Testimony 

Before the Senate Committee on Rules 

and Administration

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO 

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT 

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 SMITHSONIAN 

INSTITUTION 

Funding for Real Property 

Needs Remains a Challenge 

Statement of Mark L. Goldstein, Director 

Physical Infrastructure Issues 

GAO-07-725T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-725T.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Mark L. 

Goldstein at (202) 512-2834, 

goldsteinm@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-07-725T, a testimony to 

the Senate Committee on Rules and 

Administration 

April 11, 2007

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 

Funding for Real Property Needs 

Remains a Challenge 

In 2005, GAO reported that facilities-related problems at the Smithsonian 

had resulted in a few building closures and posed a serious long-term threat 

to the collections. For example, the 1881 Arts and Industries Building on the 

National Mall was closed to the public in 2004 for an indefinite period over 

concern about its deteriorating roof structure. Currently, this building 

remains closed. GAO also found that the Smithsonian had taken steps to 

maximize the effectiveness of its existing resources for facilities. 

Preliminary results of GAO’s ongoing work indicate that as of March 30, 

2007, the Smithsonian estimated it would need about $2.5 billion for its 

revitalization, construction, and maintenance projects from fiscal year 2005 

through fiscal year 2013, up from an estimate of $2.3 billion in 2005. In 2005, 

GAO recommended that the Smithsonian develop and implement a strategic 

funding plan to address its facilities needs. 

The Smithsonian Board of Regents—the Smithsonian’s governing body—has 

taken some steps to address GAO’s recommendation regarding a strategic 

funding plan. The board created an ad-hoc committee, which, after 

reviewing nine options, such as establishing a special exhibition fee, decided 

to request an additional $100 million annually in federal funds for facilities 

for the next 10 years, for a total of an additional $1 billion. The President’s 

fiscal year 2008 budget proposal, however, proposes an increase of about 

$44 million over the Smithsonian’s fiscal year 2007 appropriation. It is not 

clear how much of this proposed increase would be used to support 

facilities, and how Congress will respond to the President’s budget request. 

Absent significant changes in the Smithsonian’s funding strategy or 

significant increases in funding from Congress, the Smithsonian faces 

greater risk to its facilities and collections over time. 

GAO is continuing to evaluate the Smithsonian’s efforts to strategically 

manage, fund, and secure its real property. We expect to publish a report on 

these issues later this year. 

Arts and Industries Building, 1977 (left) and February 2005 

(right)

Source: Smithsonian Institution.

The Smithsonian Institution 

(Smithsonian) is the world’s largest 

museum complex and research 

organization. The age of the 

Smithsonian’s structures, past 

inattention to maintenance needs, 

and high visitation levels have left 

its facilities in need of revitalization 

and repair. 

This testimony discusses our prior 

work on some effects of the 

condition of the Smithsonian’s 

facilities and whether the 

Smithsonian has taken steps to 

maximize facility resources. It also 

discusses the current estimated 

costs of the Smithsonian’s needed 

facilities projects. In addition, it 

describes preliminary results of 

GAO’s ongoing work on the extent 

to which the Smithsonian 

developed and implemented 

strategies to fund these projects, as 

GAO recommended in prior work. 

The work for this testimony is 

based on GAO’s 2005 report, 

Smithsonian Institution: 

Facilities Management 

Reorganization Is Progressing, 

but Funding Remains a Challenge; 

GAO’s review of Smithsonian 

documents and other pertinent 

information; and interviews with 

Smithsonian officials. 
Page 1 GAO-07-725T 

Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on our work 

regarding the Smithsonian Institution’s (Smithsonian) facilities 

management and funding challenges. Since its founding in 1846, the 

Smithsonian, which is funded through its own private trust fund assets and 

its federal appropriation, has evolved into the world’s largest museum 

complex and research organization, with more than 660 owned and leased 

buildings and other structures, with an estimated replacement value of 

about $4.7 billion for owned space as of June 2004. The age of the 

Smithsonian’s structures, past inattention to maintenance needs, and high 

visitation levels have left its facilities in need of revitalization and repair. 

