GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to Congressional Requesters

June 2000 CIVIL AIR PATROL

Proposed Agreements

With the Air Force Are

Intended to Address

Identified Problems

GAO/NSIAD-00-136

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Contents

Letter 3

Appendixes Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology 26

Appendix II: Comments From the Department of the Air Force 29

Appendix III: Comments From the Civil Air Patrol 31

Appendix IV: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 32

Tables Table 1: Expected Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force

Employment by Location of Assignment 21

Figures Figure 1: Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force

Organization and Relationship 7

Figure 2: Proposed Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force

Organization and Relationship 20
Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol
Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-285116 Letr

June 5, 2000

Congressional Requesters

The Civil Air Patrol is a congressionally chartered, private, nonprofit

corporation that uses about 61,000 dues-paying volunteers to perform its

missions. The missions are to provide (1) emergency services—including

counternarcotics, disaster relief, and search and rescue missions using

small aircraft; (2) aerospace education; and (3) cadet training. Congress

has designated the Civil Air Patrol the civilian auxiliary of the Air Force and

provided about $26.6 million in fiscal year 2000 for the Patrol in the Air

Force appropriation. The Air Force is responsible for providing advice and

assistance to the Patrol’s management and overseeing its operations.

A series of Air Force and Department of Defense audits and inspections

since 1998 have raised concerns about Civil Air Patrol’s financial

management and inventory control practices as well as Air Force oversight

of the Patrol. Consequently, you asked us to review Air Force proposals to

reorganize the Patrol’s management. In addition, section 934 of the

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 20001 required us and

the Department of Defense Inspector General to independently review

potential improvements to Patrol management. During our review, we

assessed (1) the nature of the relationship between the Air Force and Civil

Air Patrol, (2) the Air Force’s oversight of the Patrol, (3) the Patrol’s

management and oversight of its own activities, and (4) plans to resolve

identified problems.

Results in Brief The Air Force and Civil Air Patrol relationship is usually cooperative. The

Air Force includes the Patrol in its internal budget process to determine

what the Patrol needs and how much money will be available to support

the Patrol. The Air Force also provides technical advice to ensure flying

safety. For its part, the Civil Air Patrol performs search and rescue and

other flying missions for the Air Force, and the Air Force reimburses the

Patrol for this service. The Air Force oversees the Civil Air Patrol to ensure

that federal funds provided are used appropriately. At times, the

1

P.L. 106-65, October 5, 1999.
B-285116

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

relationship involves conflict. The Air Force and Civil Air Patrol initially

disagreed over plans to reorganize the Patrol’s board and could not even

agree on a means for the Air Force to explain its position to the Patrol’s

volunteers. Conflict in the financial relationship includes the Civil Air

Patrol’s practice of lobbying Congress for more funding if the Patrol

disagrees with the amount supported by the Air Force. Nonetheless, the Air

Force and Civil Air Patrol believe each get benefits from the relationship

and want to continue it.

The Air Force monitors activities of the Civil Air Patrol by reviewing its

flight, financial, and logistics operations. However, most of the personnel

who monitor the Patrol’s activities for the Air Force are Civil Air Patrol

employees who are at the Patrol’s operating locations and receive their

annual performance appraisals from the commanders whose operations

they monitor. This raises questions about the independence of the officers.

Moreover, even when problems are brought to the attention of the Air

Force, it has not always been able to enforce corrective action. Air Force

officials believe that they have limited authority over Civil Air Patrol

because it is a private corporation, although they can refuse to reimburse

the Patrol for certain missions and restrict the purchase of new equipment

or parts when the Patrol has not corrected problems. Nonetheless, Air

Force action to date has not been sufficient to resolve problems.

Civil Air Patrol commanders do not have much incentive to aggressively

enforce the regulations, and they have not exercised their authority

sufficiently to ensure that all units follow regulations intended to ensure

flying safety and accountability for assets. As a result, the Patrol lacks

assurance that all assets have been used safely and appropriately. Civil Air

Patrol leaders recognized the need to maintain adequate accountability

over assets but are concerned that if the accountability requirements

became too burdensome, some volunteers might quit, since most joined to

participate in aviation-related or youth development-related activities, not

to do the paperwork sometimes necessary to manage assets. The Civil Air

Patrol needs a sufficient number of aircraft and vehicles to perform its

mission but has not adequately determined how many aircraft and vehicles

it needs. When the Air Force tried to study aircraft requirements, it relied

on sometimes inaccurate data, raising questions about the study’s

conclusions. When the Air Force tried to perform a similar study on vehicle

requirements, the Civil Air Patrol did not provide sufficient information for

the Air Force to complete the study. The Civil Air Patrol is planning to

conduct another vehicle requirements study and hopes to complete it by

February 2001.
B-285116

Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

To improve accountability and oversight, the Air Force and Civil Air Patrol

have proposed legislation to establish a new governing board for the Patrol.

The proposed legislation would also allow the Air Force to use personal

service contractors to monitor the Patrol’s operations at its various

operating locations and to end reliance on Civil Air Patrol employees for

monitoring. The Air Force and the Patrol also plan to implement a

cooperative agreement to comply with the requirements of the Grant and

Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, which requires the use of a formal

funding agreement. The agreement would also implement a statement of

work that provides new flying safety and asset accountability

requirements. However, a consultant to Civil Air Patrol has estimated that it

will need to hire about 60 new employees at a cost of about $6.4 million per

year to implement some of the proposed changes, and the Air Force and

the Patrol have yet to agree on the expected implementation costs or who

will pay. The Air Force believes that the Civil Air Patrol can implement the

agreement for as little as $1.8 million.

