prompt_front: You are given two reports by the government agency.



Question: Write a one-page summary of the report 1.

Report 1: As we have previously reported, 911 services have evolved from basic 911—which provided Americans with a universally recognized emergency number—to Enhanced 911 which also routes calls to the appropriate call center and provides information about the caller’s location and a call back number  NG911 represents the next evolution in 911 services by using IP-based technology to deliver and process 911 traffic  Under NG911, call centers will continue to receive voice calls and location information, but will also be able to accommodate emergency communications from the range of technologies in use today  In addition, NG911 systems provide call centers with enhanced capabilities to route and transfer calls and data, which could improve call centers’ abilities to handle overflow calls and increase information sharing with first responders  Generally speaking, 911 communications begin when a caller dials 911 using a landline, wireless, or Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) system  Once a 911 caller places an emergency call, a communications provider receives and routes the call to the appropriate call center, along with the caller’s phone number and location (i e , street address for a landline caller, approximate geographic location for a wireless caller, and the subscriber’s address for VoIP)  Calls and data may be routed to 911 call centers using legacy methods (i e , routing calls across traditional telephone networks) or NG911 methods (i e , routing calls and other data through IP-networks)  Once the call reaches a call center, trained call takers and dispatchers determine the nature of the emergency and dispatch first responders, typically using a variety of equipment and systems, including call handling systems, mapping programs, and computer aided dispatch  Figure 1 illustrates the 911 communications and dispatch process  As illustrated in figure 1, NG911 systems use IP-networks capable of carrying voice plus large amounts of data  These emergency-services networks are typically deployed at the state or regional level with multiple call centers connecting to the network  However, the existence of an IP- network alone does not constitute an NG911 system  As defined by standards developed by the emergency communications community, an NG911 system should have the capability to, among other things: provide a secure environment for emergency communications; acquire and integrate additional data for routing and answering calls; process all types of emergency calls, including multimedia messages; transfer calls with added data to other call centers or first responders  While NG911 systems must possess certain capabilities, it is important to note that states and localities may make decisions about which capabilities they intend to use to best meet their needs  In addition, states and localities have the authority to make decisions about what NG911 equipment, systems, and vendors to use; thus, the configurations of these systems vary  According to a panel of experts convened by the National 911 Program, the transition to NG911 may require a variety of technical and operational changes to current 911 systems and processes  For example, technical changes can include upgrades to networks or installing new hardware or software in 911 call centers  Operational changes can include the need for additional training or the development of new policies and procedures (e g , new procedures for processing or storing multimedia)  These technical and operational changes may also have effects on 911 funding and state and local governance structures, which we will discuss in more detail later in this report  According to an FCC advisory body that examined NG911 systems architecture in 2016, while NG911 systems are implemented in a variety of ways at the state or local level, NG911 implementation can occur gradually and in phases  According to this model, NG911 implementation occurs on a continuum that begins with legacy 911 systems and ends with a fully deployed NG911 national end-state where all individual 911 call centers nationwide would be connected  The NG911 implementation model identifies activities that take place as part of the NG911 transition, many of which occur concurrently, such as: planning (e g , conducting feasibility studies, preparing databases, establishing governance models); acquiring, testing, and implementing NG911 system elements (e g , establishing an emergency-services IP-network, location-based call routing, processing multimedia); connecting call centers within a jurisdiction (i e , jurisdictional end- state in which all call centers are fully NG911 operational, supported by agreements, policies, and procedures); and connecting NG911 systems nationwide (i e , national end-state in which all call centers in the nation are fully NG911 operational, supported by agreements, policies, and procedures)  In addition, because 911 services provide an essential function, the implementation of NG911 generally involves using both the legacy system and the NG911 system simultaneously for a period of time, according to the FCC advisory body, to ensure 911 services are not disrupted as new system elements are tested and implemented  Deploying and operating 911 is the responsibility of 911 authorities at the state and local level  As we have previously reported, all 50 states and the District of Columbia collect—or have authorized local entities to collect—funding for 911 from telephone service subscribers, and methods within each state for collecting funds vary  FCC, as required by statute, reports to Congress annually on the states’ collection and distribution of 911 fees and charges  There are approximately 6,000 call centers nationwide that process 911 calls, often at the county or city level, and these centers can vary greatly in size and technical sophistication  The state and local governance structures that oversee 911 operations also vary by location  For example, we previously reported that some states collect fees or charges for 911 and administer a statewide 911 program  Other states authorize local entities to collect fees or charges for 911 and administer 911 programs at the local level  Still other states use a combination of these approaches  According to a panel of experts convened by the National 911 Program, historically, 911 authority has been coordinated and maintained locally with no requirement to coordinate with other jurisdictions  However, the transition to NG911 enables connection of 911 systems  Thus, as previously mentioned, the NG911 transition may require technological and operational changes, as well as changes to 911 policies and governance responsibilities for states and localities  While deploying and operating 911 is the responsibility of entities at the state and local level, federal agencies—including NHTSA, NTIA, FCC, and DHS—have responsibilities to support state and local implementation, including through facilitating coordination of activities among 911 stakeholders and administering federal grants, for example: NHTSA houses the National 911 Program as part of its Office of Emergency Medical Services (Office of EMS) to provide national leadership and coordination for the NG911 transition throughout the United States, as previously mentioned  According to NHTSA, the fiscal year 2017 budget for the National 911 Program was $2 74 million  Among other activities, which we will discuss later in this report, the National 911 Program surveys states on progress implementing NG911 and reports this survey data annually  FCC issues orders and regulations for 911 service providers on topics relevant to NG911, such as 911 reliability, location accuracy, and text- to-911  FCC also sponsors advisory bodies comprised of government and industry experts that study relevant topics and provide recommendations related to NG911, such as the Task Force on Optimal Public Safety Answering Point Architecture and the Communications, Security, Reliability, and Interoperability Council  While there are no federally mandated time frames for implementing NG911, the Next Generation 911 Advancement Act of 2012 requires specific actions of some federal agencies as outlined in table 1, below  In addition, according to the National 911 Program, as states and localities continue to implement NG911, and begin to explore interconnection with other states’ 911 systems, federal agencies may need to take steps to help ensure state NG911 networks are interoperable and connected  We will discuss actions taken by federal agencies to assist states and localities to implement NG911 later in this report  According to NHTSA’s most recent national survey, state and local progress implementing NG911 varies, and about half of all states reported being in some phase of transition to NG911 in 2015  While a few states are well into statewide implementation, NHTSA officials told us that no state had completely implemented all NG911 functions  Additionally, as of the fall of 2017, none of the selected states we spoke with were processing multimedia—such as images or audio/video recordings—through their 911 systems due to concerns related to privacy, liability, and the ability to store and manage these types of data, among other things  The national survey data, based on responses from 45 states, measured the extent to which NG911 planning and acquisition of NG911 equipment and services were occurring, and the extent to which basic NG911 functions were operational at the state and local levels in 2015  Planning: This measure includes state and local NG911 plans for governance, funding, system components, and operations  In this context, system components refer to an emergency services IP-based network, NG911 software, system and information security, and databases, among other things, according to NHTSA’s survey  In total, 25 of 45 states reported having a state or at least one local NG911 plan in place; conversely, 18 states reported having no NG911 plan in place at either the state or local level—which may indicate they are in the early stages of planning for the NG911 transition or have not yet begun the transition to NG911  Acquisition: These measures identify states or local entities that have defined their NG911 needs and awarded contracts, and then installed and tested acquired NG911 components and services  Twenty-four states reported awarding at least one contract at the state or local level for NG911 components and services  Twenty-three states reported having installed and tested NG911 components and services at either the state or local level  NG911 services: This is a measure of 911 authorities that have some basic, functioning NG911 infrastructure in place  In total, 21 states reported having some level of basic NG911 services in place at the state or local level  Of these 21 states, 10 reported that all 911 authorities within the state were using NG911 technology to process emergency calls  Another 7 of these states reported that 25 percent or less of their state’s 911 authorities were using NG911 technology to process emergency calls  Federal officials, industry stakeholders, and state and local 911 officials we interviewed from nine states identified a number of challenges to implementing NG911, including challenges related to funding, evolving technology and operations, and governance  Funding: State and local officials in four of nine selected states identified insufficient funding as one of the challenges they face in implementing NG911  Additionally, FCC, NHTSA, and industry reports noted that state and local financing strategies are generally insufficient to fully implement NG911  Specifically, these reports note that the need to provide new capital for NG911 implementation while simultaneously funding legacy operational costs during the transition can strain state and local funding  Limited funding: Officials in three states told us that their current funding may not be able to support the upfront costs of infrastructure and equipment acquisitions associated with the transition to NG911  Further, officials said they will need to simultaneously fund both the new NG911 and legacy 911 systems currently in operation until the NG911 systems are fully operational  To address these challenges, a Minnesota official told us about how the state leveraged economies of scale to reduce overall costs through cost sharing between multiple call centers and of call centers consolidating operations from 114 to 104 call centers  Additionally, a Virginia official told us that to cover the upfront costs of transitioning to NG911, the state plans to borrow from the state treasury and then repay the treasury with future-year fee collections  Fee diversion: Diversion of fees intended for 911 costs to non-911 activities may affect a state’s or locality’s ability to cover NG911 transition costs and necessitate identifying alternative funding sources  The FCC’s 2016 annual report on 911 fees indicates that for calendar year 2015, all but two of the states that responded to FCC’s 911 fee survey affirmed that their state or jurisdiction collects fees from phone users to support or implement 911 services  State and local authorities also determine how these 911 fees can be used  FCC’s report also indicated that eight states and Puerto Rico reported diverting a total of more than $220 million (or approximately 8 4 percent) of 911 fees collected to non-911 purposes  Some of these diverted funds were directed to other public safety programs, and others were diverted to either non-public safety or unspecified purposes  According to one state official, had it not been for 911 fees being diverted to non-911 purposes, funding would have been sufficient to cover the NG911 transition without having to go to the state legislature for additional funding  However, officials in the other eight selected states told us that either fee diversion was not an issue in their state or that the diversion of funds had not affected their state’s ability to implement NG911  Evolving technology and operations: Officials in eight states told us that the retirement of legacy infrastructure and the transition to IP-based systems introduces new technical and operational challenges for call centers and states, as well as for equipment and service providers  Interoperability: Officials in three selected states mentioned that connecting to neighboring networks—whether within or between states—could pose challenges  For example, officials mentioned that states and localities may have obtained different equipment, software applications, or service providers – all of which can make interconnections difficult  Officials in Maine and New Hampshire told us that differences in service providers can also be a challenge to seamlessly connecting to neighboring systems  In an instance where two states (Minnesota and North Dakota) have worked to connect their 911 systems, both states used the same service provider, which officials said allowed for fewer barriers to connection  Cyber risks: Officials in three states told us that the transition from a traditional system that only transmits voice traffic to an IP-based system that transmits voice and data traffic has significantly increased the risk of a cyber-attack  This can be a challenge because managing cyber risks is a new and evolving role for state and local 911 authorities  Approaching the transition to NG911 without managing these risks could result in disrupted or disabled call center operations and ultimately a delayed response to an emergency situation  Multimedia: Officials in three states mentioned potential implementation challenges related to accepting and processing multimedia such as audio recordings, images, and videos  More specifically, one official said they did not have procedures to manage or store these multimedia files once received  In addition, another official raised privacy and liability concerns  Call routing: One of the core services of an NG911 system is the ability to have calls routed to the appropriate call center based on a wireless caller’s physical location, instead of the location of the cellular tower that receives and transmits the call  An FCC-sponsored working group reported that there are several options for achieving this and each option has unique positive and negative aspects  One challenge officials in two states noted was that rather than a single, nationwide approach to routing these calls, state and local 911 authorities would need to work individually with the wireless carriers to determine how to best implement location-based call routing  Governance: FCC has noted that transitioning to NG911 will likely result in new roles and levels of coordination between state 911 authorities, local 911 authorities, 911 call centers, and 911 service providers  Further, relationships among authorities at the state and local level may change as states work to interconnect NG911 systems  State and local officials noted that these types of governance challenges can apply in a variety of situations, including within or between states  Evolving roles: As previously mentioned, 911 governance structures vary among states  These varying governance structures may pose different challenges  For example, some states have a centralized structure in which a single government agency is responsible for statewide 911 system’s administration and policy  Officials in two states told us that although they faced challenges transitioning to NG911, their states’ centralized 911 structure eased the transition in their states because there was uniformity in policy and technology, among other