Facilities problems include the structural deterioration of aging buildings; 

heating, cooling, and electrical systems that are well past their normal life 

expectancy; leaks from roofs and pipes that jeopardize the collections; 

inadequate exhibition and storage space; and maintenance levels that have 

not kept pace with the wear and tear from millions of visitors each year. In 

2005, the Smithsonian estimated it would need about $2.3 billion through 

fiscal year 2013 for its identified revitalization, construction, and 

maintenance projects. 

In my statement today, I will be focusing on the results of our 2005 study 

of the Smithsonian’s facilities management and funding issues—

Smithsonian Institution: Facilities Management Reorganization Is 

Progressing, but Funding Remains a Challenge1

—as well as some 

preliminary results from an ongoing study we have undertaken of the 

Smithsonian’s real property management at the request of this committee 

and the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations, 

Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. I will be 

discussing our prior work on some effects of the condition of the 

Smithsonian’s facilities and whether the Smithsonian has taken steps to 

maximize the effects of its resources for facilities; current estimated costs 

of the Smithsonian’s revitalization, construction, and maintenance 

projects; and some preliminary results of our ongoing work on the extent 

to which the Smithsonian developed and implemented strategies to fund 

its revitalization, construction, and maintenance needs, as we 

recommended in prior work. 

 1 Smithsonian Institution: Facilities Management Reorganization Is Progressing, but 

Funding Remains a Challenge, GAO-05-369 (Washington, D.C.: April 25, 2005). 
Page 2 GAO-07-725T 

In summary: 

• In our 2005 report, we found that facilities-related problems at the 

Smithsonian had resulted in a few building closures and access 

restrictions and posed a serious long-term threat to the collections. For 

example, the 1881 Arts and Industries Building on the National Mall was 

closed to the public in 2004 for an indefinite period over concern about its 

deteriorating roof structure and pending the repair or replacement of its 

weakened roof panels and aging systems such as heating and cooling. 

Currently, this building remains closed. In addition, we found that these 

problems were indicative of a broad decline in the Smithsonian’s aging 

facilities and that in some cases, items in the Smithsonian’s collections had 

been damaged by water. We also found that the Smithsonian had taken 

steps to maximize the effectiveness of its existing resources for facilities, 

such as adopting a variety of recognized industry best practices for 

managing facilities projects. 

• Preliminary results from our ongoing work show that as of March 30, 2007, 

the Smithsonian estimates it will need about $2.5 billion for revitalization, 

construction, and maintenance projects identified from fiscal year 2005 

through fiscal year 2013, an increase of about $200 million from its 2005 

estimate of about $2.3 billion for the same time period. Smithsonian 

officials stated that to update this estimate, they identified changes that 

had occurred to project cost figures used in the 2005 estimate and then 

subtracted from the new total the appropriations the Smithsonian had 

received for facilities revitalization, construction, and maintenance 

projects for fiscal years 2005-2007. In our previous work, we 

recommended that the Smithsonian develop and implement a strategic 

funding plan to address its facilities needs. 

• Preliminary results also suggest that the Smithsonian has taken some steps 

to address our recommendation to develop and implement a strategic 

funding plan to address its facilities needs. In June 2005, the Smithsonian 

Board of Regents—the Smithsonian’s governing body, which is comprised 

of both private citizens and members of all three branches of the federal 

government—established the ad-hoc Committee on Facilities 

Revitalization to explore options to address the about $2.3 billion the 

Smithsonian estimated it needed for facilities revitalization, construction, 

and maintenance projects through fiscal year 2013. According to 

Smithsonian officials, after reviewing nine options, such as establishing a 

special exhibition fee, the ad-hoc committee decided in 2006 to request an 

additional $100 million annually in federal funds for facilities over its 

current appropriation for 10 years, starting in fiscal year 2008, to reach a 

total of an additional $1 billion. In September 2006, according to 

Smithsonian officials, several members of the Board of Regents and the 

Secretary of the Smithsonian met with the President of the United States 
Page 3 GAO-07-725T 

to make this request. The President’s fiscal year 2008 budget proposal, 

however, proposes an increase of about $44 million over the Smithsonian’s 

fiscal year 2007 appropriation, and it is not clear how much of this 

increase would be used to support facilities. Some of these funds could be 

used to support research, collections, and exhibitions, among other things. 