Background President Franklin D. Roosevelt established the Office of Civilian Defense

in the Office of Emergency Management in 1941 to encourage coordination

and cooperation between the federal and state or local governments and

ensure civilian participation in defense during World War II. The office

formed the Civil Air Patrol.

In 1943, the Civil Air Patrol was transferred to the War Department. The

Patrol’s wartime missions included doing coastal patrols, searching for

enemy submarines, doing search and rescue missions, towing aerial

gunnery targets, and running courier flights. In 1946, Congress established

the Civil Air Patrol as a federally chartered corporation to (1) encourage

and aid American citizens in contributing their efforts, services, and

resources in developing aviation and maintaining air supremacy;

(2) encourage and develop contributions of private citizens to the public

welfare; (3) provide aviation education and training to Patrol members;

(4) encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities; and

(5) provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to

assist in responding to local and national emergencies. When the Air Force

was established in 1948, Congress designated the Civil Air Patrol as the

civilian auxiliary of the Air Force.
B-285116

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Today, the Civil Air Patrol has three primary missions.

• Flying missions include (1) search and rescue, (2) reconnaissance of

illegal narcotics production or distribution, and (3) assistance to federal

or state emergency management and disaster relief agencies using

aircraft and vehicles.

• The Civil Air Patrol’s aerospace education program promotes basic

aerospace knowledge and provides instruction on advances in

aerospace technology by providing aviation-related materials to middle

and high school teachers to relay to their students. In 1999, the Patrol

reported that it distributed about 30,000 free aerospace education

products to teachers, sponsored the annual National Congress on

Aviation and Space Education (a program that trained about

800 teachers), and held 100 workshops in 36 states to develop the

educational skills of over 200 participating teachers.

• The Civil Air Patrol’s cadet program provides instruction on leadership

skills, aerospace education, and physical training to people aged 20 and

younger. According to Patrol officials, the program also introduces

cadets to certain aspects of military life and gives some an opportunity

to learn how to fly.

Organization and

Administrative

Structure

To accomplish its assistance and oversight responsibilities, the Air Force

relies on the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force, a unit of the Air Education and

Training Command, the Air Force command that operates the Air

University and recruits and trains new people in the Air Force. Figure 1

displays the current−Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force and Civil Air Patrol

structure and relationship.
B-285116

Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Figure 1: Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Organization and

Relationship

Source: Our analysis of Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force documents.

According to the Air Force, until 1995, the Air Force ran the day-to-day

affairs of Civil Air Patrol through Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force by mutual

agreement between the two organizations. At the time, Civil Air Patrol-U.S.

Air Force had a full-time staff of about 250, comprised of active duty

servicemembers and federal civilian employees, and the part-time services

of about 450 reservists. In a 1995 reorganization, the Civil Air Patrol-U.S.

Air Force reduced its full-time staff from 250 to 73 and turned over to the

Civil Air Patrol the responsibility for its own day-to-day management. The

downsized Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force continued to have a role in

overseeing the Patrol; providing financial, material, technical, and other

assistance; and providing access to bases for certain cadet activities.
B-285116

Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

A volunteer national commander and national vice-commander, who are

assisted by four other volunteer national officers, head the Civil Air Patrol.

The national commander appoints eight volunteer regional commanders,

who lead operations in eight Patrol-designated geographic regions. The

regional commanders appoint wing commanders—one in each state, the

District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.2 These officials, along with the

active duty colonel who commands Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force, make up

a 67-member national board that governs the Civil Air Patrol.

A paid executive director manages the Patrol’s headquarters at Maxwell Air

Force Base, Montgomery, Alabama. However, the executive director has no

command authority over the more than 61,000 volunteers assigned to the

52 wings and over 1,600 units throughout the United States.3 The Civil Air

Patrol has a paid administrative staff of about 100 persons primarily

assigned to headquarters. The headquarters staff provides day-to-day

administrative services such as financial management, legal services,

planning, marketing and public relations, information management, and

other services. The Patrol also has 42 employees assigned to its bookstore

in Alabama and its parts depot in Texas. Finally, the Civil Air Patrol

employs the 89 liaison officers assigned to wings around the country who

monitor and assist the Patrol for the Air Force. The Patrol pays the liaison

officers their salaries, benefits, and operating expenses, using a portion of

the Air Force appropriation designated for the Patrol.

The Civil Air Patrol agreed to limit itself to 530 powered aircraft at the

suggestion of the Air Force. These aircraft are mostly Cessna (172 and

182 models) light aircraft. Similarly, the Civil Air Patrol also voluntarily

limited itself to 950 vehicles. These assets were purchased mostly with

federal funds. In addition, the Civil Air Patrol owns land, buildings,

computers, office equipment, and other items. Most of these assets are

corporate property and are assigned to wings and squadrons. Patrol

volunteers also own or lease another 4,700 aircraft that can be used on

missions when needed.

The majority of the Civil Air Patrol’s operating revenue comes from funds

included in the Air Force’s appropriation and designated by Congress for

2

A wing is the basic operational unit of the Civil Air Patrol.