things, coming from a single statewide authority  In other states, 911 systems are primarily a local responsibility and organized with decentralized authorities and resources  In these instances, there may be specific challenges related to transitioning to an interconnected NG911 system  Such challenges may include the need for increased levels of coordination among numerous jurisdictions with potentially disparate organizational structures, levels of funding, and priorities  An official also noted that there are governance challenges related to connecting states and evolving relationships between 911 authorities and service providers  Informing decision makers: One of the challenges identified by officials in two states is differing levels of experience and understanding by state and local officials as to what NG911 priorities should be for timely implementation  To help with this understanding, the federal government is making efforts to educate state and local authorities on how to facilitate policymaker understanding as well as provide regular updates to stakeholders on recent NG911 developments  We discuss some of these efforts later in this report  While state and local entities have the primary responsibility for implementing NG911 technology and services, federal agencies are taking actions to assist state and local 911 entities to address NG911 implementation challenges  Actions taken include developing resources, offering technical assistance, and convening stakeholders  More specifically, we identified selected activities that were taken by NHTSA, NTIA, FCC, and DHS that address some of the funding, technology, and governance challenges raised by state and local 911 stakeholders, for example: Cost study: NHTSA’s National 911 Program and NTIA, in consultation with FCC and DHS, plan to issue a study of the range of costs for 911 call centers and service providers to implement NG911 systems  According to NHTSA officials, the cost study will present a nationwide view, rather than a state-by-state view, on the progress of NG911 implementation and its associated costs  Grant program: NHTSA and NTIA are preparing to jointly administer a $115 million grant program to improve 911 services, including the adoption and operation of NG911 services  In September 2017, NHTSA and NTIA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking outlining implementing regulations for the grant program  NHTSA and NTIA expect to award the grants in 2018  Technology standards: The National 911 Program issued an annual guide in 2017 that stressed the importance of using open technology standards for NG911 services  The guide provides a list of standards that have been recently updated and an analysis that identifies whether existing standards fully address NG911 processes and protocols  Cybersecurity guides: DHS issued a guide in 2016 that identified cybersecurity risks for NG911 and risk mitigation strategies  According to DHS officials, the National 911 Program provided input on this guide  In addition, an advisory body tasked by FCC to examine 911 call-centers’ architecture issued a report in 2016 that provided a cybersecurity self-assessment tool for call centers and guidance on cybersecurity strategies  Governance plans: To address challenges related to the evolving roles for state and local 911 authorities, the National 911 Program issued a guide in 2016 that provided practices for states to consider when interconnecting NG911 networks, and DHS issued a guide in 2015 for emergency communications officials for establishing, assessing, and updating their governance structures  In addition, an FCC advisory body issued a report in 2016 that identified NG911 governance approaches, issues, and recommendations for states, localities, and call centers to consider when planning for the deployment of NG911  In addition to federal agency efforts to assist the state and local 911 community, the National 911 Program is in the early stages of establishing an interagency initiative to create a National NG911 Roadmap  As part of this initiative, the National 911 Program plans to convene the 911 stakeholder community to identify tasks that need to be completed at the national level by the federal government and other public and private-sector organizations to support the creation of a national, interconnected NG911 system  Additional details regarding this planned activity are described in further detail later in this report  For additional information on federal actions to address state and local NG911 challenges, see appendix II  As the lead entity for coordinating federal NG911 activities, the National 911 Program has taken a variety of actions to assist the state and local 911 community, in collaboration with other federal agencies  However, the program lacks goals and performance measures to assess whether these activities are achieving desired results  National 911 Program officials stated that they initiate program activities based on feedback received from the 911 community  In addition, officials said the program’s activities fall within the tasks established in the Next Generation 911 Advancement Act of 2012  However, the National 911 Program does not have a means to assess its progress toward meeting its responsibilities established in the 2012 Act  National 911 Program officials said the Office of EMS—the office within NHTSA in which the program is housed—has a strategic plan, but it is outdated and does not contain specific goals or performance measures related to 911 or NG911 implementation  Officials said the Office of EMS has held preliminary discussions to begin updating its strategic plan by January 2019 and plans to include goals and performance measures related to 911 and NG911 services  Office of EMS officials told us the Office of EMS strategic plan will be jointly developed with the National 911 Program  However the Office of EMS had not yet developed a draft strategic plan during the time of our review  Federal internal control standards call for management to clearly define objectives in order to achieve desired results  According to these standards, an entity determines its mission, establishes specific measurable objectives, and formulates plans to achieve its objectives  These standards state that management sets objectives in order to meet the entity’s mission, strategic plan, and goals and requirements of applicable laws and regulations  In addition, our work on leading practices for managing for results indicated that an agency’s strategic goals should also explain what results are expected from the agency and when to expect those results  Further, these goals form a basis for an entity to identify strategies to fulfill its mission and improve its operations to support the achievement of that mission  As the lead entity for coordinating federal NG911 efforts, the National 911 Program faces a complex and challenging task of assisting the 911 community while the nation’s 911 systems undergo a major transformation  However, without specific goals and related performance measures, the National 911 Program is unable to assess how well its activities are achieving results in relation to its responsibilities identified in the 2012 Act  As the National 911 Program and the Office of EMS consider creating a strategic plan, ensuring that the plan includes specific goals and related measures for the National 911 Program would help officials better understand whether the program’s activities are effectively assisting states and localities in transitioning to a fully integrated national NG911 system, and help identify any programmatic changes that might be needed  As previously mentioned, the National 911 Program is in the early stages of establishing an interagency initiative to create a National NG911 Roadmap  This initiative will convene the 911 stakeholder community to identify national-level tasks that need to be completed by federal agencies and other organizations to realize a national, interconnected NG911 system  According to the National 911 Program, a list of the national-level tasks needed to advance NG911 implementation nationwide has not been created to date  In addition, state officials we spoke with said there are certain issues related to interoperability and cybersecurity that federal agencies need to address before states can connect their respective state NG911 systems  To address these issues, NHTSA’s National 911 Program issued a request for proposal (RFP) in August 2017 for managing the roadmap development process and awarded a contract in September 2017  While the National 911 Program is taking steps to develop a National NG911 Roadmap, the program does not have a plan to identify: (1) roles or responsibilities for federal entities to carry out national-level tasks or (2) how the program plans to achieve the roadmap’s objectives  NHTSA’s NG911 roadmap RFP specifies that by identifying a list of national-level tasks that are developed and adopted by the 911 stakeholder community, the roadmap could serve as a blueprint to carry out these tasks and thereby ensure the interoperability of the nation’s NG911 system  However, the National 911 Program does not have plans for the entities participating in the development of the roadmap to be assigned roles and responsibilities for executing the roadmap’s national- level tasks  National 911 Program officials told us the National 911 Program does not plan to assign roles and responsibilities because NHTSA does not have the authority to require or assign tasks for other entities  Additionally, program officials view the simultaneous identification of tasks and assignments of responsibility for those tasks as a risk to facilitating a candid and productive discussion with entities participating in the roadmap initiative  However, officials stated it may be appropriate for agencies participating in the roadmap initiative to perform specific tasks after the roadmap is finalized  We have previously examined interagency collaborative mechanisms and identified certain key issues for federal agencies to consider when using these mechanisms to achieve results  Our prior work has found that following leading collaboration practices, such as clarifying roles and responsibilities of agencies engaged in collaboration, can enhance and sustain collaboration among agencies and provide an understanding of who will do what in support of meeting the aims of the collaborative group  As stated above, the RFP specifies that a roadmap developed by and adopted by 911 stakeholders could serve as a blueprint to carry out the roadmap’s tasks  Securing the commitment of agencies to assigned roles could help organize the collaborative group’s joint and individual efforts and thereby better facilitate decision making  As we have previously found, a lack of clarity on the roles and responsibilities of agencies participating in an interagency effort—such as the execution of the roadmap’s tasks—may limit agencies’ abilities to effectively achieve shared objectives  Given the complexity of the task and the number of agencies that could be involved, following selected leading collaboration practices for the roadmap initiative—particularly with regard to collaborating with roadmap stakeholders to clarify their roles and responsibilities (whether during the creation of the task list or afterwards)—could reduce barriers to agencies effectively working together to achieve the national-level tasks  While clarifying the roles and responsibilities of roadmap stakeholders for the execution of the roadmap’s tasks is an important collaborative step, the National 911 Program has additional responsibilities as the lead entity for the initiative  However, National 911 Program officials are unable to clearly articulate how the program will proceed following the completion of the roadmap  National 911 Program officials said without knowing the contents of the roadmap, it would be premature to specify how the roadmap’s national-level tasks would be completed  Officials stated that once the roadmap is completed, possible next steps may include identification of timelines, deadlines, and a mechanism for tracking progress, among other things, but officials stated that these steps are not required in the roadmap RFP  As stated above, federal internal control standards call for management to clearly define objectives in specific terms  According to these standards, management defines what is to be achieved, who is to achieve it, how it will be achieved, and the time frames for achievement  Without a clear plan for how the National 911 Program would take next steps to support the implementation of the roadmap’s objectives and tasks, the National 911 Program may not be prepared to take effective action once the roadmap is completed  We have previously found that having an implementation plan can assist agencies to better focus and prioritize goals and objectives, and align planned activities  Once the roadmap is completed, developing an implementation plan that details what is to be achieved and how it will be accomplished will place the National 911 Program in a better position moving forward to support the completion of the national-level tasks  The current 911 system is undergoing a historic transition  With no federal requirement that states transition to NG911 services, federal leadership is critical to addressing interoperability challenges and promoting the goal of an interconnected national system  As the lead federal entity for fostering coordination and collaboration among federal, state, and local 911 authorities, the National 911 Program plays a critical role in coordinating NG911 implementation efforts to improve the nation’s 911 services  However, this program—in collaboration with other federal agencies— faces a complex and challenging task to help move approximately 6,000 independent 911 call centers toward an interconnected national NG911 system  In addition, given that the NG911 transition is still in its early stages and is an ongoing effort, it is difficult to assess the effectiveness of various federal actions to assist states and localities in the transition  In light of these challenges, without specific goals and related measures to assess effectiveness, the National 911 Program may be hindered in determining whether it is making progress towards its stated mission  Through the roadmap initiative, the National 911 Program has taken important first steps in identifying the need for actions at the national level, in order to fully realize the desired end-state of a national, interconnected NG911 system  However, while identifying needed next steps is essential, equally important to the collaborative effort’s success is (1) defining and agreeing on the roles and responsibilities of the entities best suited to undertake these actions, and (2) developing plans for how the National 911 Program will support implementation to achieve the roadmap’s objectives  If taken, these actions could help further NG911 implementation nationwide and help the National 911 Program and federal agencies in assisting states and localities to improve these lifesaving services  We are making the following three recommendations to the Administrator of NHTSA regarding the National 911 Program: develop specific program goals and performance measures related to NG911 implementation  (Recommendation 1) in collaboration with the appropriate federal agencies, determine roles and responsibilities of federal agencies participating in the National NG911 Roadmap initiative in order to carry out the national-level tasks over which each agency has jurisdiction  (Recommendation 2) develop an implementation plan to support the completion of the National NG911 Roadmap’s national-level tasks  (Recommendation 3) We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Transportation, Commerce, and Homeland Security and FCC for their review and comment  In its comments, reproduced in appendix III, the Department of Transportation agreed with the recommendations  The Departments of Transportation and Homeland Security also provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate  The Department of Commerce and FCC had no comments  As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the report date  At that time, we will send copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, the Secretary of the Department of Commerce, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the Managing Director of the FCC, and other interested parties  In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www gao gov  If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-2834 or goldsteinm@gao gov  Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report  Staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in appendix IV  Our objectives were to examine (1) progress states and localities are making to implement Next Generation 911 (NG911) and the challenges they have faced and (2) how federal agencies have addressed state and local implementation challenges and planned next steps  To describe state and local progress in implementing NG911 and background information on fee collection and costs, we analyzed select survey data elements from the 2016 National 911 Progress Report and the Eighth Annual Report to Congress on State Collection and Distribution of 911 and Enhanced 911 Fees and Charges, maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) respectively  More specifically, we analyzed the most recent state-provided data (from calendar year 2015) related to the planning and implementation of NG911 at the state and local levels, as well as NG911 cost and 911-related revenue data  We assessed the reliability of these data by reviewing relevant