Moreover, Congress may choose to modify the President’s budget proposal 

when funds are appropriated for the fiscal year. 

• The Smithsonian’s estimate for revitalization, construction, and 

maintenance needs has increased at an average of about $100 million a 

year over the past 2 years. Therefore, the Smithsonian’s request for an 

additional $100 million a year may not actually reduce the Smithsonian’s 

estimated revitalization, construction, and maintenance needs but only 

offset the increase in its estimate. Absent significant changes in the 

Smithsonian’s funding strategy or significant increases in funding from 

Congress, the Smithsonian faces greater risk to its facilities and 

collections over time. 

• We are continuing to evaluate the Smithsonian’s efforts to strategically 

manage, fund, and secure its real property. Our objectives include 

assessing (1) the extent to which the Smithsonian is strategically managing 

its real property portfolio, (2) the extent to which the Smithsonian has 

developed and implemented strategies to fund its revitalization, 

construction, and maintenance needs, and (3) the Smithsonian’s security 

cost trends and challenges, including the extent to which the Smithsonian 

has followed key security practices to protect its assets. We are also 

examining how other similar institutions, such as other museums and 

university systems, strategically manage, fund, and secure their real 

property. We expect to report on these issues later this year. 

In our 2005 report, we found that facilities-related problems at the 

Smithsonian had resulted in a few building closures and access 

restrictions and some cases of damage to the collections. A few facilities 

had deteriorated to the point where access must be denied or limited. For 

example, the 1881 Arts and Industries Building on the National Mall was 

closed to the public in 2004 for an indefinite period, pending repair of its 

weakened roof panels, renovation of its interior (which had been damaged 

by water intrusion), and replacement of aging systems such as heating and 

cooling. Currently, this building remains closed. Other facilities also faced 

problems. We found that water leaks caused by deteriorated piping and 

roofing elements, along with humidity and temperature problems in 

buildings with aging systems, posed perhaps the most pervasive threats to 

artifacts in the museums and storage facilities. For example, leaks have 

damaged two historic aircraft at the National Air and Space Museum. 

Additionally, Smithsonian Archives officials told us that they had had to 

Past Work Showed 

that Smithsonian’s 

Aging Facilities and 

Systems Threaten 

Collections 
Page 4 GAO-07-725T 

address 19 “water emergencies” since June 2002. These problems were 

indicative of a broad decline in the Smithsonian’s aging facilities and 

systems that posed a serious long-term threat to the collections. 

We also found that the Smithsonian had taken steps to maximize the 

effectiveness of its resources for facilities. These changes resulted from an 

internal review and a 2001 report by the National Academy of Public 

Administration, which recommended that the Smithsonian centralize its 

then highly decentralized approach to facilities management and 

budgeting in order to promote uniform policies and procedures, improve 

accountability, and avoid duplication. The Smithsonian created the Office 

of Facilities Engineering and Operations in 2003 to assume responsibility 

for all facilities-related programs and budgets. At the time of our 2005 

review, this office was adopting a variety of recognized industry best 

practices for managing facilities projects, such as the use of benchmarking 

and metrics recommended by the Construction Industry Institute and 

leading capital decision-making practices.2

Preliminary results from our ongoing work show that as of March 30, 2007, 

the Smithsonian estimates it will need about $2.5 billion for revitalization, 

construction, and maintenance projects identified from fiscal year 2005 

through fiscal year 2013, an increase of about $200 million from its 2005 

estimate of about $2.3 billion for the same time period.3

 Smithsonian 

officials stated that to update this estimate, they identified changes that 

had occurred to project cost figures used in the 2005 estimate and then 

subtracted from the new total the appropriations the Smithsonian had 

received for facilities revitalization, construction, and maintenance 

projects for fiscal years 2005-2007. 