3

Most wings are subdivided into squadrons. Most aircraft, vehicles, and other assets are

assigned to squadrons and the squadrons perform most of the missions.
B-285116

Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

the Patrol. In fiscal year 2000, this amounted to $26.6 million. Civil Air

Patrol also received appropriations of about $2.9 million from 36 states and

member dues totaling $2.1 million. The states usually designate their funds

for their local wing. Certain wings raise additional revenue through

fund-raising or receiving private donations. Also, the Civil Air Patrol has

about $20 million in investments in equities and other financial instruments

that have generated revenue. In addition, the Air Force has budgeted

$5.8 million in appropriated funds in fiscal year 2000 to cover the operating

costs of Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force.

Relationship Between

Air Force and Civil Air

Patrol Is Usually

Cooperative

The relationship between the Air Force and Civil Air Patrol is usually

cooperative but is sometimes marked by conflict. The Air Force cooperates

with Civil Air Patrol by permitting it to participate in the Air Force’s

internal budget process and providing other assistance, including technical

advice to promote safe operations. This arrangement establishes a financial

and operational relationship between the Air Force and Civil Air Patrol. For

its part, Civil Air Patrol cooperates with the Air Force by conducting search

and rescue missions for the Air Force and is reimbursed for the expenses

associated with those missions. The Air Force conducts oversight of the

Patrol’s activities to ensure that public funds are used properly. By the

same token, the Civil Air Patrol is a private, nonprofit corporation that is

generally independent from the Air Force. This situation sometimes creates

tension between the two organizations and has led to some public

disagreements. For example, the Air Force and the Patrol initially

disagreed over how to reorganize the Patrol’s governing board.

Nonetheless, each recognizes benefits stemming from the relationship.

The Relationship Is Usually

Cooperative

The Air Force routinely assists the Civil Air Patrol in many ways specified

in law (10 U.S.C. 9441), including (1) giving, lending, or selling to the Patrol

surplus Air Force equipment such as spare parts and vehicles;

(2) detailing Air Force personnel to the Civil Air Patrol; (3) permitting the

use of Air Force services and facilities; (4) providing funds for the

operational expenses of the Patrol’s national headquarters; (5) authorizing

payment of expenses related to operational, testing, and training missions;

and (6) reimbursing the Patrol for the cost of major equipment purchases.

The law also allows the Air Force to reimburse Patrol members for

expenses incurred in carrying out Air Force missions during a war or

national emergency. In a 1980 amendment to the law, Congress designated

the Civil Air Patrol and its individual members as instrumentalities of the

United States, making the United States liable under the Federal Tort
B-285116

Page 10 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Claims Act for negligent acts or omissions of Civil Air Patrol or its members

while they are engaged in an Air Force-assigned mission. The Air Force

pays for liability insurance for Civil Air Patrol’s non-Air Force missions. In

addition, under 5 U.S.C. 8141, Patrol members (except cadets under age 18)

are eligible for Federal Employees Compensation Act benefits if injured or

killed while serving on noncombat missions for the Air Force.

The Air Force also cooperates with the Civil Air Patrol by permitting it to

participate in the Air Force’s annual internal budget process to determine

the amount of funds needed for Patrol activities. For fiscal year 2000,

Congress designated $26.6 million of the Air Force’s appropriation for the

Civil Air Patrol. The funds are used to reimburse the Civil Air Patrol for Air

Force-assigned missions; headquarters operations; asset procurement; and

salaries, benefits, and operational expenses of the 89 liaison officers. For

accountability purposes, the liaison officers review the Civil Air Patrol’s

flight, financial, and logistics operations and provide technical assistance in

those and other areas, including flying safety at the wing level and below.

The Civil Air Patrol works with the Air Force on an ongoing basis by

performing search and rescue missions and searching for the production or

distribution of illegal narcotics. The Civil Air Patrol reported that it had

saved 275 lives during 1997-99 in about 30,000 hours of flying time. The

Civil Air Patrol also reported that law enforcement authorities interdicted

millions of dollars of illegal narcotics as a result of Patrol flights totaling

over 100,000 hours. The Civil Air Patrol also cooperates with the Air Force

by giving inspectors from the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force access to

Patrol wing and squadron facilities and records and trying to implement

recommendations stemming from these inspections.

The Relationship Is

Sometimes Marked by

Conflict

The Air Force and Civil Air Patrol have not always cooperated with each

other and sometimes engaged in public disputes. For example, in 1999, the

Air Force and the Patrol disagreed about plans to reorganize the Patrol’s

governing board. The Air Force wanted to contact Patrol members by letter

to explain the Air Force’s position on the matter and asked the Patrol for its

mailing list. The Civil Air Patrol refused to provide the mailing list and

offered to publish the Air Force’s letter in the Civil Air Patrol national

newspaper, but the Air Force refused that offer. Later, in a letter to the Air

Force General Counsel, the Patrol accused the Air Force of stealing the list.

The Air Force denied the allegation and did not send letters to Patrol

members. At times, the Air Force or Civil Air Patrol have made their

disagreements public. For example, in May 1999, the Civil Air Patrol posted
B-285116

Page 11 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

items on its internet home page to respond to Air Force allegations directed

at the Patrol about financial irregularities, safety concerns, and other

issues.

There are also problems with the financial relationship. While the Air Force

includes the Civil Air Patrol in the Air Force’s internal budget process, the

Patrol has not always agreed with the Air Force’s funding levels or

restrictions. At such times, the Civil Air Patrol has contacted Congress

directly to seek more funding than the Air Force has supported. The Air

Force believes that this can end up forcing the Air Force and the Civil Air

Patrol to compete for resources and has strained the relationship at times.

