricing CASU services; and 
2. "How To" guidelines for implementing the most common CASU core services, such as 
mail, photocopy and personal property. These guidelines could include key functional re
quirments and specifications, "Dos and Don ts," and commonly encountered obstacles, 
with suggestions for overcoming them. 
National CASU Reportng Mechanisms 
The national CASU board and staff should: 
1. Re-exame and revise, as necessar, the Program Activity Report content and schedule to 
assur that it adequa ely serves the needs of the national board and 
staf by providing an ac
curate pictue of CASU services, users, operational status and problems and savings 
achievements. 
2. Corrct implementation bugs in CASULINK and promote its effective utilzation by local 
CASU offcials.  National CASU Goals 
The national CASU board and staf should re-examine the feasibility of current CASU goals 
for 1) new CASUs to be charered  2) CASUs to become operational, and 3) long tenn poten
tial savings to be achieved. Respondent feedback and experience to date suggest 
these goals
may be overly optimistic. 
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT REPORT 
We shard the draft of this report, and the supportg technical report, with the CASU 
Program National Board of Directors and the CASU national staf. They generally agree with 
the report findings and concur, with only minor qualifications, with al our recommendations. 
The full text of their comments is included in the appendix. 
TECHNICAL REPORTS 
In addition to this executive report we have prepared 
thre technical report which address spe
cific aras of the CASU program. For furter details on user and local offcial assessments of 
the CASU Program and national and local improvement options the reader should examne 
the technical reports:

1) "User Assessment of Servces; 
2) "User and Governing Offcial Perceptions of Local Management;" and 
Local Official Perceptions of National Policies and Implementation. 
3) " APPENDIX

COOPERATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT UNIT PROGRAM 
COMMENTS ON OIG FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS  ",. 
......
.. 
..,
\::., ' ",!-, ;:';-. )- -' . ' ''':;.. \j:   -'/""
APPENDIX .. 
T T T T  OFFICE OF THE  i"'\'.L1G, t; :
COOPERATIVE 
:v'
t':
CASU ADMINISTRA TIVE rd-='   0 \ 
.. I0
SUPPORT  t" 
PROGRAM  "7'" 
u'-
. 0

t:/ 
0. 
f'\ 
May 26 
. 1989 
H EMORANDUM FOR  RICHARD P. KUSSEROW

INSPECTOR GENE

FROM:  WARREN MASTER 
PROGRAM DIRECTOR 

SUBJECT:  aIG Draft Reports: " 
cutive Report 
- A Assess  ent of the CASU Program by
Users of CASU Services and Local

Officials, 
" (OAI-06-89-00860) and
Related Technical Repor s -
INFORMATION 
Enclosed are our comments on the OIG Draft 
Reports.
On behalf of Paul Weiss and the National Board of

Directors we thank you for the efforts of your staff;
Chester Slaughter, George 
DeLuna, Frank Almendarez

and Suzanne Murrin. 
We have circulated the rep 
rt to

our National Board of Directors, Interagency Staff

and CASU Directors for their comments. 
These
comments represent a compilation of their 
responses. 
Since the recommendations in the Executive Report are

compiled from the three technical 
reports, we have

addressed 
our comments to the Executiv  Report
recommendations. We 
found the technical reports

favorable towards both the concept and current

operations of CASU; 
and, in general we agree wi 
th the

findings of the reports.

have already begun planning ini 
tiati ves 
to respond
to the report reco 
mendations and will be sharing

this information wi 
conference. In  th the CASU communi ty at our July

addition we will be discussing our
plans to addr ss these issues wi 
th Chester Slaughter
insure we are in accord wi 
th the intent of the

::ommendations . 
Enclosure  Comments on Spec i fie 
Recommendations 
of the HHS Office of the Inspector General Draft Report

An A  essment of the CASU Pro ram By Users of
CASU Services and 
Local CASU Officials

Since the recommendations in the 

Executive Report are compiled

from the three technical reports we have addressed our comments

to these recommendations.