According to Smithsonian officials, this estimate includes only costs for 

which the Smithsonian expects to receive federal funds. Projects that have 

been or are expected to be funded through the Smithsonian’s private trust 

 2

 GAO, Executive Guide: Leading Practices in Capital Decision-Making, 

GAO/AIMD-99-32 (Washington, D.C.: December 1998.) 

3

 The Smithsonian’s estimated revitalization and new construction costs are driven in part 

by the need to modernize or add systems such as fire detection and alarm and security 

systems and to comply with newer code requirements such as those for handicapped 

accessibility to buildings and restrooms. Maintenance costs include such things as staff 

costs, minor repair and maintenance projects, and other contracts, supplies, materials, and 

equipment for Smithsonian’s maintenance program. 

Preliminary Data 

Show that the 

Smithsonian’s 

Estimated Costs for 

Facilities Projects 

through Fiscal Year 

2013 Have Increased 

Since 2005 
Page 5 GAO-07-725T 

funds were not included as part of the estimate, although the Smithsonian 

has used these trust funds to support some facilities projects. For 

example, the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center was funded largely through 

trust funds. According to Smithsonian officials, maintenance and capital 

repair projects are not generally funded through trust funds. 

At the time of our 2005 report, Smithsonian officials told us that the 

Smithsonian’s estimate of about $2.3 billion could increase for a variety of 

reasons. For example, the estimate was largely based on preliminary 

assessments. Moreover, in our previous report, we found that recent 

additions to the Smithsonian’s building inventory—the National Museum 

of the American Indian and the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center—and the 

reopening of the revitalized Donald W. Reynolds Center for American Art 

and Portraiture4

 on July 1, 2006 would add to the Smithsonian’s annual 

maintenance costs. 

According to Smithsonian officials, the increase in its estimated 

revitalization, construction, and maintenance costs through fiscal year 

2013 from about $2.3 billion in our 2005 report to about $2.5 billion as of 

March 30, 2007, was due to several factors. For example, Smithsonian 

officials said that major increases had occurred in projects for the 

National Zoo and the National Museum of American History because the 

two facilities had recently had master plans developed that identified 

additional requirements.5

 In addition, according to Smithsonian officials, 

estimates for anti-terrorism projects had increased due to adjustments for 

higher costs experienced and expected for security-related projects at the 

National Air and Space Museum. According to Smithsonian officials, the 

increase also reflects the effect of delaying corrective work in terms of 

additional damage and escalation in construction costs. 

 4

 At the time of our 2005 report (GAO-05-369), this building was referred to as the Patent 

Office Building. Its name was changed during its revitalization. 

5

 A master plan is a proposal of a comprehensive renovation and/or expansion of a complex 

that aligns the physical plant with the organization’s strategic goals. It includes proposals 

such as making the complex conform to current codes, and meeting technology and 

security requirements. This process can also involve such things as upgrading and 

replacing major building systems, including the electrical, plumbing, fire suppression, and 

heating and air conditioning systems, as well as reinforcing the complex’s structural 

integrity and removing asbestos. Master plans also identify changes in building use and 

expansion requirements to meet mission needs. 
Page 6 GAO-07-725T 

According to Smithsonian officials, the Smithsonian’s March 30, 2007, 

estimate of about $2.5 billion could also increase, as the about $2.3 billion 

estimate was largely based on preliminary assessments, and therefore, as 

the Smithsonian completes more master plans, more items will be 

identified that need to be done. Moreover, this estimate does not include 

the estimated cost of constructing the National Museum of African 

American History and Culture, which was authorized by Congress and 

which the Smithsonian notionally estimates may cost about $500 million, 

half of which is to be funded by Congressional appropriations. 

The Smithsonian’s annual operating and capital program revenues come 

from its own private trust fund assets and its federal appropriation. 