The vehicle through which the Air Force funds the Patrol has also been

questioned. In a 1998 report,4 the Air Force Audit Agency concluded that

the Air Force had not complied with the Federal Grant and Cooperative

Agreement Act of 1977 (31 USC 6301-6308). That law requires federal

agencies to use contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements to acquire

property or services for the government or to transfer money, property,

services, or anything of value to recipients to accomplish a federal purpose.

Initially, the Civil Air Patrol resisted using a cooperative agreement

suggested by the Air Force but in January 2000 tentatively agreed to the

arrangement. In February 2000, the Civil Air Patrol National Board

overwhelmingly approved the draft cooperative agreement and statement

of work. However, as of May 2000, the Air Force and Civil Air Patrol had yet

to sign the cooperative agreement and an associated statement of work

that specifies new safety and asset accountability requirements.

Benefits From the

Relationship

Despite some problems in the relationship, both the Air Force and Civil Air

Patrol believe the relationship benefits both parties. The Air Force believes

it benefits from the relationship because the Patrol provides highly trained

and motivated new recruits and saves the Air Force from using its

resources on the war on drugs. The Civil Air Patrol also provides some

recruiting benefit because Patrol cadets have a lower attrition rate from the

Air Force Academy than those without Civil Air Patrol experience,

according to Academy data. Also, the Civil Air Patrol believes it gets some

recruiting benefit from the association with the Air Force because Patrol

officials believe some cadets are attracted to the organization by the

4

Installation Report of Audit: Air Force Oversight of FY 1996 Civil Air Patrol Corporation

Activities, CAP-USAF, Maxwell AFB AL (EB098013, May 13, 1998).
B-285116

Page 12 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

opportunity to participate in flying missions, wear an Air Force-style

uniform, and participate in military-style activities.

Limited Air Force

Authority Over Civil

Air Patrol Hinders

Oversight

Through the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force, the Air Force provides advice,

assistance, and oversight to the Civil Air Patrol but believes it has a limited

ability to effect change in the Patrol because it is an independent, private

corporation not controlled by the Air Force. While the Air Force can use

and has used certain sanctions when the Civil Air Patrol has not complied

with requirements, problems remain.

Internal control standards that we issued in accordance with the Federal

Managers’ Financial Integrity Act of 1982 (31 USC 3512) require that

organizations establish physical control procedures to provide reasonable

assurance that assets are not lost or used without authorization.5 The Air

Force conducts oversight to identify problems in Civil Air Patrol wings and

squadrons, recommending improvements when appropriate. For example,

the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force inspects every wing once every 3 years,

and its regional officials inspect wings or squadrons in their regions

routinely and also make recommendations to correct identified

shortcomings. Since 1997, the Air Force has found numerous inventory

control problems during inspections at wings and squadrons. The problems

ranged from wings’ or squadrons’ inability to locate all of the items for

which they were accountable to a lack of records needed to determine the

inventory. For example, one wing had inventory problems in 77 percent of

the squadrons inspected from September 1998 through February 2000. A

Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Regional Office found similar problems at

wings it inspected in 1998 and 1999.

Other Air Force audits and reviews have also found problems with Civil Air

Patrol or Air Force oversight.

5

Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1,

Nov. 1999).
B-285116

Page 13 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

• In a 1998 review of Air Force oversight of Civil Air Patrol, the Air Force

Audit Agency found numerous problems, including ineffective

management controls by the Air Force over the Patrol’s use of about

$23 million in appropriated funds and the failure to enter into a grant or

cooperative agreement.6 The Air Force and Civil Air Patrol plan to enter

into such an agreement to address the problems.

• In July 1999, the Air Force Office of Special Investigations and the

Federal Bureau of Investigation seized records at Civil Air Patrol and

Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force headquarters in Alabama and locations in

Kentucky, Texas, West Virginia, Florida, and Puerto Rico. According to

officials in the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, the seizures

were in response to the problems identified by Air Force studies,

informants’ reports, and an allegation of double-billing for a flying

mission. The Office of Special Investigations indicated that it was

pursuing a criminal investigation in the matter of the alleged doublebilling.

The Air Force believes it has limited authority to enforce the

implementation of recommendations it makes because the Civil Air Patrol

is an independent corporation. However, it does have some leverage in

promoting corrective actions. For example, the Air Force can deny wings

federal funds to purchase new equipment and spare parts or deny the

transfer of surplus parts from the Department of Defense. The Air Force

has occasionally exercised this authority when it finds inadequate controls

over resources in the wings. During our review, eight wings were denied

such funds. The Air Force may also withdraw approval for Air Force

missions, denying reimbursement to the wing for the missions. The Civil

Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force has used its available authority sparingly because

of the importance of continued availability of aircraft for search and rescue

missions. Air Force officials told us that withdrawal of mission status could

leave some states without search and rescue coverage. Thus, problems

have continued in the areas of compliance with safety and asset

management regulations by Civil Air Patrol units.

6

We did not verify the results of the Air Force Audit Agency review.
B-285116

Page 14 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Management and

Oversight of Wing

Activities Have Been

Weak

The Civil Air Patrol National Commander leads the organization but relies

on the region and wing commanders to manage the day-to-day affairs of

their respective areas in performing assigned missions and managing

assets. However, some wings did not always follow Patrol policies and

regulations regarding flying safety and asset management. Furthermore,

the Civil Air Patrol has not determined how many aircraft and vehicles it

needs to accomplish its missions. This raises questions about whether it

has too few or too many aircraft or vehicles and whether they are located

where needed most.