Recovery of Operatin
 Costs 
The CASU Program should adopt a policy of 

operating costs, including  full recovery of all

users.  indirect costs I through charges to

It would appear to serve the best long-term interests of both

users and the CASU Program to seek a 
full identification and

recovery of the total costs of CASU operations

billings.  ' through user 
Comments 
Concur. 
Cost Savin

The CASU staff should seek to 

1) quickly identify verifiable

savings being achieved in existing 
CASUs, 2) assure that an

accurate and complete cost baseline is 

CASUs are added to the program, 3) establstabilishsed h an effechteinv ea
ny new
mechanism to track cost saving accomplishments over 

move to the fullest application of  time, and 

unit cost pricing of services

in all existing and new CASUs. 
Comments 
Concur wi th  3. 
1, 2 I and 4; part ially 
more effective. means of 
 concur wi th  While We. need
determining actual 
continue to en  savings, we will

ourage CASUs to measure cost savings by their

performance in the market place. I 
providing savings  f CASUs are 
I in fact
I their market share will continue to 
If  increase.
I on the other hand, CASUs become cost 
have the right to extricate  inefficient, agenc ies
themselves from the CASU and seek

more equi 
table and better priced services 
recognize the necess i ty for  elsewhetrneg. sW.e  also
because we do not wish to adddo acnum aedntd ii ng the e sav  Howe\'
tional burden to opera 
CASUs by requiring a cost tracking 
system, we prefer to use t i
 0n 

data already available to 
tn c  lculate cost savings.
 ~~~
ompara t i ve 
Assessm 
o f  v i  Y Sources 
J i 

The national CASU board and staff should promote comparative

assessments of the most practical and cost-

delfvering CASU  effective means of

services, both among existing CASUs and in new

CASUs to be formed. 
Comments 
Concur. 
The CASU staff will identify various means of
effectively delivering CASU services, as options 
selec tion, depending on their circumstances.  for CASU
Standard Role Descriptions for CASU Governin

Officials 
To enhance cooperation and shared 

expectations, all CASUs should 
be encouraged to adopt a standard 
descriptiori of the roles
responsibilities of key CASU governing 
 and
developed as part of the Seattle  officials, such as that

evaluation. 
Comments 
Concur. 
While we concur with this recommendation in 
the study itself pointed out that 87% of those surveyepdr ibn
ciple,
these roles and responsibilities to 
 lieve
74% surveyed believe they are clearlyb e clearly defined, and

understood. 
Unit Cost Pricin 
The CASU staff should encourage the 

application of unit cost pricing of bsreoravdiecsets,  
 appropriate

existing CASUs. This should enhance user undienr staalnld ninewg  aanndd
  aid
in analysis of service cost trends and cost comparisons of

al terna t i ve 
service Sources. 
Comments 
Concur. 
Annual User Evaluations and Periodic Fiscal Audi 

The National CASU Staff and Board 

should: 
1 .  Formalize CASU policy to require 
a) annual user evaluations

of CASU service delivery and User
satisfaction, and

periodic fiscal audi 
i t  ts by the lead agency inspector gen

or aud  agency.  Develop, coopera ti vely 
with operat ional CASUs, suggested
practical protocols for conducting CASU evaluations and

audits. 
- Regarding the evaluation protocol, we suggest use of
simple evaluation tools. 
Commen ts

Concur. 
While we agree that 
periodic fiscal audits are
important, we intend to take care that an appropriate amount of

time for a CASU to take hold and become fully operational

(perhaps three years) be allowed be 
fore a fiscal audi t takes

pI ac e . 
Implementation Assistance

Drawing on the experience of operational 
CASUs, the national

staff should begin developing:

Generic technical assistance guides to aid developing CASUs

in achieving operational status in such areas as: 
organizing, staff 
ing and training CASU personnel. 
forecasting workloads and developing budgets. 
alternative techniques 
for pricing CASU services.

How To" guidelines for implementing the most common CASU

core services, such as mail, photocopy and personnel

property.  These . guidelines could include key functional
requirements and specifications , 
ts, 
Dos and. Don  " and
commonly encountered obstacles, wi 
th suggestions for
overcoming them. 
Comments 
Concur. 
National CASU Reportin
 Mechanisms 
The national CASU board and staff should: 
Re-examine and revise as necessary the Program Activity 
Report content and sChedule to assure that 
it adequately

serves the needs of the national board and staff by providing

an accurate picture of CASU 
services, users, operational

status and problems and sav 
ings achievements.

Correct implementation bugs in CASULINK and promote its
effective utili ation by local CASU officials.
 Comments 
Concur. 
ional CASU Goals

Na t 
The national CASU board and staff should reexamine

the
feasibility of current CASU goals for 
(1) new CASUs to be
chartered. (2) CASUs to become 
operational, and 
potential savings to be achieved.  (3) long term

Respondent feedback and
experience to date suggest these goa.ls may be overly optimistic. 
Commen ts

Concur. 
. tJ iN 
C Approval 

Mr. Paul T. Weiss