According to Smithsonian officials, the Smithsonian’s federal 

appropriation totaled nearly $635 million in fiscal year 2007, with about 

$99 million for facilities capital and about $536 million for salaries and 

expenses, of which the facilities maintenance appropriation, which falls 

within the salaries and expenses category, was about $51 million.6

 In our 

previous work, we found that the facilities projects planned for the next 9 

years exceeded funding at this level.7

 As a result, we recommended that 

the Secretary of the Smithsonian establish a process for exploring options 

for funding its facilities needs and engaging the key stakeholders—the 

Smithsonian Board of Regents, the Administration, and Congress—in the 

development and implementation of a strategic funding plan to address 

the revitalization, construction, and maintenance projects identified by the 

Smithsonian. 

 6

 According to Smithsonian officials, the Smithsonian’s fiscal year 2007 appropriation 

included $98,554,760 for facilities capital and $536,295,000 for salaries and expenses, of 

which the facilities maintenance appropriation was $51,277,000. 

7

 Our recommendation was based on funding at the level of Smithsonian’s fiscal year 2004 

appropriation, which totaled $904 million, with $184.4 million for facilities. 
Page 7 GAO-07-725T 

Smithsonian officials told us during our current review that the 

Smithsonian Board of Regents —the Smithsonian’s governing body, which 

is comprised of both private citizens and members of all three branches of 

the federal government—has taken some steps to address our 

recommendation. In June 2005, the Smithsonian Board of Regents 

established the ad-hoc Committee on Facilities Revitalization to explore 

options to address the about $2.3 billion the Smithsonian estimated it 

needed for facilities revitalization, construction, and maintenance projects 

through fiscal year 2013. In September 2005, the ad-hoc committee held its 

first meeting, at which it reviewed nine funding options that had been 

prepared by Smithsonian management for addressing the about $2.3 

billion in revitalization, construction, and maintenance projects through 

fiscal year 2013. These options included the following: 

• Federal income tax check off contribution, in which federal income tax 

returns would include a check-off box to allow taxpayers to designate 

some of their tax liability to a special fund for the Smithsonian’s facilities. 

• Heritage treasures excise tax, in which an excise tax would be created, 

and possibly levied on local hotel bills, to generate funds for the 

Smithsonian’s facilities. 

• National fundraising campaign, in which the Smithsonian would launch a 

national campaign to raise funds for its facilities. 

• General admission fee program, in which the Smithsonian would institute 

a general admission charge to raise funds for critical but unfunded 

requirements. 

• Special exhibition fee program, in which the Smithsonian would charge 

visitors to attend a select number of special exhibitions as a means to raise 

funds to meet critical but unfunded requirements. 

• Smithsonian treasures pass program, in which the Smithsonian would 

design a program through which visitors could purchase a Smithsonian 

treasures pass with special benefits, such as no-wait entry into facilities or 

behind-the-scenes tours, to raise funds to meet critical but unfunded 

requirements. 

• Facilities revitalization bond, in which the Smithsonian would borrow 

funds such as through a private or public debt bond for the Smithsonian’s 

facilities. 

• Closing Smithsonian museums, in which the Smithsonian would 

permanently or temporarily close museums to the public in order to 

generate savings to help fund its facilities. 

• Increasing Smithsonian appropriations, in which the Board of Regents and 

other friends of the Smithsonian would approach the Administration about 

a dramatic appropriations increase to fund Smithsonian’s facilities. 

The Smithsonian Has 

Taken Some Steps to 

Address Our 

Recommendation to 

Develop and 

Implement a Funding 

Strategy 
Page 8 GAO-07-725T 

According to Smithsonian officials, after considering these nine proposed 

options, the ad-hoc committee decided to request an increase in the 

Smithsonian’s annual federal appropriations, specifically deciding to 

request an additional $100 million over the Smithsonian’s current 

appropriation annually for 10 years, starting in fiscal year 2008, to reach a 

total of an additional $1 billion. 

In September 2006, according to Smithsonian officials, several members of 

the Board of Regents and the Secretary of the Smithsonian met with the 

President of the United States to discuss the issue of increased federal 

funding for the Smithsonian’s facilities. According to Smithsonian officials, 

during the meeting, among other things, the Regents discussed the 

problem of aging facilities and the need for an additional $100 million in 

federal funds annually for 10 years to address the institution’s facilities 

revitalization, maintenance, and construction needs. According to 

Smithsonian officials, the representatives of the Smithsonian at the 

meeting told the President that they had no other options to obtain this 

$100 million except the Smithsonian’s federal appropriation. According to 

Smithsonian officials, these representatives said the Smithsonian had 

made considerable expense cuts and raised substantial private funds, but 

donors are unwilling to donate money to repair and maintain facilities. 