Civil Air Patrol Wings Have

Not Always Followed All

Patrol Regulations

GAO-issued internal control standards require an organization’s

management to establish an internal control system that provides

reasonable assurance that organizational components comply with

applicable regulations. The Civil Air Patrol has written various regulations

and issued policy manuals that provide guidance on safe and effective air

operations and asset management and accountability. For example, Patrol

safety regulations require that designated flight release officers authorize

flying missions in writing. Before authorizing the flight, these officers are

supposed to ensure that pilots have a current license and medical

certificate and are qualified in the aircraft they intend to operate, among

other things. In some cases, missions were not properly authorized. One

wing we visited lacked assurance that all flights were properly authorized

because authorization documents on file lacked the officers’ signatures,

raising questions about whether the officers had authorized the flights.

Based on our inquiry, the wing staff contacted the flying squadrons, which

had kept a second set of records that ultimately documented proper

authorization on most but not all of the missions in question. Nonetheless,

without contacting the squadrons first, the wing’s headquarters could not

answer our questions about whether the flights were properly authorized.

Wing officials lacked assurance that about 170 flights had been

appropriately authorized. In addition, flight release officers sometimes

authorized flights and then flew as passengers, in violation of the

regulations.

Such problems existed at other wings as well. To determine the extent to

which the wings follow Patrol safety, asset, and financial management

regulations, we asked each of the 52 wings to provide us with evidence of

compliance with selected regulations; 49 wings responded to our request.

Our analysis showed that in fiscal year 1999 many of the wings that
B-285116

Page 15 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

responded did not follow all regulations, as indicated by the following

examples.

Fifty-five percent of the wings could not demonstrate that they did all the

annual no-notice inspections required by Civil Air Patrol regulation to

ensure compliance with safety regulations, and another 14 percent did not

provide sufficient records for analysis. Among other things, wing-level

inspectors are required to review the (1) flying unit’s safety program; flying

records, including pilots’ records; flight authorization procedures; and

condition and maintenance of Civil Air Patrol aircraft assigned to the unit.

The inspectors are also required to provide an overall evaluation of the

unit’s compliance with Patrol flight safety and other operational

requirements. Two wing commanders told us that no-notice inspections are

difficult to conduct in an organization run by volunteers. Since the

regulations require inspectors to visit squadrons without notice, there is

little assurance that any of the squadron’s volunteers will be present to

provide access to the necessary records when the inspectors arrive. When

no-notice inspections were done, inspectors found problems. For example,

numerous wings found noncompliance with aspects of the flight

authorization regulations. A key Civil Air Patrol official told us that the

Patrol plans to change the regulation to permit short-notice inspections in

the future.

Twenty percent of the wings did not separately account for administrative

fees related to counternarcotics missions, as required by Civil Air Patrol

financial management regulations, and another 8 percent did not provide

sufficient records for analysis. The fees are an add-on to reimbursements

for flights related to counternarcotics missions. These fees must be

accounted for separately. Patrol regulations specify that the wings may use

these fees only for expenses directly attributable to the wing’s

counternarcotics program.

Thirty-seven percent of the wings did not have annual budgets, as required

by Civil Air Patrol regulation, and another 12 percent did not provide

sufficient records for analysis. Civil Air Patrol regulations require each

wing to have an annual budget approved prior to the start of each fiscal

year and to monitor expenditures during the year.
B-285116

Page 16 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Civil Air Patrol Has Not

Determined Aircraft and

Vehicle Requirements

Each Civil Air Patrol wing needs a sufficient number of aircraft, vehicles,

and other assets to complete their assigned missions, but the Patrol has not

determined how many aircraft and vehicles are needed. In 1998, the Air

Force Audit Agency found that the Air Force had purchased aircraft and

ground vehicles without appropriately determining aircraft and vehicle

requirements. As a result, the Air Force studied Civil Air Patrol aircraft

requirements to try to determine whether the currently authorized powered

aircraft fleet size of 530 was the number needed for the Patrol’s missions.

The study concluded the Civil Air Patrol may need 648 aircraft for its

missions. However, the Air Force did not verify the accuracy of the Patrol’s

flying-hour data and sometimes relied on inaccurate data, raising questions

about the study’s conclusions.

Moreover, Civil Air Patrol officials could not explain the basis for assigning

aircraft to the wings, and they used no systemic process to periodically

revalidate their basing decisions. However, in 1997, the Patrol attempted to

address aircraft use, which can be used to determine basing requirements,

and established an average of 200 hours per year per aircraft as the target

flying rate for Civil Air Patrol aircraft. In 1998, the wings had widely varying

aircraft use rates, raising questions about whether some wings had more

aircraft than they needed and some had too few. For example, three wings

reported that they flew an average of over 460 hours per aircraft in 1998,

whereas another three wings reported they flew about 160 hours or less. At

the same time, the Civil Air Patrol wing with one of the lowest usage rates

had one of the highest rates of use of members’ aircraft, raising questions

about the extent to which the wing tried to fully use Civil Air Patrol aircraft,

which cost less to fly than member-owned aircraft. Another wing had a

relatively high rate of use of member aircraft in fiscal year 1998 and this

wing’s officials believe they could reduce member aircraft usage if they had

more Civil Air Patrol aircraft.

Civil Air Patrol recognizes the need to analyze the use and assignment of its

aircraft, and it developed a flying-hour database in 1998 to support such

analysis. However, the database, managed at Patrol headquarters, is not

always accurate.

• The database reported that one wing averaged about 75 hours of flying

time per aircraft in fiscal year 1998, well below the Patrol’s target of

200 hours per aircraft. However, our review of wing data shows that the

wing used each aircraft on average over 200 hours that year. Moreover,

four of the other six wings that we visited also had data problems. The
B-285116

Page 17 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Civil Air Patrol believes that the errors in the database have since been

corrected.

• The database shows two aircraft in a wing in fiscal year 1999 that were

not in the wing’s inventory. The database even shows hours flown by the

wing on one of the aircraft.

• Inaccurate data has hampered decision-making at times. According to a

Patrol official, the reported low use of aircraft in one wing during 1998

led to the transfer of one aircraft from the wing to another wing thought

to have a greater need. Civil Air Patrol information management officials

at headquarters acknowledged problems in the data and attributed it to

staff turnover and changes in the software used to maintain the

database. Further, they believe that the problem has been compounded

by late submission of wing flying reports and some wings’ reluctance to

enter data directly into the computer, as is now required. These officials

also told us they are trying to improve the accuracy of the system. In

addition, a key Patrol official told us that the database is now being

made available to the wings to permit them to verify the accuracy of

their aircraft use data.

In addition to questions about aircraft fleet size requirements and use, Civil

Air Patrol has also not determined how many vehicles it needs and whether

its 950 vehicles match requirements. The Air Force tried to study Civil Air

Patrol vehicle requirements in February 1999 but abandoned the effort in

August 1999 after some wings did not provide any data, despite repeated

requests by the Air Force and the Civil Air Patrol over an 8-month period.

Civil Air Patrol officials were unable to explain the reason for the poor

response to the data request. Officials at one wing told us they did not send

in any data because they believed that a response to the request was not

mandatory. However, without adequate data on the usage and location of

aircraft and vehicles, Patrol management cannot determine whether they

have too few or too many or whether they are located in the places where

most needed. The Civil Air Patrol has begun another study of vehicle

requirements and plans to complete it by February 2001.

Patrol leaders face a significant challenge in designing and operating an

accountability system and managing assets. They agree that proper

accountability is necessary but said that it is sometimes difficult to get

volunteers to do the necessary paperwork. Civil Air Patrol officials told us

that they try to achieve a balance—designing and implementing

accountability systems that provide reasonable assurance of appropriate

asset use but are not so burdensome that volunteers leave the Patrol.
B-285116

Page 18 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

The Air Force and Civil

Air Patrol Plan to

Address Identified

Problems

In March 2000, the Air Force and the Civil Air Patrol submitted to Congress

a proposed revision of 10 U.S.C. 9441 to reorganize the Civil Air Patrol

governance. First, the proposed legislation would establish a new board of

governance for Civil Air Patrol, with some members appointed by the Air

Force, others by Civil Air Patrol, some jointly by the Air Force and the

Patrol from among private organizations interested in civil aviation and the

missions of the Patrol, and one each by the Speaker of the House and the

President of the Senate. The board would carry out the purposes of the

Civil Air Patrol as specified in its 1948 congressional charter. The Civil Air

Patrol intends to keep its National Board as currently constituted because

its members are corporate officers and the Patrol believes wing

commanders need to remain corporate officers to execute certain financial

responsibilities. The proposed legislation would also allow the Air Force to

use personal service contractors as liaison officers, thereby addressing

concerns about the independence of the liaison officers arising from their

current status as Civil Air Patrol employees. The Air Force would pay the

liaison officers with Air Force funds to oversee the Air Force

reimbursements for Patrol flights and continue to provide the other

oversight and assistance that they do now.

In addition to the proposed legislation, the Patrol has agreed to accept

funding under a cooperative agreement beginning October 1, 2000. The

agreement clarifies the relationship by specifying the Air Force’s and the

Patrol’s rights and responsibilities in a range of areas, including

management, asset accountability, audits, dispute resolution, financial and

performance reporting, and procurement standards. Moreover, a statement

of work, which specifies certain accountability and management

requirements under the cooperative agreement, addresses many of the

issues that we raised. For example, the statement of work (1) requires that

the Civil Air Patrol revalidate its aircraft and vehicle fleet every 2 years,

(2) allows the Air Force to withhold funds or take certain other actions if

the Patrol does not properly account for its resources, (3) requires the Civil

Air Patrol and the Air Force to establish and operate a joint wing-level

inspection program, and (4) requires the Patrol to operate an inspection

program below the wing level. Moreover, Department of Defense grant

regulations permit the Air Force to terminate the current award

temporarily, withhold payments, or take other remedial action if the Patrol

is in serious noncompliance with the cooperative agreement or statement

of work.
B-285116

Page 19 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Implementing the cooperative agreement may be costly. A Civil Air Patrol

consultant concluded that to fulfill additional responsibilities, Patrol

headquarters would need to hire about 60 individuals at a cost of about

$6.4 million a year. Their responsibilities would include financial

management, planning, information technology management,

procurement, accounting, inspections, operations, professional

development, and administrative and operational support; about half would

be at headquarters and the other half at the wings. The Air Force and Civil

Air Patrol had not agreed on the actual implementation costs and who

would pay for these officials as of May 2000. The Air Force believes that

implementation could cost as little as $1.8 million annually and require

fewer than 60 new employees. Figure 2 displays the likely organization that

would result from adoption of the proposed legislation and implementation

of the cooperative agreement and statement of work by the Civil Air Patrol

and the Air Force.
B-285116

Page 20 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Figure 2: Proposed Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Organization and Relationship

Source: Our analysis of Civil Air Patrol and Air Force documents.
B-285116

Page 21 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

As noted earlier, the number of persons employed by the Civil Air Patrol

and the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force is expected to change if the

(1) proposed legislation is passed and implemented as currently written,

(2) cooperative agreement and statement of work are implemented as

currently written, and (3) consultant’s recommendation to hire

60 additional Civil Air Patrol employees is implemented. Table 1 displays

Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force employment before and

after implementation of the proposed changes, by location of assignment.

Table 1: Expected Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Employment by Location of Assignment

a

Some wings have paid staff positions funded through state appropriations or local wing funds.

b

Excludes about 450 reservists who augment Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force staff.

Source: Our analysis based on Civil Air Patrol and Air Force documents.

Conclusions Despite recent disputes between the Air Force and Civil Air Patrol, both

organizations have indicated that they value their relationship and want to

continue it. Because the Air Force’s and the Patrol’s proposed legislation,

cooperative agreement, and statement of work, address many of the

problems that we and others have identified, we believe that specific

recommendations to address these problems are unnecessary at this time.

The Civil Air Patrol’s independence from the Air Force, coupled with limits

on the Air Force’s authority to promote corrective action in the Patrol, has

created a situation in which there are few serious penalties for

noncompliance with regulations. That will change if the cooperative

agreement and statement of work are approved as written because if the

Civil Air Patrol is unable to ensure compliance with applicable regulations

and the terms of the cooperative agreement and statement of work, it risks

unilateral termination of the agreement by the Air Force.

Personnel

Employment prior to implementation of the changes Employment after implementation of the changes

Civil Air Patrol

Civil Air PatrolU.S. Air Force Civil Air PatrolCivil Air PatrolU.S. Air Force

Headquarters 101 27 129 27

Bookstore/depot 42 0 42 0

Liaison officers 89 0 0 89

Regional offices 8 46 16 46

Wings 0a 0 25 0

Total 240 73b 212 162b
B-285116

Page 22 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Agency Comments and

Our Evaluation

The Air Force concurred with our report’s findings and conclusions. The

Air Force also believed that costs associated with implementation of the

cooperative agreement should not prevent the Air Force and the Patrol

from signing the agreement. The Air Force’s comments are included in their

entirety in appendix II.

The Civil Air Patrol also concurred with our report. The Patrol felt that if

adequately funded, implementation of the cooperative agreement and

statement and proposed legislation would address identified problems. The

Patrol’s comments are included in their entirety in appendix III.

Scope and

Methodology

To conduct our work, we interviewed officials and obtained key documents

from the Civil Air Patrol headquarters in Alabama. We also contacted all

52 Civil Air Patrol wings and requested certain data and performed more

extensive fieldwork at the Delaware, New York, Ohio, Missouri, Nevada,

and Arizona Wings and limited work at the Maryland Wing. We also

interviewed officials and obtained key documents from the Office of the

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Reserve Affairs); Civil Air

Patrol-U.S. Air Force; and Patrol employees who monitor Civil Air Patrol

wing activities for the Air Force in the field. We discuss our scope and

methodology in detail in appendix I.

We conducted our work from August 1999 through April 2000 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional

committees; the Honorable William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense; the

Honorable F. Whitten Peters, Secretary of the Air Force; the Honorable

Jacob J. Lew, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; Brigadier

General James C. Bobick, Civil Air Patrol National Commander; and

Colonel Robert L. Brooks, Civil Air Patrol Executive Director. We will make

copies available to other interested parties on request.
B-285116

Page 23 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me

at (202) 512-3610. Key contributors on this assignment are listed in

appendix IV.

Norman J. Rabkin

Director, National Security

Preparedness Issues
B-285116

Page 24 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

List of Congressional Requesters

The Honorable John W. Warner

Chairman

The Honorable Carl Levin

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Armed Services

United States Senate

The Honorable Ted Stevens

Chairman

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye

Ranking Minority Member

Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Tom Harkin

United States Senate

The Honorable Floyd D. Spence

Chairman

The Honorable Ike Skelton

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Armed Services

House of Representatives

The Honorable Jerry Lewis

Chairman

The Honorable John P. Murtha

Ranking Minority Member

Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives
Page 25 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol
Page 26 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Appendix I

Objective, Scope, and Methodology ApApenednxidexiIs

During our review, we assessed (1) the nature of the relationship between

the Air Force and Civil Air Patrol, (2) the Air Force’s oversight of the Patrol,

(3) the Patrol’s management and oversight of its own activities, and

(4) plans to resolve identified problems. To complete this work, we

interviewed the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Commander and the

Commanders and key staff of Civil Air Patrol’s Middle East1 and Great

Lakes Liaison Regions. We also interviewed the Civil Air Patrol National

Commander, Executive Director, and the Wing Commanders and key staff

from the Maryland, Delaware, New York, Ohio, Missouri, Nevada, and

Arizona Wings and the Liaison Officers and Liaison Noncommissioned

Officers assigned to these wings. We selected the wings except the

Maryland Wing based on certain reported extremes in flight data, such as

unusually high or low usage of corporate or member aircraft.

To understand the nature of the relationship between the Air Force and the

Patrol, we reviewed laws defining the relationship; proposed legislation to

enhance the relationship; memorandums of understanding between the Air

Force and the Patrol; the Joint Report: Air Force-Civil Air Patrol Funding

Policies, Procedures, Relationship issued to Congress; the cooperative

agreement; the statement of work; Air Force guidance and manuals;

briefing slides; and other documents. We also reviewed the Department of

Defense Inspector General report issued in February 2000,2

correspondence, materials supporting several draft Civil Air Patrol

governing board reorganization proposals, and other documents. In

addition to the officials identified previously, we interviewed an official

from the Air Force Office of the General Counsel and another from the

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Reserve Affairs);

the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Inspector General; and other Civil Air

Patrol-U.S. Air Force officials, including the Comptroller, the Directors of

Logistics, the Aircraft Branch, the Vehicle Branch, the Director of

Operations, and the Staff Judge Advocate. We also obtained attrition data

from the Air Force Academy in Colorado.

To assess the Air Force’s oversight of Civil Air Patrol, in addition to

interviewing the officials identified in the first paragraph of this appendix,

we reviewed Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Inspector General reports; a

1

The Middle East region includes the states of Delaware, Maryland, North and South

Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.

2

Department of Defense Inspector General Administration and Management of the Civil Air

Patrol (Report No. D-2000-075, Feb. 15, 2000).
Appendix I

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Page 27 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

staff assistance visit report from the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Great

Lakes Liaison Region; Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force inspection guidance;

and other documents.

To assess Civil Air Patrol’s management and oversight, we reviewed the

legislation incorporating the Patrol and defining its mission; Civil Air

Patrol’s Constitution and Bylaws; manuals; guidance; organization charts;

the meeting minutes from every Civil Air Patrol National Board and

National Executive Committee meeting held from February 1996 to

February 2000; Civil Air Patrol’s annual report to Congress for fiscal years

1997, 1998, and 1999; and other documents. In addition to the Patrol

officials identified previously, we also interviewed Civil Air Patrol’s General

Counsel; the directors of Financial Management, Operations, Plans and

Requirements, Cadet Programs, Aerospace Education and Training, and

Mission Support; and the Great Lakes and Middle East Region

Commanders. We also discussed management and oversight with the

Liaison Officers or Liaison Noncommissioned Officers from the selected

wings. In addition to the Air Force officials identified above, we discussed

Civil Air Patrol’s management and oversight with the Deputy Assistant

Secretary of the Air Force (Reserve Affairs).

We also reviewed regulations and guidance applicable to flight operations

and financial management and determined whether the wings followed the

requirements by requesting that each of the 52 wings provide us

information to assess compliance with Patrol regulations; 49 wings

responded.

To assess asset management and related management activities, we

reviewed budgets, annual audit reports, financial reports, reimbursement

requests, training guides, recruiting materials, and other documents. To

determine the need for the number of aircraft and vehicles in the Patrol’s

inventory, we reviewed the Air Force Logistics Management Agency’s

April 1999 aircraft requirements study,3 flying hour reports, and the

attempted vehicle requirements and interviewed key Civil Air Patrol

officials to determine how basing decisions were made. To determine the

reliability of Civil Air Patrol’s flying hour system, we reviewed wing flight

reports and underlying data and compared them to database reports.

3

Air Force Logistics Management Agency Civil Air Patrol (CAP) Aircraft Requirement Study

(AFLMA Final Report LM199900600, Apr. 1999).
Appendix I

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Page 28 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

To assess planned corrective actions, we reviewed the proposed

legislation, the draft cooperative agreement, the draft statement of work,

memorandums, and other documents. We also discussed general

provisions of grant and cooperative agreements with officials from the

Office of Management and Budget and reviewed Office of Management and

Budget Circulars A-110, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants

and Agreements With Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and

Other Non-Profit Organizations; Circular A-133, Audits of Institutions of

Higher Education and Other Nonprofit Institutions; and Circular A-122,

Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations. We also reviewed the

Department of Defense grant and cooperative agreement regulations.

We did not review safety, pilot qualifications, maintenance, billings and

reimbursements; and accident and incident reporting because the

Department of Defense Inspector General planned to review those issues

concurrently with our review. The Inspector General issued a report on its

review in February 2000 and plans to issue another report later in 2000.
Page 29 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Appendix II

Comments From the Department of the Air

Force ApendxiI
Appendix II

Comments From the Department of the Air

Force

Page 30 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol
Page 31 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Appendix III

Comments From the Civil Air Patrol ApendxiI
Page 32 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Patrol

Appendix IV

GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments ApendxiIV

GAO Contacts William E. Beusse (202) 512-3517

Acknowledgments In addition to the contact name above, Brian J. Lepore,

Maewanda L. Michael-Jackson, Charles O. Burgess,

Katherine H. Woodward, and Ernie E. Jackson made key contributions to

this report.

(702019) Letr
Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of

reports are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out to

the Superintendent of Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit

cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list

from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone

phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain

these lists.

Orders by Internet:

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet,

send an e-mail message with “info” in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

To Report Fraud,

Waste, or Abuse in

Federal Programs

Contact one:

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

• e-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)


United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00