documents and discussing data elements with staff responsible for collecting and analyzing the data  We also conducted our own testing to check the consistency of the data  We found the data from both sources to be sufficiently reliable for our purposes to describe states’ progress in implementing NG911 and provide background on 911 fee collection and costs  While these data provide the best nationwide picture of NG911 implementation and fee collection, and are reliable for our purposes, there are some limitations on how the data can be used  Since we did not validate the state-reported responses, our findings based on these data are limited to what states reported  Additionally, regarding the 2016 National 911 Progress Report data, there are limitations to (1) making comparisons between states because states have different approaches to implementing NG911 and (2) ascertaining year-over-year progress because reporting is voluntary and states’ response rates can vary year to year  To describe implementation challenges that states and local authorities may be encountering, we selected a non-generalizable sample of 10 states as case studies, based upon a variety of factors, including reported progress in implementing NG911, statewide planning and coordination, reported number of annual 911 calls, whether states diverted 911 fees to other uses, and variation in geographic location  We selected these states, in part, based on their responses to the two aforementioned surveys  Based on the aforementioned criteria, we selected the following states to include as case studies: California, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Virginia  We reviewed documents and interviewed state officials from all of these states except Nevada about NG911 implementation progress, challenges, federal actions, and any additional assistance needed  We contacted 911 officials in Nevada but did not receive responses  We also interviewed local officials in four of the selected states  While not generalizable to all states, the information obtained from our case studies provides examples of broader issues faced by states and localities in managing the NG911 transition  To determine how federal agencies have addressed state and local implementation challenges and planned next steps, we reviewed relevant statutes, regulations, and documentation of federal agency actions and plans, and our prior reports  We also interviewed officials from federal agencies, including NHTSA, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), FCC, and the U S  Department of Homeland Security (DHS), about federal actions taken and plans for next steps  To understand planning activities undertaken by NHTSA’s National 911 Program, and its planned project to develop a National NG911 Roadmap, we reviewed the National 911 Program’s internal planning documents, the program’s request for proposal to develop a national roadmap, the program’s written responses to our questions, and interviewed National 911 Program officials  In addition, we interviewed officials from national associations representing emergency-response- technology companies, wireless and wireline phone carriers, emergency- communications entities, and groups representing deaf and hard-of- hearing consumers to gain their perspectives on federal actions taken and next steps  We assessed the National 911 Program’s strategic- planning activities against leading practices for performance management found in our prior work on strategic planning and goal setting and federal internal control standards  We assessed the National 911 Program’s planned activities for the national roadmap project against federal internal control standards and selected key practices to enhance interagency collaboration identified in our prior work  We conducted our work from January 2017 to January 2018 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives  We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives  Description of challenge State and local funding may not be sufficient to support costs associated with transitioning to NG911 equipment and infrastructure  Transitioning from legacy infrastructure to Internet Protocol-based systems presents technical and operational challenges such as interoperability and cybersecurity risks  Federal actions Grant resources: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) National 911 Program issued on its website a list clarifying which of the fiscal year 2016 emergency-communications grants may be used for NG911 services  Program officials said they developed this list in collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)  Cost study: NHTSA’s National 911 Program and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), in consultation with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and DHS, plan to issue a study of the range of costs for 911 call centers and service providers to implement NG911 systems and on the nationwide progress of implementing NG911 services  Grant program: NHTSA and NTIA are preparing to jointly administer a $115 million grant program to improve 911 services, including the adoption and operation of NG911 services  NHTSA and NTIA expect to award the grants in 2018  Funding mechanisms: An advisory body tasked by FCC issued a report in 2016 that identified common costs and funding mechanisms for 911 officials to consider  The report also introduced a 911 funding sustainment model designed for use by 911 officials to calculate their financial needs to support a transition to NG911 implementation  Guides on technology standards and procurement practices: In 2017, NHTSA’s National 911 Program issued an annual guide on emergency- communications technology standards that stressed the importance of using open technology standards for NG911 services  The National 911 Program issued another guide in 2016 that provides information on procuring goods and services related to NG911 such as practices for call centers to consider when developing their request for proposals and contracts  Examining emerging technology issues: In 2017, FCC tasked a public- private advisory council to recommend how FCC can promote the NG911 transition, enhance the reliability of NG911, and mitigate the threat of 911 outages  Prior to that tasking, the FCC advisory council issued a report in 2016 that explored location-based routing issues and discussed transition considerations from legacy 911 to NG911  NG911 cybersecurity guide and technical assistance: DHS, with input from NHTSA’s National 911 Program according to DHS officials, issued a guide in 2016 that identifies cybersecurity risks for NG911 and risk mitigation strategies  In addition, DHS provides NG911 technical assistance for states seeking assistance with strategic planning and technology integration  In a separate effort, an advisory body tasked by FCC to examine 911 call center architecture issued a report in 2016 that provides a cybersecurity self- assessment tool for call centers and guidance on cybersecurity strategies  Description of challenge States may face a range of challenges related to evolving roles for state and local 911 authorities that could hinder NG911 implementation  Federal actions Guides on state and legislative planning: NHTSA’s National 911 Program issued guides on state 911 planning and legislative issues to consider for NG911 and awarded a contract in September 2017 to update those guides  In 2016, the National 911 Program issued a guidebased on the experiences of Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota that identifies practices to consider for states interconnecting NG911 networks across state lines  Exploring NG911 governance implementation issues: In 2016, an advisory body tasked by FCC issued a report that identifies NG911 governance approaches, issues, and recommendations for states, localities, and call centers to consider when planning for the deployment of NG911  In 2013, FCC also issued a report that details recommendations to Congress for transitioning from legacy 911 to NG911 networks  Guide on emergency communications governance structures: In 2015, DHS and the National Council of Statewide Interoperability Coordinators issued a guide that provides characteristics of effective governance approaches and best practices for officials to establish, assess, and update their governance structures  In addition to the contact named above, Andrew Huddleston (Assistant Director), Jean Cook (Analyst in Charge), Camilo Flores, Steven Rabinowitz, Malika Rice, Kelly L  Rubin, Michael Sweet, Hai Tran, Marika Van Laan, and Michelle Weathers made key contributions to this report 


Report 2: Implementing Telework: The Telework Enhancement Act of 2010 (the Act) establishes telework implementation requirements for agencies, including, for example, that each agency designate a Telework Managing Officer and that each agency incorporate telework into its continuity of operations plans  The Act does not mention telework specifically in the context of space planning  The Act also requires the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to assess whether agencies have met agency- established telework outcome goals such as real estate savings  It also requires OPM to submit reports that include executive agencies’ goals for increasing telework participation to the extent practicable, assist each agency with developing qualitative- and quantitative- teleworking measures and goals, and track telework eligibility and participation rates across the government  According to OPM telework information from fiscal year 2012 through fiscal year 2015, the percentage of federal workers eligible to telework remained stable at about 45 percent, on average  However, during the same period, the percentage of eligible employees who participated in telework increased from 29 percent to 46 percent  Figure 1 shows the frequency of telework across the federal government from fiscal years 2012 through 2015 by type of telework  Reducing Space: OMB issued the National Strategy for the Efficient Use of Real Property and the Reduce the Footprint policy in 2015, which require all CFO Act agencies to improve the efficiency of real property use, control costs, and reduce holdings  These OMB initiatives also required agencies to develop Five-Year Real Property Efficiency Plans annually; develop office space standards that specify maximum square footage identify reduction targets for office space in square feet; and freeze the footprint (i e , not increase square footage of office space)  OMB’s National Strategy noted that employee telework has changed the dynamic of the federal real property portfolio and resulted in a need for less space  OMB’s Reduce the Footprint guidance memo states that agencies’ 5-year plans should include an explanation of actions the agency is taking to increase space efficiency, including cost-effective alternatives to acquisition of additional office space, such as consolidation, colocation, teleworking, and “hoteling ” Federal statute also requires that agencies consider whether space needs can be met using alternative workplace arrangements when deciding whether to acquire new space  GSA defines mobility as an overarching term describing the ability of employees, enabled by information technology (IT) and workplace policies to perform work both within and outside the agency worksite  Under this definition, mobility includes telework, desk-sharing, site work, and travel  Agencies can strategically use telework—one form of mobility—combined with desk-sharing and hoteling to reduce space needs and increase efficiency  This allows agencies to plan for fewer workstations than the number of employees  Other space efficiency strategies such as smaller workstations (e g , reduced space standards), reconfigured office space (e g , open-office plans instead of private offices), and mobile technology (e g , laptops, Wi-Fi throughout the office, and smart phones) can be combined with telework and used as planning tools to reduce office space, use space more efficiently, and potentially cut costs  GSA, in a 2010 publication, described a continuum of three different scenarios for the ways agencies may use mobility, including telework  These scenarios range from limited mobility not leveraged for space planning to extensive mobility leveraged for space planning to reduce and use office space more efficiently: (1) No space changes: Some employees telework at least 2 scheduled days per week but retain assigned workstations with no changes to the existing space configuration  (2) No space reduction but different space allocation: Most employees telework at least 2 scheduled days per week and keep assigned workstations  Workstations are smaller and more densely organized; and space freed up by smaller workstations can be used for collaborative work spaces  (3) Space reduction and different space allocation: Nearly all employees telework at least 3 scheduled days per week and participate in hoteling (i e , unassigned workstations), and workstations are also smaller and more densely organized  In this scenario, according to GSA, an agency can redesign its office and potentially reduce space by up to 30 percent  The key factors in distinguishing these scenarios illustrated in figure 2 below include the: level of employee participation in telework; changes to physical office spaces (e g , smaller and more densely organized workstations and more emphasis on collaborative workspaces); and extent to which employees have assigned workstations or participate in desk-sharing  Under federal statute, GSA has a role in promulgating rules and developing guidance promoting the efficient use of real property  For example, the GSA Administrator may provide guidance, assistance, and oversight to client agencies regarding the establishment and operation of alternative workplace arrangements, which include leveraging telework to reduce space needs  GSA also directly assists client agencies with identifying and prioritizing opportunities to improve and implement real- property efficiency measures  In reviewing planning documents, policies, and survey data, we found that the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies reported using telework to reduce or use space more efficiently  Specifically, our analysis of (1) agency-wide space-planning policies and procedures and (2) Real Property Efficiency Plans found that all of the agencies discussed telework in the context of space planning and achieving greater space efficiencies  Agencies also provided examples in survey responses of how they have used telework to increase operational effectiveness while optimizing their use of space  Fifteen agencies’ space-planning policies and procedures included provisions for using telework and other mobility strategies, such as hoteling and desk-sharing, as a strategic space-planning tool  Three of the agencies mentioned these strategies only in the context of space planning, and five agencies did not mention them at all (see table 1)  For the fifteen agencies with space planning policies that incorporated telework, the documents either expressly directed agency planners to include telework, hoteling, or desk-sharing in space planning; provided instructions and guidance for using these in space planning; or issued space allocation standards for their implementation  Several agency-wide space plans identify space reduction goals based on using telework strategically  For example, the Department of Transportation (DOT) documents identify a goal of at least a 10 percent workspace reduction in new acquisitions as a result of compressed work schedules and telework, and specifically state that employees who telework six or more days per pay period should not have a permanent workspace  Agency-wide space planning documents from three civilian CFO Act agencies mentioned telework, hoteling or desk-sharing as strategies in the context of space planning  For example, DOJ’s agency-wide policy notes that telework and hoteling could increase the efficient use of space and directs each sub-agency to maintain its own space design guidelines within agency-wide policy office space standards  The other two agencies, the Department of State and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, either had a short provisional agency-wide space planning document that laid out space standards or mentioned telework, hoteling and desk-sharing as a tool for creating sustainable space  Five agencies’ space planning documents made no reference to telework; however, one agency, OPM, developed a maximum office space utilization rate and criteria for determining which positions require a private office  As noted above, OMB’s Reduce the Footprint policy (2015) requires agencies to establish Real Property Efficiency Plans  In our analysis of the agencies’ fiscal year 2016 or 2017 plans, we found that 19 of the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies discussed telework in the context of space planning  A few agencies’ Real Property Efficiency Plans explicitly stated that the agency reduced space as a result of telework  For example, GSA used telework to reduce space in its Heartland, Rocky Mountain, and National Capital Region offices  Some (5 of 23) Real Property Efficiency Plans discussed the telework pilot programs agencies have initiated  For example, the Department of Education’s plans reported using a pilot program to acclimate employees to teleworking and desk-sharing; as a result, the agency intends to incorporate hoteling or space-sharing opportunities into proposed space designs in future projects  The Social Security Administration (SSA) plans also reported initiating a pilot program to experiment with smaller “hoteling” workspaces  Similarly, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s plan reported conducting a pilot program at its headquarters offices to identify challenges, better understand telework, and evaluate the potential of shared workspaces  In response to our survey, about three-quarters of agencies reported space-planning policies that use telework to reduce office space, lower real estate costs, or reduce the size of individual workstations  Agencies reported accomplishing this by using desk-sharing and hoteling for employees who have relinquished permanent workspaces  For example, several agencies discussed strategies to reduce space in their responses to our survey  The Department of Labor reported using telework to close some small offices resulting in overall space reductions of about 16,000 square feet  OPM reported that it both reduced space and created space efficiencies by transitioning staff in its Eastern Management Development Center to full-time telework and terminating the lease, resulting in a space reduction of about 32,000 square feet  OPM’s Human Resource Solutions Program also achieved a 47 percent space reduction when it instituted desk-sharing and freed the vacated space for use by another program office  The Department of the Treasury reported that its sub-agency, the Internal Revenue Service, has aggressively used telework to help reduce its real property portfolio, while other Treasury units have leveraged telework to achieve significant space reductions  At the end of fiscal year 2016, Treasury reported agency-wide reductions of about 484,000 square feet at a cost savings of about $10 million  Two agencies––Department of Homeland Security, and the National Science Foundation––reported using telework to increase the efficiency of existing office space in sub-agencies by increasing staff without increasing the size of offices, for example: The Department of Homeland Security reported that one of its sub- agencies used telework in the planning and design of a new office, resulting in both a space reduction and more efficient use of the space  The new office is 57,573 square feet smaller than the prior office while personnel assigned to the office increased from 315 to 394  The National Science Foundation reported that it used teleworking, among other workspace strategies such as new space standards and virtual technologies, to increase staff numbers without increasing its real estate footprint  Among the agencies we reviewed in detail—GSA, OJP, CDC, and the Fiscal Service—the use of telework in office space planning varied from emerging consideration to extensive implementation  GSA and OJP have used telework extensively to both reduce space and increase space efficiency in their office spaces  CDC has leveraged telework to reduce space or use space more efficiently in more limited cases while the Fiscal Service has begun to consider telework in future space planning  Appendix II provides additional details on office spaces where these agencies reduced space or used space more efficiently, including the role of telework, if any  GSA has leveraged telework to reduce space by implementing unassigned workstations in nearly all of its regional and headquarters offices, along with other forms of “employee mobility,” complementary IT, and smaller space standards  GSA adopted telework as early as 1999 and by fiscal year 2015, more than 90 percent of all eligible GSA employees teleworked, and nearly half of all employees teleworked 3 or more days per pay period, according to OPM data  GSA’s space policy cites desk-sharing (e g , hoteling, “hot-desking,” or other arrangements) as one strategy to help meet its space standard of 136 useable square feet (USF) per person  GSA employees may telework full-time, but may be required to give up dedicated workstations if they are on site 2 or fewer days per week  GSA has gradually transitioned to unassigned workstations at headquarters and in its regional offices, allowing the agency to implement desk-sharing and calculate space needs at less than one desk per employee  The agency also assigned laptops and mobile or soft phones to employees to further maximize mobility  The three GSA sites we visited used space-planning strategies to achieve, or nearly achieve, GSA’s space standard of 136 USF per person  For example, at its Philadelphia Regional Office, GSA leveraged existing telework levels to meet reduced space standards and move to a smaller leased space by accommodating about 600 employees in fewer than 500 workstations  According to GSA, this allowed the office to achieve a utilization rate of 139 USF per person and realize a reported annual rent cost savings of about $2 million  Similarly, at its New York Regional Office, GSA also leveraged existing telework levels to meet reduced space standards and move to a smaller leased space  This step allowed the office to achieve a utilization rate of 119 USF per person and realize a reported total rent cost savings of nearly $11 million  GSA also leveraged telework as part of its headquarters consolidation  GSA reports that it was able to move approximately 1,000 additional employees to the headquarters building by implementing a hoteling system and planning for less than one workstation per employee  This allowed GSA to achieve a utilization rate of 138 USF per person at its headquarters and realize a reported annual rent-cost savings of approximately $24 million  Similar to GSA, OJP used telework, along with complementary tools, to reduce space and use space more efficiently at its consolidated office  More than 90 percent of eligible employees teleworked in fiscal year 2015, and nearly half of all employees teleworked 3 or more days per pay period, according to OPM data  More recently, OJP reported that around 70 percent of its employees teleworked in August 2017, with just less than 40 percent doing so three or more days per pay period  At the departmental level, DOJ’s plans to improve space utilization include reduced space requirements, and, in some cases, alternative workplace strategies  DOJ’s space utilization policy mentions telework with hoteling as one way to increase efficient use of space, and DOJ’s telework policy mentions the potential of telework to create cost savings by decreasing space needs  While most OJP employees are eligible to telework, a few federal staff occupying administrative positions are not eligible  OJP took the opportunity to examine and improve its space use as three of its leases approached expiration in 2013  It leased space in two adjacent buildings under three separate leases  OJP worked with GSA to analyze space-planning options, contracting a study of the office that recommended ways to improve space utilization  This study included a survey of all employees, a complete physical space survey, and interviews with leadership  The results of this study not only indicated OJP employees’ openness to more mobility but also that they had concerns such as loss of privacy and social connectedness  For example, more than 80 percent of survey respondents said they could work off-site more often with proper tools and support, and almost half said they would give up dedicated space to work remotely more often  Furthermore, interviews with the leadership of several OJP units indicated a willingness to support increased mobility but also a need to maintain privacy and improve mobile IT  According to OJP, it alleviated these concerns by encouraging participation in the planning process, highlighting opportunities for positive changes, and maintaining open communication (e g , communicating changes and expected benefits)  Based on the analysis of space-planning options, OJP retained one of the three previous leases and leveraged telework to accommodate all employees into less space overall in one building  OJP achieved this objective by targeting 25 percent employee mobility and implementing hoteling  Concurrently, OJP officials explained that they introduced smaller workstations and used tenant-improvement allowance funds to reconfigure space for more flexible use  Physical reconfigurations included changing hard-walled office spaces with dedicated workstations to a primarily open office with few walls or dedicated workstations  According to OJP, it complemented these changes with investments in mobile IT for individual employees, improved IT capabilities in conference rooms and other collaborative spaces, and an emphasis on training employees to work well in a mobile office environment  For example, OJP officials said they installed Wi-Fi throughout the space, issued laptops and smart phones to employees, upgraded video-conferencing capabilities in conference rooms and collaborative spaces, and expanded tools for informal employee communication  According to OJP officials, through the consolidation, they said they achieved a utilization rate of 190 USF per person—a decrease of 30 USF per person from the prior 220 utilization rate  This rate remained higher than DOJ’s overall target and housed the same total number of employees—about 1,000—in about 50,000 fewer USF  OJP reports that the consolidation resulted in an estimated $3 million annual lease- cost savings  OJP also estimates additional savings from reduced transit subsidies, carbon emissions, and continuity of operations  Relative to GSA and OJP, CDC has made more limited use of telework in office space-planning  CDC officials told us that they have leveraged telework as a space-planning tool in many locations, but they have only documented doing so in one case  HHS expects each sub-agency to comply with its 170 USF per-person utilization-rate policy, and this policy suggests that planned space reductions should take telework into account  As a component of HHS, CDC has its own space policy, which states that telework, desk-sharing, and hoteling can help CDC’s units meet HHS’s utilization rate policy of 170 USF per person  CDC’s telework policy requires employees who telework frequently to agree to participate in desk-sharing, but according to CDC officials, how and to what extent this portion of the broader policy is implemented is up to the discretion of management  CDC officials cited two limitations to further implementing space sharing techniques: (1) the large number of employees’ who may be unable to telework on certain days based upon their job responsibilities and (2) the voluntary nature of telework  Some CDC employees cannot work off-site at least some of the time due to confidential data or lab-based work  Approximately 60 percent of eligible CDC employees teleworked in fiscal year 2015 and about one-quarter of all employees teleworked 3 or more days per pay period, according to OPM data  CDC officials told us that telework participation ranges from 49 to 86 percent across CDC units  CDC’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion’s office in Chamblee, GA, provides the most clearly documented case of CDC’s leveraging telework for space efficiency  According to CDC officials, this unit accommodated more than 300 additional employees within its existing space by implementing hoteling for employees who telework 4 or more days per pay period, and it continues to use hoteling as part of its space management strategy  In contrast, CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics’ (NCHS) office in Hyattsville, MD, reduced space without leveraging telework by reconfiguring the space with smaller, soft-walled workstations  CDC officials told us that NCHS reduced its office space from seven floors to three and three-quarters floors, resulting in a reported space reduction of more than 40 percent and allowing it to achieve a 170 USF per person utilization rate  CDC officials reported that this space reduction resulted in annual rent cost savings of approximately $1 million  Hoteling was not feasible at this location because work on confidential data limits the ability of employees to work off-site, and NCHS employees also prefer dedicated workstations  CDC officials said that there is limited documentation of any additional cases of CDC’s leveraging telework as a space- planning tool because, prior to our review, there had been no formal request to connect telework and space utilization data  In contrast to GSA, OJP, and CDC, telework as a space-planning tool is an emerging consideration at the Fiscal Service  At the departmental level, Treasury has space standards that aim for efficient and effective offices that use increased telework and shared workstations to minimize the number of dedicated workstations  Similarly, objectives of the Fiscal Service telework policy include cost savings from reduced office space needs  Treasury’s space standards specify a planned maximum utilization rate of 200 USF per person for facilities with general office space, and the Fiscal Service reported that its average office space-utilization rate was 183 USF per person at the time of our review

ground_truth: Each year, millions of Americans call 911 for help during emergencies. However, the nation's legacy 911 system relies on aging infrastructure that is not designed to accommodate modern communications technologies. As a result, states and localities are upgrading to NG911, which offers improved capabilities, such as the ability to process images, audio files, and video. While deploying NG911 is the responsibility of state and local entities, federal agencies also support implementation, led by NHTSA's National 911 Program, which facilitates collaboration among federal, state, and local 911 stakeholders. GAO was asked to review NG911 implementation nationwide. This report examines: (1) state and local progress and challenges in implementing NG911 and (2) federal actions to address challenges and planned next steps. GAO reviewed relevant statutes, regulations, and federal agency reports and plans. GAO also analyzed NHTSA's survey data on state 911 implementation for calendar year 2015, the most recent year for which data were available, and interviewed federal officials, state and local officials from nine states (selected to represent different regions and various phases of NG911 implementation), and officials from industry and advocacy groups. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) National 911 Program's most recent national survey on Next Generation 911 (NG911) implementation indicated that about half of states were in some phase of transition to NG911 in 2015, but that state and local progress varied. Specifically, 10 states reported that all 911 authorities in their state processed calls using NG911 systems; however, 18 states reported having no state or local NG911 transition plans in place—which may indicate these states were in the early phases of planning for the transition to NG911 or had not yet begun. GAO spoke with state and local 911 officials in 9 states, which were in various phases of implementing NG911, and found that none of the 9 selected states were accepting images, audio files, or video. State and local 911 officials identified a number of challenges to implementing NG911. Such challenges are related to funding, evolving technology and operations, and governance. For example, officials in 3 states said that the current funding they collect from telephone service subscribers may not be sufficient to support NG911's transition costs while simultaneously funding the operation of existing 911 systems. Federal agencies—including NHTSA, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the Federal Communications Commission, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security—have responsibilities to support NG911 implementation, such as through coordinating activities and administering grants, and are taking actions to assist state and local entities in addressing challenges to NG911's implementation. Such actions include developing resources, offering technical assistance, and convening stakeholders to explore emerging NG911 issues. For example, as the lead entity for coordinating federal NG911 efforts, NHTSA's National 911 Program is developing resources on NG911 topics, such as federal funding and governance structures. While the National 911 Program is taking steps to facilitate the state and local transition to NG911, the program lacks specific performance goals and measures to assess its progress. Without such goals and measures, it is not clear to what extent the program is effectively achieving its mission. In 2018, the National 911 Program plans to establish an interagency initiative tasked with creating a National NG911 Roadmap. This roadmap is intended to identify next steps for the federal government in supporting the creation of a national, interconnected NG911 system. While the National 911 Program is taking steps to develop a list of national-level tasks as part of its roadmap initiative, the program does not have a plan to identify: (1) roles or responsibilities for federal entities to carry out these tasks or (2) how the program plans to achieve the roadmap's objectives. Collaborating with the appropriate federal agencies to determine federal roles and responsibilities to carry out the roadmap's national-level tasks could reduce barriers to agencies effectively working together to achieve those tasks. Furthermore, developing an implementation plan that details how the roadmap's tasks will be achieved would place the National 911 Program in a better position to effectively lead interagency efforts to implement NG911 nationwide. GAO recommends that NHTSA's National 911 Program develop performance goals and measures and, for the National NG911 Roadmap, determine agencies' roles and responsibilities and develop an implementation plan. NHTSA agreed with GAO's recommendations.

prompt_front: You are given two reports by the government agency.



Question: Write a one-page summary of the report 2.



Report 2:  Treasury policy also recommends hoteling for employees who are out of the office 80 or more hours per month, but the Fiscal Service told us that it would like to conduct additional desk-sharing pilots to assess their impact before negotiating broader desk-sharing with the union  At the Fiscal Service, approximately 80 percent of eligible employees teleworked in fiscal year 2015, and about one-quarter of all employees teleworked 3 or more days per pay period, according to OPM data  The Fiscal Service reported that approximately 80 percent of Fiscal Service employees telework at its Washington, D C , Maryland, and West Virginia locations  At the time of our review, the Fiscal Service officials said the agency had reduced space without leveraging telework or implementing hoteling, instead relying on smaller space standards (i e , fewer square feet per workstation) to lease smaller offices  For example, the Fiscal Service reduced space by giving up several floors at its Hyattsville, MD, office starting in 2012  According to Fiscal Service officials, they accomplished these reductions by consolidating data centers to other locations, conducting targeted buyouts of employees, and, most recently, by implementing a new space standard of 183 USF per person through smaller workstations  The officials said that the most recent space reduction at this location resulted in savings in annual rent costs not attributable to telework  Looking forward, the Fiscal Service reported that it has started taking preliminary steps to promote efficient space utilization through telework  These steps have included: creating an Executive Space Management Council that discussed incorporating telework and desk-sharing into space management guidelines; implementing a voluntary, informal desk-sharing pilot in one program area for employees who already telework 50 percent or more of the time; and seeking information from GSA, including discussing and visiting GSA offices that have implemented hoteling as part of their space planning model  In addition, the Fiscal Service officials told us that the agency plans to negotiate the impact and implementation of desk-sharing and hoteling for telework employees with its union, but the Fiscal Service has not yet begun this effort  Our analysis of the survey responses from the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies identified three major planning challenges agencies face with using telework to reduce space: human capital issues such as negotiating workspace changes with collective bargaining units and managing organizational change; the suitability of telework to mission work requirements; and difficulty measuring cost savings that might result from space reductions attributable to telework  This measuring difficulty may include both gross savings as well as savings net of costs, such as for renovations or IT investments  See table 3 for examples of space-planning challenges related to telework reported by the 23 agencies  To address these challenges, nearly two thirds of the agencies we surveyed reported they would like guidance on using telework programs or other alternatives to meet the federal goals of reducing space or using space more efficiently  Our review of agency survey responses, Real Property Efficiency Plans, and other agency space-planning documents, found that human capital challenges to using telework in space planning generally fell into two categories: (1) requirements to negotiate space allocation changes with collective-bargaining units; and (2) managing department workforces in adapting to new workspace designs and altered workspace allocations  Collective-bargaining challenges: Of the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies, 7 of 23 noted that changes to telework policy or workspace arrangements required negotiation with collective bargaining units, for example, The Small Business Administration (SBA) reported its greatest challenge to incorporating telework in office space planning has been with negotiating and securing agreement from all parties, including management and its union, on establishing space standards  HUD reported that it could not implement hoteling or desk-sharing as its collective-bargaining agreements require that each employee retain an assigned workstation regardless of an employee’s type of telework agreement  SSA reported that changing floor plans required negotiation with its three collective-bargaining units, which could extend the time needed for construction and relocation  DOT reported that collective-bargaining agreements posed a challenge to incorporating workforce mobility options, including telework  In addition, the collective-bargaining agreements we reviewed from the four agencies we reviewed in detail––GSA, OJP, CDC and Fiscal Service––required negotiations or the opportunity to negotiate changes to matters relating to workspace arrangements and in some cases, to telework policy  Managing change: Using telework as a strategic space-planning tool, particularly in conjunction with complementary space-saving efforts such as desk-sharing, hoteling, or open-space designs, generally involves a cultural change  Nine of the 23 agencies we surveyed reported challenges associated with managing change  For example, three agencies reported employees’ discomfort or apprehension about desk-sharing and hoteling  In 2013, we reported that organizations may also encounter concerns from agency leaders, managers, employees, or employee organizations when introducing physical space changes associated with increased workforce mobility (telework)  More recently, we reported that management concerns remain the most frequently reported barrier to expanding telework  Two private sector experts we met with underscored the importance of management “buy-in” saying it was imperative that senior executives fully support the initiative to facilitate the necessary cultural change for agencies to use telework in space planning  One noted that management needed to make the business case to employees so that each layer of the organization could understand the importance of the initiative and its potential benefits  Another suggested a change management plan tailored to the work performed within a unit  This individual said that key components of such a plan might include studying existing work practices and program requirements, surveying employee preferences, and including employees in the planning process  Further, a GSA document circulated in response to the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010 mentions obtaining supervisory “buy-in” or support as key to facilitating change  According to survey responses, within agencies there are sub-agencies that have individual mission requirements that may or may not be suitable for telework  This makes it difficult for agencies to implement overarching telework and space planning policies that apply department-wide  Sub- agencies and units within sub-agencies must individually determine if telework is appropriate given their particular mission requirements  For example, the Veterans Administration reported that although it developed an agency-wide telework policy, each sub-agency and supervisor has the flexibility to implement telework based on operational needs  Moreover, because the agency’s core mission involves direct services to veterans, about 83 percent of agency staff positions are not suitable for telework  The Telework Enhancement Act of 2010 outlines two broad exceptions to telework participation for employees: (1) directly handling secure materials determined to be inappropriate for telework by the agency head and (2) on-site activity that cannot be handled remotely or at an alternative worksite  In cases where telework does not support an agency’s mission or where a particular mission may require increases or decreases in personnel, telework as a strategic space-planning tool may not work  About half (12 of 23) of the agencies we surveyed reported that office space reductions resulting from using telework in space planning led to real estate cost savings while the other half reported either that cost savings did not result or they did not know  GSA officials told us that calculating cost savings attributable to a particular aspect of space planning is complicated as several factors contribute to savings  In particular, in survey responses, the Departments of Education, Energy, and Agriculture reiterated this point  OMB’s National Strategy for the Efficient Use of Real Property and its Reduce the Footprint policy encourage agencies to increase and maximize efficiencies in office space by implementing cost-effective strategies such as telework  For example, the National Strategy outlines a framework that aims to measure real property costs and utilization to improve the efficient use of federal real property  The Reduce the Footprint policy requires agencies to measure cost savings that result from reducing space through disposals  However, neither document offers guidance or methodologies on how to measure the costs or savings that may result from using telework  We previously reported that GSA works with client agencies to develop tools to measure office space utilization and, in 2013, was developing an Excel-based tool to help agencies quantify the benefits and costs of using telework to achieve greater office space efficiencies  This tool—the Workplace Investment and Feasibility Tool—is aimed at helping agencies quantify the benefits and costs of increased telework participation and implementing other alternative-work arrangements  When completed, the tool will enable users to quickly develop rough estimates of cost and space impacts resulting from workplace changes, particularly relating to desk-sharing, workspace reconfiguration, and consolidation  Key features include the ability to compare up to three scenarios, which in turn may be used to inform a more detailed design program  As of January 2018, GSA had not yet completed the tool  GSA officials said mission needs, resource constraints, and developmental adjustments have contributed to delays in the time frame for completing the tool  They added that during this time, GSA has diverted resources to space calculation tools for individual agencies  For example, GSA worked with DHS on its Space Calculation Tool as a way to help determine workplace space requirements in a manner consistent with DHS space policies  In January 2018, GSA officials told us that they plan to make the Workplace Investment and Feasibility Tool available to GSA staff in March 2018 along with training on how to use it  However, GSA officials have not decided whether to make the tool available to other federal agencies to use as a space-planning tool  Instead, the officials plan to assess GSA’s use of the tool and then determine in late 2018 if and how it should be released to other agencies for independent use  Given the absence of a government-wide tool, in our review, we found that some agencies had used their own resources to purchase similar tools for their space-planning needs from the private sector  Without such a government-wide resource, agencies may not be able to determine how best to reduce space or use it more efficiently  In responses to our survey, nearly two-thirds of agencies reported that they would find it helpful to have additional information, assistance, or resources to assist them in using telework as a space-planning tool  As noted above, a key element of GSA’s mission is to provide guidance and services that enable agencies to improve space utilization, reduce costs, and better achieve their missions  Moreover, under federal statute, GSA may provide guidance to executive agencies on the implementation of alternative workplace arrangements, which includes telework  Federal standards for internal control also call for agencies to communicate necessary quality information such as guidance with external parties  In reviewing GSA’s websites, we found that GSA last developed formal guidance on alternative workplace arrangements in 2006 and maintains several separate informational websites on implementing telework and optimizing space utilization  Our review of this guidance and these websites found that they do not provide specific guidance for using telework as a strategic space-planning tool  For example, the 2006 guidance is generally limited to defining the factors agency heads must contemplate when considering alternative workplace arrangements along with the equipment and technical services agencies may provide for alternative worksites  However, this guidance does not address in detail the impact of such arrangements on agency office space and resulting planning issues  Similarly, our review of GSA’s teleworking and space- planning websites found that although they separately offered documented case studies along with information such as tips for implementing telework and managing a mobile workforce, GSA did not provide documents consolidating the concept of using telework as a strategic space-planning tool  For example, information on GSA’s Total Workplace Program website––intended to assist agencies in using workforce mobility (including telework) to increase space efficiencies––is generally limited  Although this website includes high-level information that describes the potential benefits of using telework with office space planning and design, it lacks a practical outline of the process agencies might use to achieve them  Because the information in the 2006 guidance and the telework and space-planning websites is neither specific nor detailed, it is of limited assistance for agencies that would like to use telework as a strategic space-planning tool to meet the goals of a more efficient use of space  While using telework to reduce space is not a new challenge, it has become more pressing with OMB’s requirement for federal agencies to explore alternatives to acquiring more office space  Most civilian CFO Act agencies reported having a telework program in place and some reported success with using it in space planning to reduce space or accommodate more employees without increasing space  However, many of the agencies continue to face challenges and do not believe that they have adequate information, assistance, or resources to assist them in using telework as a space-planning tool or assess its costs and benefits  Until agencies have access to detailed guidance and tools to help utilize various space-planning options, they may not be able to effectively identify opportunities to use telework toward the goal of reducing their real property footprint  We are making the following two recommendations to GSA: The Administrator of General Services should ensure that the appropriate GSA offices develop guidance including, but not limited to, how agencies can use telework as a strategic space-planning tool for reducing and optimizing office space efficiency and that the offices make the guidance readily available  (Recommendation 1) The Administrator of General Services should ensure the appropriate GSA offices complete the Workplace Investment and Feasibility Tool and make it available to federal agencies for use in assessing the benefits and costs of telework to achieve office space efficiencies  (Recommendation 2) We provided a draft of this report to GSA, the Department of Justice, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of the Treasury  In its written comments, reproduced in Appendix III, GSA concurred with our recommendations and stated that it is developing a plan to address them  We received technical comments from the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services, which we incorporated where appropriate  The Department of the Treasury did not have comments on our draft report  We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees; the Administrator of GSA; and the Secretaries of the Department of Health and Human Services and Department of the Treasury, and the Attorney General of the Department of Justice  In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www gao gov  If you or your staff has any questions concerning this report, please contact me at (202) 512-2834 or rectanusl@gao gov  Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report  GAO staff that made key contributions to this report is listed in appendix III  This report addresses: (1) how the 23 civilian Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Act agencies reported using telework in office space planning; (2) the specific ways selected agencies and GSA used telework in their office space planning; and (3) any challenges the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies faced in using telework in office space planning  To determine how the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies reported using telework in office space planning, we surveyed the agencies  The survey asked questions about agency-wide efforts to use telework in the human- capital and space-planning areas; whether agencies had achieved any cost savings as a result; the challenges agencies faced in using telework in space planning; and asked agencies to identify additional information, resources, or guidance that might be helpful  In addition to the survey questions, we asked each agency real property officer to provide copies of agency-wide space-planning documents and the Real Property Efficiency Plans agencies prepared for fiscal years 2016 and 2017 pursuant to the requirements of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Reduce the Footprint policy  We developed survey questions based on our review of the relevant literature, white papers from federal agencies and private sector entities, and past GAO reports  We pre- tested the survey instrument with three federal agencies to ascertain: (1) the clarity of survey questions; (2) the precision of language; and 3) the availability of information queried  As a result of the pre-tests we made changes to the content and format of the survey where appropriate  We received survey responses from each of the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies in addition to requested space-planning documents and Real Property Efficiency Plans, and thus achieved a 100 percent response rate  We analyzed survey results by calculating the frequency of responses to dichotomous questions (i e , questions requiring a “yes” or “no” answer)  We also conducted a content analysis on the open-ended, narrative-based questions by identifying common themes and tabulating results  We also conducted a content analysis to determine the extent to which agencies referenced telework in their agency-wide space-planning documents and in their Real Property Efficiency Plans  To accomplish these analyses, we developed separate coding schemes for each of the two types of documents  These were based on information obtained in our literature review, interviews with subject matter experts, and our professional judgment  We then identified relevant sections and common themes, and coded and tabulated the results  To validate the coding results, we used a second, independent coder  To determine the specific ways agencies include telework in their office space planning, we selected a non-generalizable sample of three CFO Act agency sub-agencies as illustrative case studies  To select sub- agencies, we analyzed data from the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) Public Use 2014-2015 Telework Data call  First, we applied two selection criteria: (1) agency-wide progress toward a stated goal of using telework to reduce real estate costs, and (2) agency-reported data indicating that more than 25 percent of sub-agency employees teleworked 3 or more days per pay period  Next, we considered variations in sub-agency size and percentage of employees eligible to telework  Finally, we excluded candidates that had recently been selected for related GAO work and we excluded sub-agencies related to agency administration such as Offices of Inspector General or Secretary-level offices  We assessed the reliability of the OPM’s data by interviews with knowledgeable officials and by reviewing prior assessments of the same data, and we found the data reliable for our purposes  As a result of this process, we selected (1) the Department of the Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service (Fiscal Service); (2) the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); and (3) the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP)  For each of the selected agencies, we interviewed agency officials and reviewed their telework and space- planning documents  We also visited four sub-agency office locations to determine if and how telework played a role in any space reductions or efficiencies along with any associated cost savings  In addition to these three sub-agencies, we used the General Services Administration (GSA) as a comparative example since it is responsible for providing space- planning guidance to client agencies and has experience using telework in space planning  We interviewed GSA officials, reviewed relevant documents, and visited three GSA office locations with recent space reductions or efficiencies  In total, we conducted seven site visits including two Fiscal Service locations, one location each for CDC and OJP, and three GSA locations (National Headquarters, Region 2 Office, and Region 3 Office) in Washington, D C ; New York City; and Philadelphia, respectively  To identify any challenges the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies faced in using telework in office space planning, we analyzed results from survey questions addressed to challenges, interviewed sub-agency and GSA officials as detailed above, interviewed two private sector subject matter experts, and representatives from four private-sector entities that had reported using telework to reduce and use office space more efficiently  Statements made by knowledgeable federal officials, outside experts and private sector entities are not generalizable to the universe of civilian CFO Act agencies  We also analyzed the section of each of the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies’ Real Property Efficiency Plans devoted to challenges agency face in reducing space  We selected the two subject matter experts––representatives from Global Workplace Analytics and Fentress Facility Planning and Analytics––based on: (1) their experience working with federal agencies to incorporate telework programs into the space planning process; (2) information compiled in our literature review; (3) prior GAO reports; (4) internal GAO recommendations; and (5) industry recommendations  We selected the four private sector entities (AT&T, Deloitte, Adobe, and CapitalOne) based on our literature review, recommendations from industry experts, and reports of having achieved space efficiencies including space reduction, cost savings, or cost avoidance(s)  To identify what guidance or information on using telework as a space- planning tool GSA makes available through its website, we reviewed the contents of multiple GSA websites including Telework, Total Workplace, Alternative Work, and GSA Telework Resources  We followed links and reviewed webpage contents for information on how agencies might use telework as a strategic tool to reduce space or use space more efficiently  We compared GSA’s guidance and website information to relevant statutory requirements and federal internal controls standards related to external communication  We conducted this performance audit from January 2017 to March 2018 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives  We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives  In addition to the contact named above, David J  Wise (Director); Amelia Bates Shachoy (Assistant Director); Lindsay Bach (Analyst-in-Charge); Geoff Hamilton; Malika Rice; Kelly Rubin; Shelia Thorpe; Elise Vaughan Winfrey; and Amelia Michelle Weathers made key contributions to this report 
Report 2: , allowing users to search PA projects by project number), back to the high-level requirements (e g , storing data and information provided by the applicant) identified in the FAC-Trax functional requirements document and performance work statement  Officials did not track system enhancements back to high-level requirements because they did not have a complete understanding of basic user needs and system requirements at the beginning of the FAC- Trax effort, according to the PA program manager  A PA official also said the change control process was a way to identify the basic capabilities FAC-Trax needed to have and that tracking enhancements back to high- level requirements could have made the change control process more difficult to manage, and reduced user participation if, for example, users needed to understand how their change requests related to high-level requirements  However, program officials could have tracked enhancements back to high-level requirements themselves using the change control process without putting any additional burden on users  Despite not having a complete understanding of user needs and system requirements at the beginning of the FAC-Trax effort, analyzing whether users’ change requests satisfy higher-level requirements identified in key design and planning documents would have provided officials with a basis for more detailed and precise requirements throughout project development and helped them better manage the project, according to IT management controls  Further, according to the PMBOK® Guide, tracking or measuring system capabilities against approved requirements is a key process for managing a project’s scope, measuring project completion, and ensuring the project meets user needs and expectations  Program officials acknowledged the importance of tracking system enhancements back to documented system requirements  Ensuring that FAC-Trax meets user needs and expectations is especially important because the information system is key to the success of the new delivery model, according to PA officials  By analyzing progress made on documented, high-level requirements, a step that reflects a key IT management control for requirements development, the PA program will have greater assurance that FAC-Trax will provide functionality that meets user needs and expectations  PA program officials did not fully satisfy either of the two practices in the systems testing and integration control area, according to our assessment  Key systems testing and integration practices are (1) developing test plans and test cases, which include a description of the overall approach for system testing, the set of tasks necessary to prepare for and perform testing, the roles and responsibilities for individuals or groups responsible for testing, and criteria to determine whether the system has passed or failed testing; and (2) developing a systems integration plan to identify all systems to be integrated, describe how integration problems are to be documented and resolved, define roles and responsibilities of all relevant participants, and establish a sequence and schedule for every integration step  In regards to the first practice, PA program officials and the FAC-Trax contractor established a test plan that identifies the method and strategy to perform testing, including the necessary tasks, such as responding to user feedback and testing errors, and incorporating necessary resolutions into future work, testing parameters, and the roles and responsibilities of the individuals responsible for testing  However, program officials have not developed system testing criteria to evaluate FAC-Trax, which would align with the practice described above of using criteria to determine whether the system has passed or failed testing  A key feature of Agile software development is the “definition of done”—a set of clear, comprehensive, and objective criteria, that the government should use to evaluate software after each iteration of development  PA program officials said they did not establish a definition of done because officials initially managing the FAC-Trax effort lacked familiarity with system development in the Agile environment  Officials acknowledged the importance of establishing a definition of done and said they are planning to develop one, but have not identified how or when to incorporate it into the development process  According to the TechFAR—the government’s handbook for procuring digital services using Agile processes—the government and vendor should establish this definition after contract award at the beginning of each cycle of software development  By establishing criteria, such as a definition of done, to evaluate the system—a step that reflects a key IT management control for system testing and is an effective practice for applying Agile to software development—the PA program will have greater assurance that FAC- Trax is usable and responsive to specified requirements  In regards to the second practice, PA program officials developed a systems integration plan in June 2017 that identified the potential for integration of FAC-Trax with four FEMA systems, including EMMIE  In addition, program officials included a description of how staff should document integration problems and the resolution of problems in FAC- Trax development and test plans  However, the systems integration plan does not define roles and responsibilities of all participants for system integration activities or establish a sequence and schedule for every integration step for the four FEMA systems  PA officials said that system integration planning for FAC-Trax is in the early stages, but acknowledged the importance of these elements of system integration planning  Officials plan to define roles and responsibilities of all participants for system integration activities and develop the sequence and schedule for every integration step as they add new systems to the FAC-Trax development plan and obtain funding needed for their integration  Nonetheless, FEMA has used FAC-Trax for selected PA disasters since October 2016 and plans to use FAC-Trax for all future disasters  According to IT management controls, agencies should establish the systems integration plan early in the project and revise it to reflect evolving and emerging user needs  By ensuring that the FAC- Trax systems integration plan defines the roles and responsibilities of relevant participants for all integration relationships and establishes a sequence and schedule for every integration step, the PA program will have greater assurance that FAC-Trax functions properly with other systems and meets user needs  FEMA’s new delivery model enhances participation of hazard mitigation staff with the goal of identifying opportunities for mitigation earlier in the PA preaward process, according to PA officials  Two key changes related to hazard mitigation under the new model include (1) an emphasis on engaging with hazard mitigation specialists at the JFO earlier in the PA process and involving them in specific PA preaward activities and (2) the establishment of the PA program’s hazard mitigation liaison at the CRC  For example, position guides direct program delivery managers to coordinate with FIMA’s hazard mitigation specialists prior to recovery scoping meetings, and site inspectors to coordinate with hazard mitigation specialists prior to site inspections to discuss a PA grant applicant’s damages and any potential mitigation opportunities  PA program officials also developed guidance for conducting the exploratory call and the recovery scoping meeting with applicants, which include questions for PA staff to ask on the applicant’s interest in or plans for incorporating hazard mitigation into potential projects  In addition, a new hazard mitigation liaison at the CRC is responsible for reviewing PA projects for hazard mitigation opportunities and serving as a mitigation subject matter expert for the PA program  According to data provided by FEMA, PA grant applicants incorporated hazard mitigation into approximately 18 percent of permanent work projects for all disasters nationwide from 2012 to 2015  During test implementation of the new delivery model, state, PA, and FIMA officials all reported an increase in the number of hazard mitigation activities on PA permanent work projects  For example, state officials who participated in the second new model test in Oregon said that effective communication and coordination between PA and hazard mitigation staff resulted in applicants incorporating hazard mitigation into over 60 percent of permanent work projects  Furthermore, PA officials reported an increase in hazard mitigation during the third test implementation of the new model in Georgia following Hurricane Matthew, where approximately 16 percent of permanent work projects included mitigation, as of June 2017  This represents an increase compared to the PA program’s estimate for the proportion of projects that incorporate hazard mitigation among previous PA hurricane disasters in Georgia, which was about 3 percent, according to PA officials  While PA officials are trying to increase hazard mitigation through the new delivery model, not all disasters present the same number of opportunities to incorporate hazard mitigation  First, the PA program only incorporates hazard mitigation measures for permanent work projects, such as repairs to roads, bridges, and buildings  For example, as of June 2017, approximately 60 percent of the projects FEMA funded in Georgia for the third test implementation after Hurricane Matthew were for emergency work, which is not eligible for hazard mitigation measures  Second, the PA program only funds mitigation measures that officials determine to be cost-effective  In addition, we have previously reported on other factors that affect whether applicants incorporate hazard mitigation into PA projects, such as their capacity to manage and ability to fund hazard mitigation projects  National Planning for Hazard Mitigation In our 2015 report on disaster resilience following Hurricane Sandy, we noted that disaster affected areas have different threats and vulnerabilities, and local stakeholders make the ultimate determination whether or not to incorporate hazard mitigation into a project  Further, without a strategic approach to making disaster resilience investments, the federal government and its nonfederal partners may be unable to fully capitalize on opportunities for mitigation on the greatest known threats and hazards  We recommended that the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group develop an investment strategy to help ensure that federal funds expended to enhance disaster resilience achieve the goal of reducing the nation’s fiscal exposure because of climate change and the rise in the number of federal major disaster declarations as effectively and efficiently as possible  In response, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) plans to issue a final National Mitigation Investment Strategy in 2018  The goals of this strategy include increasing the effectiveness of investments in reducing disaster losses and increasing resilience, and improving coordination of disaster risk management among federal, state, local, tribal, territorial, and private entities  Although the new model establishes hazard mitigation activities for PA and FIMA staff in the preaward process, it does not standardize and prioritize hazard mitigation planning at JFOs in the way FEMA has done with prior PA program policy  Specifically, FEMA’s 2007 PA program policy standardized planning for hazard mitigation across PA recovery efforts by stating that agency and state officials should issue a memorandum of understanding (MOU) early in the disaster, outlining how PA hazard mitigation will be addressed for the disaster, including what mitigation measures will be emphasized, and identifying applicable codes and standards, and any potential integration with other mitigation grant programs  However, PA program officials did not include guidance that standardizes planning for hazard mitigation, such as encouraging the use of an MOU, in FEMA’s 2010 PA program policy, the most recent update to the Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide in April 2017, or the New Delivery Model Operations Manual  As a result, FIMA officials said FEMA and state officials do not consistently issue MOUs that outline how FEMA and the state plan to promote PA hazard mitigation during the recovery effort, explaining that the use of the MOU is based on the preferences and priorities of the FEMA officials involved  When not issuing an MOU, FIMA hazard mitigation staff and PA officials at the JFO meet to determine the extent which hazard mitigation staff interact directly with applicants regarding PA hazard mitigation during the recovery process, according to a FIMA official  Having a consistent approach to planning for and prioritizing hazard mitigation across all disasters is important for FEMA, given that FEMA experienced challenges consistently prioritizing and integrating hazard mitigation across PA recovery efforts, according to GAO and others  For example, in our 2015 report on resilience in the Hurricane Sandy recovery, we found that state and local officials experienced challenges maximizing disaster resilience in the recovery effort because PA officials did not consistently prioritize hazard mitigation during project development  According to FEMA’s National Mitigation Framework, planning is vital for mitigation efforts during disaster recovery, and federal, state, and local officials should establish procedures that emphasize a coordinated delivery of mitigation activities and capitalize on opportunities to reduce future disaster losses  Similarly, the Recovery Federal Interagency Operational Plan, which supports FEMA’s National Disaster Recovery Framework, identifies planning as a key task for identifying mitigation opportunities and integrating risk reduction considerations into decisions and investments during the recovery process  FIMA officials agreed that including the development of a formal plan, such as the historical 2007 PA program policy regarding the use of MOUs, for PA hazard mitigation in operations guidance would help program officials plan for and prioritize hazard mitigation  They noted that FIMA’s hazard mitigation field operations guide includes procedures for implementing proposed MOUs to achieve mitigation goals  PA program officials said that, in light of changes to the PA process under the new model and subsequent updates to program policies, the MOU policy from the 2007 PA program policy was outdated  But officials agreed that planning for and prioritizing hazard mitigation at the operational level is important and said they were examining additional ways to incorporate these activities early in the PA process  As FEMA continues to implement the new model, establishing procedures to standardize hazard mitigation planning for each disaster, as it did through prior policy, could improve the prioritization of hazard mitigation in PA recovery efforts and increase the effectiveness of mitigation for reducing disaster losses and increasing resilience  PA program officials developed performance objectives and measures for hazard mitigation in the new delivery model, but could add measures to better align performance assessment for the PA program with FEMA’s broader strategic goals for hazard mitigation  In its strategic plan for 2014–2018, FEMA established an agency-wide goal to increase the percentage of FEMA-funded disaster projects, such as those under the PA program, that provide mitigation above local, state, and federal building code requirements by 5 percentage points by the end of fiscal year 2018  For example, local building codes may require measures for new construction to mitigate against future damage  To align with FEMA’s strategic goal, PA officials would also need to measure the number of PA projects that included mitigation measures that bring any repaired infrastructure to a level above applicable building codes  However, under the new model, FEMA officials developed performance objectives (and associated measures) to increase the number of projects that include hazard mitigation by 5 percent, and increase the total dollars spent on hazard mitigation by 2 percent  While these measures could help to incentivize mitigation, they are not tied to building codes and do not include specific information that FEMA could use to continually assess the PA program’s contributions to meeting the agency’s strategic goal  According to Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, agency management should design control activities, such as establishing and reviewing performance measures, to achieve the agency’s objectives  In addition, our work on leading public sector organizations has found that such organizations assess the extent to which their programs and activities contribute to meeting their mission and desired outcomes, and strive to establish clear hierarchies of performance goals and measures  A clear connection between performance measures and program offices helps to both reinforce accountability and ensure that, in their day-to-day activities, managers keep in mind the outcomes their organization is striving to achieve  FEMA’s ability to evaluate and report on PA hazard mitigation data is constrained, but officials are addressing this challenge through the development of data reporting and analytics capabilities for the PA program’s new information system, according to PA officials  PA program officials developed measures they could use to evaluate the new model during test implementation and compare new model performance to the legacy PA process, and agreed that aligning PA program hazard mitigation goals with FEMA’s agency-wide strategic goals would be helpful  As FEMA continues to develop and implement the new model, developing performance measures and objectives to better inform and support the agency’s broader strategic goals could help to ensure that FEMA capitalizes on hazard mitigation opportunities in PA recovery efforts  FEMA’s Public Assistance grant program is a complicated, multi-billion dollar program that is critical to helping state and local communities rebuild and recover after a major disaster  In recent years, FEMA has undertaken a major reengineering effort to make the PA preaward process simpler and more efficient for applicants and to address challenges encountered during recovery from past disasters  FEMA’s new delivery model represents a significant opportunity to strengthen the PA program and address these past challenges, and growing pains are to be expected when implementing any large reengineering effort  Further, FEMA officials work to implement these changes while supporting response and recovery following disasters, including the catastrophic flooding from Hurricane Harvey in August 2017 and widespread damages from Hurricanes Irma and Maria in September 2017  As such, it is critical that feedback obtained and lessons learned while testing the new model inform decisions and actions as FEMA proceeds with full implementation for all disasters, including the complex recovery efforts in the states and territories affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria  FEMA has redesigned the PA delivery model to address various challenges related to workforce management, information sharing with state and local grantees, and incorporating hazard mitigation into PA projects  FEMA has developed new workforce processes, training, and positions to address past challenges, but completing a workforce assessment that identifies the number of staff needed will inform workforce management and resource allocation decisions to help FEMA ensure a more successful implementation  This is particularly important as FEMA is using the new model for the long-term recovery from the 2017 hurricanes, and FEMA faces capacity challenges as its workforce is stretched thin  Further, FEMA’s new FAC-Trax information sharing system provides FEMA and state and local applicants and grantees with better capabilities to address past challenges in managing and tracking PA projects  In developing FAC-Trax, FEMA implemented many of the key IT management controls that can help ensure that new IT systems are implemented effectively  However, additional steps are needed to fully satisfy the areas of requirements development and systems testing and integration  Finally, FEMA has taken some actions to better promote hazard mitigation as part of its new PA model  However, more consistent planning for hazard mitigation following a PA disaster and developing specific performance measures and objectives that better align with and support the agency’s broader strategic goals related to hazard mitigation could help to ensure that mitigation is incorporated into recovery efforts, which presents an opportunity to encourage disaster resilience and reduce federal fiscal exposure from recurring catastrophic natural disasters  We are making the following five recommendations to FEMA’s Assistant Administrator for Recovery: The FEMA Assistant Administrator for Recovery should complete a workforce staffing assessment that identifies the appropriate number of staff needed at joint field offices, Consolidated Resource Centers, and in FIMA’s hazard mitigation cadre to implement the new delivery model nationwide  (Recommendation 1) The FEMA Assistant Administrator for Recovery should establish controls for tracking FAC-Trax capabilities to the system’s functional and operational requirements to more fully satisfy requirements development controls and ensure that the new information system provides capabilities that meets users’ needs and expectations  (Recommendation 2) The FEMA Assistant Administrator for Recovery should establish system testing criteria, such as a “definition of done,” to assess FAC- Trax as it is developed; define the roles and responsibilities of all participants; and develop the sequence and schedule for integration of other systems with FAC-Trax to more fully satisfy systems testing and integration controls  (Recommendation 3) The FEMA Assistant Administrator for Recovery, in coordination with the Associate Administrator of the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, should implement procedures to standardize planning for addressing PA hazard mitigation at the joint field offices, for example, by requiring FEMA and state officials to develop a memorandum of understanding outlining how they will prioritize and address hazard mitigation following a disaster as it did through prior policy  (Recommendation 4) The FEMA Assistant Administrator for Recovery, in coordination with the Associate Administrator of the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, should develop performance measures and associated objectives for the new delivery model to better align with FEMA’s strategic goal for hazard mitigation in the recovery process  (Recommendation 5) We provided a draft of this report to DHS and FEMA for review and comment  DHS provided written comments, which are reproduced in appendix III  In its comments, DHS concurred with our recommendations and described actions planned to address them  FEMA also provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate  With regard to our first recommendation, that FEMA complete a workforce staffing assessment that identifies the number of staff needed at joint field offices, Consolidated Resource Centers, and FIMA’s hazard mitigation cadre, DHS stated that PA, in coordination with the Field Operations Directorate and FIMA, will continue to refine and evaluate staffing needs and update the cadre force structures under the new delivery model  DHS estimated that this effort would be completed by June 28, 2019  This action, if fully implemented, should address the intent of the recommendation  With regard to our second recommendation, that FEMA establish controls for tracking FAC-Trax capabilities to ensure the new information system meets users’ needs, DHS stated that Recovery program managers will update the FAC-Trax Requirements Management Plan and the FAC-Trax Release Plan to ensure the tracking and traceability of FAC-Trax functional and operational requirements  DHS estimated that this effort would be completed by January 31, 2018  This action, if fully implemented, should address the intent of the recommendation  With regard to our third recommendation, that FEMA establish systems testing criteria to assess the development of FAC-Trax; and define the roles and responsibilities, and sequence and schedule for system integration, DHS stated that Recovery program managers will update the FAC-Trax System Integration Plan to include integration with the Deployment Tracking System, Enterprise Data Warehouse, Preliminary Damage Assessment interface, and State Grants Management system interface  DHS estimated that this effort would be completed by June 29, 2018  This action, if fully implemented, should address the intent of the recommendation  With regard to our fourth recommendation, that FEMA implement procedures to standardize planning for addressing PA hazard mitigation at the JFO, DHS stated that PA will update current process documents or develop new documents to better incorporate mitigation into the operational planning phase of the new delivery model  DHS estimated that this effort would be completed by July 31, 2018  This action, if fully implemented, should address the intent of the recommendation  With regard to our fifth recommendation, that PA coordinate with FIMA to develop performance measures and associated objectives for the new delivery model that better align with FEMA’s strategic goals for hazard mitigation in the recovery process, DHS stated that PA will reconvene the PA-Mitigation working group to develop and refine PA related hazard mitigation performance measures  DHS estimated that this effort would be completed by June 29, 2018  This action, if fully implemented, should address the intent of the recommendation  We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland Security and interested congressional committees  If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (404) 679-1875 or CurrieC@gao gov  Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report  GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in appendix IV  Appendix II: Assessment of Information Technology Management Controls for the FEMA Applicant Case Tracker (FAC-Trax) Table 2 shows details on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Public Assistance (PA) program office’s implementation of key practices across four information technology (IT) management control areas for its new information system, the FEMA Applicant Case Tracker (FAC-Trax)  PA developed FAC-Trax as a web-based project tracking and case management system to supplement the Emergency Management Mission Integrated Environment (EMMIE) and help resolve long-standing information sharing challenges  To determine the extent to which the FAC-Trax program office implemented IT management controls, we reviewed documentation from the FAC-Trax program and compared it to key management best practices, including the Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model® Integration for Acquisition and Development, the Project Management Institute’s Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers’ Standard for Software and System Test Documentation  We assessed the program as having fully implemented a practice if the agency provided evidence that it fully addressed the practice; partially implemented if the agency provided evidence that it addressed some, but not all, portions of the practice; and not implemented if the agency did not provide any evidence that it addressed the practice  Table 2  Public Assistance (PA) Program Office’s Implementation of Key Information Technology Management Controls for FAC-Trax PA program officials developed an acquisition plan for FAC-Trax identifying the capabilities the system is intended to deliver, the acquisition approach, and acquisition objectives  Additionally, program officials developed a capability development plan outlining a strategy for the program to obtain approval to acquire FAC-Trax  Lastly, program officials developed a systems engineering plan describing the program’s scope and its framework for using an Agile development approach, as well as a deployment, support, and maintenance plan for FAC-Trax  PA program officials developed an acquisition program baseline detailing FAC-Trax’s cost parameters and a life-cycle cost estimate for the system  As of May 2017, the life- cycle cost estimate for FAC-Trax through fiscal year (FY) 2023 is approximately $19 3 million  PA program officials updated the life-cycle cost estimate for FYs 2016 and 2017 after price negotiations with the FAC-Trax contractor, and will continue to update the estimate as annual budgets are approved, according to the Integrated Logistic Support Plan  The contracting officer’s representative for FAC-Trax performs a cost review at the end of each month, according to program officials  Furthermore, the contractor’s weekly status report includes information on the number of hours worked and the percent of contract value spent  Program officials also review program costs with Office of Response and Recovery, PA, Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO), and other program office stakeholders during a weekly program review  PA program officials developed an acquisition program baseline detailing FAC-Trax’s schedule parameters, as well as an integrated master schedule for the system  The integrated master schedule identifies tasks, major milestones, and task dependencies  The PA program manager reviews and updates the integrated master schedule on a weekly basis  Program officials also review FAC-Trax’s schedule with Office of Response and Recovery, PA, OCIO, and other program office stakeholders during a weekly program review  PA program officials identified the knowledge and skills needed to carry out the program in FAC-Trax contract documentation and the capability development plan  Specifically, program officials included an attachment to the FAC-Trax contract listing the required labor categories and corresponding functional position descriptions  Program officials also described the role, position type, minimum grade, and minimum certification for required personnel resources for the acquisition, development, and implementation of FAC-Trax  PA program officials developed, reviewed, and maintained project planning documents and obtained commitment from relevant stakeholders  For example, program officials reviewed and updated the integrated master schedule and costs on a weekly and monthly basis, respectively  Further, program officials reviewed the status of project elements, such as the schedule, quality and technical issues, stakeholders, staffing, cost, and risks, with Office of Response and Recovery, PA, OCIO, and other program office stakeholders during a weekly program review  PA program officials also established tactical, functional, and stakeholder groups, as well as an Integrated Product Team to support and oversee the development of FAC-Trax  FEMA’s Recovery Technology Programs Division (RTPD) has a division-level risk management plan that serves as guidance for all Recovery systems, including FAC- Trax  Program officials identified key risks that could negatively affect FAC-Trax work efforts in RTPD’s “risk register”—an online site used to track risks, issues, and mitigating actions for the division and each program office  Program officials also identified five technical, cost, and schedule risks in the FAC-Trax acquisition plan  Program officials included one of these risks in the risk register, while the remaining four were managed outside of the register  As of May 2017, program officials had identified 13 risks in its risk register—four open and nine closed  The four open risks were (1) limited subject matter expert engagement during requirements development, (2) vacancies in program management office support positions, (3) unresolved service level agreement support and funding issues, and (4) the loss of the authority to operate due to a Trusted Internet Connection that is not compliant with Department of Homeland Security security policy  Program officials evaluated and categorized the identified risks based on the probability of occurrence and scope, schedule, and cost impacts  These four points of measurement are used to calculate an overall risk score  The risk score helps program officials determine a risk’s risk rating—low, medium, or high  For example, program officials reported that two of its open risks have a “medium” risk rating—meaning the risk has the potential to slightly impact project cost, schedule, or performance  In addition, program officials detailed the risk category, probability, and impact for the five risks identified in the FAC-Trax acquisition plan  Program officials developed risk mitigation and contingency plans for each risk in the risk register  For example, program officials planned to mitigate the open risk concerning subject matter expert engagement, by identifying and engaging with appropriate subject matter experts through requirements development workshops scheduled in advance of the sprint they are to support, and monitoring the development of user stories to identify any issues that may cause delays  In addition, program officials described the risk management plan and responsible officials for the five risks identified in the FAC-Trax acquisition plan  PA program officials review and update program risks during a monthly program meeting  Program officials also review program risks with Office of Response and Recovery, PA, OCIO, and other program office stakeholders during a weekly program review  Furthermore, the FAC-Trax contractor provides a weekly status update which includes a section on identified risks  Program officials established re-evaluation dates and recorded updates, including any actions taken, for each risk in the risk register  In addition, program officials were able to provide updates on the four risks identified in the FAC-Trax acquisition plan and managed outside of the register  According to PA officials, these risks were addressed and closed by the approval of program planning documents, such as the mission needs statement, concept of operations, and operational requirements document, following the solutions engineering review, which demonstrates the readiness of the program to proceed with the procurement, in September 2016  Program officials established a requirements management plan outlining how it captures, assesses, and plans for FAC-Trax enhancements, and established a change control process to review, prioritize, and verify user requests for changes to the system and feedback  As of May 2017, the PA program office received 734 change requests related to FAC-Trax, of which program officials completed 420 changes and planned to address an additional 277 entries  PA program officials also facilitated workshops to gather requirements for specific user groups and obtained additional requirements for FAC-Trax through customer feedback on a temporary technology tool— an Access database referred to as the Public Assistance Recovery Information System—used to support an early stage of the new model implementation  Further, program officials developed a functional requirements document outlining the high-level functional and operational requirements for FAC-Trax  PA program officials developed a concept of operations for FAC-Trax detailing operating concepts and scenarios for each phase of the PA preaward process  Program officials also detailed the workflow, phases, business functions, and data inputs and outputs for the re-engineered PA process in FAC-Trax’s functional requirements document  In March 2017, program officials developed a standard template to describe the process, tasks, and data inputs and outputs for specific system capabilities  As part of the change control process, PA program officials meet three times a week to discuss and prioritize change requests  Specifically, program officials review submissions to the change control form to ensure completeness, validate impacts and root cause, and research details for incoming requests  PA program officials also follow up with users to understand and verify requirements  In March 2017, program officials developed a standard template to capture acceptance criteria for specific requirements  However, PA program officials do not track system enhancements back to the high-level requirements identified in FAC-Trax’s operational and functional requirements documentation and performance work statement  PA program officials identified system requirements and constraints in the FAC-Trax concept of operations and functional and operational requirements documents  Further, through its change control process, program officials collect suggestions, issues, and feedback on FAC-Trax and system enhancements from stakeholders, identify risks for change requests, and balance prioritized requirements and estimated level of efforts with projected costs prior to each sprint  In March 2017, program officials developed a standard template to analyze and document the urgency and need for specific requirements  PA program officials and the FAC-Trax contractor established a testing and evaluation plan for the system, developed acceptance criteria for user stories, and obtained feedback from users during and after testing  The testing process concludes with user acceptance testing (UAT)  If a change request fails during UAT or a new requirement is discovered during development, the PA program will capture the failed request or new requirement in the product backlog for implementation in a future product release  Key practices Systems testing and integration Developing test plans and test cases PA program officials and the FAC-Trax contractor tested and evaluated the system during development  The FAC-Trax test plan identifies the method and strategy to perform the testing, including the necessary tasks, testing parameters, and the roles and responsibilities of the individuals responsible for testing  However, program officials did not develop system testing criteria to evaluate FAC-Trax  A key feature of Agile software development is the “definition of done”—a set of clear, comprehensive, and objective criteria, that the government should use to evaluate software after each iteration of development  PA program officials developed a systems integration plan in June 2017 that identifies potential integration of FAC-Trax and four FEMA systems, including the Emergency Management Mission Integrated Environment  Specifically, the plan includes data requirements and standards; descriptions of the four systems FEMA plans to integrate with FAC-Trax and the proposed relationship for each connection; and security and access management requirements  In addition, program officials included a description of how integration problems are to be documented and resolved in FAC-Trax development and test plans  However, the systems integration plan does not define roles and responsibilities of all participants for system integration activities or establish a sequence and schedule for every integration step for the four FEMA systems  ● Fully implemented: The agency provided evidence that it fully addressed this practice  ◐ Partially implemented: The agency provided evidence that it addressed some, but not all, portions of this practice  ◌ Not implemented: The agency did not provide any evidence that it addressed this practice  In addition to the contact named above, Chris Keisling (Assistant Director), Amanda R  Parker (Analyst-in-Charge), Mathew Bader, Allison Bawden, Anthony Bova, Eric Hauswirth, Susan Hsu, Rianna Jansen, Justin Jaynes, Tracey King, Matthew T  Lowney, Heidi Nielson, Claire Peachey, Brenda Rabinowitz, Ryan Siegel, Martin Skorczynski, Niti Tandon, Walter K  Vance, James T  Williams, and Eric Winter made key contributions to this report 

ground_truth: Federal agencies are exploring ways to use telework as a tool to reduce the federal footprint and use space more efficiently. GAO was asked to examine the effects of telework on agencies' space-planning efforts. In this report, GAO reviewed: (1) how the 23 civilian CFO Act agencies reported using telework in office space planning; (2) the specific ways selected agencies and GSA used telework in their office space planning; and (3) any challenges the civilian CFO Act agencies faced in using telework in office space planning. GAO surveyed all 23 civilian CFO Act agencies, analyzed each agency's space-planning documents, and Real Property Efficiency Plans . GAO reviewed four agencies in greater detail based on analysis of telework data and other factors. For those four agencies GAO conducted site visits, interviewed officials, and analyzed agency documents. GAO also identified challenges agencies faced in using telework in space planning, based on survey results, agency documents, and interviews. The 23 civilian Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Act agencies reported various ways of considering and using telework as a space-planning tool, by, for example, implementing desk-sharing for employees who telework in order to relinquish leased space, or increasing the number of staff working in an existing space without increasing its size. All of the 23 agencies discussed telework in the context of space planning and achieving greater space efficiencies in either their space-planning documents or Real Property Efficiency Plans . The agencies that used telework as a space-planning tool generally reported implementing smaller or unassigned workstations. Three of the four agencies GAO reviewed in greater detail––the General Services Administration (GSA); the Office of Justice Programs at the Department of Justice; the Centers for Disease Control at the Department of Health and Human Services; and the Bureau of the Fiscal Service at the Department of the Treasury––leveraged telework to reduce or use office space more efficiently. For example, GSA and the Office of Justice Programs used telework to accommodate more employees in a smaller office space as illustrated in figure 1 below. The Centers for Disease Control used telework to accommodate more employees in the same amount of space. The Bureau of the Fiscal Service reduced space without telework by reducing the size of individual workstations. The 23 civilian CFO Act agencies reported several challenges in using telework to reduce space including human capital issues, mission suitability, and measuring cost savings attributable to telework. About two-thirds of the agencies said they would find it helpful to have additional information, assistance, or resources in using telework as a space-planning tool. GSA provides guidance to improve space utilization. However, GAO found that GSA last developed relevant formal guidance in 2006. This information, and that on GSA's telework and space-planning websites, was neither specific nor detailed and therefore of limited assistance to agencies that would like to use telework as a space-planning tool. Additionally, GSA's space-planning tool—the Workplace Investment and Feasibility Tool, intended to help agencies quantify the benefits and costs of telework––remains under development after more than 4 years, and GSA officials have not decided whether to make the tool available to other federal agencies. As such, agencies reported that they lack adequate guidance to determine how best to reduce space or use it more efficiently, and how to assess the benefits and costs of using telework in space planning. GSA concurred with recommendations that GSA should: (1) develop guidance on how agencies can use telework as a strategic space-planning tool and make this guidance readily available and (2) complete and make the Workplace Investment and Feasibility Tool available to federal agencies for use in assessing the benefits and costs of telework.