The President’s fiscal year 2008 budget proposal, published in February 

2007, proposed an increase of about $44 million over the Smithsonian’s 

fiscal year 2007 appropriation. The Smithsonian’s appropriation is divided 

into two categories. The about $44 million increase in the President’s 

budget proposal represented an increase of about $9 million for facilities 

capital and an increase of about $35 million for salaries and expenses, 

which includes facilities maintenance.8

 However, funds in the salaries and 

expenses category also support many other activities, such as research, 

collections, and exhibitions, and it is not clear how much of the $35 

million increase the Smithsonian would use for facilities maintenance. 

Moreover, Congress may choose to adopt or modify the President’s budget 

proposal when funds are appropriated for the fiscal year. 

As part of our ongoing work, we are reviewing the Smithsonian’s analysis 

of each funding option, including its potential for addressing its 

 8

 Specifically, the President’s fiscal year 2008 budget proposal for the Smithsonian’s 

appropriation proposed $107,100,000 for facilities capital and $571,347,000 for salaries and 

expenses. 
Page 9 GAO-07-725T 

revitalization, construction, and maintenance needs. We plan to report on 

these issues later in the year. 

The Smithsonian’s estimate for revitalization, construction, and 

maintenance needs has increased at an average of about $100 million a 

year over the past 2 years. Therefore, the Smithsonian’s request for an 

additional $100 million a year may not actually reduce the Smithsonian’s 

estimated revitalization, construction, and maintenance needs but only 

offset the increase in this estimate. Absent significant changes in the 

Smithsonian’s funding strategy or significant increases in funding from 

Congress, the Smithsonian faces greater risk to its facilities and 

collections over time. Since our work is still ongoing, it remains unclear 

why the Smithsonian has only pursued one of its nine options for 

increasing funds to support its significant facilities needs. At this time, we 

still believe our recommendation that the Smithsonian explore a variety of 

funding options is important to reducing risks to the Smithsonian’s 

facilities and collections. 

Madam Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be 

happy to respond to any questions you or other Members of the 

Committee may have at this time. 

Concluding 

Observations 
Page 10 GAO-07-725T 

We conducted our work for this testimony in March 2007 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards. Our work is based 

on our past report on the Smithsonian’s facilities management and 

funding, our review of Smithsonian documents, and interviews with 

Smithsonian officials. Specifically, we reviewed the Smithsonian’s revised 

estimated costs for major revitalization projects from fiscal year 2005 

through fiscal year 2013 and documents from the Board of Regents. We 

also reviewed the President’s fiscal year 2008 proposed budget and the 

Smithsonian’s federal appropriations from fiscal years 2005-2007. 

We are continuing to evaluate the Smithsonian’s efforts to strategically 

manage, fund, and secure its real property. Our objectives include 

assessing (1) the extent to which the Smithsonian is strategically managing 

its real property portfolio, (2) the extent to which the Smithsonian has 

developed and implemented strategies to fund its revitalization, 

construction, and maintenance needs, and (3) the Smithsonian’s security 

cost trends and challenges, including the extent to which the Smithsonian 

has followed key security practices to protect its assets. We are also 

examining how similar institutions, such as other museums and university 

systems, strategically manage, fund, and secure their real property. We 

expect to report on these issues later this year. 

Scope and Methodology 
Page 11 GAO-07-725T 

Mark L. Goldstein, (202) 512-2834 

In addition to those named above, Colin Fallon, Brandon Haller, Carol 

Henn, Susan Michal-Smith, Dave Sausville, Gary Stofko, Alwynne Wilbur, 

Carrie Wilks, and Adam Yu made key contributions to this report. 

GAO Contact 

Staff Acknowledgments 

(543186) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER