U.S. General Services Administration

2008 Ann ual PERFORMAN CE AN D ACCOU N TAB I L ITY REPORT

GSA Means Excellence in the Business of Government
How to use this report

This Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for fiscal year 

(FY) 2008 provides the U.S. General Services Administration’s (GSA) 

financial and performance information, enabling the President, 

Congress, and the American people to assess the Agency’s performance as 

provided by the requirements of the:

● Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 and other laws

● Government Management Reform Act of 1994

● Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993

● Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990

● Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) of 1982

● Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-136.

The assessment of GSA’s performance contained in this report compares performance results to the Agency’s strategic 

goals and performance goals. GSA’s Strategic Plan, Performance Plan, and annual PARs are available on GSA’s Web site at 

www.gsa.gov/annualreport. GSA welcomes feedback on the form and content of this report. If you wish to provide feedback 

please contact Michael Swanchara at (202) 501-1905 or michael.swanchara@gsa.gov.

This report is organized into the following major components:

❶ Letter from the Administrator

The Administrator’s letter includes an assessment on the reliability and completeness of the financial and performance information 

presented in the report and a statement of assurance on the Agency’s management controls as required by the FMFIA. 

❷ Management’s Discussion and Analysis

This section provides an overview of the financial and performance information contained in the Performance, Financial, and 

Other Accompanying Information sections. The Management’s Discussion and Analysis includes an overview of the GSA 

organization, highlights of the Agency’s most important performance goals and results, current status of systems and internal 

control weaknesses, and other pertinent information such as the progress being made by GSA in implementing the President’s 

Management Agenda. 

❸ Performance Section

This section provides the annual performance information as required by OMB Circular A-11 and the GPRA. Included in this 

section is a detailed discussion and analysis on the Agency’s performance in FY 2008. Information on key performance measures 

with past results can be found in the Performance Section. 

❹ Financial Section

This section contains the details on GSA’s finances in FY 2008. An introduction letter from GSA’s CFO, followed by the 

Independent Auditor’s Report, the Agency’s audited financial statements, and required supplementary financial information. 

❺ Other Accompanying Information

This section includes summary charts of GSA’s Performance Measures, the Inspector General’s Assessment of GSA’s Major 

Management Challenges with Management’s comments, Improper Payments Improvement Act information, a summary of 

the Financial Statement audit and Management assurances, information on the Agency’s Debt Management and Payments 

Management, and a glossary of acronyms.
Mission Statement

GSA leverages the buying power of the federal government to acquire best value for

taxpayers and our federal customers. We exercise responsible asset management. 

We deliver superior workplaces, quality acquisition services, and expert business solutions.

We develop innovative and effective management policies.

Strategic Goal s

Stewardship

Lead federal agencies in the economical and efficient management of federal assets

by spearheading effective policy development and by the exemplary management of the

buildings/workplaces, motor vehicles, and personal property provided by gsa.

Superior Workplaces

Deliver and maintain productive workplaces consisting of office space, 

furnishings, technology, supplies, and related services.

Best Value

Develop and deliver timely, accurate, and cost-effective acquisition

services and business solutions.

Innovation

Develop new and better ways of conducting business that result in more

productive and effective federal policies and administrative operations.

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Table of Contents

Letter from the Administrator 4

How GSA Benefits the Public 10

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Mission, Values, and Goals 17

Organization 18

Performance Summary and Highlights 22

FY 2008 Key Performance Measures within Strategic Goals 26

The President’s Management Agenda 27

Financial Statements Analysis and Summary 34

Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

Introduction to Management Assurances 39

Statement of Assurance 40

Management’s Assessment of Internal Control 41

Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control 42

Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act, Section 2 43 

Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act, Section 4 44 

Federal Financial Management Improvement Act 45

Federal Information Security Management Act 45

Financial Management Systems Framework 46

Limitations of Financial Statements 48

PERFORMANCE SECTION

Introduction to Performance 51

Performance by Service/Staff Office

Public Buildings Service 53

Federal Acquisition Service 62

Office of Citizen Services and Communications 72

Office of the Chief Financial Officer 76

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer 79

Office of Governmentwide Policy 83

Linking Strategic Goals and Performance Measures to Budget 89

Performance Measurement Data Validation and Verification 94

WWW.GSA.GOV/ANNUALREPORT

2 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s
FINANCIAL SECTION

Letter from the Chief Financial Officer 99

Office of the Chief Financial Officer’s Major Accomplishments 101

Independent Auditor’s Report

Letter of Transmittal from the Inspector General 105

Report of Independent Auditors 108

Inspector General’s Report on Internal Controls over Performance Measures 124

Financial Statements

Principal Financial Statements 126

Notes to the Financial Statements 134

Required Supplementary Information 156

OTHER ACCOMPANYING INFORMATION

Performance Measures

Summary Chart of Goals and Measures 159

Performance Goals and Measures No Longer Reported 164

Management Challenges

Office of Inspector General’s Assessment of GSA’s Major Management Challenges 166

Agency Management Comments on the Inspector General’s Assessment of 

 GSA’s Major Management Challenges 186

Improper Payments Information Act Reporting Details 189

Summary of Financial Statement Audit and Management Assurances

Summary of Financial Statement Audit 190

Summary of Management Assurances 190

Other, Agency-specific Statutorily Required Reports

Debt Management 191

Cash and Payments Management 191

Acronyms and Abbreviations 192

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 3

T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s
Letter from the Administrator

FY 2008 Performance

and Accountability

Report

As Acting Administrator, one 

of my top priorities for the 

U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) is to maintain the high 

standards of integrity and accountability that have made GSA a trusted 

business partner for Federal customer 

agencies for nearly six decades. I am 

proud to present GSA’s Fiscal Year 

(FY) 2008 Annual Performance and 

Accountability Report (PAR), which details our accomplishments and challenges in program and financial management over the past year. The PAR explains the actions GSA 

has taken to exercise effective stewardship over customer 

funds and provides quantitative evidence of the value that 

GSA provides to our Federal customer agencies, and by 

extension, to the U.S. taxpayer. Each section of GSA’s PAR 

communicates our goals, values, and accomplishments, and 

demonstrates our ongoing commitment to integrity and 

accountability in all GSA operations. 

The annual PAR is a key document for GSA because it 

provides an opportunity to publicly demonstrate our financial 

integrity to our customers, our external stakeholders, and 

the public. GSA is a provider of choice for most of the 

products and services that we offer to Federal agencies. 

Since we are not always a mandatory source, our continued 

success depends on our ability to offer best value solutions 

that satisfy all statutory and regulatory requirements, meet 

Federal standards, and exceed customer expectations for 

procurement excellence and financial stewardship. The audit 

opinion and financial results reported in the PAR verify and 

prove that GSA financial operations 

comply with Federal financial regulations, U.S. Department of the Treasury 

(U.S. Treasury) guidance, and sound 

accounting practices. GSA’s PAR gives 

our customers the confidence they 

need to conduct business with us and 

trust that we will acquire goods and 

services on their behalf with the same 

care, compliance, and stewardship 

that they apply to managing their own 

funds. 

GSA’s PAR demonstrates the value we 

provide by measuring the timeliness, quality, and efficiency 

of our services and reporting our program performance 

alongside our financial results. The performance goals, 

measures, and results reported in the PAR reflect GSA’s 

commitment to realizing our four customer-centric strategic 

goals: Stewardship, Superior Workplaces, Best Value, 

and Innovation. GSA’s performance goals and measures 

connect our diverse business offerings to our strategic 

goals and track our progress toward meeting those goals. 

GSA’s annual financial results report the cost of meeting 

our strategic goals and demonstrate our efficiency in operations. The PAR consolidates our program and financial 

reporting to provide a comprehensive report on the value 

that GSA delivered to our customers, our stakeholders, and 

the American public in FY 2008. 

The FY 2008 PAR is the first to cover a full fiscal year of 

operations under GSA’s FY 2007-2012 Strategic Plan. The 

FY 2008 PAR reports Agency progress toward meeting 

progressive and transformational goals that ensure GSA 

meets high standards of performance today and continues 

doing so into the future. Perhaps the most critical of the 

James A. Williams

4 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

L e tt e r f r o m t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r
desired outcomes introduced in the Strategic Plan is the 

guiding principle of “One GSA–One Voice.” One GSA–One 

Voice articulates our vision that agencies doing business 

with GSA should have one contact that can fulfill all their 

workplace requirements and that GSA is viewed as the one 

place to go for all workplace needs. One GSA–One Voice is 

GSA’s commitment to increase collaboration and integrate 

our many diverse offerings. This will improve our speed 

and quality in meeting customer requirements, reduce the 

administrative burden on our Federal customer agencies, 

and reduce the overall cost of government to the American 

people.

Unqualified “Clean” Opinion

GSA again received an unqualified “clean” opinion in 

FY 2008, with two significant deficiencies, one of which is 

material, from our independent auditors. Even with an 

unqualified opinion, we again face challenges with resolving 

our information technology (IT) controls over systems 

access, segregation of duties, and monitoring controls. 

There were significant improvements to specific software 

applications in FY 2008, and we will expand current controls 

to all financial systems to resolve this deficiency in 

FY 2009. 

Our auditors encountered difficulty with the Public Buildings 

Service’s (PBS) controls over monitoring, accounting, and 

reporting of budgetary transactions. Because this problem 

was a reoccurrence from last year, and there were significant unrecorded transactions in PBS and the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS), this deficiency was elevated to a 

material weakness. GSA conducted statistical sampling and 

review procedures, and we are encouraged by the fact that 

no material adjustment resulted from those procedures. 

However, the risk of a material misstatement remains unacceptably high. Internal controls have been designed to 

resolve this material weakness, but greater accountability is 

needed for these controls to be effective. We remain 

committed to continuous improvement of GSA’s strong 

internal controls. We believe that an unqualified opinion 

makes a powerful statement to our customers that GSA is 

committed to handling their funding with care and attention 

to detail. 

GSA Priorities 

Ensuring a Smooth Presidential Transition. In 

FY 2008, GSA acquired space and began renovations to 

provide workspace for the President-elect’s Transition Team. 

GSA acquired office furniture, IT equipment, communications support, and established a team of GSA employees 

to ensure immediate support for the President-elect and 

up to 500 Transition Team members on November 5, 2008. 

Additionally, GSA began planning for the transition of the 

outgoing President and Vice President, and established 

a dedicated team to support their transition. GSA also 

provided acquisition and property management services 

in support of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) in 

planning for the Presidential Inauguration. 

Leading the Nation in Green Government. GSA is a 

proven leader in the sustainable design of new Federal 

buildings and continually invests in the existing inventory to 

improve efficiency and reduce the environmental footprint 

of government-controlled office space. GSA has made 

great strides this year in reducing energy consumption in 

Federal buildings, complying with related executive orders 

and mandates, and encouraging the use of environmentallyfriendly products by our Federal customer agencies.

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 5

L e tt e r f r o m t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r
■ In FY 2008, seven GSA-controlled buildings were 

certified under the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) 

rating system. An additional 25 buildings were registered to work toward certification, bringing the total 

number of registered buildings to over 120 and the total 

number of LEED-certified buildings to 27. Our goal is 

to integrate sustainable design as seamlessly as possible 

into the existing design and construction process. 

■ GSA demonstrated progress in meeting our long-term 

goals to reduce energy consumption in GSA-controlled 

Federal buildings and increase renewable energy 

procurement; in this area GSA surpassed its FY 2008 

target by exceeding the 9 percent combined goal and 

achieving a performance level that was 9.7 percent better 

than the 2003 baseline. This achievement underscores 

our commitment to both conserving energy through 

responsible energy management and the efficient use of 

taxpayer dollars in the purchase of renewable energy.

■ GSA added nearly 23,000 alternative fuel vehicles 

(AFV) to our fleet of motor vehicles in FY 2008. These 

additions increased our inventory of AFVs to 80,000 

vehicles, including 708 hybrids. We recognize our 

responsibility to help Federal agencies reduce their 

petroleum consumption and reduce carbon emissions. 

■ In FY 2008, GSA added an environmental specialty 

category to our online ordering system, GSA Advantage, 

to specifically identify the over 10,000 environmentally 

friendly commodities we offer. GSA supports environmental stewardship by encouraging our customers 

to purchase products with recycled content, that are 

Energy Star or similarly qualified, and contain 

non-ozone depleting materials.

■ Helping Federal agencies meet the goal of President 

Bush’s Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal 

Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management; and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 by providing 

green products and services to its customers. GSA offers 

AFVs; uses wind, solar, and other innovative renewable 

energy sources in its buildings; develops alternative 

workplace arrangements; and offers a wide range of 

environmentally preferable office products.

Focus on Customer Service. GSA depends on customer 

orders to finance nearly all Agency operations, meaning we 

must continuously demonstrate value to our customers. GSA 

is committed to being an innovation leader for the government, providing effective and efficient services along with 

business offerings that are responsive to new and emerging 

needs of our Federal customer agencies. 

■ In FY 2008, the U.S. Marine Corps designated GSA as its 

Fourth Party Logistics provider. The U.S. Marine Corps 

is the flagship customer for GSA’s Enterprise Supply 

Chain Solutions, a new service that provides customized solutions to customer agencies involving multiple 

methods of order fulfillment. 

■ GSA also worked closely with the U.S. Army to develop 

a unique vehicle to provide safer and smoother transportation for wounded soldiers within the Washington, 

D.C., metropolitan area. GSA designed the first-of-a-kind 

patient evacuation vehicle (PEV) as a semi-trailer-sized 

hospital on wheels with full air ride suspension, self 

contained and redundant power generation systems, and 

an aero-medical evacuation pallet system to transport 

non-ambulatory patients. 

■ In August 2008, GSA took steps to create services to 

support new government-wide policy on Trusted 

Internet Connections. GSA developed and issued Statements of Work to vendors on our Networx contract to 

assist customer agencies in meeting their requirements 

to reduce the number of Federal Internet gateways. 

GSA’s support of this initiative will provide cost-effective products and services to strengthen the Federal 

government’s incident response capability, and enhance 

government information system security. 

6 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

L e tt e r f r o m t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r
■ Also in FY 2008, GSA lowered the fee charged to 

customers in leased space from eight to seven percent for 

most leased transactions. GSA fees recover the administrative cost of acquiring and managing leases; this fee 

reduction is the result of new efficiencies and increased 

consistency in our nationwide leasing program. 

Continue GSA’s Business Resurgence. Revenues in FAS 

increased by 4.6 percent this year, making FY 2008 the first 

year since FY 2004 that GSA has seen revenue growth across 

the combined programs of FAS. FAS also realized a solid 

increase of two percent in cash collections for our multiple 

award schedules program. Business with DoD, our largest 

customer, increased by three percent across FAS in FY 2008. 

The business resurgence in FY 2008 provides further 

evidence that GSA is delivering value to our customers by 

offering products and services that meet or exceed their 

expectations. 

Restoring the Federal Infrastructure. GSA owns 

and manages more than 1,500 real property assets spread 

across the country, and we are committed to protecting the 

Federal infrastructure and providing Federal employees 

with a safe, healthy workplace. In FY 2008, we completed 

two courthouses for the Federal judiciary in Springfield, MA 

and Richmond, VA; completed five new Federal buildings; 

and began construction on six new Land Ports of Entry for 

the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection. 

GSA continues to strive to meet our long-term goal of 

improving the financial performance of our owned inventory 

of Federal buildings by redirecting capital investment into 

our core assets, thoroughly monitoring the performance 

of each asset, and disposing of underutilized assets. In 

FY 2008, we completed 17 major renovations to Federal 

buildings and disposed of 14 under-utilized or underperforming properties, saving taxpayers millions of dollars. 

Assuring Government-wide Disaster Preparedness.

The U.S. National Response Framework assigns responsibility to GSA for providing acquisition support and securing 

alternative facilities for other Federal agencies in the event 

of an emergency or natural disaster. GSA also has responsibility for supporting the executive branch Continuity of 

Operations Plan (COOP) through planning, testing and 

training, and for facilitating interagency efforts to achieve 

Federal communications equipment interoperability requirements. In FY 2008, GSA provided heavy equipment, tools, 

and workspace for Federal disaster recovery personnel 

and delivered critical supplies, including 

bottled water and blankets, to victims 

of flooding in the Midwest, California 

wildfires, and Hurricanes Gustav and Ike 

in the Gulf Coast. 

Making GSA the #1 Place to Work 

in Government. GSA has consistently 

ranked among the top ten best places 

to work in the Federal government by 

the Partnership for Public Service and 

American University’s Institute for the 

Study of Public Policy Implementation. 

This is an admirable achievement, but it 

is our goal to make GSA the #1 place to 

Illustration of the Robert R. Merhige, Jr. U.S. Courthouse in Richmond, VA.

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 7

L e tt e r f r o m t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r
work in government. One of the ways GSA strives to reach 

this goal is by promoting the use of telework. Telework 

is an important recruiting and retention tool that will help 

attract and keep talented individuals in public service, while 

reducing gasoline consumption and emissions associated 

with commuting. By the end of FY 2008, 35 percent of 

eligible GSA employees were teleworking at least one day a 

week, well over our FY 2008 goal of 20 percent. 

President’s Management Agenda 

GSA’s ratings on the President’s Management Agenda (PMA) 

Scorecard for the fourth quarter of FY 2008 recognize our 

accomplishments in implementing Administration goals for 

improving performance in all Federal agencies. Four areas 

received the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) 

highest rating of “green” in Status and “green” in Progress in 

FY 2008: Human Capital, Performance Improvement, Real 

Property, and Financial Performance. Also of note, FY 2008 

is the fourth consecutive year that GSA earned “green-green” 

rating on the Performance Improvement and Real Property 

Scorecards. GSA improved its status and progress scores to 

“yellow-green” for E-Gov and improved its Commercial 

Services Management progress score to “green” while maintaining a “yellow” in status. In total, GSA’s Scorecard ratings 

for FY 2008 demonstrate our commitment to continuous 

improvement in Agency performance, and I am confident 

that GSA will maintain the same high standards in FY 2009.

Financial, Systems, and Performance 

Data Assurances 

As outlined in the Management Assurance section of this 

report, GSA conducted its assessment of the effectiveness 

of internal control over operations, systems, and financial 

reporting. With the exception of one material weakness, 

GSA can provide reasonable assurance that internal 

controls were operating effectively in each of these areas. 

A more detailed discussion of this topic can be found in the 

Management Assurances section of this report, beginning 

on page 39. We are proud of these accomplishments, but 

we continue to implement improvements. During FY 2009, 

we will continue our efforts to improve implementation 

and monitoring of corrective action plans to address this 

weakness and ensure proper accounting and reporting of 

budgetary transactions. 

Throughout the year, our senior managers assess the efficiency and effectiveness of their organizations by analyzing 

financial and performance data. Management relies on 

this data to identify material inadequacies in financial 

and program performance areas and to identify corrective 

actions needed to resolve them.

As required by the Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, I 

have assessed the financial and performance data used in 

this report, and believe it to be complete and reliable.

Management Challenges 

GSA has recognized a number of opportunities and challenges arising in our external environment. Most of these 

challenges are reflected in the Agency goals and priorities 

introduced in this letter and discussed throughout the PAR. 

The fact that GSA has recognized these emerging issues 

and has developed plans and initiatives to address them 

mitigates the risk, but does not eliminate the challenge. We 

will monitor our progress toward meeting these challenges 

by: regularly reviewing and assessing the effectiveness of 

our strategies to address them, scanning the market for 

Federal products and services, and monitoring the legislative and regulatory environments to identify new and 

emerging challenges and threats. 

Presidential Transition. GSA must ensure a smooth, 

orderly transition to the next Presidential administration. 

We must continue to support the incoming and outgoing 

Administrations through the transition period, as well as 

the Presidential Inaugural Committee. We will support 

additional workplace requirements of the incoming 

8 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

L e tt e r f r o m t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r
GSA is first and foremost a service organization. Our core 

purpose is to deliver value in terms of speed, quality, and 

reduced cost to our Federal customer agencies and to 

reduce the cost of government to the U.S. taxpayer. GSA 

reduces acquisition costs by consolidating common requirements from multiple Federal agencies in order to capture 

volume discounts. GSA’s acquisition professionals, along 

with streamlined electronic tools, reduce the governmentwide cost of acquisition and real property management 

processes, and allow customer agencies to focus resources 

on their core missions. GSA’s history of excellence and our 

world-class workforce allow us to offer better quality acquisition and real property management services, to reduce 

cycle times, and to deliver contracts at more advantageous 

terms for the government. 

GSA’s mission is more important today than it has been at 

any time in our history. GSA consolidates and coordinates 

common administrative processes, which helps the government to operate at its most effective and efficient level. We 

help to abolish inefficiencies and increase interoperability 

among Federal agencies. GSA increases the flexibility, 

efficiency, and responsiveness of the Federal government, 

which makes the United States safer and stronger. GSA 

means “Excellence in the business of government.” 

 

James A. Williams

Acting Administrator

November 14, 2008

President, and we will provide for the pension and office 

staff of the former President. 

One GSA–One Voice. GSA must build on the steps taken 

in FY 2008, and institutionalize the integration of our 

acquisition and real property services to provide a single 

interface with our Federal customer agencies to meet their 

multiple workplace needs. We must develop new customer 

interfaces and improve internal processes to make One 

GSA–One Voice a permanent part of our daily operations. 

Increased Environmental Standards. GSA must 

continue to expand our environmentally-friendly and 

sustainable service offerings, and we must take additional 

steps to meet or exceed the standards of Executive Order 

13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, 

and Transportation Management. Additionally, GSA has 

established the Office of Federal High-Performance Green 

Buildings, in response to the Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-140); this Office must 

be properly funded and staffed, and will fulfill a brand new 

role in the government, which will need to be defined and 

supported by policies and procedures. 

Federal Infrastructure Requirements. GSA owns over 

1,500 real property assets spread across the country, and 

has a backlog of repairs and renovations needs in those 

buildings totaling $8.8 billion. Based on FY 2008 funding 

levels, it would take GSA over 10 years to address the 

backlog, assuming no new needs arise. We will continue 

to aggressively attack this problem by investing in our core 

assets and disposing of under-performing properties, but 

we must also explore new strategies for the acquisition, 

management, and repair of government-owned properties to 

ensure that our portfolio remains viable and self-sustaining 

over the long term. 

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 9

L e tt e r f r o m t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r
GSA’s touches the lives of nearly every U.S. citizen. 

GSA delivers superior workspaces, acquisition 

services, and expert business solutions that 

support and contribute to the mission of all of its Federal 

customer agencies. GSA products and services support 

other Federal agencies and enable their citizen interactions, 

delivery of government services, and consumer protection 

activities across the United States. 

Most personal interactions between citizens and their 

government occur in Federal office buildings, leased space, 

or U.S. courthouses that were built or acquired and are 

managed by GSA. If a citizen meets a Federal employee 

outside of an office setting, it is likely that the employee 

arrived in a motor vehicle purchased or maintained by GSA. 

Nearly all Federal activities are conducted using furniture, 

computer equipment, and office supplies procured through 

GSA. GSA provides direct access to a wide range of government services as well as consumer protection information 

through the official Web portal of the Federal government, 

USA.gov and GobiernoUSA.gov, which are managed by 

GSA. GSA helps keep the nation safe by providing tools, 

equipment, and non-tactical vehicles to the U.S. military, 

and providing Federal, state, and local governments with 

law enforcement equipment, firefighting and rescue 

equipment, and disaster recovery products and services. 

The following examples highlight a few of the many 

instances in which GSA delivered tangible benefits to the 

public in FY 2008. 

GSA is a Leader in Green Government 

GSA has a long history of providing environmentally sound 

or sustainable products and services, reducing waste and 

pollution, and providing Federal employees with a healthy 

work environment. 

GSA provides superior workspace solutions to over one 

million Federal employees in over 8,600 leased and owned 

facilities across the nation. The Agency leverages its vast 

portfolio of government-controlled assets to lead the government in sustainable design and energy-efficient real property 

management. GSA’s efforts to design, build, and manage 

Federal properties in a sustainable and environmentallysensitive manner reduce the energy consumption of the 

Federal government. This reduces operating costs and 

carbon emissions while meeting the missions and functional 

needs of tenant Federal agencies. 

■ In FY 2008, GSA operated 27 owned and leased 

buildings that were certified under the U.S. Green 

Building Council’s LEED rating system. A review of 

12 of these properties found that these properties 

produced 33 percent lower carbon emissions, used 26 

percent less energy, and three percent less water, and 

their occupants reported 34 percent greater satisfaction 

than equivalent U.S. commercial buildings. 

■ In January 2008, GSA completed one of its largest green 

roofs, at the Social Security Administration’s Service 

Center in Birmingham, AL. This modern and environmentally friendly roof covers 85,000 square feet with 

plant life to help reduce storm water runoff, extend 

the roof’s life expectancy, and reduce the cost of both 

heating and cooling the building underneath. 

■ During FY 2008, GSA completed a $6.9 million solar 

park at the Federal Center in Denver, CO. The park will 

generate nearly 10 percent of peak electricity demand for 

the one square mile campus, an equivalent to powering 

about 145 homes each year. The 1.6 megawatt park 

will prevent approximately 1,244 metric tons of carbon 

dioxide from being emitted into the atmosphere and 6.5 

railcars of coal from being burned each day.

How GSA Benefits the Public

10 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

H o w G SA B e n e f i t s t h e P u b l i c
n Also in FY 2008, FAS supplied the 

National Park Service with 20 new 

compressed natural gas (CNG) buses. 

The buses replaced older, diesel buses 

and completed the transition of the 

Grand Canyon National Park’s shuttle 

system to CNG. With the addition of the 

new buses, the Grand Canyon’s visitor 

transportation system will be powered 

entirely by clean-burning CNG and will 

also become 100 percent wheelchair 

accessible. CNG will help to preserve 

the heritage of one of the nation’s 

most recognizable landmarks, and will 

substantially reduce air pollutants and 

noise levels for an estimated 4.7 million 

park visitors each year. 

GSA supports telework of Federal 

employees as a government-wide strategy 

to reduce gridlock in major urban areas and to reduce 

gasoline consumption and the resulting emissions. In April 

2008, GSA launched an enhanced interagency telework Web 

site, www.telework.gov, to make telework information more 

accessible and understandable to Federal employees and 

managers. In FY 2008, GSA sponsored 14 telework centers, 

which saved an estimated 2.8 million travel miles, almost 

115 thousand gallons of fuel, and 2.3 million pounds of 

carbon emissions.

GSA Supports Small Business Development 

GSA supports small and disadvantaged business by ensuring 

that small, minority, veteran, HUBZone, and women business 

owners are given the maximum practical opportunity to 

engage in the Federal procurement process. In FY 2008, 

GSA directed over $1.7 billion in contract awards to small 

businesses. GSA spent over 39 percent of eligible procurement dollars through small businesses, exceeding its 

statutory goal of 23 percent. 

GSA offers over 12 million products and services, more 

than any other commercial enterprise in the world. It uses 

its unique position as the lead procurement organization 

for the Federal government to provide environmentally 

responsible choices to Federal agencies. GSA gives preference to products that have recycled content, are non-toxic, 

or are energy efficient, which helps its customers to be 

effective stewards of the environment and minimize 

negative environmental impacts of Federal government 

activities. 

■ In FY 2008, GSA’s Computers for Learning (CFL) program 

extended the useful life of electronic equipment by 

transferring 6,047 pieces of electronic equipment at an 

original value of $57.6 million to over 650 individual 

qualifying educational activities. The CFL program 

primarily serves to increase opportunities for children 

to be exposed to modern computer technology, but it 

also meets environmental goals, by conserving energy 

used to manufacture new electronic equipment and 

by minimizing the environmental harm of disposing 

of reusable electronic equipment that is excess to the 

needs of the government. 

In addition to the solar park, the Federal Center in Denver, CO also has a 

green roof.

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 11

H o w G SA B e n e f i t s t h e P u b l i c
■ This year, GSA selected 62 firms to receive awards 

under the Alliant Small Business contract worth up 

to $15 billion. Alliant Small Business is GSA’s first 

small business set-aside Government Wide Acquisition 

Contract (GWAC). It provides streamlined access to 

a broad range of management and technical support 

services, enabling complex IT solutions to be acquired 

under a pre-competed multiple award, indefinite 

delivery, indefinite quantity contract. 

■ In April, GSA hosted a meeting of its Small Business 

Advisory Committee at GSA Expo in Anaheim, CA. The 

committee consists of small business owners 

and leaders of various small business associations, and advises GSA leadership on 

issues facing the small business contracting 

community. Meeting at the Expo gave the 

committee an excellent opportunity to 

interact with their peers in their official 

capacity, and to collect public comment on 

small business concerns. 

GSA Assists Veterans and Service-Disabled 

Veterans

GSA is committed to supporting the nation’s 

veterans, by expanding business opportunities 

for veterans and by supporting Federal agencies 

dedicated to veterans’ assistance. 

■ In March, GSA broke ground on the new Armed Forces 

Retirement Home in Gulfport, MS. The new home 

replaces the former structure, which was severely 

damaged by Hurricane Katrina. The new facility will 

accommodate 584 residents and provide a full spectrum 

of continuing care retirement living: independent living, 

assisted living, and long-term care. Once completed, 

the home will include a holistic wellness program, 

fitness and physical therapy, walking paths, and a “Hall 

of Honors” to recognize the military service of the 

residents and their commitment to their country.

■ In June, GSA delivered three PEVs to the U.S. Army, to 

improve the transportation of wounded soldiers from 

Andrews Air Force Base to the Walter Reed Army Medical 

Center. The PEVs are semi-trailer sized mobile intensive 

care units, which the Commander of the Walter Reed 

Army Medical Center called “an incredible leap forward” 

in the care and transport of injured soldiers. The PEVs 

provide a safer, smoother ride than the converted school 

buses that they replaced, and include critical, life-saving 

features, including built-in medical oxygen, air and 

suction, and room to carry more patients. 

■ Also in FY 2008, GSA launched the 21 Gun Salute initiative, a 21-point plan designed to increase the participation of veteran and service-disabled veteran owned 

businesses in GSA contracts. In August, GSA signed 

a Memorandum of Understanding with the Veterans 

Entrepreneurship Task Force to seek their assistance 

in matching veteran-owned businesses with Federal 

contracting opportunities. GSA recently added a ServiceDisabled Veteran Owned Small Business Subcommittee 

to its Small Business Advisory Committee; the new 

subcommittee will update GSA on concerns of servicedisabled veterans and will encourage veteran business 

owners to seek out Federal contracting opportunities 

through GSA acquisition vehicles. As a result of the 

GSA delivered the first patient evacuation vehicle (PEV) to 

Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

12 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

H o w G SA B e n e f i t s t h e P u b l i c
21 Gun Salute initiative, preliminary data shows that 

GSA spent 3.84 percent of eligible procurement dollars 

through service-disabled, veteran-owned small businesses in FY 2008, which is the first time that GSA has 

exceeded the government-wide goal of three percent. 

GSA is a Partner in Emergency Response 

and Disaster Recovery

GSA provides critical acquisition support to first responders 

in times of emergency and natural disasters. In the event of 

an emergency, GSA helps to: acquire food, water, ice, and 

hygiene products for distribution to victims and relief 

workers; acquire leased space to house disaster assistance 

centers and Federal disaster claims processing centers; and 

provide tools and equipment to support debris removal and 

infrastructure rebuilding. 

■ In FY 2008, GSA rushed fire and rescue supplies to 

California to support wildfire firefighters and evacuees. 

GSA delivered 10,000 blankets and 10,000 cots within 

10 hours. Other items supplied to fight the wildfires 

were 52,171 pounds of fire fighting materials and 5,600 

additional blankets. 

■ In September, GSA supported the Federal response 

to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. GSA shipped essential 

disaster supplies such as water, ice, blankets, hygiene 

kits, and equipment for evacuee feeding kitchens. GSA 

also assisted in staffing the National Response Coordination Center to optimize logistics support to the affected 

areas in Louisiana and Texas. 

■ Also in FY 2008, GSA received new authority to help 

state and local governments in purchasing homeland 

security equipment and services. The Local Preparedness Acquisitions Act (Public Law 110-248) expands 

GSA’s Cooperative Purchasing program to allow state 

and local officials to purchase alarm and signal systems, 

firefighting and rescue equipment, and law enforcement 

and security equipment under the same pricing afforded 

to the Federal government.

GSA Provides Access to Government Services 

and Consumer Information 

GSA manages a wide array of communication channels that 

deliver government services and consumer information 

directly to citizens. GSA manages the official Web portal of 

the Federal government, USA.gov and GobiernoUSA.gov; 

operates the National Contact Center to respond to public 

inquiries via telephone, Internet, and e-mail; and distributes 

a variety of government and consumer information publications through the Public Documents Distribution Center in 

Pueblo, CO. 

■ In FY 2008, GSA-managed communication channels 

provided for 213 million contacts between citizens and 

their government, through Web site visits, telephone 

contacts, publications distributed, and e-mails and 

Web chats processed. More than 700,000 of these 

contacts were requests for GSA’s free Consumer Action 

Handbook, which provides consumer protection advice 

and a directory of Federal agencies and private organizations dedicated to consumer protection. 

■ In FY 2008, the Brookings Institute rated USA.gov as the 

best Web site in the Federal government for the second 

year in a row. The same survey ranked the GSA Web 

site, GSA.gov, third out of 61 Federal executive, legislative and judiciary branch Web sites. Ratings were based 

on access to online information, electronic services, 

privacy and security, readability, disability and foreign 

language access, and public outreach. 

■ Also in FY 2008, GSA launched a new general government Weblog. GovGab.gov features daily posts highlighting U.S. government information and services of 

greatest use in the daily lives of Americans. GovGab 

draws on the resources in GSA’s family of Web sites: 

USA.gov and GobiernoUSA.gov; Pueblo.gsa.gov, the 

public’s trusted source of consumer information for 

more than 35 years; and ConsumerAction.gov, the 

Federal government’s Web site dedicated to helping 

citizens with consumer problems. 

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 13

H o w G SA B e n e f i t s t h e P u b l i c
GSA Preserves America’s Heritage 

GSA is a responsible for over 425 historic properties, 

including 63 National Historic Landmarks and two National 

Historic Sites. These properties represent the work of 

prominent architects and are valued for their significance in 

U.S. history, architecture, art, archaeology, engineering, and 

culture. GSA takes great pride in its inventory and strives to 

preserve, protect, and utilize historic properties as established in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. In 

an effort to share GSA’s historic buildings with the U.S. 

public, this year GSA used National Preservation Month 

(May) to release its eighth set in a series of posters featuring 

some of GSA’s most significant properties. 

In FY 2008, GSA worked with the Utah Heritage Foundation 

to preserve the 117 year-old Odd Fellows Hall, located in 

Salt Lake City and one of Utah’s last remaining examples of 

its architectural style. Located on the site of the planned 

Salt Lake City Federal Courthouse, GSA began the process 

of relocating the 3,000 ton building across the street from 

its original location. GSA plans to sell the building after the 

move is completed, so that the building can be preserved in 

the same historical context, and contribute to the development of downtown Salt Lake City. 

In the process of moving Odd Fellows Hall 

in Salt Lake City, UT.

14 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

H o w G SA B e n e f i t s t h e P u b l i c
Mission, Values, and Goals 17

Organization 18

Performance Summary and Highlights 22

• FY 2008 Key Performance Measures within Strategic Goals 26

The President’s Management Agenda 27

Financial Statements Analysis and Summary 34

Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

• Introduction to Management Assurances 39

• Statement of Assurance 40

• Management’s Assessment of Internal Control 41

• Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control 42

• Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act, Section 2 43 

• Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act, Section 4 44 

• Federal Financial Management Improvement Act 45

• Federal Information Security Management Act 45

• Financial Management Systems Framework 46

Limitations of Financial Statements 48

Management’s 

Discussion 

and Analysis
Employee Benefits:

● Reduced travel time and costs

● Lower stress

● Increased productivity

● Better balance between work and home lives

Employer Benefits: 

● Lower costs

● Improved motivation in employees

● Flexible staffing

Benefits for All:

● Reduced emissions

● Safer roads by reducing highway congestion

Currently, 35 percent of eligible GSA employees are teleworking on a regular basis 

at an average of one day per week. This surpasses 

GSA’s goal of having 20 percent of eligible 

employees teleworking by the end of FY 2008.

www.telework.gov

Benefits of Telework
The Agency’s mission derives from GSA’s original 

authorizing legislation, the Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949. This law consolidated the Federal 

government’s real estate, supply, and other management 

support functions so that agencies would run more efficiently. GSA seeks efficiencies through joint management 

policy-making with departments and other agencies. Today 

for the great majority of functions, agencies are able to 

determine for themselves whether GSA’s centralized services 

serve their needs, as agencies are no longer required to use 

GSA, for many of our products and services. 

A crucial aspect of GSA’s mission is to promote unified 

planning and coordination of disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. These responsibilities relate 

to both natural and man-made incidents that threaten lives 

and property before, during, and after a major emergency 

or disaster. In addition to making certain that GSA’s operations respond to these crises, GSA provides other agencies 

with the space, supplies, telecommunications, and policies 

they need to do their jobs. This means, for example, going 

to the site of disasters and finding suitable space for the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to set up 

operations or providing equipment and vehicles to the 

U.S. Forest Service to fight wildfires. 

Mission, Values, and Goals

As the government’s leading procurement agency, GSA continues to assist its customers with procuring various goods and services cheaper, faster, and in compliance with laws and regulations. This saves money for the taxpayers. GSA 

brings best practices to procurements and harnesses the full purchasing power of the Federal government. At the same 

time, GSA is helping other Federal agencies to concentrate their efforts and limited contracting resources onto agencyspecific procurements. 

GSA Mission Statement

GSA leverages the buying power of the Federal government to acquire best value for

taxpayers and our Federal customers. We exercise responsible asset management. 

We deliver superior workplaces, quality acquisition services, and expert business solutions. 

We develop innovative and effective management policies.

GSA Values

Integrity

Accountability and Transparency

in Operations

Effective Leadership and

Responsible Decision-Making

The use of the Internet and other new electronic tools 

touches every aspect of GSA’s mission. GSA’s primary Web 

site, GSA.gov, is the electronic gateway to the Agency. GSA 

also maintains the Web portal for the Federal government, 

USA.gov and GobiernoUSA.gov which provides citizens 

with a single point of access to the vast index of official 

government information, including more than 50 million 

Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial documents. 

Through this initiative, GSA successfully meets the President’s Electronic Government (E-Gov) directive, which is to 

provide citizens with accurate, timely, and consistent information about government programs and services. USA.gov 

and GobiernoUSA.gov have been rated the number one 

Web site in the Federal government for quality and 

E-Government readiness. 

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 17
Services (AAS); General Supplies and Services (GSS); and 

Travel, Motor Vehicles, and Card Services (TMVCS). The 

FAS portfolio structure enables GSA and FAS to provide 

best value services, products, and solutions to our 

customers by aligning resources around key functions.

n PUBLIC BUILDINGS SERVICE (PBS): PBS is the largest public 

real estate organization in the United States, providing facilities and workspace solutions to more than 60 Federal 

agencies. PBS aims to provide a superior workplace for the 

Federal worker and superior value for the U.S. taxpayer. 

Balancing these two objectives is PBS’s greatest management challenge. PBS’s activities fall into two broad areas. 

The first is space acquisition through both leases and 

Organization

GSA delivers services directly to its Federal customers through 11 regional offices and the central office in 

Washington, D.C. GSA is composed of the Federal Acquisition Service, the Public Buildings Service, 12 staff offices 

that support the Agency, the Office of Inspector General, 

and the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals.

n FEDERAL ACQUISITION SERVICE (FAS): FAS is the lead organization for procurement of products and services (other 

than real property), for the Federal government. FAS 

leverages the buying power of the government by consolidating Federal agencies requirements for common goods 

and services. FAS provides a range of high-quality and 

flexible acquisition services that increase overall government effectiveness and efficiency. FAS business operations 

are organized into four business portfolios based on the 

product or service provided to customer agencies: Integrated Technology Services (ITS); Assisted Acquisition 

GSA Strategic Goals

Stewardship

Lead Federal agencies in the

economical and efficient management

of Federal assets by spearheading

effective policy development and by the

exemplary management of the buildings/

workplaces, motor vehicles, and

personal property provided by GSA.

Superior Workplaces

Deliver and maintain productive

workplaces consisting of office space, 

furnishings, technology, supplies, and

related services.

Best Value

Develop and deliver timely, accurate, 

and cost-effective acquisition services

and business solutions.

Innovation

Develop new and better ways of

conducting business that result in

more productive and effective Federal

policies and administrative operations.

www.gsa.gov/strategicplan

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

18 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
construction. PBS translates general needs into discrete 

requirements, marshals the necessary resources, and delivers 

the space necessary to meet the respective missions of its 

Federal clients. The second area is management of space. 

This involves making decisions on maintenance, servicing 

tenants, and ultimately, deciding when and how to dispose 

of a property at the end to its useful life. 

n OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL (OIG): The OIG conducts an 

independent nationwide audit and investigative program 

of GSA’s internal operations, programs, and external 

contractors. The OIG promotes economy, efficiency, and 

effectiveness, and prevents and detects fraud, waste and 

mismanagement in the Agency’s programs and operations.

n CIVILIAN BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS (CBCA): CBCA 

serves as an independent and objective tribunal in contract 

disputes between government contractors and GSA, and 

contractors and other Executive agencies. CBCA provides 

alternative dispute resolution services to all Federal 

agencies and contractors. CBCA also hears claims involving 

transportation rate determinations, Federal employee travel 

and relocation and expense claims, and a small number of 

other types of claims.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 19
n OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ACQUISITION OFFICER (OCAO): The 

OCAO manages a broad range of acquisition activities for 

both GSA internal operations and the government as a 

whole. These include: ensuring compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies; fostering full and 

open competition for contract awards; developing the 

acquisition workforce; and maintaining accountability for 

acquisition decision-making.

n OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (OCFO): The OCFO 

provides financial management services for all of GSA and 

more than 40 external customers. The OCFO manages 

strategic planning, budgeting, and the performance 

management cycle within GSA; GSA’s core accounting 

system; and prepares financial statements and reports.

n OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER (OCIO): The OCIO 

provides high quality, enterprise IT services and solutions 

at best value by leveraging IT resources to support GSA 

business needs. 

n OFFICE OF THE CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICER (OCHCO): The 

OCHCO develops and delivers programs, policies, and 

services that promote GSA’s strategic management of 

human capital. A capable and well-managed workforce is 

essential to GSA’s success. 

n OFFICE OF CITIZEN SERVICES AND COMMUNICATIONS (OCSC):

OCSC creates a more citizen-centric, results-oriented 

Federal government. OCSC helps citizens to interact with 

government by creating a single electronic front door to 

the services and information they require in the medium 

they prefer: the Web, e-mail, telephone, fax or print. OCSC 

also provides in-house communications support to the rest 

of GSA.

n OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS (OCR): OCR ensures equal employment opportunity (EEO) for all GSA associates and applicants for employment on the basis of sex, race, color, 

national origin, religion, disability, and age, and protects 

associates from retaliation for protected EEO activity. OCR 

protects recipients of GSA’s Federal Financial Assistance 

and participants in Federally conducted programs from 

discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, age, national 

origin, and disability.

n OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL

AFFAIRS (OCIA): OCIA maintains Agency liaison with 

Congress; prepares and coordinates GSA’s annual legislative program; communicates this program OMB, Congress, 

and other interested parties; and works closely with OMB 

in the coordination and clearance of all proposed legislation impacting GSA.

n OFFICE OF EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND RECOVERY (OERR):

OERR is responsible for ensuring that GSA maintains a 

constant state of readiness to provide emergency acquisition support and emergency real property to Federal 

agencies in the event of a disaster or catastrophic event. 

OERR coordinates GSA’s national continuity responsibilities by: developing Agency policies, plans, and procedures; 

developing and implementing GSA disaster readiness 

programs; and providing emergency acquisition support 

and serving as the on-the-ground liaison between GSA field 

organizations and Federal emergency response efforts 

during national disasters. OERR coordinates emergency 

management services throughout GSA, and develops 

emergency preparedness procedures, shelter-in-place 

guidelines, and training to assist employees in the event of 

an emergency. 

Organization

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

20 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
n OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC): The OGC provides legal 

advice and representation to GSA services and staff offices 

to enhance their ability to help Federal agencies. The OGC 

carries out all legal activities of GSA, ensures full and 

proper execution of GSA’s statutory responsibilities, and 

provides legal counsel to GSA officials. 

n OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTWIDE POLICY (OGP): OGP improves 

government-wide management. Its responsibilities span 

personal and real property, travel and transportation, IT, 

regulatory information, and the use of Federal advisory 

committees. OGP accomplishes its mission through collaboration with Federal agencies and other stakeholders.

n OFFICE OF PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT (OPI): OPI provides 

advice to the Administrator and Deputy Administrator on 

major policies and procedures related to GSA performance. 

OPI is also responsible for coordinating GSA’s efforts to 

accomplish the PMA and competitive sourcing activities. 

n OFFICE OF SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION (OSBU): OSBU 

advocates for small, minority, veteran, HUBZone, and 

women business owners. OSBU promotes increased access 

to GSA’s nationwide procurement opportunities by 

nurturing entrepreneurial opportunities, outreach, and 

training.

In FY 2008, GSA had 11,792 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees. Staffing levels have steadily declined since 2003, a 

trend which is largely driven by efficiency improvements. GSA has a continuing commitment to its Federal customers and 

the U.S. taxpayers to provide services in the most cost-effective manner possible. GSA delivers on this promise by steadily 

improving organizational performance while staffing levels decline.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 21
Performance Summary and Highlights

GSA’s activities during FY 2008 advanced the Agency toward achievement of the four strategic goals established in the FY 2007-2012 GSA Strategic Plan. Specific 

long-term outcome goals and performance targets were set 

in the FY 2008 Performance Plan, which is included in the 

Agency’s Congressional Budget Justification. GSA relies on 

performance measures and goals to develop resource allocations, establish accountability for program performance, 

and drive continuous improvement in Agency performance.

GSA analyzes actual performance results against goals and 

targets to ensure progress toward achieving Agency goals. 

GSA also regularly scans the external and internal operating 

environment to identify demands, events, conditions and 

trends likely to impact GSA performance. GSA continually 

reviews performance and environmental factors and 

routinely adjusts Agency goals and objectives to capture 

new opportunities and mitigate emerging risks to the 

Agency. 

The single greatest opportunity and risk to GSA performance is the continued acceleration of technological 

advances. New technology in the markets for commodities, 

services, and real property increases the volume of products 

available and the complexity of acquiring and managing 

products and services. Federal agencies expect GSA not 

only to offer the most current products for sale, but also to 

provide an expanded range of services to implement, 

deploy, and manage those commodities and the underlying 

technology. Customers and external stakeholders also 

expect GSA to incorporate new technologies into its own 

operations, to offer customer interfaces equivalent to those 

of private vendors, to increase speed of operations, and to 

increase efficiency and effectiveness through reduced 

operating costs. 

Paramount among the new technologies that shape customer 

expectations is green technology. GSA is in the unique 

situation of being able to lead the implementation of “green 

government” by incorporating green technologies into its 

many product and service offerings and its internal operations. GSA has embraced this role and has a continuing 

commitment to providing environmentally sound and 

sustainable products and services to its Federal customers. 

GSA is a demonstrated leader in sustainable design of 

Federal buildings, Federal recycling and waste minimization, and energy and water conservation. GSA has made 

strategic investments in AFV’s to reduce energy consumption and to stimulate the private market for AFVs, has 

modified user interfaces to direct more customers to environmentally friendly products and services, and currently 

offers over 10,000 environmentally-friendly commodities 

for purchase by Federal agencies. 

GSA has responded to changing external demands and new 

technologies in other ways, too. Most notably, GSA has 

implemented a number of new initiatives under the banner 

of “One GSA–One Voice.” This phrase embodies GSA’s 

desire to present “one face to the customer” and mandates 

increased integration of GSA’s related products and services. 

One GSA–One Voice addresses customer expectations that 

are driven by their experiences with private vendors who 

leverage technology to minimize customer burden during 

ordering and speed delivery of ordered products. One 

GSA–One Voice strives for fast, seamless delivery of customer 

requirements that cross GSA organizational boundaries and 

disciplines in order to increase customer satisfaction and 

increase the efficiency and effectiveness of government 

operations. 

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

22 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
This section provides key examples of FY 2008 performance 

results that illustrate GSA’s commitment to green government, 

One GSA–One Voice, and to leveraging technology to improve 

customer experiences and maintain GSA’s position in the 

market for Federal products and services. A chart of Key 

Performance Measures follows this discussion and detailed 

performance information is provided in the Performance 

Section. Also included in the Performance Section is a certification of the validity of GSA performance measures and a 

summary of the internal controls GSA employs to ensure the 

validity of performance measures throughout the year. 

Stewardship

Lead Federal agencies in the economical and efficient 

management of Federal assets by spearheading effective 

policy development and by the exemplary management of 

the buildings/workplaces, motor vehicles, and personal 

property provided by GSA.

GSA is the steward of extensive civilian Federal government 

real estate holdings, an extensive fleet of owned and leased 

motor vehicles, and a broad spectrum of personal property. 

GSA manages, maintains, and secures these extensive 

holdings in trust for the Federal government and the U.S. 

taxpayer.

GSA helps agencies develop plans to continually review and 

drive well-managed inventories. GSA maintains a comprehensive inventory system of all real property under the 

control and custody of Executive Branch agencies. This 

database is the only centralized system of government-wide 

real property information. Government agencies will be 

able to use the information in the database to measure the 

performance of assets, including comparing and benchmarking across various types of real property assets and 

identifying underutilized assets for disposal.

The GSA Fleet currently provides 49.4 percent of Federal 

motor vehicles, excluding the U.S. Postal Service. Annual 

growth continues through customer consolidations and 

wide-ranging management support. Savings are generated 

through realignment of customer agency staff and economies 

of scale.

GSA regularly buys AFVs. Of the existing 213,000 vehicles 

in the GSA Fleet, more than 80,000 are AFVs. These vehicles 

are concentrated in six major markets to encourage the 

development of infrastructure in the private sector: service 

stations, service, and resale markets.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 23
Superior Workplaces

Deliver and maintain productive workplaces consisting of 

office space, furnishings, technology, supplies, and related 

services.

GSA provides owned or leased space for government facilities ranging from office headquarters to warehouses to 

laboratories. GSA constructs new special-purpose space, 

primarily courthouses for the Federal judiciary, and a 

growing number of land ports of entry. GSA preserves and 

restores historic buildings in its inventory. GSA explores the 

workplace of the future and puts its findings into practice. 

For example, GSA offers modern and smart control lighting 

systems that use harvesting techniques to capture natural 

daylight. 

GSA is currently establishing a process called Program of 

Requirements Plus (POR+), as a set of tools to deliver the 

requirements identified for its customers’ workspaces. The 

goal is to develop a set of requirements that promote national 

consistency and quality across transactions, are professional 

in appearance, and have the ability to deliver innovative 

workplace solutions as appropriate. The spectrum of deliverables include a current assessment of the workplace, a 

determination of future workplace needs, space program 

scenarios, and space program and design briefs.

Through its National Broker Contract, GSA is increasingly 

using contract real estate brokers to perform lease acquisition services. The contract allows GSA to focus more on 

project management and the needs of the client agency. 

This new business model will increase GSA’s ability to 

support its customers’ needs. 

Best Value

Develop and deliver timely, accurate, and cost-effective 

acquisition services and business solutions.

GSA is the Federal government’s primary civilian acquisition organization. From paperclips to integrated IT 

solutions, GSA meets the changing procurement needs of 

the Federal workforce. GSA has a responsibility to provide 

the greatest value to Federal customer agencies and cost 

savings for the U.S. taxpayer.

From products, services, and technology to vehicles, travel, 

transportation, and property management solutions, GSA 

manages widely diverse offerings and many different 

methods for acquiring these offerings. GSA will need to 

provide efficient service delivery of overlapping product 

offerings and solutions, while continuing to promote competition, procurement integrity, and consistent pricing structures. GSA regularly assesses its various customer-pricing 

models to ensure that GSA is achieving full cost recovery 

and exercising rigorous fiscal discipline.

GSA’s Networx program is future-looking technology that 

provides comprehensive, best-value telecommunications 

and networking services and technical solutions to all 

Federal agencies. It supports government-wide enterprise 

architecture and provides cross-agency collaboration, transformation, and government-wide technology improvement. 

Networx will minimize the use of government resources by 

providing a common procurement infrastructure and a 

performance-based approach to satisfy customer requirements while meeting commercial, technical, and interface 

standards. 

Innovation

Develop new and better ways of conducting business that 

result in more productive and effective Federal policies and 

administrative operations.

GSA is the Federal government’s policy management leader 

for property management and acquisition activities. GSA 

continually evaluates and develops innovative approaches 

to address emerging challenges and opportunities across 

Federal operations.

GSA is a leader in sustainable design and, in FY 2008 alone, 

achieved certification under the U.S. Green Building 

Council’s LEED rating system for two government-owned 

Performance Summary and Highlights

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

24 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
GSA’s Environmental Services (Schedule 899) Multiple 

Award Schedule (MAS) offers a list of businesses approved 

to sell Federal agencies everything from environmental 

assessments and energy management programs to recycled 

paper, fluorescent lighting, paints, chemicals, and pollutionprevention systems to assist customer agencies in meeting 

their environmental requirements. GSA also helps agencies 

reduce petroleum consumption by offering AFVs and hybrid 

electric vehicles (HEV) for lease and purchase, reducing the 

Federal government’s reliance on fossil fuels. One other 

way that GSA customers are able to buy green is through 

GSA Advantage’s Environmental Aisle. Through the use of 

this tool, customers are able to search for products and 

services based on their environmental classification (i.e., 

recycled content, environmentally friendly, etc.). This tool 

provides direct access to the thousands of environmental 

products and services featured in GSA Advantage and 

enables customers to easily locate environmentally friendly 

products and services offered by GSA.

buildings and three build-to-suit leased buildings. The 

certification represents third-party review and verification of 

energy efficiency and green building performance requirements. GSA also registered an additional 25 buildings in 

FY 2008 to work toward certification, bringing the total 

number of registered buildings to over 120 and the total 

number of LEED certified buildings to 27. 

GSA’s Rocky Mountain Region awarded a $6.9 million 

contract for the design and construction of a solar park at 

the Denver Federal Center. The park consists of 6,300 solar 

panels located on a six-acre site. The one-megawatt system 

will generate nearly 10 percent of the campus’ peak electric 

demand. The power generated by this system is the equivalent to powering approximately 145 homes each year.

GSA will continue to lead in sustainable design by advocating for siting of Federal facilities with consideration for 

local transportation and enhancing sustainability in communities. The result will be Federal facilities that balance cost, 

environmental, societal, and human benefits, while meeting 

the mission and functional needs of the customer agencies. 

GSA intends to integrate sustainable design as seamlessly as 

possible into the existing design and construction process. 

Building Information Modeling (BIM) is virtual design and 

construction technology that provides three dimensional 

(3D) visualization and 4D construction sequencing. These 

capabilities allow users to analyze the design and construction of a project through computer modeling in the actual 

sequence in which it will be built. GSA is currently using 

BIM for several active projects and is committed to adopting 

it more widely in its capital construction program.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 25
FY 2008 Key Performance Measures

within Strategic Goals

Strategic Goal/

Service or Office Measures FY 2008Target

FY 2008

Actual Result

STEWARDSHIP

PBS – Asset Management Customer satisfaction with government-owned 

space

80% 81% Met

PBS – New Construction Percent of New Construction program that is 

registered for LEED

75% 100% Met

FAS – TMVCS Percent discount from invoice price (Vehicle 

Acquisition)

>28.7% 29.0% Met

CFO Interest penalties paid $400,000 $403,395 Not Met

SUPERIOR WORKPLACES

PBS – Leasing Satisfied tenant customer satisfaction rating (4 

and 5 responses) in leased space surveyed

76% 78% Met

PBS – New Construction Construction projects on schedule 88.0% 80.4% Not Met

FAS – TMVCS Percentage of GSA Fleet leasing rates below 

commercial rates on the GSA Vehicle Leasing 

Schedule

29.5% 40.9% Met

FAS – GSS Blended mark-up (Global Supply) 30.0% 31.9% Not Met

BEST VALUE

PBS – Asset Management Percent within the private sector benchmarks 

for cleaning and maintaining office and 

similarly serviced space

+/-5.0% 0.6% Met

FAS – AAS Percent of satisfied customers (ACSI survey) 75.0 71.1 Not Met

FAS – ITS Cost avoidance/savings achieved by ITS 

Portfolio programs

$743M $782M Met

OCHCO Number of days to fill a vacancy 45 32 Met

INNOVATION

PBS – Asset Management Percent reduction in energy consumption over 

the FY 2003 baseline

-9.0% -9.7% Met

OCSC Citizen touchpoints 211.0M 213.8M Met

OGP Extent to which OGP policy initiatives 

achieved improvement targets

88% 100% Met

OGP Percentage of key policy stakeholders and 

agency users who rate OGP policy initiatives 

effective

60% 79% Met

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

26 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
The President’s Management Agenda

GSA’s Status and Progress

INITIATIVE CURRENT STATUS PROGRESS

Human Capital

Commercial Services Management

Financial Performance

E-Government

Performance Improvement

Real Property

The President’s Management Agenda (PMA) has helped GSA focus on achieving results based 

upon clear goals and challenging expectations. GSA 

is pleased with its progress in each of the initiatives 

under the PMA. The following pages provide a brief 

description of each initiative, the current status of the 

management program, and describe GSA’s progress to 

“get to green” as GSA implements the PMA with the 

ultimate goal of improving government performance 

and providing better service to citizens.

What Progress Indicates

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

assesses agency progress on a case-by-case

basis against the deliverables and timelines

established for the nine initiatives that are

agreed upon with each agency as follows:

Green

Implementation is proceeding according

to plans agreed upon with the agencies.

YELLOW

Some slippage or other issues requiring

adjustment by the agency in order to achieve

the initiative objectives on a timely basis.

RED

Initiative in serious jeopardy. Unlikely to

realize objectives absent significant

management intervention.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 27
Background: The Human Capital Initiative requires 

Federal agencies to develop both a vision and a roadmap 

for strategically managing their workforces so they can 

better accomplish their missions on behalf of the American 

people. Agencies are required to build, sustain, and effectively deploy a skilled, knowledgeable, diverse workforce to 

meet the current and emerging needs of the Federal government. 

Status: GSA maintained “green” status in FY 2008, by 

revalidating all critical success factors. GSA demonstrated 

significant workforce planning and analysis in its organizational structure and workforce restructuring efforts, 

requests for personnel flexibilities, and documenting 

progress with human capital initiatives. GSA continued the 

restructuring of FAS, which resulted in realigning 250 FTEs 

from AAS within GSA. GSA’s senior leaders worked closely 

with union officials to ensure an effective transition. GSA 

continued to focus on efforts to address mission critical 

workforce needs. Talent management strategies were 

implemented to improve hiring process results, expand 

the use of diverse recruitment sources and hiring flexibilities, address employee development and training needs, 

and address retention issues. The U.S. Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM) recertified GSA’s human capital 

accountability system for 2008. 

Progress: GSA continued to be “green” in progress for 

Strategic Management of Human Capital, completing all 

deliverables effectively and efficiently. GSA verified its 

current human capital strategic goals and updated its 

Human Capital Strategic Plan (HCSP) to align with GSA’s 

Strategic Plan. Workforce planning and analysis also 

supported effective talent management strategies for GSA’s 

mission critical workforce. GSA used personnel flexibilities 

to drive organizational alignment and performance improvement. The Agency implemented effective actions and tools 

to improve mission critical workforce competency levels 

through targeted hiring, training, development, and retention strategies. GSA continued to improve its hiring process 

and outcomes by continuing to implement recommendations from the Staff Acquisition Business Process Re-engineering effort by expanding the process to include all GSA’s 

mission critical occupations. Extensive workforce planning, 

standardized processes, and increased employee expertise 

have reduced processing time and improved hiring manager 

satisfaction to above 92 percent. GSA’s hiring process 

required an average of 30 days for General Schedule and 

75 days for Senior Executive Service (SES) hires. In August 

2007, GSA launched a mentoring program offering midlevel (GS-13 and 14) employees an opportunity to develop 

and enhance their leadership skills. The GSA National 

Mentoring Program graduated its first class of 50 in 2008. 

This program also addresses leadership succession planning 

needs. In addition to the availability of training, GSA posts 

policy and guidance on the Web, uses online job tools and 

desk guides, and has a work environment that supports 

knowledge sharing. In FY 2008, GSA updated the Agency 

telework policy. This policy supports the challenge to 

increase GSA’s employee participation and strengthen GSA’s 

leadership role in telework. In FY 2008, GSA updated the 

Agency telework policy. This policy supports the challenge 

to increase GSA’s employee participation and strengthen 

GSA’s leadership role in telework. The challenge sets goals 

for employee telework participation. Those goals are to 

have 20 percent of eligible employees teleworking at least 

one day per week by the end of calendar year 2008; to 

increase participation to 40 percent of eligible employees 

by the end of calendar year 2009, and to 50 percent by the 

end of calendar year 2010. By the end of FY 2008, GSA had 

exceeded the calendar year 2008 goal, and 35 percent of 

eligible agency employees were teleworking one day or 

more per week. 

PMA

Status

Strategic Management of Human Capital Progress

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

28 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
BACKGROUND: The goal of commercial services management 

(CSM) is to improve Agency performance by using various 

tools to create processes that are more efficient. The tools 

may include Business Process Re-engineering, Lean Six 

Sigma, A-76 public/private competitions, and High Performing Organization (HPO) designation. These tools are used 

to evaluate and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of 

performing activities. GSA continues to establish a solid 

CSM infrastructure to accomplish this task and looks for 

innovative ways to assist its workforce in this area. 

Status: GSA received a status score of “yellow” on OMB’s 

Quarterly Scorecard for the fourth quarter of FY 2008. GSA 

has completed more than 80 competitions through FY 2008. 

GSA’s Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act 

Inventory Tool (FIT) consolidated all GSA service and staff 

offices into one database. The improved FIT, a Web-based 

tool, allows for greater analysis and review at all levels 

within GSA and provided the FAIR Act Inventory “upload” 

in FY 2008 as required by OMB. GSA began providing 

Post Competition Accountability data to OMB on a quarterly 

basis in FY 2008. GSA also scheduled and conducted five 

independent validations in FY 2008 and submitted the 

results to OMB. The first Commercial Services Management 

Plan was requested by and submitted to OMB during the 

fourth quarter. GSA also submitted to OMB the “GSA Proud 

to Be as of July 1, 2009 to July 1, 2010 Report” and the GSA 

“Report to Congress on Competitive Sourcing for FY 2007” 

in accordance with OMB requirements.

Progress: In FY 2008, GSA completed or initiated reviews 

involving FAS in the areas of administrative support, maintenance control centers (MCC), and specified marketing activities. GSA’s OCIO has also reviewed the IT infrastructure 

management function in FY 2008 and plans on pursuing 

HPO status in FY 2009. The latter part of FY 2008 was 

a transition of the former Competitive Sourcing initiative 

to the newer CSM initiative, announced by OMB in July. 

During the fourth quarter of FY 2008, GSA has adopted 

the new CSM criteria by initiating a business case analysis 

review of FAS MCCs and the previously mentioned HPO.

PMA

Status

Commercial Services Management Progress

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 29
Background: This initiative is intended to improve the 

quality of the Federal government’s financial information 

so agencies can improve the integrity and efficiency of their 

operations as well as improve financial performance by 

ensuring that Federal financial systems produce accurate, 

timely information critical to Federal managers for managing 

cost and making decisions.

Status: GSA successfully met the criteria for “green” status 

and is continuing to strengthen its internal control structure 

wherever it is cost beneficial to do so. GSA views strong 

internal control as another form of customer service. Given 

the facts that GSA has again received an unqualified audit 

opinion, has no repeat material weaknesses, and has fully 

implemented OMB Circular A-123, GSA is confident that it is 

heading in the right direction. In addition, GSA submitted 

its FY 2007 PAR in record time, once again received the 

Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting (CEAR) 

award, and as of June 2008, GSA is one of four Federal 

agencies that achieved “green” in all nine of OMB’s Metric 

Tracking System (MTS) financial performance indicators. 

GSA continues to have two significant deficiencies and the 

Agency will take additional steps to ensure that corrective 

action plans and controls that were developed are being 

followed. GSA is continuing work on intragovernmental 

reconciliations with other Federal agencies to resolve differences and the implementation of the Intragovernmental 

Business Rules. 

GSA and the OCFO are continuing to monitor and promote 

financial integrity, producing an internal report called the 

“Executive Scorecard.” This report is distributed to Senior 

Agency Management in GSA’s Service and Staff Offices and 

it monitors and ages Accounts Payables, Billed and Unbilled 

Accounts Receivable, Unfilled Customer Orders (UFCO), and 

Obligations and assigns a green, yellow, or red score. The 

internal Executive Scorecard report assigns a score to each 

of GSA’s 12 regions in these categories, and monitors and 

measures the status of improvement and promotes financial 

integrity. GSA also continues to perform a semi-annual 

review of UFCOs, Undelivered Orders, and Delivered Order 

balances in January and July 2008. 

Progress: GSA’s progress rating is “green.” GSA has a 

number of initiatives underway to further strengthen its 

internal control environment and structure. GSA looks 

forward to realizing the benefits of these efforts through 

increased efficiency and timelier availability of financial 

information for decision-making and customer support. 

GSA’s goal is to ensure accurate data for reporting and 

greater flexibility to respond to information requests. 

PMA

Status

Improved Financial Performance Progress

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

30 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
PMA

Status

Expanded Electronic Government

Progress

Background: The E-Government initiatives and lines of 

business support specific goals to reduce redundancy of 

IT investments, increase the effectiveness of outreach to 

citizens, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of IT 

investment management. As the E-Government initiatives 

and lines of business continue to be integrated into the 

normal day-to-day operations of the Federal government, 

more opportunities for consolidation, systems maturity, 

and customer utilization are realized. GSA’s goals include 

helping the government become more citizen-centric, 

assisting individuals and businesses to complete government transactions online, and working with other agencies 

on government-wide initiatives. GSA is also focused on 

its internal IT management to ensure the projects are well 

managed and that IT spending is not duplicative. GSA’s 

IT team will continue to identify and retire redundant 

IT systems, ensure GSA associates have the technology 

needed to do their jobs, and that GSA systems are secure. 

Status: GSA’s status for the fourth quarter of FY 2008 is 

“yellow.” Major accomplishments include GSA’s enterprise 

architecture receiving an OMB assessment rating of “4” in 

Completion, Use, and Results; GSA’s 27 major IT programs 

having “acceptable” business cases; and an overall IT 

portfolio performance within 10 percent of planned cost, 

schedule, and performance. GSA continues to make progress 

toward improving its overall status rating to “green” through 

strengthening its earned value management practices along 

with ensuring that all major E-Gov milestones are completed 

and delivered on time. 

Progress: GSA progress rating is “green.” GSA continues 

to deliver its vast PMA goals and quarterly E-Gov planned 

actions. For FY 2008, GSA completed over 125 goals and 

planned actions in order to meet the “green” progress rating. 

Key GSA E-Gov accomplishments include:

■ Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE) –the Federal 

Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) 

of 2006 requires “the existence and operation of a single 

searchable Web site, accessible by the public at no cost 

to access” that includes information on each Federal 

award. IAE was able to help agencies meet these 

requirements by leveraging existing solutions. Innovated 

re-use resulted in agencies being able to properly report 

data on the FFATA portal (www.usaspending.gov). 

■ Federal Asset Sales – “The official site to buy U.S. 

property.” As the portal gets more than 15,000 hits 

monthly and expands Agency partner listings, this site is 

becoming a premier portal for citizens to search for 

surplus Federal property (www.govsales.gov). 

■ USA Services – completed a customer satisfaction survey 

with the overall rating result of 94 percent and received 

the 2008 Government Customer Support Excellence 

Finalist award from the Government Customer Support 

Community. This initiative handles over eight million 

government-wide telephone inquiries a year and over 

100 thousand government-wide e-mail inquiries per 

year.

■ IT Infrastructure Optimization – by leveraging industrywide performance and cost efficiency metrics, and by 

adopting government-wide benchmarking, common 

metrics, and baseline analyses, the IT Infrastructure 

Optimization line of business provides IT managers 

across government with fundamental tools that lead to 

improvements in the Federal IT infrastructure. This 

effort has resulted in the first baseline of Federal 

spending in IT infrastructure—a key to optimizing their 

commodity infrastructure cost efficiency and service 

levels. 

■ E-Government Lessons Learned – GSA created a 

document to capture lessons learned in cross-Agency 

management and to document best practices for use 

throughout government. This will help to assist future 

efforts by minimizing mistakes and utilizing successful 

strategies. 

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 31
BACKGROUND: This initiative is aimed at providing greater 

focus on performance. It enhances the quality of information on program results so that the government can make 

better-informed resource allocation decisions. The outcome 

will be better control over resources and accountability for 

results by program managers. 

Status: GSA has remained “green” on the President’s 

scorecard for status by meeting quarterly milestones jointly 

established by GSA and OMB. Senior managers meet 

quarterly to review financial and performance information 

covering all major Agency responsibilities. Strategic and 

annual plans contain a limited number of strategic, outcomeoriented goals and use Program Assessment Rating Tool 

(PART) performance measures. All PART programs have 

efficiency measures and all are rated “Adequate” or higher. 

The cost of achieving performance goals is calculated and 

marginal cost analysis is used to inform resource allocations. GSA demonstrates quantifiable improvements in 

performance and efficiency each year.

Progress: GSA has maintained “green” on the President’s 

scorecard for progress by completing quarterly actions for 

improvement in performance management processes and 

results. The following are some highlights of GSA’s accomplishments during the past year.

GSA conducted a comprehensive and detailed review of all 

externally-reported goals, measures, and targets, in accordance with OMB PART Guidance No. 2007-7, “Improving 

the Quality of PART Performance and Efficiency Goals.”

This review allowed GSA to reassess key measures and 

goals, and resulted in better alignment of performance goals 

and resources with GSA’s Strategic Goals and Mission. This 

review also increased the use of outcome-oriented goals, 

and ensured that targets are reasonably aggressive compared 

to prior-year actual performance, and thus drive incremental 

improvement in program performance over time.

GSA modified its Web site to include a link on the homepage 

to a single page with access to:

■ GSA’s Strategic Plan

■ Annual Performance Plan

■ Annual Performance and Accountability Report 

■ Status of Program Performance and Improvement 

Efforts

■ Status of PMA Initiatives

■ Government Accountability Office (GAO) High-Risk 

Improvement Plans.

GSA worked jointly with OMB to review the Real Property 

Disposal program during the FY 2008 PART cycle. The 

program received a rating of “Effective,” an improvement 

from the previous rating of “Moderately Effective.” Real 

Property Disposal is the fifth GSA program to receive this 

highest rating. Seven other programs have been rated 

“Moderately Effective” and four programs have been rated 

“Adequate.”

PMA

Status

Performance Improvement Progress

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

32 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
BACKGROUND: On February 4, 2004, the President signed 

Executive Order 13227 addressing Federal Real Property 

Asset Management. Real Property was added to the PMA in 

August 2004. The goal of the Executive Order and this initiative is to promote the efficient and economical use of U.S. 

real property assets and to assure management accountability for implementing Federal real property management 

reforms.

Status: In the first quarter of FY 2006, GSA was the 

first agency to achieve “green” in status for real property. 

Through its continued progress in rightsizing its portfolio, 

GSA has continued to maintain its “green” status throughout 

FY 2007 and FY 2008.

In FY 2008, GSA continued to demonstrate results in 

implementing the right-sizing goals of utilization, disposal, 

operation and maintenance, and physical condition. GSA has 

maintained a utilization rate in its leased inventory of assets 

of over 98.5 percent since FY 2002. Since FY 2002, GSA has 

reported as excess 305 underutilized assets, removing 14.5 

million rentable square feet (RSF) from the inventory and 

resulting in a $626.9 million reduction of GSA’s reinvestment 

liability. GSA continues to efficiently and effectively manage 

the operations and maintenance of its assets, as evidenced 

by cleaning and maintenance costs that are consistently in 

line with private sector benchmarks. This fiscal year, GSA 

also refined its asset management process through the 

implementation of the core asset initiative. This tool for 

analyzing the customer need, market viability, and asset 

characteristics of the portfolio provides PBS with an additional resource to help accomplish its mission of providing 

superior workplaces for Federal customer agencies at good 

economies to the U.S. taxpayer. 

Progress: GSA maintained “green” in progress for real 

property throughout FY 2008 by completing all deliverables and all milestones identified in the Asset Management Plan Three Year Rolling Timeline and the Proud to 

Be document. 

Specifically in FY 2008, GSA reported excess of 449,000 RSF 

reducing GSA’s reinvestment liability by over $15 million, 

received proceeds from the sale of vacant and underutilized property in excess of $58.5 million, and targeted 2.25 

percent of capital investment dollars on energy projects. 

GSA achieved a utilization rate in leased space of 98.7 

percent and increased utilization in its owned space to 

95.3 percent—achieving its utilizations targets for FY 2008. 

Additionally, GSA continued to demonstrate its commitment 

to efficient operations and maintenance by achieving its 

operating cost target. In FY 2008, GSA operating costs were 

only 0.6 percent above private sector benchmarks. 

In FY 2009 and beyond, GSA will continue to play a leadership role in advancing real property asset management both 

through its example and it leadership on the Federal Real 

Property Council (FRPC). 

PMA

Status

Real Property Progress

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 33
For FY 2008, the independent accounting firm of 

PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (PwC) expressed an 

unqualified (clean) opinion on GSA’s comparative FY 2008 

and FY 2007 proprietary financial statements, the Consolidating Statements of Net Cost, Balance Sheets, and Statements of Changes in Net Position, as well as the budgetary 

Combining Statements of Budgetary Resources. Agency 

management is accountable for the integrity of the financial 

information presented in the financial statements.

The financial statements and financial data presented in this 

report have been prepared from GSA’s accounting records 

in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles 

(GAAP) in the United States. GAAP for Federal entities 

are the standards prescribed by the Federal Accounting 

Standards Advisory Board (FASAB). 

Overview of Financial Position

ASSETS: Total assets were $30,400 million at the end of 

FY 2008. This represents an increase of $1,238 million 

(4.3 percent) over the previous year’s total assets of $29,162 

million. This increase is largely attributable to continued 

growth in GSA’s Federal Buildings Fund (FBF) primary 

business operations, which is reflected in capital asset 

purchases and alterations and increases in earnings 

that provided cash (Fund Balance with Treasury) from 

operations. 

Taken together, Property and Equipment combined with 

Fund Balance with Treasury comprise 93.4 percent of 

the total assets for FY 2008. The $7,065 million of Fund 

Balance with Treasury is generally available to GSA to 

liquidate outstanding commitments and provide working 

capital to the revolving fund programs, and contains 

balances that will fund future needs. While the majority of 

these balances are available for such future needs, $2,467 

million of the available balance is committed to funding of 

building construction and alteration projects provided for in 

legislation. Amounts totaling $687 million were unavailable 

for spending as of September 30, 2008 and would require 

future authorization or even legislation to be used.

GSA’s assets reflected in the Consolidating Balance Sheets 

are summarized in the table below:

assets (Dollars in Millions) FY 2008 FY 2007

Property and Equipment, Net $ 21,334 $ 20,419

Fund Balance with Treasury 7,065 7,011

Accounts Receivable, Net 1,737 1,480

Other Assets 264 252

Total Assets $ 30,400 $ 29,162

Financial Statements Analysis

and Summary

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

34 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Property and Equipment increased by $915 million 

(4.5 percent) from FY 2007. Property acquisitions of $2,762 

million during the year, net of the recorded depreciation 

expense of $1,488 million and $361 million in property 

disposals and write-offs, account for most of this increase. 

For the total amount of property acquisitions in FY 2008, 

$1,780 million were comprised of construction, modernization, and alterations to buildings.

LIABILITIES: In FY 2008, total Agency liabilities increased 

by $124 million (2.2 percent) to $5,759 million from $5,635 

million in FY 2007. Liabilities reported on the Consolidating 

Balance Sheet are summarized in the table below.

For FY 2008, GSA’s largest liability balance is Accounts 

Payable, making up 38.2 percent of total liabilities. These 

balances increased $243 million (12.4 percent) in FY 2008, 

mostly attributable to increased business volumes in the 

Acquisition Services Fund (ASF). 

The $2,098 million of Intragovernmental Debt is 36.4 percent 

of total liabilities. Periodically, in lieu of direct appropriations, GSA receives authority in its FBF to finance construction of buildings. Borrowings have been obtained from the 

U.S. Treasury’s Federal Financing Bank (FFB), with the expenditure of the funds amortized over a 30-year period. GSA has 

almost depleted its authority to borrow and is currently 

paying off more debt than it is taking on. 

LIABILITIES (Dollars in Millions) FY 2008 FY 2007

Accounts Payable $ 2,198 $ 1,955

Intragovernmental Debt 2,098 2,151

Other Unfunded Liabilities 259 226

Workers’ Compensation 198 198

Capital Leases/Installment Purchases 405 427

U.S. Treasury Judgment Fund 308 269

Contingencies/Environmental Disposals 125 157

Deferred Revenues/Advances 53 97

Miscellaneous Liabilities 115 155

Total Liabilities $ 5,759 $ 5,635

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 35
Results of Operations

The results of operations are reported in the Consolidated 

Statements of Net Cost and the Consolidated Statements 

of Changes in Net Position.

The Consolidated Statements of Net Cost presents the cost 

(net of any earned revenue) of operating the FBF, ASF, the 

Working Capital Fund (WCF), and other operating funds 

in reporting the Agency’s Net Cost. 

GSA’s total Net Revenues from Operations at the end of 

FY 2008, after intra-agency eliminations, was $458 million, 

a $30 million (6.2 percent) decrease from the prior fiscal 

year. The Net Revenues from Operations is presented as 

Total Revenues less Total Expenses at the end of FY 2008. 

Most services in GSA had modest growth in both Revenues 

and Expenses, with the exception of the ASF, which had 

a few swings in Net Revenues from Operations. AAS 

returned to breakeven in FY 2008 compared to a loss of 

$64 million in FY 2007. Net Revenues in TMVCS decreased 

by $73 million as fuel costs increased substantially in the 

Motor Vehicle Fleet program and GSS experienced an 

increase in Net Revenues from Operations due to significant increases in business with DoD customers.

Liabilities totaling $1,355 million, or 23.5 percent of total 

liabilities, were unfunded, i.e., budgetary resources are not 

yet available. For most unfunded liabilities, budgetary 

resources will be made available in the years balances are 

due, in accordance with OMB funding guidelines. The major 

elements of unfunded liabilities are $198 million for Workers’ 

Compensation, $405 million for capital leases and installment 

purchases, $308 million for reimbursements due the U.S. 

Treasury Judgment Fund for costs from past litigation, and 

$125 million for contingencies and environmental/disposal 

liabilities.

ENDING NET POSITION: GSA’s Net Position at the end of 2008 

on the Consolidating Balance Sheet and the Consolidating 

Statement of Changes in Net Position was $24,641 million, 

a $1,114 million (4.7 percent) increase from the prior fiscal 

year. Net Position is the sum of the Unexpended Appropriations and Cumulative Results of Operations. 

The increase in Cumulative Results of Operations resulted 

primarily from the Net Results of Operations in GSA’s FBF 

(results of $699 million) which mostly funds the capital 

needs for building construction and alterations, and ASF 

(results of $206 million). These increases are primarily 

attributed to the profitability of the FBF and the ASF as seen 

in the Statement of Net Cost. 

Financial Statements Analysis and Summary

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

36 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
The charts above summarize the activity on GSA’s Consolidated Statements of Net Cost (before intra-GSA eliminations) 

and the Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Position by showing the funds available to GSA in FY 2008 and 

how these funds were used.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 37
Budgetary Issues

The largest variance between balances reported on the 

Combining Statements of Budgetary Resources for FY 2008 

and FY 2007 is found in balances reported as Changes in 

UFCOs. The ASF displays the most notable change in the 

activity associated with these orders, totaling $954 million, 

as UFCOs increased $168 million in FY 2008 compared to the 

substantial decline of $786 million in FY 2007. As discussed 

in the analysis of net operating results, AAS has significantly 

improved its operating performance from the previous year 

as customer demand stabilized. In AAS, from September 

2006 to September 2007, total UFCOs decreased by more 

than $700 million due to a decline in business volume from 

DoD customers. Comparably, UFCOs increased slightly in 

AAS for FY 2008.

Funding for capital investment in real property remains a 

significant challenge. The current funding level of the FBF 

is inadequate to meet the demand for new construction, 

particularly new courthouses and facilities with stringent 

security requirements, and the need to reinvest in the 

existing inventory of government-owned buildings. PBS’s 

Strategy for Restructuring and Reinvesting in the Owned 

Inventory has brought new emphasis to addressing the nonperforming assets in the PBS inventory. This effort, along 

with asset management reform legislation and continued 

support for repairs and alterations (R&A) funding, is 

essential to reducing the $8.8 billion backlog of building 

R&A work and providing quality space for GSA’s Federal 

customers and the visiting public.

Financial Statements Analysis and Summary

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

38 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
I n FY 2008, GSA continued making progress in strengthening its management practices and internal controls to 

assure the integrity of its programs, operations, and business 

and financial management systems. GSA has fully embraced 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular 

A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control; 

the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA); OMB 

Circular A-127 Financial Management Systems; and the 

Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA) as 

the foundation of effective management operations. The 

FMFIA requires agencies to establish internal controls over 

their programs, financial reporting, and financial management systems. GSA’s internal control reviews are conducted 

for Agency program components to ensure that all significant risks are identified, tested, evaluated, and mitigated in 

a timely and effective manner. These reviews also ensure 

that audit findings are responded to in a timely and effective 

manner. In light of these reviews, GSA provides qualified 

assurance on the effectiveness of the internal control over 

operations, management systems, and financial reporting 

for FY 2008. 

Internal Control

The Internal Control Program is a GSA-wide program that 

ensures Agency objectives are met and internal controls are 

in place and working properly. Internal controls are the 

plans, methods, and procedures used at GSA to ensure that 

the Agency accomplishes its mission, goals, and objectives. 

Internal controls are the first line of defense in safeguarding 

assets and preventing and detecting waste, fraud, abuse, 

and mismanagement. Throughout the fiscal year, GSA 

Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

managers monitor and improve the effectiveness of internal 

management control associated with GSA programs and 

systems. Effective internal control and management systems 

go hand in hand with GSA’s well-trained program experts, 

customer satisfaction, and innovative solutions to ensure 

GSA meets the ever-changing needs and challenges within 

the Federal community. 

Audit Follow-up

The Audit Follow-up program is GSA’s program designed to 

assure the prompt resolution and implementation of audit 

recommendations. During the year, the OIG, GAO, and 

independent auditors conduct audits on specific GSA 

programs, systems, and operations. As an agreement is 

reached between GSA management and the auditors 

through a management decision process, a written plan for 

corrective action is developed. GSA then submits this plan 

to the auditors for their concurrence. When the auditors 

and GSA management reach concurrence and the recommendations are met through corrective action, the audit is 

considered resolved. The audit follow-up program ensures 

that prompt and responsive action is taken. GSA’s OCFO 

oversees audit follow-up for the Agency, ensuring all corrective actions are completed and submitted for closure, determining if final action has been completed sufficiently to 

close the audit.

GSA’s management is confident that the Agency’s systems, 

controls, and legal compliance will ensure that it meets its 

responsibility of providing outstanding services at the best 

value for the U.S. taxpayer.

Introduction to Management Assurances

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 39
G  SA management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control and financial 

management systems that meet the objectives of the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA). 

GSA is able to provide a qualified statement of assurance that the internal controls and financial management 

systems meet the objectives of FMFIA, with the exception of one material weakness. The details of the exception 

are provided in Exhibit 1.

GSA conducted its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over the effectiveness and efficiency 

of operations and compliance with applicable laws and regulations in accordance with OMB Circular A-123, 

Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control. Based on the results of this evaluation, GSA identified one 

material weakness noted above in its internal control over the effectiveness and efficiency of operations and 

compliance with applicable laws and regulations as of September 30, 2008. Other than the exceptions noted in 

Exhibit 1, the internal controls were operating effectively and no other material weaknesses were found in the 

design or operation of the internal controls.

In addition, GSA conducted its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which 

includes safeguarding of assets and compliance with applicable laws and regulations, in accordance with the 

requirements of Appendix A of OMB Circular A-123. Based on the results of this evaluation, GSA identified one 

material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2008. Other than the exceptions 

noted in Exhibit 1, the internal controls were operating effectively and no other material weaknesses were 

found in the design or operation of the internal control over financial reporting.

James A. Williams

Acting Administrator

November 14, 2008

Statement of Assurance

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

40 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Management’s Assessment of Internal Control

Exhibit 1: Summary of Management’s Assessment of Internal Control

Management’s

Assessment Description Corrective Action

Material Weakness

Financial 

Management 

Systems, Internal 

Controls, and 

Financial Reporting

Invalid PBS Obligations and UFCOs

Management identified $243 million 

in invalid obligations

Progress has been made on this issue, in 

that controls have been designed, but the 

implementation of those controls faltered. During 

FY 2009, we will improve the implementation of 

these controls. As part of the corrective action 

plans the OCFO will partner with the PBS to 

eliminate the acquisition control deficiencies that 

contribute to the control weaknesses in the UFCO 

and acquisition processes.

Unrecorded PBS Obligations

Management identified $276 million 

in contract obligations from FY 2007, 

which were not reported in GSA's 2007 

Combining Statement of Budgetary 

Resources.

The OCFO is actively working on a systems 

interface solution that would improve information 

flowing from business feeder systems. The OCFO 

and PBS are developing a monthly report to 

measure the delay between obligation entry into 

the feeder system (Comprizon) and entry into the 

accounting system of record (Pegasys). This will 

hold regions accountable for timely entry of these 

obligations.

Unrecorded FAS AutoChoice UFCOs

Management identified $220 million in 

Unfilled Customer Orders that originated 

in FY 2007, which were not reported 

in GSA's 2007 Combining Statement of 

Budgetary Resources.

This is a new issue for FY 2008. GSA will analyze 

the process through which these orders are 

entered into the financial systems, and develop an 

action plan which will increase controls over the 

timely recording of these transactions.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 41
GSA fulfilled the requirements of the OMB Circular A-123, 

Appendix A, during 2008. The circular serves to emphasize 

management’s focus on ensuring that effective internal 

control over financial reporting is established and maintained throughout the Agency. Under the leadership of the 

CFO, GSA’s management plan includes a comprehensive 

program to complete the assessment of internal control 

over financial reporting. The CFO established the Senior 

Assessment Team (SAT) comprised of senior executives 

who provide leadership, oversight, and accountability for 

GSA’s internal control over financial reporting. The SAT 

conducted its assessment based on the five-step process 

used in the Implementation Guide developed by the CFO’s 

Council. The five steps are: Planning; Evaluate Internal 

Control at the Entity Level; Evaluate Internal Control at the 

Process Level; Testing at the Transaction Level; and 

Concluding, Reporting, and Correcting Deficiencies and 

Weaknesses.

GSA determined the scope of financial reports to be 

included in the assessment and established materiality. The 

scope included all material line items on the Balance Sheet, 

Statement of Net Cost, Statement of Changes in Net Position, 

Statement of Budgetary Resources, Notes to the Financial 

Statements and the SF 133: Report on Budget Execution 

and Budgetary Resources.

GSA management identified the key processes feeding into 

material line items by reviewing financial statements and 

related disclosures, cycle memoranda, flowcharts, and other 

information for the two major revolving funds and other 

combined funds. Key processes feeding into the financial 

statement line items include UFCOs, Obligations, Fund 

Balance with Treasury, Cash Receipts, Cash Disbursements, 

Financial Reporting, Budget (Administrative Control of 

Funds), Revenue Accruals, and Estimates.

Using a risk-based approach, a rotational plan was 

developed for financial and IT controls to ensure that 

controls are assessed in each location throughout GSA 

within a three-year period. As part of the rotation plan, 

some systems will undergo full general and application 

controls testing in a given year and the others will undergo 

limited general and application controls testing for the year. 

FY 2008 was the third year of the three-year period, and 

IT and financial controls were tested in accordance with 

the plan.

The SAT conducted a comprehensive review of test results 

considering the likelihood and degree of the potential for 

misstatements and determined whether the consolidations 

of deficiencies are incidental, create a significant deficiency, 

or rise to the level of material weakness for reporting in the 

assurance statement. Based on the exceptions noted and 

the impact on the financial statements, the SAT concluded 

no material weakness existed as of June 30, 2008. However, 

in light of subsequent events and the discovery of unrecorded transactions after the SAT meeting (see Footnote 13: 

Combining Statements of Budgetary Resources on page 

149), the SAT believes one material weakness exists (see 

Exhibit 1). 

GSA has made progress in validating balances in its 

budgetary accounts. Although vast improvement has been 

made in resolving UFCOs and un-liquidated obligations, 

incidences of invalid amounts still remain. Improvements 

will continue, and management is monitoring corrective 

actions. 

In light of the above deficiencies, GSA provides qualified 

assurance that internal controls over financial reporting as 

of September 30, 2008, were operating effectively. 

Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control (A-123)

Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

42 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
The FMFIA provides the statutory basis for management’s 

responsibility for internal control. The FMFIA requires 

Federal agencies to establish controls which reasonably 

ensure that obligations and costs comply with applicable 

laws; funds, property, and other assets are safeguarded 

against waste, loss, unauthorized use, or misappropriation; 

and revenue and expenditures are properly recorded and 

accounted for to maintain accountability over assets. 

Guidance for implementing the FMFIA is provided through 

OMB Circulars A-123 and A-127. The FMFIA also requires 

the agency head to annually assess and report on the 

effectiveness of internal controls that protect the integrity of 

the Federal programs (FMFIA Section 2) and financial 

management systems (Section 4), providing assurance on 

programmatic internal controls and financial management 

systems, and effectiveness of internal control over financial 

reporting.

GSA has met all of the requirements of FMFIA and OMB 

Circulars A-123 and A-127. In FY 2008, GSA continued 

improvement on its Agency-wide internal control program, 

which holds managers accountable for the performance, 

productivity, operations, and integrity of their programs. 

Annually, senior managers at GSA are responsible for 

evaluating the adequacy of the internal controls surrounding 

their activities and determining whether they conform to 

these requirements. In support of these efforts, GSA 

introduced a new Agency-wide Web-based internal control 

database system to perform assurance statements and 

internal control reviews.

Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) — Section 2

During FY 2008, extensive internal control training was 

provided to employees and managers throughout GSA. 

Training focused on internal control at GSA, implementation 

of OMB Circular A-123, and procedures to complete internal 

control reviews. Training sessions were held for all Regional 

and Central Office internal control liaisons. On-site Internal 

Control training was presented to several GSA regional 

locations and offices, including the New England Region, 

the Mid-Atlantic Region, the National Capital Region, the 

Heartland Region, the Greater Southwest Region, and 

several offices at GSA Headquarters. A Web-based version 

of this Internal Controls training was also provided as 

requested, as well as the availability of a GSA online Internal 

Controls Training class, which enabled employees to receive 

extensive internal controls training from their computers.

Moving forward, in FY 2009, GSA is looking to invest in a 

more robust Agency-wide Audit and Assurance Statement 

Management Database/System. The goal is to establish this 

system as the Audit Management/Internal Controls Software 

Database of record for GSA. To foster continuous 

improvement in processes within internal controls, GSA 

needs an effective system that will allow for increased 

scalability, functionality, flexibility and interoperability. The 

new solution will incorporate the functionality of the 

existing two applications into one consolidated solution 

and include new functionality allowing for improved audit 

management, risk management, corrective actions and 

preventive actions. This system will automate the process 

of auditing and automate the process of surveys, including 

internal audits, assurance statements, and internal control 

reviews for the entire Agency in one centralized system, but 

accessible to all GSA offices. This will further enhance 

GSA’s ability to meet the requirements of FMFIA and OMB 

Circulars A-123 and A-127.

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 43
As required by law, GSA evaluates its financial management 

systems annually for compliance with Section 4 requirements of the Federal Manager’s Financial Integrity Act. GSA 

evaluated its financial management system controls and 

compliance using a consolidated A-123 and A-127 questionnaire and by completing independent systems certification 

and accreditation (C&A) reviews, Statement on Auditing 

Standards (SAS) 70 reviews, A-123 reviews, and other 

systems assessments. As in prior years, additional compliance review steps included a review of pertinent audit 

reports issued during FY 2008, a review of the status of 

prior year systems-related issues, and discussions with 

senior managers and auditors regarding the details of 

pertinent systems-related control issues. Taken as a whole, 

GSA is confident that these systems-related review 

activities provide a sufficient basis for assessing Agency 

compliance with Section 4, FMFIA, and FFMIA requirements 

for FY 2008.

During FY 2008 more than 73 action steps were completed 

to fully or partially resolve financial systems-related issues 

and findings. These conditions related primarily to the 

financial system general and application controls.

Work Continues to Correct a Systems-related Significant Deficiency

During FY 2008, certain GSA financial systems continued to 

experience compliance issues relating to certain system 

access, segregation of duties, and activity monitoring 

controls. While these issues do not materially affect the 

agency’s financial statements, GSA management is 

committed to improving financial system controls to correct 

these conditions. To address these continuing challenges, 

GSA will continue to examine and improve operational and 

technical systems controls for GSA’s critical program and 

financial management systems. To support these ongoing 

efforts, the OCFO appointed three new full-time, Information Systems Security Officers (ISSO) to design, develop, 

and monitor financial system controls on an ongoing basis 

within the OCFO. In addition, two new work groups 

recently began to re-examine current system access and 

monitoring controls for certain targeted GSA financial 

systems, with the objectives of standardizing and strengthening such controls, where needed. In addition, as a result 

of a prior OIG audit, control improvements were made for 

certain web-based system applications to better protect 

access to, and storage of, certain sensitive and Privacy Act 

data. Longer-term improvement actions will explore the 

feasibility of implementing an automated, centralized 

Identity Management System. Such a system could streamline and standardize the daily management of system access 

and system monitoring activities and effectively restrict 

access to sensitive Privacy Act data on a “least privileged 

basis” in a more consistent and economical manner.

Additional Improvements Planned for FY 2009

To ensure that GSA remains properly focused on being 

proactive in improving the effectiveness of its financial 

reporting and systems controls, several new initiatives are 

planned for FY 2009. Major initiatives will involve taking 

various actions to improve financial reporting processes, 

standardize financial system operating procedures, and 

strengthen systems-related life-cycle manage¬ment controls 

for program and financial systems.

During FY 2008, significant progress continued to be 

achieved in integrating GSA’s internal processes for 

assessing the sufficiency of management and systemsrelated internal control via one survey instrument. During 

FY 2009, the challenge will be to devise and implement an 

improved and more fully integrated process to conduct 

various internal control and compliance reviews. Currently, 

these activities require considerable effort on the part of 

several different groups within GSA. By more effectively 

coordinating and consolidating these review activities, more 

meaningful reviews and assessments will be able to be 

completed in a more timely, cost-effective manner. These 

planned improvements should serve to significantly improve 

Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) — Section 4

Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

44 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
GSA’s financial system controls and thereby improve the 

extent of GSA’s overall compliance with pertinent laws and 

regulations.

Federal Financial Management

Improvement Act (FFMIA)

The FFMIA of 1996 requires Federal agencies to implement 

and maintain financial management systems that comply 

substantially with Federal financial management systems 

requirements, applicable Federal accounting standards, and 

the U.S. Standard General Ledger (USSGL) at the transaction level. Under law, agency heads are required to assess 

and report on whether these systems comply with FFMIA 

on an annual basis.

In assessing compliance with FFMIA, GSA adheres to the 

revised FFMIA implementation guidance provided by OMB 

and considers the results of the GSA OIG and GAO audit 

reports, annual financial statement audits, Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA)-related and other 

questionnaire results, FISMA compliance reviews, and other 

systems-related review and monitoring activities.

Non-Compliance with FFMIA

As previously reported in Exhibit 1, during FY 2008 a 

material weakness was noted with respect to certain 

financial reporting and related processing internal controls 

pertaining predominantly to FBF and ASF budgetary 

accounting and reporting. As a direct result of this material 

weakness, GSA’s Administrator has determined that as of 

September 30, 2008, GSA’s financial management systems 

did not substantially comply with FFMIA requirements. To 

bring GSA systems back into compliance with FFMIA 

requirements, GSA management will formulate an appropriate remediation plan and coordinate its corrective action 

plans with the Office of Management and Budget, as 

required by law.

Federal Information Security

Management Act (FISMA) 

The FISMA of 2002 requires Federal agencies to implement 

a mandatory set of processes and system controls in order 

to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of 

system-related information and information resources. 

Processes implemented within each Federal agency must 

follow a set of established Federal Information Processing 

Standards (FIPS), and National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST), and other legislative requirements 

pertaining to Federal information systems, such as the 

Privacy Act of 1974.

To ensure compliance with FISMA requirements, GSA 

maintains a formalized program for information security 

management that is focused on meeting FISMA requirements, protecting GSA’s information resources, and 

supporting GSA’s mission. This program is supported by a 

set of established policies, procedures, and processes to 

mitigate new threats and anticipate risks posed by new 

technologies. Designated GSA information security 

managers and system security officers ensure that information security requirements are being implemented in accordance with FISMA requirements and GSA’s policies.

During FY 2008, GSA continued to strengthen its security 

posture by addressing weakness identified in its Plan of 

Action and Milestones and completing all FISMA-related 

system control initiatives. For example, GSA reported that 

C&A Annual Testing and Contingency Plan Testing were 

completed for all of its 85 information systems. In addition, 

more than 14,900 Agency employees and contractors 

completed IT security awareness training and 97 percent of 

Agency employees with significant security responsibilities 

completed specialized role based training. Also, Privacy 

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 45
Impact Assessments were completed on all applicable 

systems and the Agency continues to implement the provisions in OMB M-06-15, Safeguarding Personally Identifiable Information.

No major system control findings were identified as a result 

of all FISMA compliance efforts. Accordingly, management 

believes that GSA remains compliant with FISMA requirements and will earn another high scorecard grade for FISMA 

compliance and IT security for 2008. For FY 2009, the 

OCIO plans to provide additional specialized training for all 

ISSOs so that additional control improvements can be made 

to strengthen GSA’s compliance with FISMA requirements. 

Further opportunities to improve systems controls will be 

implemented during 2009 to ensure that GSA maintains its 

strong reputation and high scorecard grade for FISMA 

compliance into the future.

Financial Management Systems Framework

Financial Management Systems

The CFO Act assigns clear responsibilities for planning, 

developing, maintaining, and integrating all accounting and 

financial management systems within an agency. During 

FY 2008, significant progress was achieved by GSA in 

implementing its planned “to be” financial systems 

framework. This framework is designed to fully integrate 

and streamline all of GSA’s financial system applications in 

accordance with applicable systems requirements, Federal 

accounting standards, and other related mandates.

GSA continues to make substantial progress in replacing its 

legacy financial applications with an expanded, more fully 

integrated core accounting system, Pegasys. Pegasys is a 

commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) system solution that integrates several of GSA’s financial accounting applications, 

processes more than 35 million transactions per year, and 

complies fully with Federal accounting standards and 

external financial reporting requirements. Pegasys also 

holds the most current Financial Systems Integration Office 

(FSIO) certification concerning its functional design and 

performance capabilities. In addition to serving as GSA’s 

current financial accounting system of record, Pegasys 

currently provides GSA with the functionality to meet 

requirements to interface with the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) component of the President’s Integrated 

Acquisition Environment E-Gov initiative, supports the 

e-Payroll and E-Travel system initiatives, and provides a 

user friendly Web-based format. 

Substantial progress was also made in FY 2008 to improve 

internal controls of GSA financial systems. For the third 

consecutive year, favorable SAS 70 reviews were completed 

for both GSA’s Payroll and Pegasys systems. These reviews 

provide needed feedback to the client agencies on GSA’s 

internal accounting and system control in relation to established internal control objectives. The conduct of these 

reviews helps to ensure that GSA maintains an effective 

system of internal control and saves GSA’s client agencies 

and their auditors the additional costs of having to periodically test and review GSA’s financial systems.

Due in part to the effectiveness and efficiency of GSA’s 

financial management system and its related internal control 

environment, GSA continues to function as one of four 

Federal agencies selected by OMB to cross-service other 

Federal agencies as a Financial Management Line of 

Business (FMLoB). During FY 2009, GSA will continue with 

its ongoing efforts to refine its existing financial management system capabilities so that it remains well positioned 

to service others as a leading and cost-effective service 

provider of choice for financial management services.

Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

46 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
■ Data Store (Financial, Labor,

Payroll, Travel)

■ Business Intelligence Functions

■ Modeling

■ Analysis Functions

■ Query & Reporting Functions

Future Financial Information System

e-Payroll

■ Payroll Functions

■ Labor Data Collection/Distribution

■ Electronic Time & Attendance

E-Gov Travel (Outsourced

government-wide solution)

■ Authorizations

■ Reservations

■ Miscellaneous Reimbursements

■ Vouchers

LEGEND

Target Achieved

Work in Progress

PAR

■ Payroll Functions

FedDesk

■ Labor Data Collection/Distribution

■ Electronic Time & Attendence

Business Objects

■ Business Modeling & Analysis

FMIS

■ Valid Accounting Transactions

■ Detail & Summary Query Functions

Pegasys

■ Core Accounting Functions

Pegasys

■ Core Accounting Functions

■ Cost Allocation

■ Asset Accounting

■ Accounts Receivable and Billing

■ Internal/External Financial Reports

■ Accounts Receivable/Billing

■ Asset Management

■ Credit Card Accounts Payable (CAPS)

■ FAIM (Inventory Control)

NEAR

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS FRAMEWORK

TODAY TRANSITION TARGET

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 47
Management prepares the accompanying financial statements to report the financial position and results of operations for GSA, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 31 of 

the U.S. Code section 3515(b). While these statements have 

been prepared from GSA’s books and records in accordance 

with GAAP for Federal agencies and the formats prescribed 

in OMB Circular A-136, Financial Reporting Requirements, 

these statements are in addition to the financial reports used 

to monitor and control the budgetary resources, which are 

prepared from the same books and records.

Limitations of Financial Statements

M a n a g e m e n t ’ s D i s c u s s i o n a n d A n a l y s i s

48 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Introduction to Performance 51

Performance by Service/Staff Office

• Public Buildings Service 53

• Federal Acquisition Service 62

• Office of Citizen Services and Communications 72

• Office of the Chief Financial Officer 76

• Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer 79

• Office of Governmentwide Policy 83

Linking Strategic Goals and Performance Measures to Budget 89

Performance Measurement Data Validation and Verification 94

Performance 

Section
www.GSA.gov/green

GSA Fleet provided its customers with almost 

23,000 alternative fuel 

vehicles (AFV) in 2008.

GSA currently has over 

80,000 AFVs in its inventory 

(708 are hybrids) accounting 

for 38 percent of Fleet’s total 

inventory.

When the Grand Canyon National 

Park needed to replace their 

old diesel vehicles, the Federal 

Acquisition Service (FAS) 

supplied new compressed 

natural gas (CNG) powered 

buses to reduce air pollution 

and noise levels in the park.

GSA FLEET
G SA is a performance driven organization. Planning 

and resource allocation revolve around the careful 

design and selection of performance measures, which focus 

on outcomes and attainment of the GSA mission. GSA 

uses performance-based tools and techniques to realize 

its commitment to delivering excellence in the business of 

government.

GSA and the Performance

Management Process

The Performance Management Process (PMP) is GSA’s 

primary vehicle for enterprise-level decision-making. The 

PMP is a comprehensive process for establishing Agency 

priorities, aligning resources to support priorities, developing quantifiable measures of success in meeting those 

priorities, and ensuring accountability for results. GSA uses 

the PMP to produce an annual Agency-level strategic direction, supported by derivative actions plans that clearly identify the tactical actions required to meet strategic goals.

GSA and the Program

Assessment Rating Tool

GSA uses the President’s Management Agenda (PMA) as a 

guide to establish business practices, which enables GSA to 

achieve quantifiable results and a workplace that has been 

rated one of the best in the Federal government by the Partnership for Public Service. GSA is committed to ongoing 

improvement and will continue adapting the PMA initiatives to ensure that GSA provides the best value to customer 

agencies and U.S. taxpayers. Within the PMA, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has established the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), a diagnostic tool used 

to assess the performance of Federal programs and to drive 

improvements in program performance. 

PART reviews consist of 25 to 30 questions, grouped into 

four categories: Program Purpose and Design, Strategic 

Planning, Program Management, and Program Results. Each 

question is assigned a numerical rating that results in a total 

weighted average ranging from 0-100. Based on the scores, 

OMB assigns a summary rating to each program. These 

ratings vary from “Effective” (highest) to “Moderately Effective,” “Adequate,” and “Ineffective” (lowest). In addition, the 

rating of “Results Not Demonstrated” means that the measures developed by the program managers are not adequate 

to determine their effectiveness. To receive a rating other 

than “Results Not Demonstrated,” a program must have at 

least one long-term outcome goal, two outcome goals, and 

one measure of efficiency.

GSA continuously analyzes operations by conducting PART 

reviews in a joint effort with OMB. In FY 2008, GSA and 

OMB jointly reviewed the Public Buildings Service (PBS) 

Real Property Disposal program, and rated the program 

Introduction to Performance

GSA is a performance-driven agency. The use of, and dependence on, good 

performance metrics and data is prevalent and growing in importance 

throughout the Agency.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 51
“Effective.” Real Property Disposal is the fifth GSA program 

to receive the highest rating of “Effective.” Seven other 

programs have been rated “Moderately Effective” and four 

programs have been rated “Adequate.” Additional information about GSA’s PART scores and results can be found at 

www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/agency/023.html.

In FY 2008, GSA conducted a comprehensive, detailed review 

of all externally-reported goals, measures, and targets, in accordance with OMB PART Guidance No. 2007-7, Improving 

the Quality of PART Performance and Efficiency Goals. This 

review allowed GSA to re-assess key measures and goals, 

and resulted in better alignment of performance goals and 

resources with GSA’s Strategic Goals and Mission. This review also increased the use of outcome-oriented goals, and 

ensured that targets are reasonably aggressive compared to 

prior-year actual performance, and thus drive incremental 

improvement in program performance over time.

The remainder of this section provides performance highlights, key measures, and corresponding results for the Services and Staff Offices. The complete list of FY 2008 measures can be found in the Other Accompanying Information 

section of this report on page 159, and the full performance 

report will be published on the GSA Web site, www.gsa.gov/

annualreports in December 2008.

GSA Part Results

GSA PROGRAM RATING

PBS Asset Management of Government Owned Real Property Effective

FAS Charge Card Services Effective

OCSC USA Services Effective

PBS New Construction Effective

PBS Real Property Disposal Effective

FAS Vehicle Leasing Moderately Effective

PBS Real Property Leasing Moderately Effective

FAS Personal Property Management Moderately Effective

OGP Office of Governmentwide Policy Moderately Effective

FAS Transportation Management Moderately Effective

FAS National Furniture Center Moderately Effective

FAS Integrated Technology Services Portfolio Moderately Effective

FAS Travel Management Adequate

FAS General Supplies and Services Portfolio Adequate

FAS Vehicle Acquisition Adequate

FAS Assisted Acquisition Services Portfolio Adequate

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

52 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
PBS

maintained its “Effective” rating and improved its score to 96 

percent on the OMB PART in FY 2007. 

Performance Highlights

GSA continuously analyzes operations by conducting 

PART reviews in a joint effort with OMB. PBS has four 

separate PART programs: New Construction, Real Property 

Leasing, Asset Management, and Real Property Disposal. 

New Construction, Asset Management, and Real Property 

Disposal have the highest PART rating, “Effective,” and the 

Real Property Leasing program has been rated “Moderately Effective.” GSA and OMB use PART reviews of these 

programs to inform budget decisions and to identify actions 

to improve results. 

GSA worked jointly with the OMB to review the Real 

Property Disposal program during the FY 2008 PART 

cycle, in which the program received the highest rating 

of “Effective.” The high rating is primarily due to a better 

performance in the area of independent evaluations. In 

the 2008 review, the program was able to demonstrate that 

it received regular, independent evaluations and that those 

The Public Buildings Service (PBS) provides 

superior workplaces for Federal agencies and their 

employees, at a superior value to the U.S. taxpayer. 

By providing its customers with quality work environments, 

PBS enables Federal agencies to better serve the public. 

As the largest public real estate organization in the nation, 

PBS provides workspace and workplace solutions to over 

60 Federal agencies, bureaus, and commissions.

PBS is a customer-driven organization, and its accomplishments include portfolio restructuring and real estate asset 

analysis that resulted in properties that are both performing 

and providing quality workplaces for over one million 

Federal employees. PBS activities make it possible to achieve 

GSA’s four priorities for asset management:

■ Improve Real Property Capital Project Planning and 

Delivery 

■ Improve the Real Estate Leasing Program

■ Strengthen and Expand Workspace/Workplace Delivery 

■ Implement the PMA for Real Property 

GSA continues to be a leader in asset management and sets 

Federal asset management standards through its leadership 

on the Federal Real Property Council (FRPC). GSA was the 

first Federal agency to achieve a “green” status on the Federal 

Real Property Asset Management initiative of the PMA. In 

FY 2008, GSA maintained its green rating in both progress 

and status by continuing to achieve the PMA right-sizing 

goals of utilization, disposal, operation and maintenance, 

and physical condition. GSA’s asset management practices 

and its progress toward rightsizing its portfolio of assets 

were recognized when the asset management program 

PUBLIC BUILDINGS SERVICE

Performance By Service/Staff Office

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 53
PBS

evaluations indicated that the program is effective and 

achieving results. 

The paragraphs below summarize FY 2008 PBS major 

performance results by business line activity.

New Construction

PBS manages an $11 billion, multi-year capital investment 

program to build new Federal buildings, courthouses, and 

land ports of entry and to renovate and modernize existing 

Federal facilities, including courthouses, agency headquarters, office buildings, laboratories, and infrastructure. The 

program includes over 300 capital projects in the pre-planning, site acquisition, design, and construction phases. In 

FY 2008, PBS completed two new courthouse construction 

projects and five new Federal building projects, as well 

as 17 major repairs and alterations (R&A) projects. PBS 

awarded design contracts for three new land ports of entry, 

two new courthouses, and three major R&A projects. PBS 

also completed designs for two new courthouse projects 

and three new land port of entry projects, as well as nine 

major R&A projects. In FY 2008, PBS initiated construction 

of six new land ports of entry, three new courthouses, six 

new Federal buildings, and 12 major R&A projects.

GSA is a leader in sustainable design and in FY 2008 

achieved certification of two government-owned buildings 

and three build-to-suit leased buildings under the U.S. Green 

Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental 

Design (LEED) rating system. Certification represents thirdparty review and verification of energy efficiency and green 

building performance achievements. PBS also registered an 

additional 25 buildings in FY 2008 to work toward certification, bringing the total number of registered buildings to 

over 120 and the total number of LEED-certified buildings 

to 27. These results demonstrate GSA’s continued commitment to improved building performance. GSA will continue 

to lead in sustainable design by advocating for siting of 

Federal facilities with consideration for local transportation 

and enhancing sustainability in communities. The result will 

be facilities which balance cost, environmental, societal, and 

human benefits, while meeting the mission and functional 

needs of the customer agencies. GSA integrates sustainable 

design as seamlessly as possible into the existing design 

and construction process. 

PBS continued to develop and implement business process 

improvements to enhance the performance of the capital 

construction program, and made significant progress on 

several key initiatives, including Electronic Project Management, project management training curriculum, project 

scope of work templates, and Building Information Modeling 

(BIM). BIM is virtual design and construction technology 

that provides three dimensional (3D) visualization and 4D 

construction sequencing. These capabilities allow users to 

analyze the design and construction of a project through 

computer modeling in the actual sequence in which it will 

be built. GSA is currently using BIM for several active 

projects and is committed to adopting it more widely in its 

capital construction program. In March, PBS convened its 

annual Capital Construction training workshop for project 

management professionals. 

The PBS Office of the Chief Architect (OCA) and Construction Programs provided national peer professionals for 

12 Architect/Engineer Design Excellence selections, 40 

Design and Construction Peer Reviews of ongoing capital 

San Francisco, CA Federal Building

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

54 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
PBS

projects, 17 Art in Architecture Peer Reviews, and two Fine 

Arts Reviews. The Chief Architect arranged eight Design 

Concept Presentations for the PBS Commissioner, and 

developed and produced a new video in FY 2008: The GSA 

Design Excellence Process: Creating Enduring Value. 

GSA received numerous honors in FY 2008 for the 

capital construction program, including citations from the 

American Institute of Architecture, the National Institute of 

Building Sciences, and the Building Owners and Managers 

Association (BOMA). GSA was honored by the White 

House with a Preserve America award for the African Burial 

Ground Project, and the San Francisco Federal Building 

was honored with a 2008 White House Closing the Circle 

Award. PBS was also recognized as number one real estate 

owner/investor in a top 100 poll by Real Estate Forum.

Space Acquisition by Lease

PBS has introduced new efficiencies to its leasing program 

to give the customer a consistent look and feel in transactions. The implementation of the National Broker Contract 

program has improved PBS’s ability to deliver high-quality, 

reasonably priced workplace solutions to its customers. 

Under the newly created Office of Real Estate Acquisition, PBS is developing consistent, enterprise-wide procedures and is enhancing communications with brokers 

and customers. The Office of National Customer Services 

Management continues to build and improve working relationships with GSA’s customers at both the national and 

local level. 

For the first time in FY 2008, the amount of leased space 

surpassed the amount of owned space in the GSA portfolio. 

If the current situation of budget constraints and lack of 

resources for modernization and new construction projects 

continues, it is expected that the growth in leased space will 

also continue. Also beginning in FY 2008, PBS lowered the 

fee that it charges customer agencies for leased space from 

eight to seven percent for cancelable space, and from six to 

five percent for non-cancelable space, as it gained efficiencies through its processes and procedures. 

Asset Management of Real Property

PBS continues to be a leader in real property asset management. PBS is continually focused on rightsizing its portfolio 

and, as a result, has shown considerable progress toward 

achieving its long-term goal of achieving a viable, selfsustaining inventory with an average return on equity (ROE) 

of at least six percent for 80 percent of its government-owned 

assets. Assets with an ROE of at least six percent are solid 

financial performers that fulfill the long-term needs of GSA’s 

customers by generating enough income to fund their own 

operations, repairs, and capital needs. Through September 

2008, 80.5 percent of PBS’s owned assets achieved at least 

a six percent ROE. This performance improvement over 

FY 2007 was accomplished by continuing to right-size the 

portfolio through disposing of or decommissioning underutilized assets, redirecting capital investment into core 

assets, and monitoring the performance of each asset. 

PBS has also demonstrated progress toward meeting its 

long-term energy goal of reducing energy consumption in 

GSA Federal buildings by three percent per year for a cumulative reduction of 30 percent by FY 2015. GSA surpassed 

its FY 2008 goal of a nine percent reduction over the 2003 

baseline, and is working on continuing this trend in future 

years. There are currently $15 million in efficiency investments underway in GSA buildings nationwide. These investments are expected to reduce annual energy consumption 

by an additional 154,667 million Btu, resulting in savings 

of $3.17 million each year. These achievements underscore 

PBS’s commitment to responsible energy management.

Real Property Disposal

In FY 2008, the Office of Real Property Disposal was 

instrumental in the disposal of 13 GSA properties valued at 

approximately $58.5 million. These disposals have already 

provided revenues of $56 million for the Federal Buildings 

Fund (FBF). An additional 235 properties valued at approximately $192.2 million were disposed of for other Federal 

agencies. PBS also conducted 26 targeted asset reviews 

to help agencies identify underutilized real property assets 

and improve their compliance with Executive Order 13327, 

Federal Real Property Asset Management.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 55
PBS

PBS Performance By GSA Strategic Goals

Stewardship

Lead Federal agencies in the economical and efficient management of Federal assets by spearheading 

effective policy development and by the exemplary management of the buildings/workplaces, motor 

vehicles, and personal property provided by GSA.

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

PBS (Asset

Management)

Customer Satisfaction with government owned

space. 

Met

PBS (New

Construction)

Percent of New Construction program registered

for LEED.

Met

PBS (Asset Management)

Performance Goal

Execute energy conservation goals while increasing GSA’s Customer Satisfaction scores to 80 percent by FY 2008.

Measure

Customer Satisfaction with government-owned space.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

77.6% 83.0% 78.3% 80.0% 81.0%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: This measure calculates the percentage of survey respondents who rate their overall satisfaction level with PBS service delivery as a “4” or “5” on a five-point scale. GSA surveys the tenants in one-third of eligible 

buildings each year, on a rotating basis. This measure helps to determine how well GSA is achieving its desired outcome 

of meeting customer space requirements while providing best value for customer agencies and taxpayers. 

DATA SOURCE: The data source is a customer survey of PBS’s tenants in space owned and leased by GSA, which is conducted 

for GSA by the Gallup Organization.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: PBS Asset Management met its FY 2008 target. According to the Gallup Organization, PBS’s survey provides a true gauge of customer satisfaction. Major factors contributing to the high customer satisfaction level include the quality of leased space and proactive responses by PBS to previous tenant survey issues. PBS is 

exploring the implementation of a nationwide system for developing work plans to address results of the survey, improve 

response to customer concerns, and sharing best practices.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

56 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
PBS

PBS (New Construction)

Performance Goal

By FY 2008, register 75 percent of the New Construction program for LEED in the same fiscal year design funding is 

authorized.

Measure

Percent of New Construction program registered for LEED.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

9.1% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 100.0%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: LEED registration measures the level of sustainability achieved by the New Construction 

program. Requiring timely LEED registration ensures that sustainable design principles are incorporated from the very 

beginning in new projects, and increases the likelihood that the project will be successfully LEED certified upon construction completion. The desired outcome is an optimal balance of cost, environmental, societal, and human benefits while 

meeting the needs of the client agency.

DATA SOURCE: PBS Project Information Portal (PIP); Regional Project Managers; U.S. Green Building Council.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: PBS New Construction exceeded its FY 2008 target. Nine new construction 

projects received design funding in FY 2008. All five of the projects eligible for inclusion in the LEED Registration measure 

were registered for LEED on schedule, for a 100 percent result. One project was a parking garage and not eligible for 

LEED, so it was not included in the measure. The remaining three projects had already been registered in previous years 

and were not eligible for inclusion in the measure.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 57
PBS

Superior Workplaces 

Deliver and maintain productive workplaces consisting of office space, furnishings, technology, 

supplies, and related services.

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

PBS (Leasing) Satisfied tenant customer satisfaction rating

(4 and 5 responses) in leased space surveyed.

Met

PBS (New

Construction)

Construction projects on schedule. Not Met

PBS (Leasing)

Performance Goal

Achieve a satisfied customer satisfaction rating (4 and 5) 76 percent of the time by FY 2008.

Measure

Satisfied tenant customer satisfaction rating (4 and 5 responses) in leased space surveyed.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

78.0% 78.0% 78.4% 76.0% 78.0%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: This measure calculates the percentage of survey respondents who rate their overall satisfaction level with PBS service delivery as a “4” or “5” on a five-point scale. GSA surveys the tenants in one-third of eligible 

buildings each year, on a rotating basis. This measure helps to determine how well GSA is achieving its desired outcome 

of meeting customer space requirements while providing best value for customer agencies and taxpayers.

DATA SOURCE: The data source is a customer survey of PBS’s tenants in space owned and leased by GSA, which is conducted 

for GSA by the Gallup Organization.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: PBS Leasing met its FY 2008 target. According to the Gallup Organization, PBS’s 

survey provides a true gauge of customer satisfaction. Major factors contributing to the high customer satisfaction level 

include the quality of leased space and proactive responses by PBS to previous tenant survey issues. PBS is exploring the 

implementation of a nationwide system for developing work plans to address results of the survey, improve response to 

customer concerns, and share best practices.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

58 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
PBS

PBS (New Construction)

Performance Goal

New construction projects on schedule 88 percent of the time by FY 2008.

Measure

Construction projects on schedule.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

100.0% 84.0% 78.8% 88.0% 80.4%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: Projects on schedule reports the percentage of New Construction projects completed on 

schedule, weighted by the value of work in place. This measure uses an earned value technique to assess construction 

project performance on all prospectus level projects. Delivering space when the customer needs it enables customers to 

carry out their mission; this measure helps to gauge GSA’s success in meeting this outcome. 

DATA SOURCE: PBS PIP.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: PBS New Construction did not meet its FY 2008 target. Four new construction 

projects drove the FY 2008 results for this measure: Springfield, MA Courthouse; New York, NY U.S. Mission to the 

United Nations; El Paso, TX Courthouse; and Houston, TX FBI Building. In FY 2008, there were 29 active new construction projects and 25 of them were on schedule, or 86 percent of the projects. The total value of new construction work 

in place in FY 2008 was nearly $900 million, compared to $213 million of work off the schedule pace, which drives the 

FY 2008 actual result of 80.4 percent. 

The Springfield, MA Courthouse was delayed because the construction contract was awarded with limited contingency and 

additional funds were required to cover the cost of unforeseen conditions and design defects and omissions. The New 

York, NY U.S. Mission to the United Nations project schedule was delayed due to contractor difficulties encountered early 

in the project in constructing the building’s complex, concrete frame on a tight, mid-town Manhattan site, with abutting 

adjacent buildings and significant, complex security requirements. The El Paso, TX Courthouse encountered delays due to 

funding shortfalls, tight market conditions, construction problems, and a fire. The Houston, TX FBI Building was delayed 

due to a funding shortfall, project requirement issues, and tenant-requested changes to bring the project up to the most 

current security standards. 

PBS will continue to undertake construction peer reviews on major capital construction projects at 15 percent, 35 percent, 

and 90 to 95 percent of construction completion, to monitor construction progress against major milestones and to identify 

correction strategies.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 59
PBS

Best Value 

Develop and deliver timely, accurate, and cost-effective acquisition services and business solutions.

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

PBS (Asset

Management)

Percent within the private sector benchmarks

for cleaning and maintaining office and similarly

serviced space.

Met

PBS (Asset Management)

Performance Goal

Maintain cleaning and maintenance costs in office and similarly serviced space within +/- five percent of private sector 

benchmarks.

Measure

Percent within the private sector benchmarks for cleaning and maintaining office and similarly serviced space.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

-5.8% -0.6% +4.0% +/-5.0% 0.6%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: This measure compares GSA cleaning and maintenance costs for owned buildings to 

industry benchmark rates in the same geographic area. GSA assets are matched to local, private sector data from BOMA. 

Consistently paying cleaning and maintenance costs within an acceptable variance from benchmark rates demonstrates 

that GSA manages owned assets as efficiently as the private sector. 

DATA SOURCE: BOMA Experience Exchange Report, Consumer Price Indices (CPI), Energy Information Administration, Pegasys, 

and the System for Tracking and Administering Real Property (STAR).

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: PBS achieved its operating cost target in FY 2008. GSA employs private sector 

benchmarks to measure performance in all comparable instances to ensure that GSA is operating and maintaining its assets 

as efficiently as the private sector. However, the unique mission and operating environment of GSA make comparisons 

difficult. PBS is subject to restrictions and regulations that negatively affect operating costs, when compared to the private 

sector. Increased security requirements, socio-economic considerations, and additional wage factors all increase operating 

costs. In order to account for these, PBS now strives to operate at costs that are comparable to, as opposed to below, the 

private sector benchmarks. This incentivizes the Agency to operate efficiently and effectively without sacrificing customer 

service or deferring needed maintenance. 

In FY 2008, PBS was able to continue to operate at a cost comparable to the private sector. PBS is committed to providing 

cost savings to the U.S. taxpayer without compromising its service to its client agencies. The Agency will continue to 

leverage the buying power of the Federal government and concentrate on achieving cost-efficient operations.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

60 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
PBS

Innovation 

Develop new and better ways of conducting business that result in more productive and effective 

Federal policies and administrative operations. 

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

PBS (Asset

Management)

Percent reduction in energy consumption over the

FY 2003 baseline.

Met

PBS (Asset Management)

Performance Goal

Reduce energy consumption in GSA Federal buildings by nine percent (as measured by Btu/GSF) over the FY 2003 

baseline by FY 2008. 

Measure

Percent reduction in energy consumption over the FY 2003 baseline.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

-35.3% -4.4% -8.3% -9.0% -9.7%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: Building energy consumption is defined as the amount of energy used per square foot to 

operate a building and is measured in Btu/GSF. This measure represents the percent energy reduction per square foot of 

space over the FY 2003 baseline. This measure tracks GSA’s progress toward the desired outcome of reducing the energy 

footprint of the Federal government and satisfying the mandates of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and Executive Order 

13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. The 2005 baseline and target are 

measured against the 1985 baseline. 

DATA SOURCE: Energy Usage and Analysis System (EUAS) and STAR.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: GSA exceeded the goal for this measure primarily due to the application of the 

renewable energy Btu reduction credit in accordance with guidance issued from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 

Federal Energy Management Program. Under Section 102 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, (42 U.S.C. 8253(a)(1)), and 

Executive Order 13423, on-site, renewable energy generation projects that do not incur fuel costs are not included in the 

total Btu/GSF calculations used for energy efficiency goals. DOE provides a Btu reduction credit for renewable energy 

purchases. Without the application of the Btu reduction credit, GSA’s performance would be -4.4 percent. The results 

stated above are based on a rolling 12-month report through July 2008.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 61
FAS

The Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) operates at 

the core of the GSA mission: Leverage the buying 

power of the Federal government to acquire the best 

value for taxpayers and Federal customers. To support GSA 

and accomplish its mission, FAS uses innovative techniques 

and leverages government-wide buying power, acquisition 

expertise, and electronic tools to successfully deliver new 

and existing services, products, and solutions. FAS uses its 

understanding of GSA’s customers to offer multiple channels 

for customers to acquire needed solutions. The result is an 

organization that is capable of delivering excellent acquisition services effectively and efficiently and providing best 

value to Federal customers and the U.S. taxpayer.

FAS is organized around four business portfolios that deliver 

total solutions to customer agencies. These portfolios are: 

Integrated Technology Services (ITS); Assisted Acquisition Services (AAS); General Supplies and Services (GSS); 

and Travel, Motor Vehicles, and Card Services (TMVCS). 

Together, these portfolios manage the largest, most diverse, 

and innovative Federal marketplace in the world, offering 

approximately 12 million supplies and services to customer 

agencies. The organization provides best value at the 

best price through strategic sourcing, faster contracting 

services, greater efficiency and flexibility in procurement 

processes, lower transaction costs, and smarter ways of 

doing business. 

FAS pledges to put customer service first and promises to 

provide innovative, best-value solutions. FAS continues to: 

■ look for ways to streamline its procurement processes 

and tools to increase its value to customers; 

■ leverage the government’s buying power while 

enhancing its central role in Federal procurement; 

■ meet unique support requirements of global customers; 

■ increase customer education and outreach efforts and 

improve market research capabilities; 

■ participate in multiple interagency 

groups as well as industry forums; 

■ work within the changing GSA 

structure (maintain flexibility as the 

reorganization is finalized; balance 

organizational needs against the 

customer needs).

In FY 2008, FAS demonstrated its commitment to the GSA mission and its 

customers. In the first part of the year, 

FAS made process improvement a high 

priority and implemented Lean Six Sigma, 

a process improvement methodology 

focused on improving efficiency and 

FEDERAL ACQUISITION SERVICE

GSA Expo in Anaheim, CA

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

62 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
FAS

quality while reducing costs. Six Lean Six Sigma projects 

were launched that are important to the organization as a 

whole and will benefit FAS’s customers, industry partners, 

U.S. taxpayers, and FAS employees. FAS committed to 

“Going Green,” giving customers more green options that 

save resources and help preserve the environment. FAS 

also continued to strengthen its position as the government’s leading acquisition service provider, saving billions 

of dollars for customer agencies and taxpayers, including 

state and local governments which are now able to purchase 

products and services through many of GSA’s Multiple 

Award Schedule (MAS).

FAS also supports the entire Federal community and 

taxpayers through its participation in good for government 

initiatives such as the Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative 

(FSSI). The FSSI Program Management Office is managed 

out of AAS and serves as an operational arm for the Office 

of Federal Procurement Policy. This program’s mission is to 

improve the Federal government acquisition value chain, 

improve socioeconomic participation, and ultimately lower 

total cost of ownership and/or operations for strategic 

sourcing vehicles. There are three major commodity categories managed within FAS: domestic delivery services, telecommunications expense management, and office supplies.

The Express and Ground Domestic Delivery Services 

(ExGDDS) contract has matured from nine to 57 participating agencies, boards, and commissions with FY 2008 

total projected spend of $94.7 million and $33.8 million 

projected savings. Agencies receive high-volume location 

discounts for ground deliveries, no fuel surcharges for 

ground or express deliveries, and additional savings opportunities by utilizing business intelligence to streamline 

processes. FSSI Wireless Telecommunications Expense 

Management Services expects to save agencies 25 to 40 

percent off their wireless total cost of operations through 

rate plan, inventory, and billing error cost savings; process 

efficiencies; and improved management and security 

controls. This vehicle can also help agencies strategically 

address the complexities of their wireless tools through a 

central management portal and dashboard reporting. The 

FSSI Office Supplies has grown from 12 to over 50 participating Federal agencies, boards, and commissions, with 

$10 million in spend, 89 percent with small business. The 

Office Supplies Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) for 

toner, paper, and general office supplies complies with the 

Trade Agreement Act and various environmental regulations. 

Performance Highlights

GSA continuously analyzes operations by conducting PART 

reviews in a joint effort with OMB. FAS has completed PART 

reviews for all four of its business portfolios. The ratings 

are as follows: ITS was rated “Moderately Effective,” AAS 

was rated “Adequate,” GSS was rated through three separate 

reviews, two of which were rated “Moderately Effective,” 

and one “Adequate” rating, and TMVCS was rated through 

five separate reviews one of which was rated “Effective,” 

two were rated “Moderately Effective,” and two were rated 

“Adequate.” 

Independent Evaluations

Independent evaluations are just one method that FAS uses 

to improve performance and address OMB PART findings. 

These evaluations help FAS find solutions to current issues 

as well as ways to improve current operations. During FY 

2008, ITS engaged outside expertise to do a review of the 

entire portfolio and its operations and create a baseline of 

the current state upon which improvements could be made. 

It is anticipated that this evaluation will be completed early 

in FY 2009 and will result in improvement recommendations to capitalize on current strengths of the portfolio and 

resolve any weaknesses that are identified. An Office of 

Inspector General (OIG) audit was also initiated in FY 2008 

in the Office of Personal Property Management‘s (PPM) 

Utilization and Donation Program of the GSS portfolio. The 

results of this review are expected in March 2009 and will 

also support process improvements going forward.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 63
FAS

The results of independent evaluations also are used in 

some cases to demonstrate the favorable results that FAS 

programs can deliver. The IG conducted a study of the 

TMVCS FedRooms program this year and validated that 

4,500 participating hotels delivered the stated benefits of 

the program, yet less than one percent of hotels booked 

government-wide were booked at FedRooms’ rates. As a 

result, the IG recommended FAS develop a business plan 

to increase the utilization of this program and savings to 

the government. Two additional independent evaluations 

were completed within the TMVCS portfolio during FY 2008 

which demonstrated that the Freight Management Program 

(FMP) and Centralized Household Goods Traffic Management Program (CHAMP) deliver pricing that is approximately 25 percent and six percent lower, respectively, when 

compared with commercial rates.

The paragraphs below summarize FY 2008 FAS major 

performance results by portfolio.

Integrated Technology Services 

During FY 2008, the FAS ITS organization continued its 

success in executing its mission to enable its customers 

to acquire quality, best value information technology 

(IT) solutions while supporting achievement of important 

public policy goals. For example, ITS was recognized in 

a Federal Computer Week/Government Computer News

survey during the past fiscal year as having six of the top 

20 IT contracts used by government, including the two most 

used government IT contracts: SmartBuy and IT Schedule 

70. In addition, customers of ITS’s SmartBuy and Network 

Services solutions are projected to save more than $750 

million this year compared to costs utilizing alternative 

sourcing channels. 

ITS contracting products are used by customers and recognized by key stakeholders as tools to support important 

government-wide security initiatives. For example, citing 

the need to maximize cost savings for the Federal government and to improve security, OMB issued Memorandum 

08-26, Transition from FTS2001 to Networx, in August 2008. 

This endorsed government-wide use of GSA’s Networx 

contracts to cost-effectively assist agencies in meeting the 

requirements of its Trusted Internet Connections initiative 

to strengthen the Federal government’s incident response 

capability through the reduction of external connections, 

and enhance government information system security. In 

addition, the SmartBuy Program’s Data At Rest Tiger Team and 

the Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12 (HSPD-12) 

Program Management Office both received recognition and 

awards from government and private organizations this year. 

SmartBuy is now collaborating with the government-wide 

Information System Security Line of Business to provide 

in one place, for the first time, standards-based security 

tools that can audit and assess a system to determine its 

compliance with the Federal Desktop Core Configuration 

requirements. The HSPD-12 Program Management Office is 

responsible for personalizing and issuing Personal Identity 

Verification (PIV) cards for 67 Federal agencies. 

ITS contracting products are also used as tools to meet 

other important public policy goals. For example, ITS has 

actively been working to improve use of green IT products 

and services across government to help bring environmental thinking to the world of IT. Along with other FAS 

Portfolios, ITS is working with its suppliers to highlight 

products compliant with important environmentally-friendly 

standards like ENERGY STAR and Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT). In addition, ITS 

launched its Data Center Optimization initiative in June 

with the goal of providing customers with a continuum of 

energy-efficient data center solutions to help them meet 

national green initiatives. Further, in August, the SmartBuy 

program negotiated an agreement enabling customers to 

purchase personal computer power conservation software 

at an initial annual license fee of only $3 per computer. 

This software, which ensures that computers are shut down 

during non-business hours, offers potentially substantial 

cost and environmental benefits by saving up to $40 to $50 

per year per computer in electric power costs for customers 

throughout government.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

64 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
FAS

ITS contracts are also at the forefront in meeting key socioeconomic contracting goals. For example, the Veterans 

Technology Services (VETS) Government Wide Acquisition 

Contract (GWAC) provides Federal agencies the ability to 

achieve mandated small business goals through purchase of 

IT services and IT services-based solutions from small businesses owned by service-disabled veterans. This initiative 

was a direct result of Executive Order 13360 that is designed 

to strengthen Federal contracting opportunities for ServiceDisabled Veteran-Owned firms. As of August 2008, VETS 

contractors have received 141 orders totaling $138 million 

in obligated dollars with a total estimated value of $480 

million if all options are exercised.

Assisted Acquisition Services 

In FY 2008, AAS continued to provide support for veterans 

and small businesses. AAS provided approximately $50 

million of assisted acquisition services for IT and professional services to the Veterans Administration. In addition, 

several service-disabled veteran-owned set aside acquisitions were conducted, including a $75 million award 

supporting the 640th Electronic Systems Squadron at the 

Electronic Systems Center at Hanscom Air Force Base. As a 

result of a small business set aside, a five-year $10 million 

contract was awarded on behalf of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce (DOC), Chief Information Officer (CIO), Office 

of Computer Services to provide complete IT infrastructure 

systems administration and operational support. Another 

key small business acquisition was conducted to provide the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Environmental Information, with data management, technical 

expertise, and outreach support and maximum flexibility to 

meet the changing needs of the Agency.

Compared to FY 2007, there have been significant improvements to AAS’s financial position in FY 2008. AAS has 

broken even after recovering from a large financial loss last 

year. The improvement in the financial situation is due to 

cost savings generated in part by space consolidation and 

the reassignment of approximately 250 AAS employees to 

other offices throughout GSA. Through FY 2008, revenue 

was approximately $64 million below FY 2007 levels. This 

is the smallest decline in revenue in recent years, and AAS 

has seen some new business opportunities during FY 2008. 

AAS has captured $39 million of new business opportunities at EPA; $65 million at the U.S. Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD); and $350 million from 

various components of DOC. At the U.S. Department of 

Defense (DoD), opportunities have been captured in the 

U.S. Army IT System, Defense Logistics Info Services IT, and 

U.S. Army Human Resources Command Infrastructure. In 

addition, in the Southeast Sunbelt Region AAS awarded a 

$70.6 million task order for DoD National Guard Bureau. 

This project was awarded in a record time of 39 days to 

an Alaskan Native corporation, NANA Pacific, LLC, which 

will provide rapid response support to the National Guard 

Bureau. Among other contracts, AAS also awarded a $344.2 

million contract to Lockheed Martin for the DoD’s High 

Performance Computing Modernization Program.

General Supplies and Services 

During this fiscal year, GSS has been working hard to 

enhance relationships with its strategic partners. In 

October, GSS signed an agreement with the U.S. Marine 

Corps designating GSA the Fourth Party Logistics provider 

for the U.S. Marine Corps. This partnership supports retail 

store operations at key Marine bases and a virtual storefront, enabling GSA to leverage its supply chain expertise 

so that the Marines can put more focus on their missions. 

The agreement with the U.S. Marine Corps was followed by 

a joint agreement signed among GSA, the U.S. Transportation Command and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) 

on January 31, 2008, to align and improve supply support 

to the war fighter. This agreement codifies ongoing work 

to improve the global distribution supply chain supporting 

DoD, with particular emphasis on the Iraq-Afghanistan 

conflict. Examples of this improvement work include GSA’s 

forward-positioned inventory at DLA’s distribution site in 

Kuwait, which is saving millions in air transportation costs 

(estimated at $15 to $20 million annually) and improving 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 65
FAS

supply readiness. GSA products valued at approximately 

$68 million shipped quickly to U.S. deployed forces from 

this Kuwait inventory during FY 2008, up from $47 million 

in FY 2007. Supplies are also reaching the U.S. Central 

Command theatre from the continental United States more 

rapidly due to shipping method improvements, with over 20 

“pipeline” days eliminated on ocean surface movement. 

GSS has helped local communities in need due to disasters, 

including wildfires. In November, GSS rushed fire and 

rescue supplies to California Wildfire Firefighters and 

evacuees. GSA vendors delivered 10,000 blankets and 

10,000 cots within 10 hours. Other items supplied to fight 

the wildfires were 52,171 pound shipments of fire fighting 

materials, and 5,600 additional blankets required later in 

the week. During September, GSS was back at the forefront 

helping the Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) respond to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. GSS shipped 

essential disaster supplies such as water, blankets, cots, and 

supplies and equipment for evacuee feeding kitchens. GSS 

also assisted in staffing FEMA’s National Response Coordination Center to optimize logistics support to the affected 

areas in Louisiana and Texas. 

During the latter part of FY 2008, PPM has been working 

with FEMA to establish disposal solutions for travel trailers 

that require special use/handling conditions due to concerns 

over levels of formaldehyde in the trailers. Although the 

trailers have not been deemed usable for housing purposes, 

PPM has provided FEMA and Centers for Disease Control 

(CDC) disposal guidance in establishing specific conditions 

and requirements under which trailers could be utilized, 

in lieu of destruction alternatives. Opportunities to offer 

remaining travel trailers for utilization, donation, and sales 

represents savings to the taxpayers by continued use, return 

of sales proceeds, and elimination of unnecessary destruction costs.

The Computers for Learning (CFL) Program, under the 

administrative guidance of PPM, has evolved as a program 

to implement Executive Order 12999, Education Technology, directing Federal agencies, to the extent permitted 

by law, to transfer excess computers and related peripheral 

equipment directly to schools and qualifying educational 

nonprofit organizations. However, CFL not only addresses 

the Executive Order 12999’s goal to increase the opportunities for children to be exposed to modern computer 

technology but also Executive Order 13423’s purpose to 

“Strengthen Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management.”

In FY 2008, the CFL program has extended the useful life of 

electronic equipment by transferring 6,047 pieces of electronic equipment at an original value of $57.6 million to 

over 650 individual qualifying educational activities. PPM 

continues to promote the program and provide a module in 

its disposal system to match educational activities’ needs to 

available excess property. CFL serves as a way to enhance 

technology training in schools, conserve energy utilized to 

manufacture electronic equipment, and minimize environmental harm involved in the manufacturing of materials 

used in electronic products. 

This year, the PPM Sales Program has worked diligently 

to establish GSA Auctions® as a leading principal sales 

center under the e-Federal Asset Sales (eFAS) initiative, 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

66 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
FAS

one of 24 E-Gov initiatives from the PMA. In 2008, the 

requirement for Federal agencies to utilize one of the Sales 

Centers established under eFAS to sell their surplus and 

exchange/sale property was incorporated in the Federal 

Management Regulation (FMR). Since the establishment of 

GSA Auctions® as a sale center, PPM has worked to make 

Federal agencies aware of the sales regulation as well as the 

services they offer as a sales center. Due to these efforts, 

PPM has sold approximately $84 million in surplus and 

exchange/sale property for Federal agencies. 

GSS also implemented several programs to support MAS. 

For example, the program expanded the array of products 

and services available through Schedules, increased 

the number of environmentally sensitive items on GSA 

Advantage, and implemented Cooperative Purchasing of 

state and local governments. GSS provided leadership on 

the National Security Convergence project, and supported 

FEMA during disasters such as the Cedar Rapids flooding 

and major hurricanes. The program improved internal 

processes which led to a significant reduction in offer and 

modification cycle times and an increase in the receipt of 

electronic offers and modifications. They have also introduced several long-term programs designed to recruit and 

retain its acquisition workforce.

Travel, Motor Vehicles, and Card Services

GSA Automotive worked closely with the U.S Army to 

develop a custom patient evacuation vehicle (PEV). The 

PEV is a semi-trailer-sized hospital on wheels that will make 

wounded soldiers’ transport to medical centers within the 

National Capital Region more comfortable and safer. The 

GSA Automotive engineers designed the vehicles to be 

equipped with full air ride suspension, self contained and 

redundant power generation systems, and an aero-medical 

evacuation pallet system to transport litter-borne patients. 

The PEV can also be used to enhance the U.S. Army’s capability to respond to mass casualty events in the National 

Capital Region. 

GSA Fleet and Automotive continue to support efforts to 

make the government fleet more environmentally friendly. 

GSA Fleet and Automotive have provided an additional 

29,000 AFVs and hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) in FY 2008. 

GSA Automotive collaborated with the National Park Service 

to provide 20 compressed natural gas buses for the Grand 

Canyon National Park.

The new SmartPay2® contract, awarded in June 2007, will 

be effective November 30, 2008. All of the departmental 

level agencies are on track to transition their card programs 

on or before November 29, 2008. The Office of Charge Card 

Services is successfully supporting agencies in their transition planning efforts. The program closely monitors the 

transition status and assesses the risk status of each agency. 

As of June 2008, no agency was classified as “high risk,” 

meaning the progress toward the completion of transitionrelated tasks is well on track. Card Services also continues 

to work with the outgoing bank contractors to ensure they 

remain compliant with the original GSA SmartPay® Master 

Contract and provide a consistent level of customer service 

throughout the transition. Per the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recommendation, Card Services is 

making progress in updating the online Purchase Cardholder Training and is working with OMB to update OMB 

Circular A-123, Appendix B.

The E-Gov Travel Initiative, launched in response to the 

PMA to improve the internal efficiency and effectiveness of 

travel management in the Federal government, is exceeding 

FY 2008 performance measures in utilization and online 

adoption. It is estimated that FY 2008 trips utilizing E-Gov 

Travel are 960,000 versus a plan of 921,000; additionally 67 

percent of these trips were booked online exceeding the 

plan of 65 percent for online bookings.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 67
FAS

FAS Performance By GSA Strategic Goals

Stewardship 

Lead Federal agencies in the economical and efficient management of Federal assets by spearheading 

effective policy development and by the exemplary management of the buildings/workplaces, motor 

vehicles, and personal property provided by GSA

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

FAS (Vehicle

Acquistion)

Percentage discount from invoice price

(Vehicle Acquisition).

Met

FAS (Vehicle Acquisition)

Performance Goal

Maintain 28 percent or better discount from manufacturer’s invoice price. 

Measure

Percentage discount from invoice price (Vehicle Acquisition).

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

40.6% 39.0% 32.0% >28.7% 29.0%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: Percentage discount measures the cost savings to customers from using GSA services 

rather than purchasing vehicles through a different source and paying invoice pricing. The average percentage savings 

is calculated by the weighted average discount from vehicle manufacturers’ invoice prices for seven of GSA’s top-selling 

vehicle types. Business projections show that 20 percent discount below invoice continues to be a reasonable long-term 

outcome goal for this business line.

DATA SOURCE: The Requisitioning, Ordering, and Documentation System (ROADS) contains contract pricing for vehicles.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: GSA Automotive met its FY 2008 target. Automotive tracks the discount from 

invoice for seven of the top 10 selling vehicles as a measure of internal efficiency to ensure that customers receive the 

maximum discount from the manufacturers’ invoice prices. This translates to extremely effective pricing on the vehicles 

purchased for customer agencies, as well as those in the GSA Fleet, which keeps monthly and mileage charges well under 

commercial leasing rates. The seven vehicle classes used in this calculation are: midsize sedan six cylinder, compact sedan 

four cylinder, passenger van, 4x4 SUV (five passenger), 4x4 pickup extended cab, 4x4 SUV (six passenger), and compact 

sedan six cylinder. In FY 2005 and FY 2006, a major automobile manufacturer discontinued one of its models and offered 

GSA unusually large discounts in order to clear its inventory. FY 2008 results are more consistent with historical performance and the current market condition. The Detroit automakers have advised that GSA receives the lowest vehicle prices 

of its customers. 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

68 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
FAS

Superior Workplaces 

Deliver and maintain productive workplaces consisting of office space, furnishings, technology, 

supplies, and related services.

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

FAS (Fleet) Percentage GSA Fleet leasing rates below

commercial rates on the GSA Vehicle Leasing

Schedule.

Met

FAS (GSS) Blended mark-up (Global Supply). Not Met

FAS (Fleet)

Performance Goal

Maintain the gap between GSA Fleet rates and commercial rates at 20 percent or more.

Measure

Percentage of GSA Fleet leasing rates below commercial rates on the GSA Vehicle Leasing Schedule.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

43.13% 39.06% 42.38% 29.50% 40.90%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: This measure estimates the cost savings from using GSA services to lease automobiles 

rather than outside sources. GSA rates are compared to leasing rates available on GSA schedule, as this is a readily 

available and comparable benchmark of commercial service offering(s). FAS strives to maximize savings realized by 

customers and uses this measure to monitor its success. 

DATA SOURCE: GSA Fleet rate. 

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: GSA Fleet has exceeded its FY 2008 target. GSA Fleet remains competitive by 

offering affordable lease rates in comparison to the private sector. In order to justify these rates, the program proactively 

tracks vehicle purchase prices and expenses on a consistent basis. This also helps to support Fleet’s primary goal of 

breaking even each fiscal year. The consolidation of Fleet Management Centers also plays an integral role in decreasing 

overhead expenses to maintain these locations. In the future, GSA Fleet will offer superior service to the customer in 

addition to offsetting rising fuel costs with competitive lease rates.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 69
FAS

FAS (GSS)

Performance Goal

Reduce Supply blended mark-up from 31 percent to 29 percent, toward a goal of 28 percent.

Measure

Blended mark-up (Global Supply).

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

31.60% 32.71% 31.80% 30.00% 31.90%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: Blended mark-up is the fee that is applied to the cost of goods provided to customers to 

cover program operating costs. GSA strives to minimize this fee through efficient operations and process improvements 

that allow goods to be provided at the lowest possible mark-up to customers. This measure helps to determine how well 

FAS is achieving its desired outcome of providing products to customers at the lowest possible price.

DATA SOURCE: GSA Administrator’s Report 

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET vs. RESULTS: While Global Supply did not quite meet the FY 2008 target, the program has 

maintained FY 2007 performance. In addition, the FY 2008 target was based on the original timetable for the Global 

Supply Business Model Transformation, which would effectively lower the mark-up by approximately 25 percent for a large 

percentage of stocked office supplies. The original schedule for office supply movement was during FY 2008; however, 

that timetable has been pushed back to FY 2009/FY 2010.

Best Value 

Develop and deliver timely, accurate, and cost-effective acquisition services and business solutions.

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

FAS (AAS) Percent of satisfied customers (American

Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) survey). 

Not Met

FAS (ITS) Cost avoidance/savings achieved by ITS 

Portfolio programs.

Met

FAS (AAS)

Performance Goal

Increase Assisted Acquisition Service’ customer satisfaction results. 

Measure

Percent of satisfied customers (ACSI survey).

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

70 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
FAS

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

N/A N/A 73.5% 75.0% 71.1%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: Annual customer satisfaction surveys are conducted to ensure that customer needs are 

being met. The results of these surveys are used to better adapt product and service offerings to stay current with the 

marketplace, and to refine program operations going forward. GSA operates in a competitive environment, and customer 

satisfaction is on of many outcomes used to gauge program success. 

DATA SOURCE: FY 2008 External Customer Satisfaction Survey 

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET vs. RESULTS: AAS did not meet its FY 2008 target for external customer satisfaction; however, 

a score of 71.1 percent is still a high satisfactory score. Loss of approximately one-third of the nationwide AAS workforce 

has put a strain on the remaining employees. However, AAS continues to focus on improving its customer relationship by 

having investments in developing a world-class workforce begun late in FY 2008 that will continue throughout FY 2009. 

Training initiatives in areas of customer service skills and sales were launched to promote higher customer service satisfaction within the portfolio. 

FAS (ITS)

Performance Goal

Increase cost avoidance/savings to ITS customers.

Measure

Cost avoidance/savings achieved by ITS Portfolio programs.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

$632M $720M $766M $743M $782M

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: This measure estimates the amount of savings that customers realize by using FAS solutions. 

GSA’s objective is to increase its value to customers by maximizing the amount saved through using ITS service offerings 

rather than offerings available through other sources in the market. GSA ensures this outcome is being realized by monitoring the savings realized by customers and taking actions to maximize those savings.

DATA SOURCE: SmartBuy cost savings are derived from DoD and SmartBuy reports. Network Services pricing is determined 

based on the respective FTS2001/Bridge and Crossover Contracts and billing records from a third-party research firm. 

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: FY 2008 was another successful year for ITS. The actual savings to customers 

surpassed its FY 2008 target by approximately $39 million. The Network Services savings continue to be on target, 

$638 million versus $637 million. Although the sales volume increased from $981 million to $1.06 billion, approximately 

$79 million or 8 percent, the savings remain flat due to agencies’ increased use of Internet protocol (IP)-based services and 

Custom Design Documents. These services generate a smaller percentage of savings as compared to commodity services 

such as voice, Private Line, etc... The SmartBuy program again looks to meet its cost avoidance target due to a growth in 

power optimization software sales agreements that were put into place at the end of FY 2008.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 71
The Office of Citizen Services (OCS) was created in 

June 2002, to serve as the Federal government’s 

“customer service department” for citizens. It 

integrated all of GSA’s citizen-facing delivery channels in 

order to provide consistent, accurate, and timely government 

information to citizens. OCS was combined with the internal 

communications function within GSA, which resulted in the 

Office of Citizen Services and Communications (OCSC). 

OCSC’s mission is to help make the government more 

citizen-centric by providing citizens with easy access to 

accurate, consistent, and timely government information. 

OCSC provides citizens direct information about and from 

all levels of their government through an array of integrated 

information channels, including USA.gov (the official portal 

of the U.S. government), telephone and e-mail inquiry 

response from the National Contact Center (NCC), and print 

materials distributed from Pueblo, CO. 

OCSC provides a contract vehicle (i.e., USA Contact) to 

agencies to help them establish contact centers for their 

every-day contact center needs as well as in emergency 

situations. OCSC conducts research on citizens’ preferences 

in accessing information from the government, creates 

networks that allow communities of practice to share lessons 

learned, trains Web managers across government, provides 

the government-wide Internet search to other governments, 

collaborates across government, shares best practices, and 

creates Web and contact center service level standards.

Performance Highlights

In FY 2006, OCSC/USA Services achieved the rating of 

“Effective” in the OMB PART process. In FY 2007, OCSC 

accomplished its PART Improvement Plan goals by 

completing the first regularly scheduled comprehensive, 

independent evaluation of USA Services and by providing 

OMB and Congress a consolidated picture of all OCSC 

performance goals and resource needs. In FY 2008, 

OCSC accomplished its PART Improvement Plan goal by 

establishing a government-wide contact center managers’ 

forum which meets regularly to share information and best 

practices.

The paragraphs below summarize OCSC’s major performance 

results in FY 2008:

■ Achieved 211 million citizen touchpoints, and thereby 

met OCSC’s target for FY 2008. This was accomplished 

by providing accurate, consistent, and timely information 

to citizens through a variety of channels in both English 

and Spanish. These include online information via 

USA.gov (the official portal of the U.S. government), 

telephone response via 1-800 FED INFO, email, and print 

publications from Pueblo, CO. There was significant 

growth (11 percent) in touchpoints through OCSC Web 

sites and through e-subscriber outreach (56 percent). 

Telephone service dropped back to normal annual 

OFFICE OF CITIZEN SERVICES AND COMMUNICATIONS

OCSC

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

72 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
OCSC

levels after the spike caused by changes in passport 

regulations.

■ OCSC continued its outstanding management of the 

direct information channels to the public. OCSC was 

instrumental in citizen outreach during the floods in the 

Midwest; the West coast fires; and Hurricanes Gustav 

and Ike. 

■ During 2008, OCSC continued its effective management 

of the USA.gov Infrastructure through effective software 

development controls and intensified security programs 

that met all Federal Information Security Management 

Act (FISMA) of 2002 requirements. This included 

performance testing disaster recovery operations, 

frequent vulnerability scans, continual upgrading of the 

infrastructure for various software patches, and a variety 

of processes to tighten access to systems.

■ OCSC has become an acknowledged leader across 

government in the use of Web 2.0 or social media tools. 

This is evidenced by the volume of traffic to OCSC’s 

social media tools, and the number of requests for OCSC 

speakers in the area. Additionally, OCSC launched a 

pilot of a Section 508 compliant accessible video player 

on USA.gov.

■ OCSC directly uses social media as part of its expanded 

outreach efforts. The blog (GovGab.gov) just celebrated 

its one-year birthday. While originally intended to appeal 

to and attract a younger audience, this blog has proven 

to be popular across a wide demographic and public 

readership has steadily increased.

■ OCSC oversees a variety of forums, both nationally 

and internationally, to share ideas, best practices, and 

lessons learned and to help establish benchmarks for 

development of responsive citizen service. Forums 

include the 5-Nation CIO Council that brings together the 

national CIOs from the United States, United Kingdom, 

Australia, Canada, and New Zealand to discuss IT issues. 

In addition, other forums include the Web Managers 

Advisory Group, consisting of senior government 

Web managers who collaborate on government-wide 

standards for Web sites and intergovernmental forums of 

Federal, state, and local government officials that ensure 

each entity is aware of the priorities of the others. 

■ OCSC plays an important role in supporting the 

expansion of E-Government and other efforts of the 

IT community to improve government’s interactions 

with citizens. In 2008, OCSC shared best practices and 

kept the nationwide and international E-Government 

community apprised of news and developments in 

government IT through newsletters on the Role of the 

CIO and the monthly e-mail newsletter, The DotGov 

Buzz. The newsletter on The Role of the CIO was 

translated into Spanish for distribution by the U.S. 

Agency for International Development, (USAID) and 

used at Harvard and Georgetown University. 

■ OCSC operates Web Manager University which provides 

practical, affordable training to government Web 

managers across the country. The classes are taught by 

world-class Web experts and cover the core skills needed 

by government Web managers including: writing for 

the Web; Web management and governance; Federal 

Web requirements and accessibility; social media, 

search engine optimization, and Web metrics; and many 

other topics. Through more than 100 classes, including 

annual conferences, courses, and online webinars, Web 

Manager University has successfully trained over 7,100 

Web managers from 75 Federal and 25 state and local 

agencies.

■ In FY 2008, OCSC/USA Services was bestowed the 

President’s Quality Award for Management Excellence. 

In addition, Brookings Institute designated USA.gov 

as “the #1 Website in the Federal Government.” USA 

Services received an Excellence.gov award and OCSC 

staff members received numerous individual awards 

such as the AFFIRM award for “Service to the Citizen,” 

the CIO Council Award, Government Executive’s top Fed 

100s, and a Federal IT Rising Star. 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 73
OCSC

OCSC Performance By GSA Strategic Goals 

Innovation 

Develop new and better ways of conducting business that result in more productive and effective 

Federal policies and administrative operations. 

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

OCSC Citizen touchpoints. Met

OCSC

Performance Goal

Increase use of all OCSC information channels by the public.

Measure

Citizen touchpoints.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

122.7M 133.0M 222.3M 210.8M 213.8M

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: OCSC operates a variety of channels to provide citizens with government information. These 

channels include the USA.gov Web site, GobiernoUSA.gov, and seven other Web sites (including pueblo.gsa.gov, kids.

gov, and consumeraction.gov), NCC, and a publication distribution facility in Pueblo, CO. Additionally, OCSC provides a 

variety of agencies with reimbursable services which directly assist them in meeting the information needs of citizens. 

The measure of citizen touchpoints provides an overview of citizen awareness and usage of all of OCSC information 

services. It is measured by direct and assisted Web site visits; direct and assisted telephone contacts; e-mails and Web chats 

processed; publications distributed; subscriber e-mailings; and telephone, e-mail, and Web activity conducted through 

task orders awarded under OCSC Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) support contracts (primarily USA Contact 

and FirstContact). 

DATA SOURCE: Data is collected on a monthly basis from a wide variety of automated and manual systems used by in-house and 

contractor staffs to produce reports showing activity in the different categories of citizen touchpoints. Reports on Web activity 

come from industry standard WebTrends tracking reports; information on calls and e-mails comes from both NCC and USA 

Contact Contractor reports along with automated reports produced by Verizon, which supplies telecommunications support. 

Publication distribution information is maintained and reported through the automated inventory system used at OCSC’s 

Pueblo, CO distribution facility. Subscription e-mail data is provided through separate online tracking systems maintained by 

GSA and contractors, and some of the smallest numbers are done by individual counts

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

74 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
OCSC

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: OCSC met its FY 2008 target. Entering FY 2008, OCSC knew that barring some 

unforeseen circumstance, it would not be able to repeat the number of touchpoints recorded during FY 2007. During 

FY 2007, OCSC received an unanticipated boost in touchpoints through the telecommunications support to the National 

Passport Information Center (NPIC). As a direct result of new legal requirements that Americans flying to destinations in 

Canada, Mexico, or the Caribbean would have to have a passport to get back into the country, calls poured into the NPIC. 

Calls increased by 326 percent from 7.9 million in FY 2006, to 33.5 million in FY 2007. 

Allowing for the loss in passport-related activity, OCSC still set an ambitious target for FY 2008 of 210.8 million touchpoints. 

OCSC was able to meet and surpass this target with strong growth in touchpoints in other OCSC channels, notably traffic 

to USA.gov, which was up 20 percent over the previous year, and subscriber use of OCSC e-mailings, which was up 

60 percent.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 75
The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) 

provides professional financial management 

services, guidance, and innovative solutions to 

its internal and external customers. The OCFO’s primary 

purpose is to support and enhance GSA’s ability to 

achieve its objectives and improve Agency-wide financial 

management performance. The OCFO’s efforts focus on 

creating and optimizing value at least cost by combining 

and interpreting financial and non-financial analysis to assist 

managers in making sound business decisions. The OCFO 

develops overall Agency policies and procedures for budget 

administration, planning and performance measurement, 

financial reporting, management and internal controls, and 

financial management systems. The OCFO promotes a GSAwide culture of financial integrity, financial transparency, 

and accountability. The OCFO provides timely and accurate 

financial and performance information; reporting and advice 

to support managers in making sound business decisions; 

and ensures that GSA executes its mission in a compliant, 

efficient, and effective manner.

Performance Highlights

The following summarizes key OCFO performance 

highlights from FY 2008:

GSA Budget Development

The OCFO led a comprehensive review of all Agency 

externally-reported goals, measures, and targets. This review 

increased the use of outcome-oriented goals and ensured 

that performance targets were aggressive compared to 

prior-year actual performance. This review resulted in better 

alignment of performance goals and resources with GSA’s 

Strategic Goals and Mission. The review process is now 

incorporated into the annual Performance Management 

Process (PMP) and will enhance existing processes to drive 

continuous improvement in Agency performance. 

Sound Strategic Decision-Making and Integrated 

Planning

The OCFO continues to refine and improve the OCFO 

Executive Scorecard, which provides executives and managers 

with an unambiguous snapshot of current organizational 

performance and indicates where management attention 

should be focused to prevent future problems. The OCFO 

Executive Scorecard has successfully focused GSA financial 

management resources on identifying errant data and 

purging it from GSA financial systems, helping to ensure 

the financial integrity of GSA and its customers. 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OCFO

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

76 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
OCFO

Best Value Financial Management Shared Services

Financial transaction and system operations are at the core 

of the services provided by the GSA financial management 

community. The OCFO delivers these services both internally 

to GSA and externally to other Federal agencies and 

commissions. Pursuant to GSA’s goal to be a governmentwide leader in these business offerings, GSA is working to 

achieve efficiencies by streamlining financial transaction 

processing. 

The OCFO has taken the initial steps toward meeting and 

incorporating the Financial Systems Integration Office’s 

(FSIO) Common Government-wide Accounting Classification 

(CGAC) structure into GSA’s financial systems. FSIO will 

help GSA improve cost, quality, and performance financial 

management systems by standardizing business processes, 

interfaces, and data, allowing GSA to capture and report 

financial information in a consistent manner.

Inspire Confidence and Trust

During FY 2008, the OCFO led GSA’s efforts to achieve 

“green” scores on all nine government-wide metrics that 

are reported in the OMB Metric Tracking System (MTS). 

The nine MTS measures provide government managers, 

Congress, and other stakeholders with information to assess 

the financial management health of the Federal government 

as a whole and for each individual agency. To view the 

MTS measures and agency rankings, go to www.fido.gov/

mts/cfo/public. 

Timely, Accurate Financial Analysis in a Secure, 

Reliable Operating Environment

During the past year, the OCFO continued to make 

substantial progress in streamlining and integrating its 

financial management systems, replacing its remaining 

legacy financial system modules, strengthening its financial 

system controls, and improving its operational efficiency, 

effectiveness, and servicing of stakeholders. Substantial 

improvements were made to strategic planning and project 

management systems. In addition, the OCFO met its system 

availability requirements and successfully migrated several 

of its financial applications to a new data center under a 

new contract that will save GSA more than $9 million over 

a five-year period. Significant progress was also made with 

regard to consolidating all of GSA’s billing and accounts 

receivable systems under GSA’s core accounting system. 

Finally, the OCFO met all of its FISMA compliance and 

A-123 system control related responsibilities during FY 2008 

and acted aggressively to strengthen its systems controls 

regarding the protection of personally identifiable information within the OCFO systems. 

Efficient, Effective Financial Operations 

Environment

GSA was successful in its efforts to fully implement the 

latest A-123 internal control requirements throughout GSA’s 

nationwide programs. Managers of GSA programs listed 

on the Internal Control Plan conducted risk assessments 

for their programs, and over 30 internal control reviews 

incorporated risk-based testing as part of the review process. 

These reviews resulted in numerous recommendations 

for improvement of internal controls. The OCFO also 

successfully completed the assurance statement process, 

with over 600 managers throughout the Agency completing 

statements and attesting to the adequacy of their internal 

controls. 

The OCFO continues to focus on achieving its financial 

performance metrics. The OCFO measures both payable 

and receivable functions, including a critical performance 

measure of decreasing the amount of interest penalties 

paid. Total interest paid is a reflection of the efficiency and 

effectiveness of the GSA payment process for commercial 

vendors and of the OCFO’s efforts to improve processes 

and procedures. 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 77
OCFO

OCFO Performance By GSA Strategic Goals 

Stewardship

Lead Federal agencies in the economical and efficient management of Federal assets by spearheading 

effective policy development and by the exemplary management of the buildings/workplaces, motor 

vehicles, and personal property provided by GSA.

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

OCFO Interest Penalties Paid. Not Met

OCFO

Performance Goal

Increase the efficiency of the payment of vendor invoices through electronic receipt and process streamlining.

Measure

Interest penalties paid.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

N/A $574,462 $452,014 $400,000 $403,395

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: Total interest penalties paid is a reflection of the efficiency and effectiveness of the GSA 

payment process for commercial vendors and the OCFO’s efforts to increase electronic invoices received. Receiving 

invoices electronically reduces the mail time needed for paper documents, which results in more timely, less costly 

payments. It also measures the efficiency of the OCFO’s process for receipt and acceptance of goods and services, 

payment processing, and disbursement controls. If orders or receipt documents have been processed in the accounting 

system by the time an electronic invoice is received, there should be no delay in payment. 

DATA SOURCE: Pegasys

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: Although the target was not met, progress was made in reducing the total interest 

penalties paid bringing the OCFO very close to meeting the FY 2008 target. GSA paid over $15.2 billion in invoices subject 

to the Prompt Payment Act and incurred only $26.50 in interest penalties paid per $1 million paid. There are opportunities 

for improvement in the timely processing of purchase orders, receiving reports, and invoices into the accounting system. 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

78 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
The mission of the Office of the 

Chief Human Capital Officer 

(OCHCO) is to contribute to 

GSA’s business success by providing 

human capital management strategies, 

policies, advice, information, services, and 

solutions consistent with merit system 

principles. In order to remain focused on 

this mission, the OCHCO will continue to 

lead the implementation of the Strategic 

Management of Human Capital in support 

of the PMA, as well as other Agencyspecific objectives in GSA’s Human Capital 

Strategic Plan (HCSP). 

At GSA, human capital is integral to the Agency’s ability to 

achieve its mission. Recognizing the strategic importance 

of human capital, the Agency is committed to maintaining a 

world-class workforce and a world-class workplace.

GSA’s HCSP established seven goals to support GSA’s 

business and performance objectives and meet PMA requirements.

Performance Highlights

Strategic and Organizational Alignment

GSA developed a new Strategic Plan in FY 2007. To ensure 

alignment between GSA’s strategic and human capital 

goals, the OCHCO reviewed its HCSP for FY 2002 - FY 2007 

and established a new HCSP for FY 2007 - FY 2012. GSA’s 

new HCSP provides a full view of the Agency’s business and 

human capital needs, workforce data and analysis, and a 

description of GSA’s seven human capital goals. To assist in 

the implementation of human capital strategies, the OCHCO 

established the position of Human Capital Advisor (HCA) 

for GSA’s services, PBS and FAS. These advisors work with 

service leadership to understand their human capital needs, 

especially related to GSA’s mission-critical workforce, and 

to implement strategic initiatives. The OCHCO continued 

to work with GSA’s services and staff offices to evaluate and 

assist in implementing organizational changes.

In FY 2008, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 

required all agencies to revalidate all previously earned 

checkmarks on their PMA human capital scorecards. GSA 

achieved “green” status on its human capital scorecard in 

September 2007 and the OCHCO immediately set out to 

revalidate that it had met the “green” standards in each area 

of the scorecard. Each quarter, the OCHCO provided new 

evidence for each of the government-wide Human Capital 

Assessment and Accountability Framework (HCAAF) areas 

to demonstrate that GSA was “green” in status and was 

achieving desired outcomes. In addition to retaining GSA’s 

“green” status and progress scores throughout the year, 

the Agency continued to demonstrate its efforts to better 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICER

OCHCO

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 79
OCHCO

progress in hiring women and minorities in leadership 

ranks with the last three years showing positive gains over 

previous year-end levels.

GSA’s Leadership Institute

The Advanced Leadership Development Program (ALDP) is 

an intensive, highly selective program designed to prepare 

employees for executive careers, and the Leadership for New 

Supervisors (LNS) course provides new supervisors with the 

tools and information to effectively manage their organization. During FY 2008, 30 GSA employees graduated from 

the ALDP and 119 graduated from the LNS program.

Monitoring Program

GSA launched a mentoring program to foster future leadership and complement its succession planning work. The 

mentoring program pairs talented, experienced employees 

(mentors) with employees (protégés) who need to enhance 

their leadership and other business skills. A mentoring 

relationship benefits both participants. Protégés have a 

chance to learn from a seasoned professional and mentors 

get a chance to see things from a new perspective. During 

FY 2008, the program graduated 58 mentoring pairs and 

recruited 60 mentoring pairs for year two.

Performance Culture

GSA continued to focus on achieving results through implementing its robust, Agency-wide performance program. 

GSA organizations develop detailed organization performance plans and undergo Quarterly Performance Reviews 

with senior leadership to assess accomplishments and 

identify areas for improvement. New performance and 

awards policies guide the Agency in establishing individual 

performance plans that hold employees accountable, as 

well as reward them for achieving results.

GSA’s new Strategic Plan laid the foundation for important 

changes in executive performance management in FY 2008. 

A new FY 2008 performance agreement for senior executives 

was developed and implemented that aligns with the GSA 

manage its human resources and ensure alignment with 

GSA’s strategic goals. A major PMA accomplishment for 

FY 2008 was the issuance of the Human Capital Management Report, which outlined the human capital challenges, 

efforts taken, and results achieved under each of the HCAAF 

areas.

Executive Leadership

During FY 2008, GSA’s executive leadership remained relatively stable with 15 Senior Executive Service (SES) hires 

and 15 SES separations occurring throughout the fiscal 

year. GSA started and ended the fiscal year with the same 

number of SES members on the rolls with 98 executives 

on board, which currently represents 87 percent of GSA’s 

permanent SES allocation. In addition, GSA was successful 

in increasing its executive resources allocation in the 

FY 2008 - FY 2009 biennial allocation process administered 

by OPM in consultation with OMB. As a result, GSA was 

able to hire an additional senior level employee and shored 

up its ability to hire additional SES employees across the 

enterprise in key leadership positions. GSA also became 

subject to the Qualifications Review Board moratorium in 

2008 due to the departure of the Agency head at the end 

of April. This has affected GSA’s ability to continue to hire 

leadership talent late in calendar year 2008 as the change 

in Presidential administration approaches in January 2009. 

GSA continues to position itself for success in meeting its 

mission requirements with strong executive leadership in 

place temporarily while awaiting a President-appointed, 

Senate-confirmed Administrator.

Diversity

As of the end of FY 2008, GSA’s senior executive workforce 

was comprised of 29 percent women, which represents 

an increase of three percent since FY 2006. This is the 

highest representation of women executives in GSA since 

FY 2002. Minorities currently represent 14 percent of the 

SES workforce. This represents only a one percent increase 

since FY 2002, but a four percent increase in minority executives since FY 2003. GSA is making steady, incremental 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

80 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
OCHCO

Strategic Plan and holds executives accountable for leadership results, management results, and program results. GSA 

also significantly improved its organizational and individual 

assessment of executives at the close of FY 2007 throughout 

the use of standardized, streamlined assessment forms 

that enhanced the evaluation process conducted by rating 

officials and GSA’s SES Performance Review Board. These 

process improvements provided more transparency and 

accountability by making performance-based results more 

visible in a more rational, evidence-based format. As the 

Agency ends the FY 2008 performance cycle for appraising 

senior executives, GSA plans to build on the success 

achieved in FY 2007 by using a similar process to evaluate 

and measure its accomplishments against annual plans and 

commitments. GSA has a solid record of accomplishment 

in making meaningful distinctions based on relative performance Agency-wide.

Learning and Knowledge Sharing

During FY 2008, the OCHCO promoted Online University as 

a cost-effective distance learning method to deliver training. 

During the fiscal year, there were 30,937 course completions. 

GSA continued to implement Learning Management System 

(provider - Learn.com) capabilities that offer a number of 

additional features (Individual Development Plan Module; 

Competency Management System Module; Instructor Led 

Training/Classroom Scheduler Module; Learning Content 

Management System Module; and the SF 182, Authorization, 

Agreement, and Certification of Training Module). Additionally, the continuance of this contract will enable GSA to 

have one Learning Management System for the Agency, 

which will lead to a complete training dataset for each GSA 

employee.

Workplace and Environment

GSA continued to enjoy the recognition of being named in 

the top 10 agencies in the Federal government by the Best 

Places to Work organization. This recognition is based on 

employee survey feedback to which employees scored GSA 

in the top 10 agencies for Talent Management, Leadership 

and Knowledge Management, and Job Satisfaction. GSA 

implemented a Workforce Engagement Survey in FY 2007 

to comply with the new annual employee survey requirement. In FY 2008, GSA senior executives, managers, supervisors, and employees received presentations on the survey 

results. Additionally, the Federal Human Capital Survey 

online administration period was August 4 to September 

26, 2008 and the results will be available to the public in 

February 2009.

GSA’s telework policy was signed in April 2008 and is 

being implemented across the Agency. The new policy 

strengthens GSA’s government-wide leadership role in 

telework and supports the challenge for GSA to “lead by 

example” by increasing telework participation throughout 

the organization. It clearly defines eligibility criteria, establishes an easy-to-use GSA Telework Agreement form, and 

addresses IT issues, while recognizing the potential benefits 

of telework in regard to response to emergency situations, 

environmental sustainability, recruitment and retention 

efforts, and support for employees in balancing work and 

personal responsibilities. By the end of FY 2008, 35 percent 

of eligible Agency employees were teleworking on a regular 

basis (an average of one day per week). Ongoing goals 

for the Agency include reaching participation rates of 40 

percent by the end of calendar year 2009 and 50 percent by 

the end of calendar year 2010. 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 81
OCHCO

OCHCO Performance By GSA Strategic Goals 

Best Value 

Develop and deliver timely, accurate, and cost-effective acquisition services and business solutions.

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

OCHCO Number of days to fill a vacancy. Met

OCHCO

Performance Goal

Compete for and retain a workforce that is talented and effectively deployed.

Measure

Number of days to fill a vacancy. 

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

26.3 30.1 29.0 45.0 32.0

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: This goal measures GSA’s ability to fill a vacancy from the time that the announcement is 

posted until a selection is made. This goal is established by OPM. 

DATA SOURCE: Manual spreadsheet extracted from GSAjobs.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: The OCHCO achieved its target in this area for FY 2008. The target, 45 days, 

was established by OPM to measure how much time was needed to make a selection once a particular job announcement closes. GSA was able to exceed this goal, while it simultaneously implemented the Business Process Re-engineering 

recommendations.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

82 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
OGP

The Office of Governmentwide Policy (OGP) 

provides a policy and best practices framework for 

more effective, efficient use of Federal resources 

and improved performance in real and personal property, 

automotive and aviation fleet management, travel, transportation, mail management, IT, financial management, alternative workplaces, telework, committee management, and 

the regulatory process. Under the direction of OMB and 

Congress, OGP provides leadership and program support in 

the development of a policy environment that encourages 

the adoption of innovative solutions toward more productive work environments, and coordinates major governmentwide management improvement initiatives. OGP actively 

helps agencies understand and implement new ways of 

doing business, effectively align with common standards, 

and adopt government-wide solutions that increase efficiencies. OGP accomplishes this through collaboration, 

communication, performance measurement, monitoring 

compliance, and managing essential government-wide 

databases and Web-based applications. OGP ensures the 

involvement and buy-in of Federal agencies, the private 

sector, and other stakeholders in the processes. OGP also 

serves as an incubator for new programs or business opportunities created by Administration policies or by law, and 

ensures that opportunities that prove viable are migrated to 

GSA services or other suitable government or private organizations for operational implementation.

Performance Highlights

In FY 2008, OGP maintained its “Moderately Effective” 

rating under OMB’s PART audit. The continued implementation of OGP’s Policy Portfolio Performance System (3PS) 

is the primary mechanism OGP employs to demonstrate its 

effectiveness under PART. To comply with PART recommendations, OGP fully implemented three major policy 

assessment initiatives, which serve to fulfill the PART 

requirement that OGP hold Agency partners accountable 

for their performance relative to policy areas under OGP’s 

purview. These three programs include:

■ Policy Change Management Model (PCMM) for real 

property policy

■ Center for Policy Evaluation (COE) for aircraft, mail, 

motor vehicles, personal property, relocation, transportation, and travel. 

■ Policy Utilization Assessment (PUA) determines the 

effectiveness of Agency implementation and utilization 

of Federal IT policies.

In FY 2008, OGP received an effectiveness rating of 79 

percent from a target respondent pool of 656 Federal 

executives representing 183 executive branch departments, 

OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTWIDE POLICY

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 83
OGP

bureaus, and agencies across a wide spectrum of the U.S. 

government. The FY 2008 score represents a significant 

increase in the satisfaction of Federal executives with the 

programs administered by OGP. It also represents OGP’s 

concentrated efforts to constantly improve communication 

and collaboration with its stakeholders and partners in the 

Federal community. In FY 2006, OGP’s implemented this 

survey methodology for the first time, which yielded an 

effectiveness rating of 54 percent. In FY 2007, the effectiveness rating jumped to 70 percent. 

The paragraphs below summarize OGP’s major performance 

results in FY 2008.

OGP utilizes a portfolio-based approach to performance 

measurement called the 3PS. Per the 3PS requirements, 

OGP selects a set of five to eight policy initiatives that 

represent its strategic priorities for that specific fiscal year. 

Each policy initiative has an individual performance metric 

that measures improved outcomes achieved as a result of 

OGP’s efforts that year. To determine the success of the 

performance measure as a whole, OGP aggregates the 

results observed for the underlying component measures 

specific to a fiscal year to obtain that year’s success rate. 

OGP can then compare the degree of success of the annual 

portfolio over multiple years. In FY 2008, the seven initiatives assessed in the portfolio were Financial Management 

Line of Business (FMLoB), IT Accessibility, Telework and 

Alternative Workplace Arrangements (AWA), PCMM, eFAS, 

COE, and OGP’s Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) 

Program.

The performance of these initiatives is described below:

Financial Management Line of Business

FMLoB improves the cost, quality, and performance of 

financial management by standardizing financial system 

data, expanding shared service solutions, and implementing 

other government-wide reforms that foster efficiencies in 

Federal financial operations. In order to mitigate the risk of 

moving to shared services solutions, common standards and 

processes must first be established. FMLoB met its improvement target to issue four process standards (final business 

process standards for payment and funds management, 

draft standards for receivable management, and reporting). 

The final business process standards for payment and funds 

management have been incorporated in draft core financial 

management requirements, which will be tested on commercial off-the-shelf software package in the future. 

IT Accessibility

The program was responsible for drafting OMB Guidance 

on Section 508 Implementation in early FY 2008. This 

guidance, which was addressed to Agency CIOs and Chief 

Acquisition Officers (CAO), articulated specific Section 508 

responsibilities with regard to the procurement of Electronic and Information Technologies. Agencies were also 

put on notice that GSA would be monitoring their solicitations on www.FBO.gov for compliance with Section 508 

requirements and that they would receive letters showing 

how well they did. The goal for FY 2008 was to raise the 

amount of civilian agency procurements that were minimally 

successful from a baseline of 20 percent to 25 percent. The 

final civilian average for FY 2008 was 30 percent. This 

program is helping GSA to fulfill its statutory obligation to 

provide agencies with Section 508 support. This support 

helps make government information more accessible to the 

54 million Americans with disabilities who are its employees 

and customers.

Telework and Alternative Workplace Arrangements 

For FY 2008, the AWA program was instrumental in delivering both direct and indirect benefits and services to 

taxpayers and agencies. AWA staff has worked in partnership 

with OPM to provide telework services and technical assistance which resulted in increased telework participation in 

more than half (52 percent) of all Federal agencies. OGP 

has published 59 telework policy, practice, and/or event 

advisories on GSA’s listserv, which reaches an audience of 

more than 4,500 interested citizens, members of the media, 

telework experts, etc., and 225 Federal agency telework 

program coordinators. In FY 2008, OGP’s AWA team also 

published multiple articles in significant publications.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

84 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
OGP

Policy Change Management Model

The PCMM is quickly becoming a foundational tool for 

supporting the OGP Office of Real Property Management’s 

mission to develop, promote, and assess conformance with 

management policies and regulations for the effective, 

efficient stewardship of Federal real property assets and 

alternative workplaces. The PCMM is a central point of 

knowledge and interaction for the taxpayers and Federal 

Real Property Professionals on FMR. The FMR Reference 

page provides user-friendly electronic access to real property 

FMRs, guidance, bulletins, executive orders, and laws. The 

Agency feedback from the Self-Assessment Questionnaire is 

being analyzed to determine how well agencies are capable 

of conforming to the FMRs. 

Federal Asset Sales

The eFAS program identifies, recommends, and implements 

improvements for asset recovery and disposition, making 

it easier for agencies, businesses, and citizens to find and 

acquire/buy Federal assets. In FY 2008, eFAS achieved its 

goals of migrating all 26 scorecard agencies to a Sales Center 

and developing a three-year strategic plan and 67 individual 

tactical plans. Net revenue received as a result of sales via 

the Govsales.gov Web site exceeded $3 billion.

Center for Policy Evaluation

Through a government-wide evaluation of policy, OGP’s COE 

established a baseline of policy adherence in the following 

seven policy areas: aircraft, mail, motor vehicles, personal 

property, relocation, transportation, and travel. OGP identified that 22 percent of the agencies survey scored a “strong” 

rating in policy adherence, 21 percent scored “satisfactory,” 

and 57 percent. of the agencies received a “weak” rating. 

OGP has identified strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, 

threats, and areas of further government-wide policy and 

program improvement. 

OGP’s Federal Advisory Committee Act Program

FACA was enacted in 1972 to ensure that advice by the 

various advisory committees formed over the years is 

objective and accessible to the public. The act formalized a 

process for establishing, operating, overseeing, and terminating these advisory bodies and created the Committee 

Management Secretariat to monitor compliance with the 

act. OGP’s Committee Management Secretarial successfully worked with Agency customers and Congressional 

stakeholders to improve FACA compliance during FY 2008. 

In addition to working with the Congress on potential 

statutory initiatives, the Secretarial increased delivery of 

government-wide training, completed the first phases of 

its planned enhancement of FACA regulations, and refined 

performance measures for advisory committees. GSA also 

partnered with the Office of Government Ethics to ensure 

that over 70,000 committee members are in compliance 

with ethics requirements.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 85
OGP

OGP Performance By GSA Strategic Goals 

Innovation 

Develop new and better ways of conducting business that result in more productive and effective 

Federal policies and administrative operations. 

Program PERFORMANCE Measure Result

OGP Extent to which OGP policy initiatives achieved improvement

targets.

Met

OGP Percent of key policy stakeholders and Agency users who

rate OGP policy initiatives “effective.”

Met

OGP

Performance Goal

Ensure OGP policy initiatives achieve improvement targets.

Measure

Extent to which policy initiatives achieved improvement targets.

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

71% 100% 98% 88% 100%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: An essential goal of OGP is to ensure that the policies generated are not only “used and 

useful,” but that they also produce the outcome improvements that they are designed to achieve. Under OGP’s 3PS, 

this measure gauges OGP’s progress across its diverse field of policy responsibilities (such as real property, technology, 

personal property, etc.). The first step in this process was to identify the appropriate performance measure for each policy 

initiative in the 3PS for FY 2008. The second step is to determine an aggressive, but attainable annual target for each policy. 

Once data has been gathered for each measure, a simple percentage is generated (Target/Actual). Each of these percentages is averaged to determine the overall percentage score for this measure. 

DATA SOURCE: There are seven sources of data corresponding to each of the seven initiatives that comprise the FY 2008 policy 

portfolio. Each initiative and its related data source is listed below:

■ IT Accessibility (508): Acquisition data from www.FBO.gov is sampled and analyzed by OGP to determine if government 

procurements conform to section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as stipulated by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

86 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
OGP ■ FMLoB: Financial management documentation transmitted to and approved by OMB are a matter of public record on 

FSIO.gov. 

■ FACA Initiative: An agency’s compliance is reviewed and data is generated by the Committee Management Secretariat 

as stipulated by law under the FACA.

■ Telework and AWA: Data is collected by OPM and published annually.

■ PCMM: Data is derived from OGP’s PCMM, which is a Web-based knowledge management tool that aims to help Federal 

agencies determine their compliance with real property regulations/policies, as well as to serve as a resource for best 

practices in Federal real property asset management.

■ eFAS: Data regarding the GovSales.gov, which is managed by the eFAS initiative, is collected and analyzed by a third 

party.

■ Policy Evaluation: OGP’s COE conducts reviews in seven policy areas including aircraft, mail, motor vehicles, personal 

property, relocation, transportation, and travel. This information is submitted by agencies via Web-based Program 

Review Tool (PRT) and is used to generate performance data. 

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: OGP set a target to achieve an 88 percent rating for this measure for FY 2008. 

All seven component measures fulfilled or exceeded their targets, which generated a 100 percent rating for FY 2008. Each 

component measure is listed below:

■ IT Accessibility (508): Improvement above the baseline of Agency procurement solicitations rated as minimally 

complying or better with Section 508 requirements. Target: 25 percent; Actual 30 percent

■ FMLoB: Number of core financial system requirements, or data standards developed and released to OMB. Target: 

four; Actual: four

■ FACA Initiative: Percentage of FACs completing scheduled annual reporting requirements under the statutory Annual 

Comprehensive Review of FACs and submitted to GSA by the government-wide deadline. Target: 100 percent; 

Actual: 100 percent

■ Telework and AWA: Percentage of agencies showing (1) an increase in the number of eligible employees teleworking 

at least once/week and/or (2) 100 percent of eligible teleworking at least once/week. Target: 51 percent; 

Actual: 52.7 percent

■ PCMM: The number of Federal agencies participating in the PCMM Self Assessment Questionnaire. Target: 15; 

Actual: 18

■ eFAS: Percent increase in the number of hits to the portal as compared to the same quarter in FY 2007. 

Target: 2.5 percent; Actual: 9.4 percent

■ Policy Evaluation: 65 percent policy evaluations for all 23 Business Reference Model (BRM) agencies. 

Target: 65 percent; Actual: 87 percent

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 87
OGP

OGP

Performance Goal

Development policy initiatives that are rated “effective” by key policy stakeholders and agency users.

Measure

Percent of key policy stakeholders and agency users who rate OGP policy initiatives “effective.”

FY 2005

Actual

FY 2006

Actual

FY 2007

Actual

FY 2008

TARGET

FY 2008

Actual

N/A 54% 70% 60% 79%

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE: Under this performance metric, OGP measures the perceived effectiveness of its policies by 

external Federal groups. These groups have been divided into two broad categories, which are key policy stakeholders 

and agency users. 

OGP determines the potential pool of key policy stakeholders and agency users it intends to survey during a given fiscal 

year. This is done by using the individual who will be responding to the instrument as the unit of measure. OGP sets a 

per policy initiative target for the number of respondents it expects to receive an “effective” or “very effective” rating from 

using a one to five scale (with five equaling “very effective”). 

For each of the seven initiatives in the FY 2007 portfolio, OGP developed a short survey instrument for both groups. Key 

policy stakeholders received the survey during a live focus group session administered by a third party. Agency users 

received the survey via the Internet.

After the data was collected, the performance measure was calculated as a percentage of respondents that rate OGP 

effective over the number of respondents.

DATA SOURCE: See above. OGP contracts with third party vendors to devise the survey instruments, conduct focus groups, and 

collect data.

DISCUSSION OF FY 2008 TARGET VS. RESULTS: OGP met its FY 2008 target. OGP has seen steady progress in the increase of 

its effectiveness rating over the last three years. In the inaugural FY 2006 survey, OGP established a baseline rating of 54 

percent. This jumped to 70 percent in FY 2007. OGP continued to demonstrate continued improvement with a 79 percent 

rating in FY 2008.

Overall, key policy stakeholders reported that OGP provides excellent service across agencies and should continue to do 

so. Across all of the policy initiatives studied, respondents gave the highest positive ratings to items related to receiving 

sufficient information from OGP (4 or 5 on a 5-point scale).

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

88 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Linking Strategic Goals and Performance

Measures to Budget

The purpose of this table is to show the financial impact of each performance measure and the corresponding strategic goal. The results presented in the following table linking strategic goals and performance measures to budget are 

preliminary. The final results will be presented in the FY 2010 Congressional Justification. 

LINKING STRATEGIC GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO BUDGET

(Dollars in Thousands)

StrategicGoals

Business Line 

Activity Performance Goals Performance Measures

FY 2008 Projected

Target Dollars1

Stewardship

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Increase to 77% the percentage of governmentowned assets with a Return on Equity (ROE) of at 

least 6% by FY 2008.

Percentage of government-owned assets 

with an ROE of at least 6%.

76.50% $ 79,739

Increase the percentage of government-owned 

assets with a positive Funds From Operations 

(FFO) to 85% by FY 2008.

Percentage of government-owned assets 

achieving a positive FFO.

84.90% $ 25,487

Decrease the vacant (available and committed) 

space to 5% of the owned inventory by FY 2008 

and maintain thereafter.

Percentage of vacant space in the 

government-owned inventory.

≤5% $ 78,708

Execute energy conservation goals while 

increasing GSA's Customer Satisfaction scores to 

80% by FY 2008.

Customer satisfaction with governmentowned space.80% $ 1,256,408

PBS (Leasing) Maintain percent of vacant space in leased 

buildings at less than or equal to 1.5% by FY 2008.

Percent of vacant space in leased 

inventory.

≤1.50% $ 54,357

Manage the costs of administering leased space so 

that leased FFO is greater than 0% and no more 

than 2% of the leased inventory revenue.

Percent of leased revenue available after 

administering the leased program.

0%-2% $ 4,315,776

PBS (New 

Construction)

By FY 2008, certify 25% of the New Construction 

program for LEED within 18 months of substantial 

construction completion.

Percent of New Construction program 

that is certified for LEED.

25% $ 15,140

By FY 2008, register 75% of the New Construction 

program for LEED in the same fiscal year design 

funding is authorized.

Percent of New Construction program 

registered for LEED.

75% $ 15,141

Verify 35% of newly constructed buildings 

for achievement of established operational 

requirements by FY 2008.

Percent of newly constructed buildings 

independently verified for achievement 

of established operational requirements. 

35% $ 184,149

PBS (Real Property 

Disposal)

Award 95% of public sales within 170 days for 

fiscal year 2008.

Percent of public sales awarded within 

170 days.

100% $ 11,455

FAS (Vehicle 

Acquisition)

Manage program resources to meet its future 

needs while maximizing program efficiency.

Number of vehicles purchased per fulltime equivalent (FTE).1,320 $ 2,249

Maintain 28% or better discount from 

manufacturer’s invoice price.

Percentage discount from invoice price. >28.70% $ 4,847

FAS (Fleet) Aggressively pursue consolidation opportunities to 

reduce overall government expenses.

Number of vehicles managed per 

onboard.

345 $ 5,790

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

To the extent possible, ensure maximum 

competition on task orders to obtain best value for 

Federal agencies for the taxpayer.

Percentage of new task orders subject to 

competition/fair opportunity process.

96% $ 19,083

FAS (Card ServicesSmartPay)

Maximize program-operating efficiency. Government-wide spend per GSA 

SmartPay® contract administration FTE.

$5.11 billion $ 2,104 

1 The source of the FY 2008 dollars is the FY 2010 Budget Request; because the request was submitted to OMB prior to year-end, the dollars are projections.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 89
LINKING STRATEGIC GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO BUDGET (continued)

(Dollars in Thousands)

StrategicGoals

Business Line 

Activity Performance Goals Performance Measures

FY 2008 Projected

Target Dollars1

Stewardship (continued)

OCFO Increase the efficiency of the payment of vendor 

invoices through electronic receipt and process 

streamlining.

Interest penalties paid.2 $400,000 $ -

OCHCO Create a culture that motivates employees to high 

performance.

Percentage of employees that have 

individual performance plans and 

receive ratings at end of rating cycle.2

95% $ -

OCIO Provide reliable and cost effective IT 

infrastructure.

IT Infrastructure Library processes 

adopted.2

15% $ -

IT network and server availability.2 98.27% $ -

Provide a secure IT environment. Percentage certification and accreditation 

completed.2

100% $ -

Improve IT capital planning and investment 

control.

Percentage of major IT investment 

business cases rated highly by OMB.2

100% $ -

OGP Ensure OGP policy initiatives meet their scheduled 

development milestones.

Percentage of OGP initiatives meeting 

their scheduled development milestones.

88% $ 10,776

Ensure all OGP initiatives meet their cost targets. Percentage of OGP initiatives meeting 

their scheduled cost targets.

100% $ 5,994

Stewardship Total - $ 6,087,203

Superior Workplaces

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Obligate 75% of the minor repairs and alterations 

(R&A) budget for planned projects by the end of 

FY 2008.

Percent of minor R&A budget obligated 

on planned projects.

75% $ 239,215

PBS (Leasing) Achieve a satisfied customer satisfaction rating (4's 

& 5's) 76% of the time by FY 2008.

Satisfied tenant customer satisfaction 

rating (4 and 5 responses) in leased 

space surveyed.

76% $ 49,505

Analyze 100% of leases expiring within 3 years for 

market opportunities to reduce rental payments 

where market data is available.

Percent of existing lease inventory 

reviewed for beneficial opportunities.2

100% $ -

PBS (New 

Construction)

New construction projects on schedule 88% of the 

time by FY 2008.

Construction projects on schedule. 88% $ 432,005

FAS (Fleet) Maintain the gap between GSA Fleet rates and 

commercial rates at 20% or more.

Percentage of GSA Fleet leasing rates 

below commercial rates on the GSA 

Vehicle Leasing Schedule.

29.50% $ 43,665

Maintain the Vehicle Leasing program’s current 

level of world-class customer satisfaction in 

government.

GSA Fleet external customer satisfaction 

survey score.

83.20 $ 25,169

FAS (Global 

Supply-Distribution 

Operations)

Reduce Supply blended mark-up from 31% to 29% 

- toward goal of 28%.

Blended mark-up. 30% $ 63,572

Superior Workplaces Total - $ 853,131

Best Value

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Maintain cleaning and maintenance costs in office 

and similarly serviced space within +/- 5% of 

private sector benchmarks.

Percent within the private sector 

benchmarks for cleaning and 

maintaining office and similarly serviced 

space.

+/-5% $ 1,039,629

PBS (Leasing) Award leases at an average rental rate of not less 

than 9% below industry averages for comparable 

office space by FY 2008.

Cost of leased space relative to industry 

market rates.

-9% $ 295,908

Deliver lease space when the customer needs it 

86% of the time or better by FY 2008.

Percent of customers who say they 

received their leased space when they 

needed it.

86% $ 60,997

Use National Broker Contract for at least 80% of 

expiring leases by FY 2008.

Percent of expiring leases using the 

National Broker Contract.2

80% $ -

1 The source of the FY 2008 dollars is the FY 2010 Budget Request; because the request was submitted to OMB prior to year-end, the dollars are projections.

2 These performance measures do not have dollar amounts associated with them.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

90 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
LINKING STRATEGIC GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO BUDGET (continued)

(Dollars in Thousands)

StrategicGoals

Business Line 

Activity Performance Goals Performance Measures

FY 2008 Projected

Target Dollars1

Best Value (continued)

PBS (New 

Construction)

Average cycle time on new courthouse 

construction projects is 3,100 days or less by 

FY 2008.

Number of days to complete new 

courthouse construction projects.

≤3,100 $ 119,541

PBS (Real Property) Percentage of utilization and donation (U&D)

property awarded within 240 days.

Percentage of utilization and donation 

(U&D) property awarded within 240 

days.

95% $ 21,635

Maintain “highly satisfied” ratings of 93% or higher 

on the Customer Transactional Satisfaction Survey 

by FY 2008.

Percent of disposal transactions that 

“exceed” or “greatly exceed” customer 

expectations.

93% $ 314

Attain 1.08% cost of sales as a percentage of sales 

proceeds for reimbursable sales for fiscal year 

2008.

Cost of reimbursable sales as a 

percentage of sales proceeds.

1.08% $ 6,050

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

Increase the Assisted Acquisition Service's 

customer satisfaction results.

Percent of satisfied customers (American 

Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) 

survey).

75 $ 23,855

Improve performance against business 

performance metrics, including timeliness, 

cost effectiveness, and efficiency to verify best 

value and effective acquisition management are 

achieved. 

Percent of negotiated award dates for 

services and commodities that are met 

or bettered.

97% $ 28,625

Decrease the number of days it takes to 

process contract modifications for services and 

commodities.

Number of calendar days from receipt 

of modification request to issuance 

of modification for services and 

commodities. (Regional IT/Professional 

Services).

55 $ 4,772

Number of calendar days from receipt 

of modification request to issuance of 

modification for services and commodities. 

(National IT/Professional Services).

40 $ 4,772

Improve the financial condition of the Fund. Direct cost as a percentage of gross 

margin.

77% $ 14,313

FAS (Global 

Supply-Distribution 

Operations)

Increase customer satisfaction. External customer satisfaction. 80.50 $ 34,759

Increase program efficiency and value to Global 

Supply customers by minimizing program 

operating costs.

Direct cost as a percentage of revenue. 10.40% $ 27,554

Achieve timely delivery for all customer nonhazardous orders.Percentage of domestic, non-hazardous 

orders shipped within 24 hours.

85% $ 61,820

FAS (GSS-Acquisition 

Operations)

Increase customer satisfaction. External customer satisfaction (Multiple 

Awards Schedule).

73.80 $ 20,113

Increase program efficiency and value to its 

customers by minimizing program operating costs.

Direct Costs as a percent of gross margin 

(Multiple Awards Schedule).

25% $ 10,807

Decrease the cycle time to process offers from 

vendors.

Cycle time (days) to process offers from 

vendors (Multiple Award Schedule).

79 $ 23,997

Decrease the cycle time to process modifications. Cycle time (days) to process contract 

modifications (Multiple Award Schedule).

17.50 $ 23,997

1 The source of the FY 2008 dollars is the FY 2010 Budget Request; because the request was submitted to OMB prior to year-end, the dollars are projections.

2 These performance measures do not have dollar amounts associated with them.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 91
LINKING STRATEGIC GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO BUDGET (continued)

(Dollars in Thousands)

StrategicGoals

Business Line 

Activity Performance Goals Performance Measures

FY 2008 Projected

Target Dollars1

Best Value (continued)

FAS (Integrated 

Technology Services)

Meet customer’s expectation of timeliness. IT Acquisition Center cycle time to 

process offers (days).

115 $ 17,995

IT Acquisition Center cycle time to 

process modifications (days).

23 $ 17,995

Increase ITS overall customer satisfaction index 

score across its Portfolio.

External customer satisfaction ITS (IT 

Acquisition center).

76.30 $ 71,979

Increase cost avoidance/savings to ITS customers. Cost avoidance/savings achieved by ITS 

Portfolio programs.

$743M $ 17,995

Align program operations to support efficiency of 

operations and reduce operating costs.

ITS direct costs for all programs as a 

percentage of ITS gross margin.

36% $ 35,990

FAS (Personal 

Property)

Decrease the time it takes to complete disposal 

action for excess property to 55 days by FY 2008.

Cycle time for disposal process (days). 55 $ 6,559

Maintain a customer satisfaction score higher than 

the Federal Government ACSI reflecting customer 

satisfaction in Government in FY 2008 and each 

year thereafter.

External customer satisfaction survey 

score.

75.60 $ 3,300

Align program operating costs relative to revenue 

generated by the Sales Program, and strive to 

maximize the return on these resources. 

Operating cost per $100 business 

volume.

$21 $ 3,947

Direct cost of Sales Program as a percent 

of revenue.

44% $ 3,947

FAS (National 

Furniture Center)

Reduce the time required to award new contracts 

and modify existing contracts.

Timeliness to award new contracts 

(days).

70 $ 8,280

Timeliness to award contract 

modifications to add products and 

services (days).

9.50 $ 8,633

Increase the percentage of projects where cost 

and Procurement Administrative Lead Time 

(PALT) schedule variances are within +10% of the 

approved project plan for projects over $5,000,000.

Percentage of projects where cost and 

Procurement Administrative Lead Time 

(PALT) schedule variances are within 

10% of the approved project plan for 

projects over $5,000,000.

100% $ 1,332

Enable customers to capitalize on cost savings 

and improved services by ensuring fair and equal 

competition throughout the vendor community.

Number of schedule task orders solicited 

using GSA e-Buy.

13,000 $ 2,837

Align program operations to support efficiency of 

operations and reduce operating costs.

Direct operating expenses as a 

percentage of gross margin.

41.50% $ 1,332

Ratio of full-time equivalents (FTE) to 

business volume.

0.0000039% $ 4,685

FAS (Vehicle 

Acquisition)

Increase customer satisfaction. GSA Automotive external customer 

satisfaction score.

80.10 $ 1,526

FAS (Fleet) Maintain the gap between GSA Fleet rates and 

commercial rates at 20% or more.

Program support and operating expense 

per vehicle year of operation.

$495 $ 5,790

FAS (Travel) Reduce program operating costs. Direct cost as a percent of revenue. 62% $ 1,087

Increase customer satisfaction. External customer satisfaction score. 75.60 $ 1,142

Provide compliant, consolidated and fully 

integrated end-to-end travel services governmentwide.

Percentage of Business Reference Model 

(BRM) agencies migrating to E-Gov 

Travel.

100% $ 5,296

Percentage of vouchers serviced through 

E-Gov Travel.

30.70% $ 6,479

Provide programs that enable customer agencies 

to realize discounts off of commercially available 

rates.

FedRooms percentage off consortia rate. 27% $ 534

City Pair Program (CPP) percentage off 

the lowest published full economy fare.

66% $ 648

1 The source of the FY 2008 dollars is the FY 2010 Budget Request; because the request was submitted to OMB prior to year-end, the dollars are projections.

2 These performance measures do not have dollar amounts associated with them.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

92 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
LINKING STRATEGIC GOALS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO BUDGET (continued)

(Dollars in Thousands)

StrategicGoals

Business Line 

Activity Performance Goals Performance Measures

FY 2008 Projected

Target Dollars1

Best Value (continued)

FAS (Transportation) Increase customer satisfaction. External customer satisfaction survey. 77.50 $ 1,013

Reduce program operating costs. Direct cost as a percent of gross margin. 47% $ 3,063

Maximize customer savings through the use of 

GSA Transportation programs.

Freight savings. 25.50% $ 1,018

Household goods savings. 6.50% $ 1,018

Express and Ground Domestic Delivery 

Services Savings-Federal Strategic 

Sourcing Initiative (FSSI).

62.40% $ 1,018

FAS (Transportation 

Audits)

By FY 08, as part of overall automation and 

streamlining of transportation processes, attain 

and sustain percentage of electronic audits at 95% 

gradually increasing to 98%.

Percent of audits performed 

electronically.

97% $ 5,750

Percent of claims processed within 120 

days.

77% $ 5,750

FAS (Card Services 

-SmartPay)

Provide quality services to our customers as 

determined by satisfaction scores.

Overall customer satisfaction of GSA 

SmartPay® Program.

65 $ 3,340

GSA SmartPay® Conference satisfaction 

as determined by attendee survey 

results.

93.50% $ 968

Provide timely information to customers as 

requested to meet their needs.

Timeliness of report submission. >90% $ 899

OCIO Align business and IT strategy using Enterprise 

Architecture.

Number Major/Non major Development, 

Modernization and Enhancement 

(DME) projects identified in Enterprise 

Architecture (EA) Transition Strategy and 

Sequence Plan.

30% $ -

Provide reliable and cost effective IT 

infrastructure.

IT service desk responsiveness. 96% $ -

IT service desk first call resolution. 60% $ -

IT local support resolution. 85% $ -

OCSC Federal agencies and E-Gov initiatives using USAS 

contact center services contract (USAContract) to 

meet citizen information needs.

USAContact and Web Solutions Task 

Orders.

5 new,

total 22

$ 1,403

OCHCO Compete for and retain a workforce that is 

talented and effectively deployed.

Number of days to fill a vacancy. 45 $ -

Best Value Total - $ 2,078,006 

Innovation

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Reduce energy consumption in GSA Federal 

buildings by 9% (as measured by Btu/GSF) over 

the FY 2003 baseline by FY 2008.

Percent reduction in energy consumption 

over the FY 2003 baseline.

-9% $ 26,217

OCSC Public acceptance and increased usage of all 

public information channels.

Citizen touchpoints. 210.8M $ 43,600

Improvement in the quality of citizen web 

interactions across government.

Government-wide Web site ACSI 

satisfaction benchmark.

74 $ 840

Effective use of resources to successfully achieve 

the OCS mission at reduced unit costs.

Cost per touchpoint (in dollars).2 $0.230 $ -

OGP Ensure OGP policy initiatives achieve 

improvement targets.

Extent to which OGP policy initiatives 

achieve improvement targets.

88% $ 11,611

Development policy initiatives that are rated 

"effective" by key policy stakeholders and agency 

users.

Percentage of key policy stakeholders 

and agency users who rate OGP policy 

initiatives effective.

60% $ 6,006

Innovation Total - $ 88,274

Total - $ 9,106,614

1 The source of the FY 2008 dollars is the FY 2010 Budget Request; because the request was submitted to OMB prior to year-end, the dollars are projections.

2 These performance measures do not have dollar amounts associated with them.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 93
Performance Measurement

Data Validation and Verification

Each agency is required by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) and the Reports 

Consolidation Act of 2000 to certify the completeness and 

reliability of performance data and describe the method 

used to verify and validate this data. GSA accomplishes this 

requirement through the use of a survey. 

The Data Verification and Validation survey is issued to 

GSA Services and Staff Offices on a rotating schedule. In 

FY 2008, surveys were completed and reviewed for the 

performance measures of GSA’s PBS. The FY 2008 survey 

verified and ensured that PBS performance measures are 

backed by accurate, reliable data that supports management 

decisions on a day-to-day basis. 

The survey ensures accuracy and reliability of data by 

documenting and reviewing performance processes 

and procedures to verify the validity and accuracy of 

performance measurement data. GSA’s OIG has determined 

that this method is an effective system of internal controls 

for performance measurement data.

The survey documents and reviews performance data 

management processes for adherence to seven distinct 

criteria:

■ Validity – the extent to which the data adequately 

represents actual performance.

■ Completeness – the extent to which enough of the 

data is collected from a sufficient portion of the target 

population.

■ Consistency – the extent to which data is collected using 

the same procedures and definition across collectors 

and times.

■ Accuracy – the extent to which data is free from 

significant error.

■ Timeliness – whether data about performance is available 

when needed to improve program management and 

report to Congress.

■ Ease of Use – measures how easily information is 

obtainable.

■ Independent Evaluations – were also reviewed to 

determine the accountability of the program. 

All GSA major information systems are certified and 

accredited. Most data originates from one of these major 

systems. Reviews are conducted by various organizational 

units throughout the Agency to ensure the accuracy and 

integrity of the data. National and regional office points 

of contacts regularly review data to ensure its accuracy. 

External data sources are reputable, and backup data 

records are available. All performance data is available 

for viewing by all GSA employees in the Performance 

Measurement Tool (PMT), an electronic tool that displays 

all performance measures, targets, and actual performance. 

This tool is updated monthly, quarterly, and/or annually.

GSA uses a broad range of performance goals and measures. 

The data sources used and the means to verify and validate 

the measures are also diverse. A general discussion of the 

verification and validation of each of those sources follows. 

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

94 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Controls and Procedures

GSA’s performance measurement data is divided into five 

broad categories. Each category has controls and procedures 

in place to validate and verify the data. These controls and 

procedures are outlined below.

1. FINANCIAL DATA: During the FY 2008 financial statement 

audit, various tests and reviews of the core accounting 

system and internal controls were conducted as 

required by the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act. 

GSA’s core financial system is Pegasys, which is GSA’s 

financial system of record. It is a reliable, highly stable 

system that consolidates financial data from a variety of 

business information systems throughout GSA.

2. DATA FROM LARGE COMPUTER SYSTEMS: GSA has 

undertaken an extensive process of systems certification 

to ensure that its business systems operate as 

intended. Data quality is maintained through ongoing 

training. The Federal Procurement Data System-Next 

Generation (FPDS-NG) and the System for Tracking and 

Administering Real Property (STAR) are the major large 

computer systems.

3. DATA FROM MANUAL OR SMALL FEEDER COMPUTER

SYSTEMS: For these systems, GSA stresses confirmation 

that more than one person is responsible for data 

and written policy and procedures. GSA maintains a 

variety of business systems including: Transportation 

Accounts Receivable and Payable Systems (TARPS); 

Requisitioning, Ordering, and Documentation System 

(ROADS); Sales Automation System (SAS); Rent Estimate 

(RentEst); Telecommunications Ordering and Pricing 

System (TOPS); Office of IT Integration Management 

Information System (OMIS); Tracking and Ordering 

System (TOS); IT Solutions Shop/Integrated Task Order 

Management System (ITSS/ITOMS); and, the Commercial 

Acquisition and Supply Operating and Management 

Information System (FSS-19).

4. BENCHMARK DATA FROM EXTERNAL SOURCES: GSA uses 

external data as a benchmark for those activities that are 

similar to the private sector. Highly reputable sources 

of data are used as industry benchmarks, including the 

Gallup Organization, Building Owners and Managers 

Association (BOMA), Society of Industrial and Office 

Realtors (SIOR), and Logistics Management Institute 

(LMI).

5. DATA OBTAINED UNDER CONTRACT: Highly reputable 

outside polling firms are often contracted to develop 

customer satisfaction or other survey data. GSA’s contract 

provisions require that sound business practices be 

followed and GSA follows up to ensure confidence in 

the results. 

GSA has reviewed the data verification and validation 

techniques for performance measures of PBS. The policies, 

processes, and procedures were examined to provide 

reasonable assurance of reliable performance data. Surveys 

found that the controls in place sufficiently ensure the 

validity of the performance measurement data.

P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 95
P e r f o r m a n c e S e c t i o n

96 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Letter from the Chief Financial Officer 99

Office of the Chief Financial Officer’s Major Accomplishments 101

Independent Auditor’s Report

• Letter of Transmittal from the Inspector General 105

• Report of Independent Auditors 108

• Inspector General’s Report on Internal Controls 

 over Performance Measures 124

Financial Statements

• Principal Financial Statements 126

• Notes to the Financial Statements 134

Required Supplementary Information 156

Financial 

Section
www.GSA.gov/green

Print Smarter and Go Paperless when Possible

The average U.S. office worker uses 10,000 sheets of paper a 

year. Make it a habit to print on both sides and use the back 

side of old documents. When possible, save paper by reducing 

margins and font size. Avoid color printing, and avoid printing 

materials that could be read or stored online instead.

Be Bright About Light

Light accounts for 44 percent of the electricity 

use in office buildings. Turn off the lights when 

you leave a conference room or your office, and 

take advantage of natural light. Be mindful of 

your office thermostat to avoid excess use of air 

conditioning or heat.

Maximize Energy Efficiency

The electricity to power computers costs about 

$1 billion a year. Turn your computer off at the 

end of the day or when it is not in use. Switch 

to ENERGY STAR models to save on energy 

consumption.

I

n addition to the general environmental tips like using public transportation 

and recycling, here are a few more small changes to make a big impact on the 

future of the environment.

Ways to Go Green at Work
I

am pleased to present the U.S. General 

Services Administration’s (GSA) FY 

2008 financial statements. GSA received 

an unqualified opinion on our FY 2008 

financial statements, which attests to the 

fact that our financial statements are fairly 

presented. Additionally, our Performance 

Improvement and Financial Performance 

initiatives under the President’s Management 

Agenda (PMA) continue to be rated by the 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

as “green” for both status and progress. In 

June 2008, GSA achieved “green” in all of 

OMB’s Metric Tracking System (MTS) measures and at year 

end, GSA remains “green” in all MTS measures. In addition, 

as an OMB-designated financial management Shared Service 

Provider, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) 

successfully provided financial management services to the 

Public Buildings Service (PBS); Federal Acquisition Service 

(FAS); General Management and Administration (GM&A); 

and over 50 Federal agencies, boards, and commissions. 

These services included financial systems operations, 

financial services (including budget management and 

financial activities in payables and receivables management), 

e-Payroll, and E-Gov Travel system and operations. 

Despite these achievements, significant challenges remain. 

Our internal control report again identifies two significant 

deficiencies, one of which is material. First, we continue to 

face challenges with information technology (IT) controls 

over system access, segregation of duties, and monitoring 

controls. While improvements have been made in specific 

software, we have not adequately improved controls in all 

software applications that process financial activity at GSA to 

effectively minimize risk of improper access and/or activity. 

In FY 2009, we plan to expand appropriate controls to all 

financial software.

Second, our financial auditors were unable 

to rely on PBS controls over monitoring, 

accounting, and reporting of budgetary 

transactions. Because our invalid PBS 

budgetary amounts were similar to last 

year and there were significant unrecorded 

transactions in PBS and FAS, this deficiency 

was elevated to a material weakness for 

both services. Progress has been made 

on resolving the issues identified in that 

controls have been designed, but the 

implementation of those controls faltered. 

GSA continued to perform a semiannual 

review of open obligations and unfilled customer orders 

(UFCO), but they proved to be ineffective. Statistical 

sampling and review efforts were implemented to ensure 

that all balances are materially correct, and I am happy 

to note that the error projections from these procedures 

were immaterial. While our internal controls did prevent 

a material misstatement from occurring this fiscal year, the 

risk that a material misstatement could occur and not be 

detected in the future is unacceptably high. During FY 2009, 

we will continue our efforts to improve implementation 

and monitoring of corrective action plans to address this 

weakness and ensure proper accounting and reporting of 

budgetary transactions. As part of the action plan to address 

this control weakness, the OCFO is partnering with the 

Office of the Chief Acquisition Officer (OCAO) to eliminate 

the acquisition control deficiencies that contribute to the 

control weaknesses in the UFCO and acquisition processes. 

In order to ensure that GSA’s finances are transparent and 

accountable, it is imperative that we successfully implement 

the planned corrective actions and strive to achieve my goal 

for clean financial opinions with no material weaknesses 

and no significant deficiencies. 

Letter from the Chief Financial Officer

Kathleen Turco

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 99
Letter from the Chief Financial Officer

As noted in my letter last fiscal year, GSA published a 

new Strategic Plan establishing a new mission and goals 

that reaffirm our core values. This plan can be found at 

www.gsa.gov/strategicplan. In FY 2008, the OCFO made 

significant progress on several initiatives supporting the 

achievement of that plan. An updated OCFO Strategic 

Business Plan was completed which includes a revised 

mission, vision, and strategic goals, as well as seven long 

term outcome goals that were integrated into the OCFO 

Strategy and Action Plan. This ensures that the OCFO 

strategy, budgeting, and action planning are fully aligned 

with GSA’s strategic goals and the GSA Performance 

Management Process (PMP). In addition, acquisition 

actions were initiated to integrate billing and accounts 

receivable functionality into Pegasys, our core financial 

system, which will reduce cost and improve security and 

reliability. Finally, planning has begun on the update of 

GSA’s financial coding structure to facilitate performance 

based planning and budgeting, improve financial data and 

analysis, and ensure compliance with government-wide 

standards. The financial coding and billing and accounts 

receivable integration initiatives are crucial to our efforts 

to incorporate the Financial Systems Integration Office’s 

(FSIO) Common Government-wide Accounting Classification 

(CGAC) structure into GSA’s financial systems. CGAC 

adopts a common Federal government-wide framework 

around financial data elements, and will improve the 

OCFO’s effectiveness with both our internal and external 

customers. 

As the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), I am committed to 

ensuring that the OCFO continues to provide leadership in 

strategic planning, budgeting, and financial management. 

This includes delivering world class financial management 

services to GSA and our external customers. By doing so 

with transparency and accountability, we can continue to 

move toward fulfilling our vision of a GSA-wide culture of 

financial integrity.

Kathleen M. Turco

Chief Financial Officer

November 14, 2008

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

100 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Office of the Chief Financial Officer’s

Major Accomplishments

GSA associates’ time, efforts, and dedication are reflected 

in GSA’s success.

The OCFO is focused on enabling GSA to achieve its strategic goals. To make this focus a reality, the OCFO 

revised its vision, mission, and strategic goals in FY 2008 to 

fully align with GSA’s. This ensures direct support to the 

missions of GSA’s business and program customers, both 

internal and external to GSA. The OCFO used the GSA PMP 

to identify seven specific long-term outcome goals, with 

associated objectives and performance measures, which 

help tie the day-to-day work of the OCFO personnel directly 

to GSA’s strategic goals. The revised vision, mission, and 

strategic goals, along with the long-term outcome goals, 

create the OCFO Strategic Business Plan which serves as the 

framework to realize the OCFO vision of a GSA-wide culture 

of financial integrity. The overall intent of the Strategic 

Business Plan is to support all of GSA in achieving budget 

and financial management excellence. In addition, with its 

increased emphasis on proactive financial and performance 

analysis, it will greatly facilitate the transition of the OCFO 

to a full partner in GSA’s strategic planning and decisionmaking, consistent with the CFO Act of 1990.

Organization and Process Improvements

Financial transaction and system operations are at the core 

of the services provided by the GSA financial management 

community. The OCFO delivers these services both internally to GSA and externally to other governmental agencies 

and commissions. Pursuant to GSA’s goal to be a government-wide leader in these business offerings, GSA is 

working to achieve efficiencies by streamlining financial 

transaction processing.

The OCFO has taken the initial steps toward meeting and 

incorporating FSIO’s CGAC structure into GSA’s financial 

systems. This is a new concept which adopts a common 

Federal government-wide framework around financial 

code data elements. It offers best practices and applies 

common standards across the entire Federal government’s 

realm of financial capabilities while providing enough 

flexibility for agency mission-specific functionality. As a 

first step, the OCFO began development of a comprehensive update to GSA’s financial coding structure to be fully 

consistent with CGAC structures. The projected end results 

will be a fully integrated Budget and Planning process, 

improved financial information, and a transparent financial 

system which meets the now evolving, seamless FSIO/

CGAC coding requirement.

The OCFO continues to refine and improve the OCFO 

Executive Scorecard, which provides managers with an 

unambiguous snapshot of current organization performance 

and indicates where management attention should be 

focused to prevent future problems. The Executive Scorecard 

has successfully focused GSA’s financial management 

resources on identifying errant data and purging it from 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 101
accounting system. The OCFO also developed a data 

management and reporting strategy to improve GSA’s 

performance budgeting and financial management capabilities in a more efficient, more fully integrated manner. 

Finally, the OCFO met all of its Federal Information Security 

Management Act (FISMA) compliance and A-123 system 

control related responsibilities during FY 2008 and acted 

aggressively to strengthen its systems controls regarding the 

protection of personally identifiable information within the 

OCFO systems. These efforts enabled GSA to continue to 

receive high marks for FISMA compliance and provide its 

customers with a high level of financial systems integrity 

and assurance.

Gsa Budget Development

In accordance with OMB Program Assessment Rating Tool 

(PART) Guidance No. 2007-7, Improving the Quality of PART 

Performance and Efficiency Goals, the OCFO led a comprehensive review of all Agency externally-reported goals, 

measures, and targets. This review increased the use of 

outcome-oriented goals and ensured that performance 

targets are aggressive compared to prior-year actual performance. This review resulted in better alignment of performance goals and resources with GSA’s strategic goals and 

mission. In addition, the PART reporting structure was 

streamlined, reducing 17 programs and 86 measures down 

to 10 programs and 49 measures. The review process has 

been incorporated into the annual PMP, and will enhance 

existing processes to drive continuous improvement in 

Agency performance. 

In its role as the Controller for GSA’s GM&A, the OCFO 

provides funding for common support functions such as 

human resources, financial management, and information 

management. Through application of the PMP, cooperative 

interaction with the GM&A service providers, and utilizing 

economies of scale by centrally managing these common 

functions, the OCFO significantly reduces the total costs to 

the Agency. Specific cost containment actions taken in 

FY 2008 include controlling personnel compensation and 

benefits expenditures through enforcing a hiring exceptions 

GSA financial systems, helping to ensure the financial 

integrity of GSA and its customers. The OCFO worked with 

the financial communities within each of GSA’s services to 

adjust several of the measures to better capture the data 

believed to be “high risk.” This not only focused the OCFO 

scorecard on the data that most needed attention, but 

ensured that GSA business lines receive the consistent 

message that the Agency’s business and financial leadership 

is focused on it as well. 

During FY 2008, the OCFO led GSA’s efforts to achieve 

“green” scores on all nine government-wide metrics that are 

reported in the OMB MTS. The nine MTS measures provide 

government managers, Congress, and other stakeholders 

information to assess the financial management health of 

the Federal government as a whole and for each individual 

agency. To view the MTS measures and agency rankings, go 

to www.fido.gov/mts/cfo/public. This effort involved almost 

two years of working with the U.S. Department of the 

Treasury’s Financial Management Service and OMB to 

identify and implement alternative strategies for some of 

GSA’s business practices that were using suspense funds. In 

June 2008, GSA was one of only three agencies governmentwide with an all “green” MTS scorecard, indicative of how 

the OCFO’s internal controls and operations are supporting 

the strategic vision of a GSA-wide culture of financial 

integrity

During the past year, the OCFO continued to make substantial progress in streamlining and integrating its financial 

management systems; replacing its remaining legacy 

financial system modules; strengthening its financial system 

controls; and improving its operational efficiency, effectiveness, and servicing of stakeholders. Substantial improvements were made to strategic planning and project 

management systems for financial systems. In addition, the 

OCFO met its system availability requirements and successfully migrated several of its financial applications to a new 

data center under a new contract that will save GSA more 

than $9 million over a five-year period. Significant progress 

was also made with regard to consolidating all of GSA’s 

billing and accounts receivable systems under GSA’s core 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

102 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
For external reporting, GSA was successful in ensuring that 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) audits are 

responded to in a timely fashion by fully instituting new 

procedures that have greatly reduced the number of overdue 

responses to GAO. Regarding internal close-out of audit 

action items, GSA continued to meet its performance 

measure of zero percent for overdue action items by working 

closely with audit liaisons and managers throughout the 

Agency. Additionally, the OCFO completed efforts to fully 

automate the process to prepare the Semi-annual Management Report to Congress and designed reports that independently verify the accuracy of semi-annual statistics. 

In FY 2008, GSA developed training modules that provide 

managers the opportunity to obtain training on Internal 

Controls and assurance statements via on-site training at 

various GSA locations, through Web-conferencing and a 

GSA Online University course. The course developed 

through the use of the GSA Online University provides an 

understanding of internal controls and discusses critical 

elements such as assessing, testing, and reporting on 

internal controls. GSA Online University houses several 

learning functions, such as online courses, e-books, and 

links to other reference sources, testing, and performance 

planning.

process, use of labor modeling to predict and track expenditures, implementing a Working Capital Fund (WCF) hiring 

cap, and reducing the GM&A by 88 full-time equivalents 

(FTE) with a resulting savings of $3.5 million. The OCFO 

worked closely with the Office of the Chief Information 

Officer (OCIO) to implement a nationwide wireless contract, 

allowing centralized monitoring of usage and cost control. 

The OCFO analyzed all Centralized Charges programs to 

ensure each FY 2008 transaction fully met the funding 

criteria. For any transactions that did not meet the criteria, 

the OCFO made corrections via cost transfers and removed 

ineligible programs resulting in a cost savings of $2.1 

million. During FY 2008, the OCFO worked closely with 

the Staff Offices and Regions to cancel and de-obligate 

$13.9 million in Unfilled Customer Orders (UFCO) from 

past fiscal years. All unobligated balances from FY 2005 

and earlier were de-obligated.

Internal Controls and Audits

GSA was successful in its efforts to fully implement the 

latest A-123 internal control requirements throughout GSA’s 

nationwide programs. Agency senior executives were 

involved in the implementation of the Agency Internal 

Control Program which ensured that GSA continued to have 

a viable program in place to comply with the requirements 

of OMB Circular A-123 and the Federal Managers’ Financial 

Integrity Act (FMFIA). To implement the new mandatory 

government-wide requirements, the OCFO conducted 

extensive training and continued to improve the automated 

system which assists GSA managers in preparing risk assessments. Managers of GSA programs listed in the Internal 

Control Plan have conducted risk assessments for their 

programs and over 30 internal control reviews incorporating risk-based testing as part of the review process. 

These reviews resulted in numerous recommendations for 

improvement of internal controls. The OCFO also successfully completed the assurance statement process, with over 

600 managers throughout the Agency completing statements and attesting to the adequacy of their internal 

controls. 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 103
F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

104 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES A. WILLIAMS

 ACTING ADMINISTRATOR (A) 

KATHLEEN M. TURCO 

 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (B) 

FROM: BRIAN D. MILLER 

 INSPECTOR GENERAL (J) 

SUBJECT: Audit of the General Services Administration’s

 Fiscal Years 2008 and 2007 Financial Statements

This memorandum transmits PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP’s (PwC), an 

independent certified public accounting firm, report on its audit of the General 

Services Administration’s (GSA) financial statements as of September 30, 2008 

and 2007, and for years then ended, and the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) 

Report on Internal Controls over Performance Measures. 

The Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-576) requires GSA’s 

OIG or an independent external auditor, as determined by the OIG, to audit the 

Agency’s financial statements. Under a contract monitored by the OIG, PwC 

performed the Fiscal Years 2008 and 2007 Financial Statements Audit of GSA. 

The contract required that the audit be performed in accordance with 

Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United 

States and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 07-04, 

Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements.

Results of Independent Audit

Report on the Financial Statements of GSA, the Federal Buildings Fund, 

and the Acquisition Services Fund 

In PwC’s opinion, the consolidated balance sheets of GSA and the individual 

balance sheets of the FBF and the ASF, as of September 30, 2008 and 2007, 

and the related consolidated and individual statements of net cost and changes 

in net position, and the combined and individual statements of budgetary 

resources for the years then ended are presented fairly, in all material respects, 

in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States 

of America. 

Independent Auditor’s Report

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 105
Independent Auditor’s Report

Report on Internal Controls 

In the report on internal controls over financial reporting, PwC identified a 

material weakness relating to financial management systems, internal controls, 

and financial reporting. Since fiscal year 2004, PwC has reported significant 

deficiencies surrounding GSA's financial management systems, its processes, 

and substantial transaction errors resulting from insufficient controls related to 

the reporting of budgetary accounts and balances. During fiscal year 2008, 

similar issues continued to exist as GSA continues to lack effective controls over 

its accounting and business processes to ensure its budgetary transactions are 

properly recorded, processed, and summarized to permit the timely preparation 

of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting 

principles.

In addition to the material weakness, PwC identified one significant deficiency 

concerning Information Technology (IT) controls. Specifically, during fiscal year 

2008, PwC identified individual security weaknesses across multiple systems 

that, when aggregated, constitute three common across-cutting themes – 

segregation of duties, user and administrator logical access, and activity 

monitoring. These security weaknesses with the greatest risk to financial data 

reside within the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) accounts payable 

system. These control deficiencies create significant risks and vulnerabilities to 

financial data and GSA systems.

Compliance with Laws and Regulations 

PwC reported no reportable instances of GSA non-compliance with applicable 

laws and regulations specified in Appendix E of OMB Bulletin No. 07-04, Audit 

Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. However, PwC found reportable 

instances of non-compliance in which GSA’s financial management systems did 

not substantially comply with the requirements of the Federal Financial 

Management Improvement Act (FFMIA).

OIG Evaluation of PwC’s Audit Performance

To ensure the quality of the audit work performed, we conducted a review of 

PwC’s Fiscal Years 2008 and 2007 Financial Statements Audit of GSA. 

Specifically, we: 

• Reviewed and accepted PwC’s approach and planning of the audit; 

• Ensured the qualifications and independence of the auditors; 

• Monitored the progress of the audit at key points; 

• Reviewed and accepted PwC’s audit report; and 

2

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

106 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
3

• Performed other procedures we deemed necessary. 

PwC is responsible for the attached auditor report dated November 14, 2008, 

and the conclusions expressed therein. We do not express an opinion on GSA’s 

financial statements; internal controls; compliance with other laws and 

regulations; or on whether GSA’s financial management systems substantially 

complied with FFMIA.

Report on Internal Controls Over Performance Measures

OMB Bulletin No. 07-04 no longer requires the OIG to perform audit procedures 

over the performance measures data reported in the Management Discussion 

and Analysis section of GSA’s Annual Performance and Accountability Report. 

However, the Government and Performance Results Act (GPRA), codified as 31 

USC 1115(a)(6), requires that agencies include a description of the means to be 

used to verify and validate measured values in the annual performance plan. As 

a result, the OIG performed the necessary audit procedures to obtain an 

understanding of the design and operation of internal controls over the reliability 

of data supporting the performance measures reported in the Management 

Discussion and Analysis section of GSA’s Fiscal Year 2008 Annual Performance 

and Accountability Report. Our review found that these internal controls as 

designed by the OCFO are operating effectively.

The Office of Inspector General appreciates the courtesies and cooperation 

extended to PwC and to our audit staff during the audit and review. If you or your 

staff has any questions, please contact Regina O’Brien, Acting Assistant 

Inspector General for Auditing at (202) 501-0374. 

Attachments

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 107
Independent Auditor’s Report

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Suite 900 

1800 Tysons Boulevard 

McLean VA 22102 

Telephone (703) 918 3000 

Facsimile (703) 918 3100 

www.pwc.com 

Report of Independent Auditors

To Mr. Brian Miller 

Inspector General of the United States General Services Administration 

In our audits of the United States General Services Administration (GSA) and its two primary revolving funds, the 

Federal Buildings Fund (the FBF) and the Acquisition Services Fund (the ASF), we found: 

• The consolidated balance sheets of GSA and the individual balance sheets of the FBF and the ASF, as of 

September 30, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated and individual statements of net cost and 

changes in net position, and the combined and individual statements of budgetary resources for the years 

then ended are presented fairly, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally 

accepted in the United States of America. 

• GSA had a material weakness in financial management systems, internal control, and financial reporting. 

• No reportable instances of non-compliance with the applicable laws and regulations we tested, as specified 

in Appendix E of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 07-04, Audit Requirements for 

Federal Financial Statements.

• Reportable instances of non-compliance in which GSA’s financial management systems did not 

substantially comply with the requirements of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act 

(FFMIA) of 1996.

Opinion on the Financial Statements 

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of the GSA and the individual balance sheets of the 

FBF and the ASF as of September 30, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated and individual statements of net 

cost and changes in net position, and the combined and individual statements of budgetary resources for the years 

then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of GSA’s management. Our responsibility is to 

express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. 

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, 

the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller 

General of the United States, and OMB Bulletin No. 07-04. Those standards require that we plan and perform the 

audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An 

audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

108 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(2)

statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by 

management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a 

reasonable basis for our opinion. 

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position 

of the GSA, the FBF, and the ASF at September 30, 2008 and 2007, and their net cost of operations, changes in net 

position, and budgetary resources for the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally 

accepted in the United States of America. 

Report on Internal Control 

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the GSA, the FBF, and the ASF as of and for the 

year ended September 30, 2008, we considered the GSA’s, the FBF's, and the ASF's internal control over financial 

reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial 

statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the GSA's, the FBF's, and the 

ASF's internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the GSA's, the FBF's, and 

the ASF's internal control over financial reporting. 

We limited our control testing to those controls necessary to achieve the following OMB control objectives that 

provide reasonable, but not absolute assurance, that: (1) transactions are properly recorded, processed, and 

summarized to permit the preparation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally 

accepted in the United States of America, and to safeguard assets against loss from unauthorized acquisition, use, or 

disposition; and (2) transactions are executed in compliance with laws governing the use of budget authority, 

government-wide policies and laws identified in Appendix E of OMB Bulletin No. 07-04, and other laws and 

regulations that could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. 

We did not test all internal controls relevant to the operating objectives broadly defined by the Federal Managers' 

Financial Integrity Act of 1982. 

A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in 

the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis. A 

significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or combination of control deficiencies, that adversely affects the 

GSA's, the FBF's, and the ASF's ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report financial data reliably in 

accordance with generally accepted accounting principles such that there is more than a remote likelihood that a 

misstatement of the GSA's, the FBF's, and the ASF's financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not 

be prevented or detected by the GSA's, the FBF's, and the ASF's internal control. 

A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination of significant deficiencies, that results in more than 

a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented or detected by the 

GSA's, the FBF's, and the ASF's internal control. 

We identified certain deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be significant deficiencies, the first of which 

is considered a material weakness. These deficiencies are: 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 109
Independent Auditor’s Report

(3)

Financial Management Systems, Internal Controls, and Financial Reporting Need Improvement 

Material Weakness

I. Budgetary Accounts and Balances

Since fiscal year 2004, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) has reported in its Report on Internal Control, 

significant deficiencies surrounding the GSA's financial management systems, its processes, and substantial 

transaction errors resulting from insufficient controls related to reporting of budgetary accounts and balances. 

During fiscal year 2008, similar issues persist as GSA continues to lack effective controls over its accounting and 

business processes to ensure budgetary transactions are properly recorded, processed, and summarized to permit the 

timely preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Specifically, 

we noted deficiencies in the GSA's, the FBF's, and the ASF's financial management systems, internal controls, and 

financial reporting processes (the effects of which were adjusted in the individual and consolidated financial 

statements, as appropriate). 

Business System Interfaces 

The design of GSA’s internal control over processing of budgetary transactions is not adequate to ensure all 

appropriate budgetary transactions are recorded in the financial systems timely and accurately. GSA management 

routinely uses high level analyses to develop adjustments to its account balances for financial reporting purposes. 

Management's inability to prepare budgetary statements without extensive compensating procedures, and not having 

complete and reliable timely budgetary information indicate a significant weakness in internal control. This lack of 

sufficient internal control over the core business processes continued to necessitate management's reliance on costly 

compensating processes, statistical estimates, substantial adjustments, and labor intensive efforts to prepare reliable 

financial statements. These efforts would not have been necessary, had GSA's internal controls been designed and 

operating effectively to mitigate the risk of a misstatement or potential violation of laws and regulations to an 

acceptable level. 

The FBF and the ASF management rely heavily on manual workarounds and significant adjusting journal entries to 

prepare the statement of budgetary resources and related note disclosures. This includes the FBF management's 

continued use of statistical sampling projections to determine invalid Undelivered Orders (UDOs), Delivered Orders 

(DOs), and Unfilled Customer Orders (UFCOs) as well as to ensure the accuracy of UDO and DO classifications. 

Within the ASF, postings of budgetary amounts based on business feeder system data are recorded at a summary 

level in Pegasys. As a result, any corrections made with Pegasys cannot be made to the detail information in the 

supporting feeder systems in a common standard format. Because the corrections of errors are made to the UDOs, 

DOs, and UFCOs balances as adjusting journal entries, the detail transaction errors are not corrected timely at the 

transaction level. 

Moreover, GSA's financial system, Pegasys, continues to lack the appropriate posting model to account for FBF 

Recoveries of Prior Year Obligations, necessitating monthly transaction reviews by management. Similar instances 

continue to exist in ASF where subsystem budget fiscal years are not transmitted to Pegasys for prior year recovery 

transactions requiring extensive manual reviews and adjustments. ASF downward adjustments to prior year 

obligations are not recognized by Pegasys and must be manually calculated and recorded in Pegasys as an adjusting 

entry. The entries are reviewed monthly for downward adjustments to prior year obligations within the sub-systems 

and changes are then booked at a lump sum in Pegasys. 

Internal Control Weaknesses

The GSA Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) has issued policies to each GSA Service - - Public Buildings 

Service (PBS) and Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) - - to address the need to strengthen internal controls over 

budgetary reporting and to mitigate known weaknesses in the transaction level controls. In result, both the PBS and 

FAS instituted corrective action plans, to include: semi-annual reviews and certifications of UDOs, DOs, and 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

110 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(4)

UFCOs; reconciliations of subsystems and business systems to the general ledger; developing policies and 

procedures; performing reviews of budgetary entries at the transaction level; and monitoring regional financial 

performance quarterly. Furthermore, both PBS and FAS instituted further reviews at the regional offices and 

program levels, including providing necessary training nationwide. 

In response to management's reviews and corrective actions plans put in place during the year, PwC adjusted the 

timing and extent of its audit testing, including delaying the fiscal year 2008 FBF budgetary controls testing 

procedures to August. The change in the timing of testing was intended to provide management the necessary 

amount of time to complete the planned reviews and report complete, accurate, and valid UDO, DO, and UFCO 

balances. 

Transaction Level Errors 

During our interim testing of the FBF, we selected a random sample of 78 unliquidated obligations and noted 

six errors. We also selected 78 open Reimbursable Work Authorization agreements (RWAs) for FBF's 

UFCO and noted 11 instances in which the RWAs did not either have adequate documentation to support a 

valid UFCO balance or the RWAs were long outstanding and were no longer valid. 

In response to the control weaknesses and errors noted above, PBS management conducted a statistical 

sample of its UDO, DO, and UFCO transactions as of July 31, 2008. The sampling was undertaken to 

identify invalid transactions and to make appropriate corrections for financial reporting purposes. As 

described in the table below, management's statistical sampling revealed significant transaction-level errors 

that resulted in significant adjustments to the amounts recorded in the financial systems. During our 

transaction level controls testing, the errors noted in the FBF include instances of both overstatements and 

understatements of: (1) UDOs, which represent GSA's obligations to vendors for goods and services ordered 

on behalf of customer agencies; (2) DOs, which represent GSA's obligations to vendors for goods and 

services received; and (3) UFCOs, which represents the amount of goods and services to be furnished for 

other Federal Government agencies. 

Line Item Adjustments Made at 9/30/08 

UDOs ($45,166,693) 

DOs ($78,316,660) 

UFCOs ($141,356,192) 

Completeness of Transactions 

Within the FBF, contracts with vendors are signed manually and then entered in GSA's financial system of 

record, Pegasys. Some of these contracts are also recorded in Comprizon (PBS's procurement management 

system), as Comprizon is utilized by PBS contracting officers to track the progress of individual contracts. 

However, Comprizon does not interface with Pegasys or any other financial management system. Therefore, 

obligating documents entered in Comprizon must manually be entered into Pegasys. Based on the work 

performed around the timeliness and completeness of entering obligation transactions in Pegasys, it was 

evident that not all signed contracts were recorded in Pegasys within five business days, as per PBS's policy. 

Weaknesses related to this control become more important when contracts are signed close to year end and 

do not get into the system until the following fiscal year. We noted the following: 

• During fiscal year 2008, PBS management became aware of contracts that had been signed in fiscal 

years 2007 and prior, but not recorded in Pegasys prior to the related fiscal year's end. These 

amounts totaled $276 million and were adjusted for in the current fiscal year. To determine the 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 111
Independent Auditor’s Report

(5)

completeness and accuracy of the fiscal year 2008 obligation balances in Pegasys, PBS management 

performed additional analyses after the fiscal year end to ensure valid, awarded contracts were 

included in Pegasys or were adjusted for in the financial statements. This effort included the 

reconciliation of all fiscal year 2008 valid contracts in Comprizon to Pegasys. As of September 30, 

2008, the unreconciled difference between the two systems was $4 million compared to $282 

million at March 31, 2008. 

• After September 30, 2008, PBS also performed data calls to regional offices requesting the 

submission of valid, signed contracts that should have been recorded in the financial system before 

fiscal year end. At October 27, 2008, valid contracts signed during fiscal year 2008 but not 

recorded in Pegasys totaled $20 million, where management made appropriate adjustments to the 

financial statements. This process was also complemented by a request for certification letter from 

each of the 11 Assistant Regional Administrators (ARA) certifying as to the completeness of the 

provided information. 

• PBS management performed procedures analyzing contracts recorded in Comprizon after fiscal year 

end. This analysis was intended to ensure obligations that should have been recorded in Pegasys 

during fiscal year 2008 were recorded as of September 30, 2008. Although this effort provides 

additional evidence that reported valid transactions were included in the financial statements by 

September 30, 2008, it does not eliminate the risk of further unreported obligations. 

We also noted weaknesses in financial reporting and controls over ASF's budgetary transactions, specifically 

related to ASF Motor Vehicle UFCOs. GSA Automotive purchases vehicles for all federal agencies. In 

certain months of the year and for certain discontinued models, GSA does not have detailed pricing from the 

vehicle manufacturers to enable processing of a customer's order at the time it is placed with GSA. During 

such situations customer orders are ‘garaged’ in the Autochoice, GSA's on-line system for vehicle ordering, 

until a valid contract and/or specific pricing with the vendor is in place. 

Currently, ASF's Motor Vehicle UFCOs balance is determined based on a markup percent on orders placed 

with the manufacturers once transmitted through FEDPAY, GSA's ordering and payment sub-system. 

Although these 'garaged' items represent valid customer orders, ASF management was not aware of the 

existence of such orders and has not been recording the related unfilled customer orders in its financial 

statements. The table below describes the magnitude of prior year and current year unrecorded UFCO 

amounts related to customer vehicle orders that were accepted in Autochoice but not included for financial 

reporting purposes. These amounts were subsequently adjusted and corrected for in the current year 

financial statements. 

Ending Fiscal Year 

Balance

Amount of Unrecorded Unfilled Customer 

Orders - ASF 

2006 $123,329,285 

2007 $220,435,042 

2008 $159,880,858 

These errors indicate that the GSA does not have adequate controls to ensure its obligations and unfilled 

customer orders are recorded fully, accurately, and in the proper accounting period in accordance with the 

USSGL. These errors can also be attributed to GSA's lack of integrated acquisition system where valid 

transactions occur manually and in different business units and there is no automated financial transaction 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

112 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(6)

processing activity to ensure that all valid accounting transactions have been included for timely and accurate 

financial reporting. 

GSA-wide Accountability for Internal Control 

A goal of the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act is to improve accounting and financial management practices by 

providing management with the full range of information needed for day-to-day management. The Federal 

Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA) builds on the foundation laid by the CFO Act by 

emphasizing the need for agencies to have financial management systems that can generate reliable, useful, and 

timely information with which to make fully informed decisions and to ensure accountability on an ongoing basis. 

Specifically, section 803(a) of the FFMIA requires each agency to implement and maintain systems that comply 

substantially with: (1) the Federal financial management systems requirements; (2) the applicable Federal 

accounting standards; and (3) the United States Standard General Ledger at the transaction level. 

With respect to system requirements in the area of financial reporting, OMB Circular A-127 provides that an 

agency's financial management system should generate reliable, timely, and consistent information necessary for 

meeting management's responsibilities, including the preparation of financial statements. Within OMB Circular A123, the management control processes necessary to ensure that "reliable and timely information is obtained, 

maintained, reported and used for decision making" are set forth, including prompt and appropriate recording and 

classification.

PwC believes the series of errors identified during our tests of controls around budgetary accounting are indicative 

of a continued lack of comprehensive and effective internal control systems. Moreover, we noted GSA 

Management's assessment of internal controls as part of their OMB Circular A-123, Appendix A reviews indicated 

similar issues. We believe management's view of internal controls should contemplate the root causes of its 

ineffective internal controls as part of the overall control deficiency assessment to help design an effective internal 

control environment that is suitable to its business processes. 

The financial reporting function should be viewed as an integral part of the organization. During fiscal year 2008, 

GSA management instituted the OCFO policy to address the prior year significant deficiency. However, we noted 

that the design of the mitigating control over obligations was not comprehensive enough to ensure that all financial 

statement assertions are addressed. GSA Central Office's high level mitigating controls over budgetary transactions 

should not be viewed as a substitute for transaction level, process driven controls. Tackling the root causes of the 

budgetary control weakness will encompass addressing the weak control environment, ineffective information and 

communication between Central Office and the Regional program offices, as well as addressing the ineffective 

monitoring controls of budgetary accounts. There is a continued disconnect between the role of Regional program 

offices and the financial reporting function regarding the purpose of accurate and timely financial reporting. 

Regional program offices do not understand the impact that their day-to-day functions have in ensuring and 

promoting effective internal controls across the organization. This was evident when we noted the inadequacies of 

appropriate processes and tools that enable the Assistant Regional Administrators (ARAs) to assert and certify the 

completeness of their region's obligations. Regional program offices should take full responsibility for the 

information they provide to the PBS and FAS financial reporting offices by instituting effective internal controls in 

their region. 

The Financial Reporting division at Central Office relies heavily on the information provided by the regions to 

accurately account for and report on their organization's budgetary transactions. In most instances, control 

deficiencies are largely due to weak operating controls at the regions. The valid prior year unrecorded obligating 

contracts noted in fiscal year 2008 were due to ineffective communications between the program office and Central 

Finance Offices. The lack of reliable internal control systems to prevent or detect such incidences expose the GSA 

to increased risk of misstatements of its financial reports. Processing of obligations manually also presents 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 113
Independent Auditor’s Report

(7)

increased risk of unrecorded obligations and possible violations of law, as GSA has no effective mechanism to 

detect unrecorded obligations short of performing desk audits. Although GSA management continues its efforts to 

utilize data calls and certifications from the ARAs, it is not deemed to be an effective process due to the high 

volume of transactions that take place at GSA and the lack of system integration between its business and subsidiary 

systems and Pegasys. 

Our control evaluation demonstrated that while policies and processes have been implemented, and monitoring of 

down-stream control processes was performed by PBS, FAS, and OCFO financial management communities, there 

is a need for further evaluation and improvement of controls over GSA's budgetary accounting and reporting 

processes. GSA needs to continue to drive financial management and reporting initiatives and improvements 

throughout its regional and district offices. Continuation of current practices, without the institution of 

comprehensive, routine, and effective controls, will continue to heighten the risk that material errors will not be 

prevented or detected in GSA's financial records at interim and annual period ends. 

II. Financial Statement Preparation 

In fiscal year 2008, the GSA recorded more than 344 top-side adjustments, each representing multiple accounting 

transactions with an aggregate value of more than $5.5 billion, to produce its financial statements. Although the 

nature of these adjustments varies, they can be classified into the following areas: 

• Adjustments derived due to reconciliation of sub-systems to the general ledger. 

• Adjustments due to statistical sample projections and management reviews in CIP and budgetary accounts. 

• Period end adjustments including accruals of income and expenses, and elimination entries. 

• Correction of errors including reclassification of account balances. 

• Adjustments made to align budgetary activity to proprietary activity at September 30. 

During testing of GSA’s preparation of its financial statements, we noted that improvement is needed to ensure that 

GSA can accurately produce its period end financial statements and perform related analyses. The errors we noted 

related to incorrect accumulation of account balances, incorrect identification of general ledger accounts, and 

incorrect postings to the financial reporting system. These errors occurred because of ineffective management 

reviews and approvals to ensure the adjustments were accurate and properly supported. 

While the actual errors noted were not material to the GSA, the FBF, and the ASF consolidated and combined 

financial statements taken as a whole, they serve to illustrate that errors are more likely to occur in an environment 

that necessitates a time-consuming, manually-intensive financial statement preparation process, as well as the need 

for additional strengthening of the agency's financial statement preparation, review, and approval processes. 

Recommendations: 

We recommend that GSA Management: 

1. Implement agency-wide procedures requiring Regional offices, service lines, program areas, and the 

financial management community's full commitment to a sound budgetary accounting process that is in 

accordance with federal accounting standards. 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

114 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(8)

2. Expand upon the implementation of OMB Circular A-123, Appendix A to address root causes of budgetary 

reporting control weaknesses across the breadth and depth of the financial reporting process -- from the 

level of transaction initiation, through all processing and monitoring activities, through the preparation of 

interim and annual financial reports. Effective remediation should be instituted to implement needed 

reforms to the control environment, risk assessment processes, control activities, information and 

communication, and monitoring elements of GSA's integrated internal control system. GSA's assessment 

and remediation should encompass operating activities that may occur indirectly or outside of the finance 

function -- such as contract management -- but which have a direct and fundamental impact upon the 

complete, accurate, and reliable reporting of transaction-level information. 

3. Utilize the OCFO to serve as the primary coordinator of the involvement of Regional and Program areas, 

whose involvement and full support is vital for effective internal control structure. 

4. Continue to implement an integrated financial management system for use by program offices to promote 

consistency and reliability of financial information. 

5. Fully utilize the functionalities of Pegasys to perform complete budgetary transaction processing and 

financial reporting in compliance with Federal financial reporting requirements. 

6. For the financial statement preparation process, (a) minimize the number of top-side adjustments at period 

end by instituting a process to ensure regional program offices record valid transactions timely, and (b) 

enhance the documentation requirement related top-side adjustments to help facilitate the review and 

monitoring process. 

Management's Response: 

GSA management will redouble their efforts to address GSA-wide procedures requiring Regional offices, service 

lines, program areas, and the financial management community's full commitment to integrating sound budgetary 

and program management processes. During FY 2009, the OCFO will lead, in partnership with PBS and FAS, 

agency efforts to implement needed reforms to the control environment, risk assessment processes, control activities, 

information and communication, and monitoring elements of GSA's integrated internal control system. We are not 

satisfied with the need to rely on mitigating manual controls but are encouraged by the fact that despite the issues 

noted above, the Unfilled Customer Order and Obligation statistical samples yielded immaterial error projections. 

In addition, GSA’s internal controls have prevented material errors for the last three fiscal years which provides 

some insight on their level of effectiveness. Regardless, there is room for improvement and the risk of material 

misstatement is unacceptably high. Therefore, we will directly address how to strengthen the effectiveness of 

certain controls currently in place as well as determine which new or revised controls will reduce the risk of material 

misstatement to acceptable levels. In addition, we will review previous corrective action plans, review current year 

recommendations, and draft revised corrective action plans to further improve our reporting, system, and operational 

controls. The OCFO is working in partnership with the business and OCIO staffs across GSA to ensure that we 

continue to implement an integrated financial management system for use by program offices to promote 

consistency and reliability of budgetary and financial information. 

Regarding the discussion of weaknesses in financial statement preparation, it is noted that GSA recorded 

adjustments in excess of $5.5 billion. The list of adjustment types is misleading and not aligned with the major 

causes of adjustments to financial statement balances. The majority of large dollar adjustments are due to activities 

that are normally treated as adjustments such as intra-fund eliminations, reclassifications within SGL accounts for 

better financial statement presentation, and adjustments to recognize events that occurred after the closing of GSA's 

accounting system for the fiscal year, as well as adjustments between accounts for GSA's internal record keeping 

purposes and with no financial statement impact. Within the $5.5 billion of adjustments, approximately $1.6 billion 

were attributable to the adjustments and corrections noted in the Internal Control Report above. This represents 

approximately 5% of GSA assets. 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 115
Independent Auditor’s Report

(9)

Strengthen Segregation of Duties, Account Management, and Activity Monitoring Controls 

Significant Deficiency

During fiscal year 2008, we identified individual system access weaknesses across multiple systems that, when 

aggregated, constitute three common cross-cutting themes—segregation of duties, account management, and activity 

monitoring. Although these deficiencies were identified as the result of reviews of systems in scope for fiscal year 

2008, we have reported similar issues in prior years' Reports on Internal Control related to other GSA systems, 

indicating a weakness in the design of the processes necessary to meet information technology control objectives. 

The system access weaknesses identified this year with the greatest risk to financial data reside within the Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) accounts payable (AP) system. These control deficiencies create significant 

risks and vulnerabilities to financial data and GSA systems. Our testing indicated the following: 

1. Weak segregation of user and administrator duties were identified in five of the systems tested. 

• Our testing revealed that a control did not exist to prevent users from being assigned a combination of 

incompatible roles within an OCFO AP system and GSA's general ledger system. At the time of our 

testing, we noted 22 persons who had been assigned access rights that would permit them to perform 

several key functions within an OCFO AP system, allowing them access to incompatible functions. 

Additionally, at the time of our testing two of these users were also granted the ability to create and 

modify vendor data within the general ledger system, enter transactions within an OCFO AP system, 

including creation of invoices and purchase orders, and perform the final approval for payments within 

the general ledger system. We also noted two additional users had the ability to enter transactions 

within an OCFO AP system and, for a period of time during the year, had the ability to create and 

modify vendor data within the general ledger system. It is not clear whether these incompatible duties 

were held at the same time, because the general ledger system does not maintain a record of user 

access modifications. Because the general ledger system does not maintain historical information 

regarding transaction access assignments, we were unable to determine the actual number of users who 

had these incompatible duties throughout the period under review. 

• Access to source code and production code was not appropriately segregated in an OCFO AP system. 

• An IT Project Manager was not restricted from accessing production data in an update mode in an 

OCFO AP system. 

• Developers and administrators were permitted to access the production environment in a FAS Travel, 

Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system. 

• A segregation of duties policy for a FAS General Supplies and Services system did not exist. 

• Users who moved changes into production were also permitted to access the development environment 

in an OCFO core financial system. 

• One user in the general ledger system had unauthorized access to the source code repository and a role 

permitting the movement of changes into production. 

• Business line administrators in a FAS Travel, Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system were assigned 

access to grant and modify user access, and perform user transactions. 

2. Weak controls around account management were identified in nine of the systems tested. 

• Procedures for requesting and authorizing user access were not consistently implemented for the OCFO 

AP and general ledger systems, the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) enterprise network, 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

116 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(10)

and a PBS system. Additionally, a FAS Travel, Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system had not 

implemented a standardized process for requesting and authorizing user access. 

• Procedures for requesting and authorizing administrator access to the operating system were not 

consistently implemented for an OCFO payroll system and a FAS Travel, Motor Vehicle, and Card 

Services system. Additionally, the OCIO enterprise network had not implemented a standardized 

process for requesting and authorizing administrator access to the operating system. 

• Accounts for separated users were not removed in a timely manner from an OCFO AP system, the 

OCIO enterprise network, and two PBS systems. 

• Processes did not exist to identify and automatically disable inactive accounts for an OCFO AP system, 

the OCIO enterprise network, and a FAS Travel, Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system. 

• A user account recertification was not properly completed for an OCFO AP system, a FAS Integrated 

Technology Services system, and a PBS system. Additionally, a FAS General Supplies and Services 

system did not have procedures documented for performing the annual recertification. 

• Procedures for completing a recertification of administrator accounts on the operating system had not 

been developed and implemented for a FAS Travel, Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system. 

• Administrator accounts on the operating system were shared among multiple individuals for a FAS 

Travel, Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system. 

3. Weak monitoring controls over application and system activity logs and violation reports of user actions were 

identified in six of the systems tested. 

• Although logs existed, monitoring of user activity was not performed and documented for an OCFO AP 

system. 

• Procedures did not exist for performing a periodic, documented review of user activity for an OCFO AP 

system. 

• Existing procedures for logging and monitoring OCIO enterprise network activity, and a FAS Travel, 

Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system's user and operating system activity needed improvement. 

• Procedures for monitoring changes to a FAS General Supplies and Services system's security profiles 

were not documented. 

• User transaction audit logs were not reviewed on a regular basis for a FAS Integrated Technology 

Services system. 

• Security violation reports for a FAS Assisted Acquisition Services system were generated on a daily 

basis; however, evidence of the review of these reports was not documented. 

• Evidence of review for the failed login report of the general ledger system was not available. 

• A process was in place for regional Fleet managers to review audit trails logging user activity in a FAS 

Travel, Motor Vehicle, and Card Services system; however, evidence of these reviews was not 

documented. Additionally, business line administrator activity, specifically relating to updating user 

access code privileges, was not logged or monitored. 

These weaknesses expose GSA’s financial management systems to multiple risks. Specifically: 

• Lack of a control to prevent the assignment of access to incompatible functions within and between 

systems exposes the applications to the risk that certain users (IT management staff and end users) could 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 117
Independent Auditor’s Report

(11)

be assigned the ability to perform multiple critical systems transactions, including creation of vendors, 

initiation of invoices and purchase orders, and approval of transactions without adequate oversight and 

limitation. Failure to achieve the concepts of “least privilege” and “segregation of duties” may also lead 

to an environment more conducive to fraudulent activity and/or inaccurate processing of financial data, 

ultimately affecting the integrity of the financial statements. 

• Absence of strong logical account management controls may lead to users being assigned excessive, 

unauthorized access, increasing the risk of disclosure and/or modification of financial and other 

production data without awareness by management. 

• Failure to perform timely and formal reviews of user activity logs could result in the inability of 

management to detect unusual activities and trends in transaction processing that could result in 

improper and/or inaccurate transactions that may adversely affect the financial statements. 

As a result of the deficiencies noted above, there is a risk that improper or inaccurate transactions of more than 

inconsequential amounts could be processed and recorded in the financial statements without timely detection. 

Additionally, through our inquiries with GSA management, we determined that an agency-wide process to ensure 

that incompatible duties are not assigned across other financially significant systems does not exist. 

Recommendations: 

The individual system access weaknesses in fiscal year 2008 associated with segregation of duties, user and 

administrator logical access, and monitoring were noted across GSA systems tested in the current audit and were 

previously reported in prior year reports for other systems. Although these deficiencies were identified as the result 

of reviews of systems in scope for fiscal year 2008, we have reported similar issues in prior years' Reports on 

Internal Control related to other GSA systems, indicating a weakness in the design of the processes necessary to 

meet information technology control objectives. In the past, system owners had corrected individual conditions 

rather than the OCIO taking an agency-wide root-cause approach to addressing these pervasive weaknesses. 

We recommend the GSA OCIO revisit the design of existing processes around segregation of duties, account 

management, and logging and monitoring, and institute agency-wide corrective action, and specifically: 

1. Perform an agency-wide review of GSA segregation of duties policies for significant financial systems and 

develop and implement new policy, or improve existing policy where necessary, to document incompatible 

duties within each application and across multiple applications. The OCIO should develop and implement 

robust segregation of duties policies that can prevent future incompatible duties issues across multiple 

systems, reducing the risk that persons will be granted roles that allow them to perform multiple critical 

transactions that could result in erroneous or fraudulent activity. 

To ensure that incompatible duties across systems are not assigned, the OCIO should also develop and 

implement a process for performing user access recertification involving a review of user access 

assignments across multiple significant financial systems that share data or pass transactions. Expanding 

the examination of incompatible duties to users that span multiple financial systems ensures that these users 

do not possess roles across financial systems that allow them to control several aspects of a financial 

process that should otherwise be segregated. 

2. Coordinate an implementation plan to strengthen OCFO AP system general and application security 

controls by taking actions to improve: 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

118 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(12)

• Recertification processes to include the linkage between the OCFO AP and general ledger systems 

when examining user incompatible roles that span both applications; 

• Assignment of access to ensure compliance with segregation of duties and least privilege policies; 

• Monitoring and reviewing user and administrator security logs and violation reports including the 

development of thresholds and unusual activity reports aimed at detecting fraud and other 

anomalies; 

• Procedures for removing user access for separated individuals; and, 

• Procedures for identifying and automatically disabling inactive accounts. 

3. Develop and implement an agency-wide policy and procedure that establishes a standard user account 

request, authorization, creation, and removal process. Additionally, separated, inactive, and shared user 

accounts should be continually monitored and removed as necessary. 

4. Perform an agency-wide review of GSA monitoring controls over significant financial systems and develop 

and implement new procedures, or improve upon existing procedures to define events to be monitored, 

procedures for following up on suspicious events, and documentation of log reviews. Although GSA has 

policies in place, more needs to be done to ensure consistent implementation. Monitoring or detective 

controls should be in place across information systems to review user activity, changes and updates to the 

system, and resource use. These controls could be automated or manual activities to identify and report 

suspicious or unauthorized activity. 

Management's Response: 

GSA management agrees with the auditor’s recommendation to perform an agency-wide review of GSA segregation 

of duties policies for significant financial systems and develop and implement new policy, or improve existing 

policy where necessary, to document incompatible duties within each application and across multiple applications. 

We believe the integrity and security of our business and financial systems is a high priority issue and while we have 

successfully closed parts of this deficiency from the FY 2007 Internal Control report, more work remains. In 

addition, we are reviewing the Notifications of Findings supporting this significant deficiency to determine the most 

effective method of addressing the conditions noted above and all prior audit findings. We will use the issues and 

recommendations in this audit report to compile detailed corrective action plans that address measurable corrective 

actions to ensure this deficiency is not repeated. 

* * * 

Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the internal control section of this 

report and would not necessarily identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be significant deficiencies or 

material weaknesses. 

As required by Government Auditing Standards, our discussion of significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 

within this report includes management's response to our recommendations. Management describes corrective 

actions it has taken subsequent to our performance of internal control testing. We have not performed additional 

procedures to validate the corrective actions management has described. 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 119
Independent Auditor’s Report

(13)

Follow-up on Previous Report 

As required by Government Auditing Standards and OMB Bulletin No. 07-04, we have reviewed the status of the 

GSA’s corrective actions with respect to findings and recommendations from our prior audits. The analysis below 

provides our assessment of the progress GSA, the FBF, and the ASF have made in correcting the significant 

deficiencies identified during our prior year audits. We also provide the year where this condition was last reported, 

our recommendation for improvement, and the status of the condition as of the end of fiscal year 2008: 

Report Significant Deficiency Status 

2007 Significant Deficiency -The Public Buildings Service (PBS) controls 

over monitoring, accounting, and reporting of budgetary transactions 

need improvement. 

Recommendation: PBS should: 

• Perform a critical analysis of the transaction level control activities 

and monitoring controls used for substantiating FBF's budgetary 

transactions. This analysis should include a variety of criteria, 

including dollar thresholds, risk, type, complexity, activity, and 

populations of transactions not subject to management review. 

• If changes to underlying transaction level or monitoring controls are 

not implemented, PBS should perform ongoing statistical sampling 

of its budgetary transactions to address the identified control 

weaknesses. 

• Ensure compliance with policies and procedures to prepare and 

monitor budgetary accounting and reporting on a routine basis, 

which includes supervisory reviews, analytical procedures, and data 

validation, and ensure that activities are in compliance with the 

applicable guidance. 

• Expand upon the implementation of OMB Circular A-123 to address 

root causes of budgetary reporting control weaknesses across the 

breadth and depth of the financial reporting process -- from the level 

of transaction initiation, through all processing and monitoring 

activities, through the preparation of interim and annual financial 

reports. Effective remediation should be instituted to implement 

needed reforms to the control environment, risk assessment 

processes, control activities, information and communication, and 

monitoring elements of GSA's integrated internal control system. 

GSA's assessment and remediation should encompass operating 

activities that may occur indirectly or outside of the finance function 

-- such as contract management -- but which have a direct and 

fundamental impact upon the complete, accurate, and reliable 

reporting of transaction-level information.

Open 

2007 Significant Deficiency - GSA needs to strengthen system access, 

separation of duties, and monitoring controls. 

Recommendations: OCIO, OCFO, and PBS should coordinate an 

implementation plan Agency-wide to strengthen general and application 

security controls by taking actions to improve: 

Partially

Resolved 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

120 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(14)

Report Significant Deficiency Status 

• Procedures for performing user access recertification; 

• Completion and maintenance of access authorizations; 

• Procedures for removing user access for separated individuals; 

• Access role structures to ensure compliance with separation of duties 

and least privilege policies; and 

• Monitoring and review of user and administrator security logs and 

violation reports. 

We noted certain matters involving the GSA's, the FBF's, and the ASF's internal control that we will communicate 

to management separately. 

Report on Compliance and Other Matters 

As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, 

we performed tests of the compliance with laws and regulations including laws governing the use of budgetary 

authority, laws, regulations, and government-wide policies identified in Appendix E of OMB Bulletin No. 07-04 and 

other laws and regulations, non-compliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the consolidated 

and combined financial statements. Under FFMIA, we are required to report whether the GSA's, the FBF's, and the 

ASF’s financial management systems substantially comply with the Federal financial management systems 

requirements, applicable Federal accounting standards, and the United States Government Standard General Ledger 

at the transaction level. To meet this requirement, we performed tests of compliance with FFMIA section 803(a) 

requirements. 

We limited our tests of compliance to the provisions of laws and regulations referred to in the preceding paragraph. 

Providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and, accordingly, we do 

not express such an opinion. 

The results of our tests of compliance disclosed no instances of noncompliance with laws and regulations or other 

matters, exclusive of FFMIA, that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards or OMB 

Bulletin No. 07-04. 

The results of our tests disclosed instances, described below, where the GSA's financial management systems did 

not substantially comply with the Federal financial management systems requirements, applicable Federal 

accounting standards, and the United States Government Standard General Ledger at the transaction level. 

Material weakness in internal control 

In our "Report on Internal Control", we report a material weakness in internal control over financial reporting 

entitled, "Financial Management Systems, Internal Controls, and Financial Reporting Need Improvement". We 

believe that significant deficiencies surrounding the GSA's financial management systems and internal controls, its 

processes, and substantial transaction level errors resulting from insufficient controls related to accountability, 

reporting, and monitoring of budgetary accounts and balances and financial statement preparation process is a 

condition that precludes the GSA from providing reasonable assurance that material misstatements in the financial 

statements will be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The FFMIA and related implementation guidance set 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 121
Independent Auditor’s Report

(15)

forth requirements for agency financial management systems, including preparing financial statements and other 

required financial and budget reports, and providing reliable and timely financial information for managing current 

operations in a way that is consistent with the Federal accounting standards and the United States Standard General 

Ledger. Further, "Financial Management System Requirements" in Section 7 of OMB Circular A-127 requires 

agency financial management systems to include a system of internal controls that ensure reliable data is obtained, 

maintained, and disclosed in reports. 

In accordance with FFMIA, we report the following with respect to the instance of lack of substantial compliance: 

1. GSA is the entity responsible for the systems found not to comply. 

2. Relevant facts pertaining to the non-compliance are included in this report in our "Report on Internal 

Control" in the section entitled "Financial Management Systems, Internal Controls, and Financial 

Reporting Need Improvement". 

3. We recommend that management: (1) Implement agency-wide procedures requiring Regional offices, 

service lines, program areas, and the financial management community's full commitment to a sound 

budgetary accounting process that is in accordance with federal accounting standards; (2) Expand upon 

the implementation of OMB Circular A-123, Appendix A to address root causes of budgetary reporting 

control weaknesses across the breadth and depth of the financial reporting process -- from the level of 

transaction initiation, through all processing and monitoring activities, through the preparation of interim 

and annual financial reports. Effective remediation should be instituted to implement needed reforms to 

the control environment, risk assessment processes, control activities, information and communication, 

and monitoring elements of GSA's integrated internal control system. GSA's assessment and remediation 

should encompass operating activities that may occur indirectly or outside of the finance function -- such 

as contract management -- but which have a direct and fundamental impact upon the complete, accurate, 

and reliable reporting of transaction-level information; (3) Utilize the OCFO to serve as the primary 

coordinator of the involvement of Regional and Program areas, whose involvement and full support is 

vital for effective internal control structure; (4) Continue to implement an integrated financial 

management system for use by program offices to promote consistency and reliability of financial 

information; and (5) Fully utilize the functionalities of Pegasys to perform complete budgetary transaction 

processing and financial reporting in compliance with Federal financial reporting requirements. 

Management's Response: 

We are reviewing the Notifications of Findings supporting this noncompliance to determine the most effective 

method of addressing the conditions noted in the Material Weakness above. After the issues and recommendations 

are reviewed, we will compile detailed corrective action plans to ensure the FFMIA non-compliance is not repeated. 

Other Information 

The Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), and Required Supplementary Information (RSI) are not a 

required part of the financial statements but are supplementary information required by the Federal Accounting 

Standards Advisory Board and OMB Circular A-136, Financial Reporting Requirements. We have applied certain 

limited procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement 

and presentation of the MD&A and RSI. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it. 

Our audits were conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the consolidated and combined financial 

statements of the GSA, and the individual financial statements of the FBF and the ASF, taken as a whole. The other 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

122 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(16)

accompanying information included in this performance and accountability report is presented for purposes of 

additional analysis and are not a required part of the consolidated and combined, or individual financial statements. 

Such information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the consolidated and 

combined, and individual financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on them. 

* * * 

This report is intended solely for the information and use of the management and Inspector General of the GSA, 

OMB, the Government Accountability Office, and Congress, and is not intended to be and should not be used by 

anyone other than these specified parties. 

November 14, 2008 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 123
Independent Auditor’s Report

MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES A. WILLIAMS 

 ACTING ADMINISTRATOR (A) 

 KATHLEEN M. TURCO 

 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (B)

FROM: BRIAN D. MILLER 

 INSPECTOR GENERAL (J) 

SUBJECT: Report on Internal Controls Over Performance Measures 

 Report Number: A090022/B/F/F 

This report presents the results of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) review 

regarding the design and operation of the internal controls over performance 

measures reported in the Management Discussion and Analysis section of the 

General Services Administration’s (GSA) Fiscal Year 2008 Performance and 

Accountability Report.

Scope and Methodology 

Under a contract monitored by the OIG, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP 

performed the audit of GSA’s Fiscal Year 2008 Financial Statements. However, 

the portion of the audit related to internal controls over performance measures 

was performed by the OIG. To obtain an understanding of the controls in place, 

we examined the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) and current 

GSA Policy relating to GPRA. In addition, we met with officials from the Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) regarding compliance with the policy. We 

obtained and reviewed responses to the Verification and Validation questionnaire 

prepared by the OCFO and submitted to the designated officials of the Public 

Buildings Service (PBS). Furthermore, during our review, we selected three 

attributes of a key performance measure for testing. The purpose of this test was 

to assess whether there was valid documentation to support the responses 

provided on the Verification and Validation questionnaire for the selected 

attributes. Our procedures were not designed to provide an opinion on internal 

controls over reported performance measures. Accordingly, we do not express 

an opinion on such controls. 

1

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

124 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
We conducted this review 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. 

Results of Audit 

The internal controls designed by the OCFO over GSA’s performance measure 

data reported in the Management Discussion and Analysis Section of the 

Agency’s Fiscal Year 2008 Performance and Accountability Report are operating 

effectively.

In accordance with GSA Order CFO 2170.1, “Performance Measurement Data 

Verification and Validation Procedures,” a cyclical review of the performance 

measure data reported by each Service and Staff Office is required. Our review 

found that in accordance with this Order, the OCFO performed and documented 

the required review of performance measure data, and that the conclusions 

therein were adequately supported. Specifically, for the key measure selected 

for testing, we found that the responses provided on the Verification and 

Validation survey were sufficiently supported. 

We would like to thank the staff of the Office of the Chief Financial Officer for the 

assistance provided during our review. Should you or your staff have any 

questions, please feel free to contact me directly or the audit manager for this 

review, Anthony Mitchell, on (202) 501-0006. 

2 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 125
F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

126 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

Consolidating Statements of Net Cost

For the Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2008 and 2007

(Dollars in Millions)

2008 2007

Federal Buildings Fund

Revenues:

Building Operations - Government-Owned $ 3,966 $ 3,822

Building Operations - Leased 5,322 5,051

Expenses:

Building Operations - Government-Owned 3,347 3,182

Building Operations - Leased 5,390 5,133

 Net Revenues From (Cost of) Operations 551 558

ACquisition Services Fund

Revenues:

General Supply and Services 1,501 1,379

Travel, Motor Vehicles, and Card Services 2,011 1,741

Integrated Technology Services 1,350 1,279

Assisted Acquisition Services 3,643 3,697

Other Programs 72 46

 Revenues Subtotal 8,577 8,142

Expenses:

General Supply and Services 1,456 1,353

Travel, Motor Vehicles, and Card Services 2,003 1,660

Integrated Technology Services 1,270 1,200

Assisted Acquisition Services 3,644 3,761

Other Programs 42 46

 Expenses Subtotal 8,415 8,020

 Net Revenues From (Cost of) Operations 162 122

Principal Financial Statements
Continued from previous page

2008 2007

Other Funds

Revenues:

Working Capital Fund 426 356

GSA OE and OGP Funds 21 17

Other Funds 14 19

Expenses:

Working Capital Fund 432 358

GSA OE and OGP Funds 157 156

 Other Funds 162 103

 Net Revenues From (Cost of) Operations (290) (225)

Less: Intra-GSA Eliminations (Note 1-B)

Revenues 643 534

Expenses 678 567

GSA Consolidated

Revenues 17,683 16,873

Expenses 17,225 16,385

 Net Revenues From (Cost of) Operations $ 458 $ 488

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 127
Principal Financial Statements

Consolidating Balance Sheets

As of September 30, 2008 and 2007

(Dollars in Millions)

Federal 

Buildings Fund

Acquisition Services 

Fund

2008 2007 2008 2007

ASSETS

Intragovernmental Assets:

Fund Balance with Treasury (Notes 1-D,2) $ 5,765 $ 5,620 $ 720 $ 782 

Accounts Receivable - Federal, Net (Note 4) 403 334 1,225 1,032 

Prepaid Expenses and Advances - Federal - - 1 4

 Total Intragovernmental Assets 6,168 5,954 1,946 1,818 

Inventories (Note 1-E) 6 6 246 219

Accounts Receivable - Public, Net (Note 4) 11 22 90 78

Prepaid Expenses and Advances - Public 2 1 - -

Other Assets 13 27 6 8

Property and Equipment (Notes 1-F,5):

Buildings 29,110 27,656 - -

Leasehold Improvements 260 263 26 25

Telecommunications and ADP Equipment - - 93 100 

Motor Vehicles - - 4,268 4,086 

Other Equipment 101 88 188 163 

Less: Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization (14,748) (13,743) (1,559) (1,465)

 Subtotal 14,723 14,264 3,016 2,909 

Land 1,507 1,485 - -

Construction in Process and Software in Development 2,054 1,723 3 6

 Total Property and Equipment 18,284 17,472 3,019 2,915 

Total Assets $ 24,484 $ 23,482 $ 5,307 $ 5,038

LIABILITIES AND NET POSITION

Intragovernmental Liabilities:

Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses - Federal $ 58 $ 61 $ 20 $ 21

Deferred Revenue and Advances - Federal 11 10 27 68

Intragovernmental Debt (Note 6) 2,098 2,151 - -

Other Intragovernmental Liabilities (Note 9) 330 291 8 7

 Total Intragovernmental Liabilities 2,497 2,513 55 96

Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses - Public 1,055 921 1,044 940

Deferred Revenue and Advances - Public 6 3 1 1

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities (Notes 5,10) 103 105 - -

Obligations Under Capital Leases (Note 8) 261 273 - -

Workers’ Compensation Actuarial Liability (Note 7) 108 108 37 37

Annual Leave Liability (Note 1-G) 47 43 29 29

Deposit Fund Liability - - - -

Other Liabilities (Note 9) 319 309 - -

Total Liabilities 4,396 4,275 1,166 1,103 

Net Position (Note 14)

Cumulative Results of Operations 19,906 19,207 4,141 3,935 

Unexpended Appropriations 182 - - -

Total Net Position 20,088 19,207 4,141 3,935 

Total Liabilities and Net Position $ 24,484 $ 23,482 $ 5,307 $ 5,038

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

128 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Other Funds

LESS: INTRA-GSA

ELIMINATIONS

GSA Consolidated 

Totals

2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007

$ 580 $ 609 $ - $ - $ 7,065 $ 7,011

5 3 28 21 1,605 1,348

- 3 - 3 1 4

585 615 28 24 8,671 8,363

- - - - 252 225

31 32 - - 132 132

- - - - 2 1

1 2 11 15 9 22

- - - - 29,110 27,656

- - - - 286 288

- - - - 93 100

- - - - 4,268 4,086

94 83 - - 383 334

(63) (51) - - (16,370) (15,259)

31 32 - - 17,770 17,205

- - - - 1,507 1,485

- - - - 2,057 1,729

31 32 - - 21,334 20,419

$ 648 $ 681 $ 39 $ 39 $ 30,400 $ 29,162

$ 14 $ 5 $ 27 $ 21 $ 65 $ 66

19 33 11 18 46 93

- - - - 2,098 2,151

65 62 1 - 402 360

98 100 39 39 2,611 2,670

34 28 - - 2,133 1,889

- - - - 7 4

2 24 - - 105 129

- - - - 261 273

19 20 - - 164 165

21 20 - - 97 92

55 97 - - 55 97

7 7 - - 326 316

236 296 39 39 5,759 5,635

314 264 - - 24,361 23,406

98 121 - - 280 121

412 385 - - 24,641 23,527

$ 648 $ 681 $ 39 $ 39 $ 30,400 $ 29,162

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 129
Principal Financial Statements

Consolidating Statements of Changes in Net Position

For the Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2008 and 2007

(Dollars in Millions)

Federal 

Buildings Fund

Acquisition Services 

Fund

2008 2007 2008 2007

Beginning Balance of Net Position

Cumulative Results of Operations $ 19,207 $ 18,552 $ 3,935 $ 3,605

Unexpended Appropriations - - - -

Net Position Beginning Balance 19,207 18,552 3,935 3,605

Results of Operations

Net Revenue From (Cost of) Operations 551 558 162 122

Appropriations Used (Note 1-C) 84 94 - -

Non-Exchange Revenue (Notes 1-C, 1-G) 1 5 - -

Imputed Financing Provided By Others 61 56 41 47

Transfer of Earnings Paid and Payable to U.S. Treasury - - - -

Transfers of Net Assets and Liabilities

(To) From Other Federal Agencies 2 (59) 3 161

Receipts Paid and Reclassified as Payable From

(To) the Land and Water Conservation Fund - - - -

Other - 1 - -

Net Results of Operations 699 655 206 330

Changes in Unexpended Appropriations

Appropriations Received 266 94 - -

Appropriations Used (84) (94) - -

Appropriations Adjustments and Transfers From 

Other Agencies or Funds - - - -

Net Change in Unexpended Appropriations 182 - - -

Ending Balance of Net Position

Cumulative Results of Operations 19,906 19,207 4,141 3,935

Unexpended Appropriations 182 - - -

Net Position Ending Balance $ 20,088 $ 19,207 $ 4,141 $ 3,935

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

130 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Other Funds

LESS: INTRA-GSA

ELIMINATIONS

GSA Consolidated 

Totals

2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007

$ 264 $ 243 $ - $ - $ 23,406 $ 22,400

121 111 - - 121 111

385 354 - - 23,527 22,511

(290) (225) (35) (33) 458 488

206 196 - - 290 290

38 132 - - 39 137

86 24 35 33 153 94

(18) (107) - - (18) (107)

25 6 - - 30 108

- (3) - - - (3)

3 (2) - - 3 (1)

50 21 - - 955 1,006

210 213 - - 476 307

(206) (196) - - (290) (290)

(27) (7) - - (27) (7)

(23) 10 - - 159 10

314 264 - - 24,361 23,406

98 121 - - 280 121

$ 412 $ 385 $ - $ - $ 24,641 $ 23,527

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 131
COMBINING Statements of Budgetary Resources

For the Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2008 and 2007

(Dollars in Millions)

Federal 

Buildings Fund

2008 2007

Budgetary Resources

Unobligated Balance, Net - Beginning Balance $ 4,425 $ 4,028

Prior Year Recoveries 134 237

Budget Authority

Appropriations 266 94

Spending Authority:

 Earned Revenue 9,317 8,858

 Change in Unfilled Customer Orders 210 478

 Previously Unavailable 141 56

Resources Temporarily Not Available (288) (141)

Transfers (50) (102)

Total Budgetary Resources 14,155 13,508

Status of Budgetary Resources

Obligations Incurred

Direct - -

Reimbursable 9,735 9,083

Unobligated Balance - Available 4,066 4,425

Unobligated Balance - Not Available 354 -

Total Status of Budgetary Resources 14,155 13,508

CHANGE IN OBLIGATED BALANCE

Obligated Balance, Net - Beginning Balance

Unpaid Obligations, Oct 1 3,525 3,476

Less: Uncollected Customer Payments, Oct 1 (2,421) (1,887)

Obligations Incurred 9,735 9,083

Less: Gross Outlays (9,319) (8,797)

Less: Recoveries of Prior Year Unpaid Obligations, Actual (134) (237)

Change in Uncollected Customer Payments (Increase)/Decrease (286) (534)

Obligated Balance, Net - End of Period:

Unpaid Obligations 3,807 3,525

Less: Uncollected Customer Payments (2,707) (2,421)

NET OUTLAYS

Gross Outlays 9,319 8,797

Less: Offsetting Collections (9,241) (8,802)

Less: Offsetting Receipts - -

Net Outlays $ 78 $ (5)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

Principal Financial Statements

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

132 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Acquisition Services 

Fund Other Funds

GSA Combined

 Totals

2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007

$ 1,170 $ 1,822 $ 216 $ 235 $ 5,811 $ 6,085

260 253 29 13 423 503

- - 242 249 508 343

9,594 9,185 459 387 19,370 18,430

168 (786) (8) 5 370 (303)

- - - - 141 56

- - - - (288) (141)

- - (9) (13) (59) (115)

11,192 10,474 929 876 26,276 24,858

- - 232 246 232 246

9,935 9,304 487 414 20,157 18,801

1,216 1,170 59 108 5,341 5,703

41 - 151 108 546 108

11,192 10,474 929 876 26,276 24,858

3,538 3,721 178 166 7,241 7,363

(3,926) (4,864) (10) (5) (6,357) (6,756)

9,935 9,304 719 660 20,389 19,047

(9,427) (9,233) (671) (635) (19,417) (18,665)

(260) (254) (29) (13) (423) (504)

(397) 938 (4) (5) (687) 399

3,786 3,538 197 178 7,790 7,241

(4,323) (3,926) (14) (10) (7,044) (6,357)

9,427 9,233 671 635 19,417 18,665

(9,366) (9,337) (447) (387) (19,054) (18,526)

- - (21) (108) (21) (108)

$ 61 $ (104) $ 203 $ 140 $ 342 $ 31

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 133
F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

134 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

Notes to the Financial Statements

For the Fiscal Years Ended

September 30, 2008 and 2007

Organization

GSA was created by the U.S. Federal Property and 

Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended. 

Congress enacted this legislation to provide for the 

Federal government an economic and efficient system for the 

procurement and operation of buildings, procurement and 

distribution of general supplies, acquisition and management 

of a motor vehicle fleet, management of automated data 

processing resources, and management of telecommunications 

programs. 

The Administrator of General Services, appointed by the 

President of the United States with the advice and consent of the 

U.S. Senate, oversees the operations of GSA. GSA carries out its 

responsibilities through the operation of several appropriated 

and revolving funds.

❶ Significant Accounting Policies 

A. Reporting Entity

For its principal financial statements, GSA uses consolidating 

and combining formats to display its two largest components: 

the Federal Buildings Fund (FBF) and the Acquisition Services 

Fund (ASF). All other funds have been combined under Other 

Funds.

The FBF is the primary fund used to record activities of the 

Public Buildings Service (PBS). The ASF, created by law in 

FY 2007 from the merging of GSA’s former Information 

Technology Fund (ITF) and General Supply Fund (GSF), is the 

primary fund used to record activities of the Federal Acquisition 

Service (FAS). See Note 17 for further information on the ASF. 

The accompanying financial statements of GSA include 

the accounts of all funds which have been established and 

maintained to account for resources under the control of 

GSA management. The entities included in the Other Funds 

category are described below, together with a discussion of the 

different fund types.

Revolving Funds are accounts established by law to finance a 

continuing cycle of operations with receipts derived from such 

operations usually available in their entirety for use by the fund 

without further action by Congress. The Revolving Funds in 

the Other Funds category consist of the following:

■ Federal Citizen Information Center Fund (FCICF)

■ Panama Canal Revolving Fund

■ Working Capital Fund (WCF) 

General Funds are accounts used to record financial 

transactions arising under Congressional appropriations or 

other authorizations to spend general revenues. GSA manages 

14 General Fund accounts of which four are funded by current 

year appropriations, two by no-year appropriations, and eight 

which cannot incur new obligations. The General Funds 

included in the Other Funds category are as follows:

■ Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents

■ Budget Clearing Account – Broker Rebates

■ Budget Clearing Account – Proceeds of Sales, Personal 

Property

■ Budget Clearing Account – Real Property

■ Budget Clearing Account – Suspense

■ Budget Clearing Account - Undistributed Intragovernmental 

Payments

■ Election Reform Payments

■ Excess and Surplus Real and Related Personal Property 

Holding Account

■ Expenses, Electronic Government Fund

■ Expenses, Presidential Transition

■ Office of Inspector General (OIG)

■ Operating Expenses, GSA

■ Operating Expenses, Government-wide Policy

■ Real Property Relocation
Special Funds are accounts established for receipts 

earmarked by law for a specific purpose, but are not 

generated by a cycle of operations for which there is 

continuing authority to reuse such receipts. In accordance 

with Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) 

Statements of Federal Financial Accounting Standards 

(SFFAS) No. 27, Identifying and Reporting Earmarked 

Funds, these Special Funds are classified as earmarked 

funds. Although immaterial, earmarked fund balances are 

displayed in Note 2-B. GSA uses Special Fund receipts to 

pay certain costs associated with the disposal of surplus real 

property, for funding of the Transportation Audits program, 

and to fund the Acquisition Workforce Training program. 

GSA’s Special Funds consist of the following:

■ Expenses, Disposal of Real and Related Personal Property

■ Expenses, Transportation Audits

■ Expenses, Acquisition Workforce Training Fund

■ Operating Expenses, Disposal of Real and Related Personal 

Property

■ Other Receipts, Surplus Real and Related Personal 

Property

■ Receipts of Rent, Leases and Lease Payments for 

Government-Owned Real Property

■ Receipts, Transportation Audits

■ Receipts, Acquisition Workforce Training Fund

■ Transfer of Surplus Real and Related Personal Property

Miscellaneous Receipt and Deposit Fund accounts are 

considered non-entity funds since GSA management does 

not exercise control over how the monies in these accounts 

can be used. Miscellaneous Receipt Fund accounts 

hold receipts and accounts receivable resulting from 

miscellaneous activities of GSA where, by law, such monies 

may not be deposited into funds under GSA management 

control. The U.S. Department of the Treasury (U.S. Treasury) 

automatically transfers all cash balances in these receipt 

accounts to general funds of the U.S. Treasury at the end 

of each fiscal year. Deposit Fund accounts hold monies 

outside the budget. Accordingly, their transactions do not 

affect budget surplus or deficit. These accounts include 

(1) deposits received for which GSA is acting as an agent or 

custodian, (2) unidentified remittances, (3) monies withheld 

from payments for goods and services received, and 

(4) monies whose distribution awaits a legal determination 

or investigation. The receipt and deposit funds in the Other 

Funds category consist of the following:

■ Advances Without Orders from Non-Federal Sources

■ Employees’ Payroll Allotment Account, U.S. 

Savings Bonds

■ Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures, Not Otherwise Classified

■ Forfeitures of Unclaimed Money and Property

■ General Fund Proprietary Interest, Not Otherwise 

Classified

■ General Fund Proprietary Receipts, Not Otherwise 

Classified, All Other 

■ Other Earnings From Business Operations and 

Intragovernmental Revolving Funds 

■ Proceeds from Sale of Surplus Property

■ Reserve for Purchase Contract Projects

■ Small Escrow Amounts

■ Unconditional Gifts of Real, Personal, or Other Property

■ Withheld State and Local Taxes

In the FBF, Electronic Government Fund, Allowances 

and Staff for Former Presidents Fund, and Real Property 

Relocation Fund, GSA has delegated certain program and 

financial operations of a portion of these funds to other 

Federal agencies to execute on GSA’s behalf. Unique subaccounts, also known as allocation accounts (child), of GSA’s 

funds (parent) are created in the U.S. Treasury to provide 

for the reporting of obligations and outlays incurred by 

such other agencies. Generally, all child allocation account 

financial activity is reportable in combination with the results 

of the parent fund, from which the underlying legislative 

authority, appropriations, and budget apportionments are 

derived. GSA has allocation accounts in this regard with 

the following Federal entities: the U.S. Departments of 

the Treasury, Defense, Commerce, Homeland Security, and 

Interior; the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM); 

and the U.S. Small Business Administration.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 135
Notes to the Financial Statements

B. Basis of Accounting

The principal financial statements are prepared in accordance 

with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) 

as promulgated by FASAB, and Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Circular A-136, Financial Reporting 

Requirements. The American Institute of Certified Public 

Accountant’s (AICPA) Statement on Auditing Standards 

No. 91, Federal GAAP Hierarchy, established a hierarchy 

of GAAP for Federal financial statements. GSA’s financial 

statements are prepared in accordance with requirements 

prescribed in OMB Circular A-136, in all material respects. 

These formats are considerably different from business-type 

formats. The Consolidating Statements of Net Cost present 

the gross operating results of the FBF, ASF, and Other Funds, 

and GSA consolidated operating results as a whole. The 

Consolidating Balance Sheets present the financial position 

of GSA using a format clearly segregating intragovernmental 

balances. The Consolidating Statements of Changes in 

Net Position display the changes in equity accounts. The 

Combining Statements of Budgetary Resources (CSBR) 

present the sources, status, and uses of GSA’s budgetary 

resources. 

GSA reconciles all intragovernmental fiduciary transaction 

activity, and works with agency partners to reduce significant 

or material differences reported by other agencies in 

conformance with U.S. Treasury intragovernmental reporting 

guidelines and requirements of OMB Circular A-136.

Certain prior year balances have been reclassified to conform 

with the current year’s presentation.

On the Consolidating Statements of Net Cost, Consolidating 

Balance Sheets, and Consolidating Statements of Changes 

in Net Position, all significant intra-agency balances and 

transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. No such 

eliminations have been made on the CSBR. Certain amounts 

of expenses eliminated on the Consolidating Statements of 

Net Cost are imputed costs for which the matching resource 

is not revenue on this statement, but imputed resources 

provided by others, displayed on the Consolidating 

Statements of Changes in Net Position. Accordingly, on 

the Consolidating Statements of Net Cost the revenues and 

expense eliminations do not match. The Consolidating 

Statements of Changes in Net Position display the offsetting 

balances between these categories. 

The preparation of financial statements requires management 

to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported 

amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent 

assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements 

and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during 

the reporting period. Actual results may differ from those 

estimates.

C. Revenue Recognition and Appropriations Used

Substantially all revenues reported by GSA’s funds on the 

Consolidating Statements of Net Cost are generated from 

intragovernmental sales of goods and services. GSA earns 

97 percent of revenues from other Federal customers. 

Expenses are primarily incurred with non-Federal entities 

supplying the underlying goods and services being 

provided to GSA’s Federal customers, with only two percent 

of operating expenses resulting from purchases from 

Federal agencies. Each fund has established rate-setting 

processes governed by the laws authorizing its activities. 

In most cases, the rates charged are intended to cover the 

full cost that the funds will pay to provide such goods and 

services and to provide capital maintenance. In accordance 

with the governing laws, rates are generally not designed 

to recover costs covered by other funds or entities of the 

U.S. government, such as for post-employment and other 

inter-entity costs. Revenues from non-Federal entities make 

up an immaterial portion of GSA’s total sales. Accordingly, 

where not otherwise governed by law, unique rates for nonFederal customers have generally not been established. 

Generally, Revolving Fund and reimbursable General Fund 

revenue is recognized when goods have been delivered or 

services rendered. 

■ In the FBF, rent revenues are earned based on occupancy 

agreements with customers, as space and services 

are provided. Generally, agencies are billed for space 

at rent based upon commercial rates for comparable 

space. In some instances special rates are arranged 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

136 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
in accordance with Congressional guidance or other 

authorized purposes. Most agencies using funding 

from Trust Funds have rent rates set to recover full cost. 

Revenue under nonrecurring reimbursable building 

repairs and alterations (R&A) projects is recognized 

under the percentage-of-completion method.

■ In the ASF, Global Supply revenues are recognized as 

goods are provided to customers. Vehicle Acquisition 

and Leasing revenues are recognized when goods are 

provided and based on rental agreements over the 

period vehicles are dispatched. Commercial Acquisitions 

revenues are recognized when goods are provided, 

and fee revenues in the GSA Schedules programs are 

earned based on estimated and actual usage of GSA’s 

contracting vehicles by other agencies. The Schedules 

programs generated $286 million in fees, constituting 

three percent of ASF revenues in FY 2008, and $267 

million (three percent of ASF revenues) in FY 2007. 

Professional Services revenues are recognized when 

goods and services are provided. Telecommunications 

service revenues are generally recognized based on 

customer usage or on fixed line rates. IT Solutions 

revenues are earned when goods or services are 

provided or as reimbursable project costs are incurred. 

■ In the WCF, revenues are generally recognized as 

general management and administrative services are 

provided to the Service components of GSA and to 

external customers. Such WCF revenues are earned in 

accordance with agreements that recover the direct cost 

and an allocation of indirect costs from the components 

of GSA receiving those services. 

Non-Exchange Revenues are recognized on an accrual basis 

on the Consolidating Statements of Changes in Net Position 

for sales of surplus real property, reimbursements due from 

the audit of payments to transportation carriers, and other 

miscellaneous items resulting from GSA’s operations where 

ultimate collections must be deposited in miscellaneous 

receipt accounts of the U.S. Treasury. Non-Exchange 

Revenues are reported net of associated bad debt expense 

on uncollectible accounts.

Appropriations for General Fund and Special Fund activities 

are recorded as a financing source on the Consolidating 

Statements of Changes in Net Position when expended. 

Unexpended appropriations are reported as an element of 

Net Position on the Consolidating Balance Sheets.

D. Fund Balance with Treasury 

This total represents all unexpended balances for GSA’s 

accounts with the U.S. Treasury. Amounts in Fund Balance 

with Treasury are based on the balances reported on the 

books of the U.S. Treasury, as the official record of the 

Federal government. Adjustments are only made to those 

amounts when significant errors are identified.

GSA acts as a disposal agent for surplus Federal real and 

personal property. In some cases, public law entitles 

the owning agency to the sales proceeds, net of disposal 

expenses incurred by GSA. Proceeds from the disposal 

of equipment are generally retained by GSA to replace 

equipment. Under GSA’s legislative authorities, the gross 

proceeds from some sales are deposited in GSA’s Special 

Fund receipt accounts and recorded as Non-Exchange 

Revenues in the Consolidating Statements of Changes in 

Net Position. A portion of these proceeds is subsequently 

transferred to a Special Fund to finance expenses incurred in 

disposing of surplus property. The remainder is periodically 

accumulated and transferred, by law, to the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund administered by the U.S. Department of 

the Interior (DOI).

E. Inventories

Inventories held for sale to other Federal agencies consist 

primarily of ASF inventories, which are valued at historical 

cost, generally determined on a moving average basis. The 

recorded values are adjusted for the results of physical 

inventories taken periodically in accordance with a cyclical 

counting plan. In the ASF, $5.4 million of the balances in 

inventories held for sale are excess inventories. Excess 

inventories are defined as those exceeding the economic 

retention limit (i.e., the number of units of stock which may 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 137
Notes to the Financial Statements

be held in inventory without incurring excessive carrying 

costs). Excess inventories are generally transferred to 

another Federal agency, sold, or donated to state or local 

governments.

In the FBF, inventory balances consist of operating 

supplies and materials that will be consumed in operations. 

In accordance with FASAB SFFAS No. 3, Accounting 

for Inventory and Related Property, as balances of these 

supplies are immaterial and in the hands of end users for 

use in normal operations, they are accounted for using the 

purchases method. Amounts on hand at the end of the 

reporting period are valued at market for presentation on 

the Consolidating Balance Sheets.

F. Property and Equipment (See Note 5)

Generally, property and equipment purchases and additions 

of $10,000 or more and having a useful life of two or more 

years are capitalized and valued at cost. Property and 

equipment transferred to GSA from other Federal agencies 

on the date GSA was established is stated at the transfer 

value, which approximates historical cost. Subsequent 

thereto, equipment transferred to GSA is stated at net 

book value, and surplus real and related personal property 

transferred to GSA is stated at the lower of net book value 

or appraised value.

Expenditures for major additions, replacements, and 

alterations to real property of $50,000 or more are 

capitalized. Normal repair and maintenance costs are 

expensed as incurred. The cost of R&A and of leasehold 

improvements performed by GSA, but financed by other 

agencies, is not capitalized in GSA’s financial statements as 

such amounts are transferred to the other agencies upon 

completion of the project. Substantially all land, buildings, 

and leasehold improvements are leased to other Federal 

agencies under short-term cancellable agreements.

Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment 

are calculated on a straight-line basis over their initial 

or remaining useful lives. Leasehold improvements are 

amortized over the lesser of their useful lives, generally five 

years, or the unexpired lease term. Buildings capitalized by 

the FBF at its inception in 1974 were assigned remaining 

useful lives of 30 years. Prior to 1974, no depreciation 

was recorded by GSA. It is GSA policy to capitalize 

construction costs in the Land and Buildings accounts upon 

project completion. Buildings acquired under capital lease 

agreements are also depreciated over 30 years. Major and 

minor building renovation projects carry estimated useful 

lives of 20 years and 10 years, respectively.

Telecommunications equipment and automated data 

processing equipment are used in operations to perform 

services for other Federal agencies for which billings are 

rendered. Most of the assets comprising Other Equipment 

are used internally by GSA. Telecommunications and 

other equipment are depreciated over periods generally 

ranging from three to 10 years. Automated data processing 

equipment is depreciated over periods generally ranging 

from three to five years.

Motor vehicles are generally depreciated over four to six 

years.

In accordance with FASAB SFFAS No. 10, Accounting for 

Internal Use Software, capitalization of software development 

costs incurred for systems having a useful life of two years or 

more is required. With implementation of this standard, GSA 

adopted minimum dollar thresholds per system that would be 

required before capitalization would be warranted. For the 

FBF, this minimum threshold is $1 million. For all other 

funds, it is $250,000. Once completed, software applications 

are depreciated over an estimated useful life determined 

on a case-by-case basis, ranging from three to 10 years. 

Capitalized software is reported as an element of Other 

Equipment on the Consolidating Balance Sheets.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

138 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
G. Annual, Sick, and Other Types of Leave

Annual leave liability is accrued as it is earned and the accrual is 

relieved as leave is taken. Each year the balance in the accrued 

annual leave account is adjusted to reflect current pay rates.

Sick leave and other types of nonvested leave are expensed as 

taken.

❷ Fund Balance With Treasury

A. Reconciliation to U.S. Treasury 

There were only negligible differences between amounts 

reported by GSA and those reported to the U.S. Treasury as of 

September 30, 2008 and 2007. 

B. Balances by Fund Type

GSA’s most significant amounts in Fund Balance with Treasury 

are found in its revolving funds such as the FBF and ASF. Within 

the Other Funds category, Special Receipt and Special and 

Trust Expenditure Funds are classified as earmarked funds 

in accordance with FASAB SFFAS No. 27, Identifying and 

Reporting Earmarked Funds. The fund balances in the Other 

Funds category contains amounts in the following fund types 

(dollars in millions):

2008 2007

Revolving Funds $ 234 $ 195

Appropriated and General Funds 128 173

Special Receipt Funds 118 114

Special and Trust Expenditure Funds 45 48

Deposit Funds 55 79

Total Other Funds $ 580 $ 609

C. Relationship to the Budget

In accordance with FASAB SFFAS No. 1, Accounting for Selected 

Assets and Liabilities, the following information is provided to 

further identify amounts in Fund Balance with Treasury as of 

September 30, 2008 and 2007, against which obligations have 

been made, and for unobligated balances, to identify amounts 

available for future expenditures and those only available to 

liquidate prior obligations. Unobligated balances presented 

below will not equal related amounts reported on the CSBR. In 

the FBF, the CSBR includes balances associated with borrowing 

authority for which actual funds have not yet been realized 

(see Note 6). In the Other Funds group, the schedule below 

includes unavailable unobligated balances of Special Receipt 

and Deposit Funds, shown above in Note 2-B, which are not 

reportable for purposes of the CSBR. The following schedule 

presents elements of the Fund Balance with Treasury (dollars 

in millions):

Obligated

Balance, 

Net

Unobligated Balance

available Unavailable TOTAL

2008

FBF $1,088 $4,035 $ 642 $ 5,765

ASF (537) 1,216 41 720

Others 183 59 338 580

Total $ 734 $ 5,310 $ 1,021 $ 7,065

2007

FBF $ 1,087 $ 4,392 $ 141 $ 5,620

ASF (388) 1,170 - 782

Others 168 108 333 609

Total $ 867 $ 5,670 $ 474 $ 7,011 

D. Availability of Funds

In GSA’s earmarked Special Receipt Funds, included in balances 

of Fund Balance with Treasury, are certain amounts that may be 

transferred to either the U.S. Treasury or the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund (see Note 1-D). These amounts, related 

to the Transportation Audits program, Acquisition Workforce 

Training program, and surplus real property disposals, are 

subject to transfer subsequent to GSA’s determination of the 

internal working capital needs of these programs. Such amounts 

totaled $118 million and $114 million at September 30, 2008 

and 2007, respectively, of which $46 million and $43 million, 

respectively, were recorded as liabilities in the Consolidating 

Balance Sheets.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 139
Notes to the Financial Statements

At September 30, 2008 and 2007, the amounts in Fund Balance 

with Treasury that were no longer available for expenditure and 

for which related authorities cancelled, totaled $0.2 million, 

and $4 million, respectively. Of these amounts, substantially 

all balances were transferred back to the Special Fund Receipt 

Accounts from which they were appropriated, with minor 

amounts returned to the Treasury General Fund.

A portion of Fund Balance with Treasury also includes amounts 

where authority to incur new obligations has expired, but 

are available to liquidate residual obligations that originated 

when the funds were available. Such expired balances totaled 

$46 million and $40 million at September 30, 2008 and 2007, 

respectively.

The FBF has balances that are temporarily not available in 

accordance with annual appropriation acts that limit the 

amount of reimbursable resources that are available for 

spending each year. Such amounts totaled $288 million and 

$141 million at September 30, 2008 and 2007, respectively, and 

will not be available for expenditure except as authorized in 

future appropriation acts. 

Under ASF legislative authorities, GSA is allowed to retain 

earnings to ensure the fund has sufficient resources to support 

operations in association with a cost and capital planning 

process as approved by the Administrator of GSA. At the end 

of FY 2008 and 2007, management determined that all earnings 

will be retained in accordance with this process.

Effective on October 1, 2004, Public Law 108-309 transferred 

the balances of the Panama Canal Revolving Fund to GSA as 

the Panama Canal Commission was abolished. At September 

30, 2006, this fund contained $41 million of balances being 

retained to liquidate claims related to that commission and 

its responsibilities. In FY 2007, all remaining legal issues 

were resolved and the remaining balance was returned to the 

government of Panama.

❸ Non-Entity Assets

As of September 30, 2008 and 2007, certain amounts reported 

on the balance sheet are not available to management for use 

in ongoing operations and are classified as Non-entity assets 

(see Note 1-A). These balances consisted of $70 million and 

$111 million, respectively in Fund Balance with Treasury.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

140 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Substantially all accounts receivable are from other Federal agencies. Unbilled accounts receivable result from the delivery of 

goods or performance of services for which bills have not yet been rendered. Allowances for doubtful accounts are recorded using 

aging methodologies based on analysis of historical collections and write-offs.

A summary of Accounts Receivable is as follows (dollars in millions):

❹ Accounts Receivable

Federal 

Buildings 

Fund

Acquisition 

Services 

Fund Other Funds

LESS: 

INTRA-GSA

ELIMINATIONS

GSA 

Consolidated 

Totals

2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007

Accounts Receivable - Billed $ 143 $ 112 $ 108 $ 113 $ 35 $ 36 $ - $ - $ 286 $ 261

Accounts Receivable - Unbilled 288 251 1,209 1,000 5 2 28 21 1,474 1,232

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts (17) (7) (2) (3) (4) (3) - - (23) (13)

Total Accounts Receivables 414 356 1,315 1,110 36 35 28 21 1,737 1,480

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 141
Notes to the Financial Statements

❺ Property and Equipment

A. Summary of Balances

In FY 2007, GSA recorded capitalized interest costs of $3.1 million in the Construction in Process account associated with debt 

provided by the U.S. Treasury’s Federal Financing Bank (FFB), as discussed in Note 6. There was no such interest capitalized in 

FY 2008. Balances in GSA’s Property and Equipment accounts subject to depreciation as of September 30, 2008 and 2007, are 

summarized below (dollars in millions):

2008 2007

Cost

Accumulated

Depreciation

Net Book 

Value Cost

Accumulated

Depreciation

Net Book 

Value

Buildings $ 29,110 $ 14,502 $ 14,608 $ 27,656 $ 13,506 $ 14,150 

Leasehold Improvements 286 210 76 288 206 82 

Telecom and ADP Equipment 93 90 3 100 92 8 

Motor Vehicles 4,268 1,324 2,944 4,086 1,260 2,826 

Other Equipment 383 244 139 334 195 139 

Total $ 34,140 $ 16,370 $ 17,770 $ 32,464 $ 15,259 $ 17,205 

B. Cleanup Costs

In GSA’s FBF, certain properties contain environmental 

hazards that will ultimately need to be removed and/or 

require containment mechanisms to prevent health risks to 

the public. Cleanup of such hazards is governed by various 

Federal and state laws. The laws most applicable to GSA are 

the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation 

and Liability Act of 1980, the Clean Air Act, and the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act.

In accordance with FASAB SFFAS Numbers 5 and 6, 

Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government and 

Accounting for Property Plant and Equipment, respectively, 

and interpretive guidance in Federal Financial Accounting 

and Auditing Technical Release Number 2 issued by the 

Accounting and Auditing Policy Committee, if an agency 

is required by law to clean up such hazard, the estimated 

amount of cleanup cost must be reported in the financial 

statements. Accordingly, GSA recognized liabilities 

totaling $103 million and $105 million for Environmental 

and Disposals costs as of September 30, 2008, and 2007, 

respectively, for properties currently in GSA’s property 

inventory. In instances where no reasonable estimate of 

the cost to clean up a particular site could be made, GSA 

recognized the estimated costs for related environmental 

studies as is prescribed in the guidance noted above. 

Management has estimated an additional $15 million in 

both FYs 2008 and 2007, of potential cleanup costs where 

it is only possible that GSA could incur additional costs. In 

some instances, GSA has been named as a party in certain 

environmental cases where the subject property is no longer 

in the GSA or Federal property inventory. GSA’s liability for 

such cases is further discussed in Note 10.

C. Heritage Assets

With an average age of GSA’s buildings being over 46 

years old, many buildings have historical, cultural, and/or 

architectural significance. While GSA uses these buildings 

to meet the office space and other needs of the Federal 

government, maintaining and preservation of historical 

elements is a significant priority. In accordance with 

SSFAS No. 29, Heritage Assets and Stewardship Land, these 

buildings meet the definition of Multi-use Heritage Assets, 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

142 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
and are reportable within general property, plant, and 

equipment on the Consolidating Balance Sheets. 

GSA defines its Historic Buildings as those buildings that 

are either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, 

have formally been determined eligible, or appear to meet 

eligibility criteria to be listed. GSA has 293 buildings on the 

National Register, of which 107 are designated as National 

Historical Landmarks. An additional 187 buildings are 

potentially eligible for listing on the National Register, but 

have not gone through the formal determination process. 

Under the National Historic Preservation Act, GSA is required 

to give these buildings special consideration, including first 

preference for Federal use, and rehabilitation in accordance 

with standards established by the DOI.

Owen B. Pickett U.S. Custom House, Norfolk, VA

❻ Intragovernmental Debt

A. Lease Purchase Debt

Starting in FY 1991, GSA entered into several agreements to 

fund the purchase of land and construction of buildings under 

the FBF lease purchase authority. Under these agreements, 

the FBF borrows monies (as advance payments) through 

the FFB or executes lease-to-own contracts to finance the 

lease purchases. Mortgage loans and construction advances 

held by the FFB are due at various dates from June 28, 

2021, through August 1, 2035, at interest rates ranging from 

3.935 percent to 8.561 percent. The program authorizes 

total expenditures of $1,945 million for 11 projects. In FYs 

2008 and 2007, the FFB made advance payments on behalf 

of GSA totaling $8 million and $18 million, respectively. 

As of September 30, 2008 and 2007, $42 million and $50 

million, respectively, of borrowing authority under the 

lease purchase program remained available for additional 

advance payments.

Resources to retire debt are obtained from annual revenues 

generated by the FBF. Aggregate debt maturities are as 

follows (dollars in millions): 2009 - $47; 2010 - $50; 2011 - $54; 

2012 - $57; 2013 - $61; 2014 and beyond - $1,161.

B. Pennsylvania Avenue Debt

The former Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation 

(PADC) originally received authority to borrow from the 

FFB to finance construction of the Ronald Reagan Building 

(RRB) in Washington, D.C., with a project budget of $738 

million. Effective March 31, 1996, the PADC was dissolved, 

with portions of its functions, assets, and liabilities being 

transferred to GSA, including the RRB.

Subsequent legislation consolidated GSA’s portion of these 

assets and liabilities into the FBF, in which the cost and 

associated debt for the RRB is now recorded. Mortgage 

loans for the RRB are due November 2, 2026, at interest 

rates ranging from 4.004 percent to 8.323 percent.

No additional amounts are anticipated to be borrowed 

under this authority.

Aggregate maturities on debt related to the RRB are as follows 

(dollars in millions): 2009 - $19; 2010 - $20; 2011 - $22; 

2012 - $23; 2013 - $25; 2014 and beyond - $559.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 143
Notes to the Financial Statements

GSA also uses a small volume of operating leases of vehicles 

in the ASF to fill demand when sufficient owned vehicles 

are not available. The following are schedules of future 

minimum rental payments required under leases that have 

initial or remaining non-cancellable terms in excess of one 

year, and under capital leases together with the present value 

of the future minimum lease payments (dollars in millions): 

Operating Leases

FISCAL YEAR TOTAL

2009 $ 4,338

2010 3,457

2011 3,060

2012 2,660

2013 2,193

2014 and thereafter 8,152

Total future minimum lease payments $ 23,860

Capital Leases

FISCAL YEAR FBF

2009 $ 32

2010 31

2011 32

2012 32

2013 31

2014 and thereafter 240

Total future minimum lease payments 398

Less: Amounts representing–

Interest 135

Executory Costs 2

Total obligations under capital leases $ 261

Substantially all leased space maintained by the FBF is 

sublet to other Federal agencies at rent charges based upon 

approximate commercial rates for comparable space. The 

agreements covering the sublease arrangements allow 

customer agencies to terminate the sublease at any time. In 

most cases, however, GSA believes the subleases will continue 

without interruption. Rental income under subleasing 

agreements approximated $5.3 billion and $5.0 billion for 

the FYs ended September 30, 2008 and 2007, respectively. 

C. Schedules of Debt Arrangements

GSA’s outstanding debt arrangements in the FBF at 

September 20, 2008, and 2007, were as follows (dollars in 

millions):

2008 2007

Lease Purchase Debt $1,430 $ 1,465

Pennsylvania Avenue Debt 668 686

Total GSA Debt $2,098 $ 2,151

❼ Workers’ Compensation Benefits

The Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) provides 

income and medical cost protection to covered Federal civilian 

employees injured on the job, employees who have incurred 

a work-related occupational disease, and beneficiaries of 

employees whose death is attributable to a job-related injury 

or occupational disease. The FECA program is administered by 

the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), which initially pays valid 

claims and subsequently seeks reimbursement from the Federal 

agencies employing the claimants. DOL provides the actuarial 

liability for claims outstanding at the end of each fiscal year. This 

liability includes the estimated future costs of death benefits, 

workers’ compensation, and medical and miscellaneous costs 

for approved compensation cases. The present value of these 

estimates at the end of FY 2008 was calculated by DOL using a 

discount rate of 4.368 percent for FY 2008, and 4.770 percent 

for FY 2009 and thereafter. At the end of FY 2007, the discount 

rate used was 4.930 percent for FY 2007, and 5.078 percent 

for FY 2008 and thereafter. At September 30, 2008 and 2007, 

GSA’s actuarial liability totaled $164 million and $165 million, 

respectively.

❽ Leasing Arrangements

As of September 30, 2008, GSA was committed to various 

non-cancellable operating leases primarily covering 

administrative office space and storage facilities maintained 

by the FBF. Many of these leases contain escalation clauses 

tied to inflationary and tax increases, and renewal options. 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

144 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Rent expense under all operating leases, including shortterm non-cancellable leases, was approximately $4.6 billion 

and $4.4 billion in FYs 2008 and 2007, respectively. The 

Consolidating Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2008 and 

2007, include capital lease assets of $359 million and $362 

million, respectively, for buildings. Aggregate accumulated 

❾ Other Liabilities

As of September 30, 2008 and 2007, amounts reported on the Consolidating Balance Sheets as Other Intragovernmental Liabilities 

and Other Liabilities, which are substantially all long-term in nature, consisted of the following (dollars in millions):

FBF ASF Others

Less: 

Intra-GSA 

Eliminations TOTAL GSA 

2008

Other Intragovernmental Liabilities:

Workers’ Compensation Due to DOL $ 22 $ 8 $ 4 - $ 34

Deposits Held in Suspense - - 14 1 13

Earnings Payable to Treasury - - 47 - 47

Payments Due to the Judgment Fund (Note 10) 308 - - - 308

Total $ 330 $ 8 $ 65 1 $ 402

Other Liabilities:

Contingencies $ 20 $ - $ - - $ 20

Installment Purchase Liabilities 144 - - - 144

Pensions for Former Presidents - - 7 - 7

Unamortized Rent Abatements 155 - - - 155

Total $ 319 $ - $ 7 - $ 326

2007

Other Intragovernmental Liabilities:

Workers’ Compensation Due to DOL $ 22 $ 7 $ 4 $ - $ 33

Deposits Held in Suspense - - 14 - 14

Earnings Payable to Treasury - - 44 - 44

Payments Due to the Judgment Fund (Note 10) 269 - - - 269

Total $ 291 $ 7 $ 62 $ - $ 360

Other Liabilities:

Contingencies $ 28 $ - $ - $ - $ 28

Installment Purchase Liabilities 154 - - - 154

Pensions for Former Presidents - - 7 - 7

Unamortized Rent Abatements 127 - - - 127

Total $ 309 $ - $ 7 $ - $ 316

amortization on such structures totaled $152 million and 

$140 million in those years, respectively. For substantially all 

of its leased property, GSA expects that in the normal course 

of business such leases will be either renewed or replaced in 

accordance with the needs of its customer agencies.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 145
Notes to the Financial Statements

❿ Commitments and Contingencies

A. Commitments and Undelivered Orders

In addition to future lease commitments discussed in Note 8, 

GSA is committed under obligations for goods and services 

that have been ordered but not yet received (undelivered 

orders) at fiscal year-end. Aggregate undelivered orders for 

all GSA activities at September 30, 2008 and 2007, were as 

follows (dollars in millions):

2008 2007

FBF $ 2,677 $ 2,524

ASF 2,711 2,569

Other Funds 149 145

Total Undelivered Orders $ 5,537 $ 5,238

B. Contingencies

GSA is a party in various administrative proceedings, legal 

actions, environmental suits, and claims brought by or 

against it. In the opinion of GSA management and legal 

counsel, the ultimate resolution of these proceedings, 

actions, and claims will not materially affect the financial 

position or results of operations of GSA.

C. Contingencies Covered by GSA Funds

As of September 30, 2008 and 2007, GSA recorded liabilities 

in total of $102 million and $116 million, respectively, for 

pending and threatened legal matters for which, in the 

opinion of GSA management and legal counsel, GSA funds 

will probably incur losses. Of these amounts, $83 million 

and $86 million, respectively, relate to environmental claims. 

Environmental claims are included in Environmental and 

Disposal Liabilities, and the balance of possible contingent 

liabilities are reported within Other Liabilities on the 

Consolidating Balance Sheets.

In addition, GSA had another $112 million and $48 million in 

contingencies at September 30, 2008 and 2007, respectively, 

where it is reasonably possible, but not probable, that 

GSA funds will incur some cost. Accordingly, no balances 

have been recorded in the financial statements for these 

contingencies.

In most cases, legal matters which directly involve GSA 

relate to contractual arrangements GSA has entered 

into either for property and services it has obtained or 

procured on behalf of other Federal agencies. The costs 

of administering, litigating, and resolving these actions are 

generally borne by GSA unless it can recover the cost from 

another Federal agency. Certain legal matters in which 

GSA may be named party are administered and, in some 

instances, litigated by other Federal agencies. Amounts to 

be paid under any decision, settlement, or award pertaining 

thereto are sometimes funded by those agencies.

D. Contingencies Covered by the Judgment Fund

In many cases, tort and environmental claims are administered 

and resolved by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and 

any amounts necessary for resolution are obtained from a 

special Judgment Fund maintained by the U.S. Treasury. 

In accordance with the FASAB’s Interpretation No. 2, 

Accounting for Treasury Judgment Fund Transactions, 

costs incurred by the Federal government are to be reported 

by the agency responsible for incurring the liability, or to 

which liability has been assigned, regardless of the ultimate 

source of funding. In accordance with this interpretation, 

GSA reported $2 million and $24 million in FYs 2008 

and 2007, respectively, of Environmental and Disposals 

and Other Liabilities for contingencies which will require 

funding exclusively through the Judgment Fund. Of those 

amounts, almost $2 million and $24 million result from 

several environmental cases outstanding at the end of FYs 

2008 and 2007, respectively, where GSA has been named 

as a potentially responsible party. Environmental costs are 

estimated in accordance with the FASAB Accounting and 

Auditing Policy Committee’s Federal Financial Accounting 

and Auditing Technical Release No. 2, Determining Probable 

and Reasonably Estimable for Environmental Liabilities in 

the Federal Government. 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

146 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Additional contingencies subject to ultimate funding from 

the Judgment Fund where the risk of loss is reasonably 

possible but not probable ranged from $199 million to $3.6 

billion at September 30, 2008 and ranged from $159 million 

to $3.5 billion at September 30, 2007. 

The recognition of claims to be funded through the Judgment 

Fund on GSA’s Consolidating Statements of Net Cost and 

Consolidating Balance Sheets is, in effect, recognition of 

these liabilities against the Federal government as a whole, 

and should not be interpreted as claims against the assets or 

resources of any GSA fund, nor will any future resources of 

GSA be required to liquidate any resulting losses. Further, 

for most environmental claims, GSA has no managerial 

responsibility other than as custodian and successor on 

claims made against former Federal entities, particularly 

former World War II defense related activities.

Amounts paid from the Judgment Fund on behalf of GSA 

were $108 million and $34 million in FYs 2008 and 2007, 

respectively. Of these amounts, $40 million and $30 million, 

respectively, related to claims filed under the Contract 

Disputes Act for which payments have been or will be made 

to reimburse the Judgment Fund by the GSA funds liable 

under the contracts in dispute. The balance of claims paid 

on behalf of GSA does not require reimbursement to the 

Judgment Fund.

⓫ Unfunded Liabilities

As of September 30, 2008 and 2007, budgetary resources 

were not yet available to fund certain liabilities reported on 

the Consolidating Balance Sheets. For such liabilities, most 

are long-term in nature where funding is generally made 

available in the year payments are due or anticipated. The 

portion of liabilities reported on the Consolidating Balance 

Sheets that are not covered by budgetary resources consists 

of the following (dollars in millions): 

2008 2007

Intragovernmental Debt $ 20 $ 31

Other Intragovernmental 

Liabilities 402 360

Obligations Under Capital 

Lease 241 252

Workers’ Compensation 

Actuarial Liabilities 164 165

Environmental and Disposal 105 129

Annual Leave Liability 97 92

Other Liabilities 326 316

Total Liabilities Not Covered

 By Budgetary Resources $ 1,355 $ 1,345

In addition, all balances reported in the Consolidating 

Balance Sheets under the caption Deposit Fund Liability, 

as well as amounts shown as Other Intragovernmental 

Liabilities - Deposits Held in Suspense and Earnings 

Payable to Treasury in Note 9, while also unfunded by 

definition (as no budgetary resources have been applied), 

will be liquidated from resources outside of the traditional 

budgeting process and require no further Congressional 

action to do so.

⓬ Reconciliation to the President’s Budget

In accordance with FASAB SFFAS No. 7, Accounting for 

Revenue and Other Financing Sources and Concepts for 

Reconciling Budgetary and Financial Accounting, if there 

are differences between amounts reported in these financial 

statements versus those reported in the most recent Budget 

of the United States Government (President’s Budget), they 

must be disclosed. With the President’s Budget generally 

released in February each year, the most current comparable 

data is the FY 2009 President’s Budget, which contains 

FY 2007 financial statement results. The FY 2010 President’s 

Budget, containing FY 2008 actual results is expected to be 

released in February 2009 on OMB’s Web site. The portion 

of the President’s Budget relating specifically to GSA can be 

found in the appendix of that report. Balances submitted to 

the U.S. Treasury constitute the basis for reporting of actual 

results in the President’s Budget. 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 147
Notes to the Financial Statements

FBF ASF Others TOTAL

CSBR President’s

Budget

CSBR President’s

Budget

CSBR President’s

Budget

CSBR President’s

Budget

Difference

Budgetary Resources $13,649 $ 13,594 $ 10,474 $10,474 $ 876 $ 829 $24,999 $24,897 $ 102

Obligations Incurred 9,083 9,119 9,304 9,303 660 659 19,047 19,081 (34)

Unobligated Balances 4,566 4,475 1,170 1,171 216 169 5,952 5,815 137

Balance of Obligations 1,104 1,196 (388) (389) 168 171 884 978 (94)

Outlays (5) (5) (104) (104) 140 247 31 138 (107)

Budgetary

Resources

Obligations 

Incurred

Unobligated 

Balance

Obligated 

Balance

Net

Outlays

Combined Statement of Budgetary 

Resources $ 24,999 $ 19,047 $ 5,952 $ 884 $ 31

Expired Funds, Not Reflected in the Budget (55) – (54) (1) –

Amounts Cancelled in Other Funds, 

Not Reflected in the Budget 7 – 7 – –

FBF Statistical Sampling, Not Reflected in 

the Budget (56) 36 (92) 92 –

Offsetting Receipts Not Reflected in the 

Budget – – – – 108

Rounding 2 (2) 2 3 (1)

Budget of the U.S. Government $ 24,897 $ 19,081 $ 5,815 $ 978 $ 138

Differences between the CSBR and the President’s Budget 

can be due to adjustments identified by GSA during the 

preparation of the CSBR, which occurred after the U.S. 

Treasury’s deadline for reporting of fund balances and 

budget execution results. Such adjustments to the balances 

reported to the U.S. Treasury were made on the CSBR to 

more fully reflect the activity for the fiscal year ended, and 

for balances as of September 30, 2007. 

The basis of the CSBR is data reported to the U.S. Treasury on 

the Reports on Budget Execution and Budgetary Resources 

(SF 133s). However, as the CSBR is being developed, 

items may be identified that require adjustment to the data 

originally submitted on the SF 133s, which would create 

differences between the CSBR and the President’s Budget. 

Generally, such items are identified after the deadlines for 

reporting to the U.S. Treasury, and reflect reclassifications 

of balances to report the proper status of obligations or 

budgetary resources. For FY 2007, the only significant 

differences were due to the effect of adjustments recorded 

in the FBF, based on statistical sampling techniques which 

were not sufficiently detailed for SF 133 reporting. 

Additional reconciling differences are caused by the 

presentation style of the President’s Budget, which 

excludes Budgetary Resources, Obligations Incurred, and 

Unobligated Balances in expired annual funds, as well as 

offsetting collections, which are required for reporting on 

the CSBR.

In some instances OMB may require additional changes to 

actual reported results for pending or known changes in 

legislation that affect future presentations. Small rounding 

differences also exist due to differences in display of the 

CSBR versus the President’s Budget.

Below are two schedules highlighting the most significant 

comparable amounts reported in the FY 2007 CSBR and 

FY 2009 President’s Budget (dollars in millions). The 

first schedule shows the total differences where the CSBR 

contains balances greater or (less) than amounts reported in 

the President’s Budget by fund. Following this is a second 

schedule displaying the components of each difference at 

the consolidated level.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

148 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
⓭ Combining Statements of Budgetary

Resources

The CSBR presents GSA’s budgetary results in accordance 

with reporting requirements prescribed in OMB Circular A-11, 

Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget, 

which identifies budgetary resources available for spending, 

the status of those resources, and the relationship between 

obligated balances and outlays (see Note 12). For balances 

reported as obligations incurred, the ASF includes $473 million 

classified as Category B, while all other significant balances in 

the ASF and the rest of GSA’s funds are classified as Category 

A in accordance with OMB apportionment guidelines. In 

consolidated reporting by OMB and the U.S. Treasury, for the 

U.S. government as a whole, substantially all of GSA’s program 

operations and operating results are categorized as general 

government functions.

Balances reported on the CSBR as Prior Year Recoveries 

generally reflect the downward adjustment of obligations that 

originated in prior fiscal years which have been cancelled or 

reduced in the current fiscal year. These balances may also 

include the effect of adjustments caused when an obligation is 

modified to change the applicable program, or budget activity. 

In managing and controlling spending in GSA’s funds on a fundby-fund basis, unique budget control levels (such as programs, 

budget activities, or projects) are established. These levels are 

based on legislative limitations, OMB apportionment limitations, 

as well as management-defined allotment control limitations, in 

order to track and monitor amounts available for spending and 

obligations incurred against such amounts, as is required under 

the Antideficiency Act. When an obligation from a prior year is 

modified to change the budget control level of an obligation, 

a Prior Year Recovery would be credited to the level that was 

initially charged, and Obligations Incurred would be charged 

to the new level. While there may be no net change to total 

obligations in a particular fund, offsetting balances from the 

upward and downward adjustments would be reported on the 

corresponding lines of the CSBR.

The basis of the CSBR is data reported to the U.S. Treasury on 

the SF 133s. However, as the CSBR is being developed, items 

may be identified that require adjustment to the data originally 

submitted on the SF 133s. Generally, such items are identified 

after the deadlines for reporting to the U.S. Treasury, and 

reflect reclassifications of balances to reflect the proper status 

of obligations or budgetary resources. For FY 2008, significant 

differences were due to the effect of adjustments made to the 

CSBR as a result of statistical samples used to validate balances 

reportable as Undelivered Orders and Delivered Orders in the 

FBF. Projections of such adjustments are based on extrapolations of aggregate amounts which could not readily be determined to the detailed levels that are required to accompany SF 

133 reporting.

Also in the FBF, during FY 2008, management identified $276 

million in contract obligations from FY 2007, which were not 

reported in GSA’s FY 2007 CSBR. OMB Circular A-11 guidance 

for SF 133 reporting states that such balances, regardless of 

materiality, be reported as adjustments to the Unobligated 

Balance, Net – Beginning Balance, and Obligated Balance, 

Net - Beginning Balance. As these obligations are not material 

to the FBF to warrant restatement of the CSBR, the balances 

are reported as FY 2008 obligations incurred (for upward 

adjustments) on the CSBR, in accordance with OMB Circular 

A-136, resulting in differences between the two reports. 

As a result of these conditions, the following differences existed 

between the CSBR and SF 133s of the FBF for FY 2008 due to 

increases (decreases) to the CSBR (dollars in millions):

Unobligated Balance, Net – Beginning $ 368

Unobligated Balance, Net – Ending $ 105

Prior Year Recoveries $ (58)

Obligations Incurred $ (205)

Obligated Balance – Beginning $ (368)

Obligated Balance – Ending $ (105)

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 149
Notes to the Financial Statements

In the ASF, during FY 2008, management identified $220 

million in Unfilled Customer Orders (UFCO) that originated 

in FY 2007, but were not reported in GSA’s FY 2007 CSBR. 

While these balances were not material to the ASF, the 

differences in OMB requirements for SF 133 reporting and 

reporting of the CSBR, noted above, created imbalances 

between the reports. Differences in balances reported 

between the CSBR and SF 133’s of the ASF for FY 2008 

due to increases (decreases) to the CSBR were as follows 

(dollars in millions):

Unobligated Balance, Net – Beginning $ (220)

Change in Unfilled Customer Orders $ 220

Obligated Balance – Beginning $ 220

⓮ Consolidating Statements of Changes

in Net Position

A. Cumulative Results of Operations

Cumulative results of operations for Revolving Funds include the 

net cost of operations since their inception, reduced by funds 

returned to the U.S. Treasury, by Congressional rescissions, and 

by transfers to other Federal agencies, in addition to balances 

representing invested capital. Invested capital includes 

amounts provided to fund certain GSA assets, principally land, 

buildings, construction in process, and equipment, as well as 

appropriated capital provided as the corpus of a fund (generally 

to meet operating working capital needs).

GSA’s FBF, ASF, WCF, and FCICF have legislative authority to 

retain portions of their cumulative results for specific purposes. 

The FBF retains cumulative results to finance future operations 

and construction, subject to appropriation by Congress. In the 

ASF, earnings are retained to cover the cost of replacing the 

motor vehicle fleet and supply inventory as well as to provide 

financing for major systems acquisitions and improvements, 

contract conversion costs, major contingencies, and to 

maintain sufficient working capital. The WCF retains earnings 

to finance future operations. The FCICF retains cumulative 

results to finance future operations, subject to appropriation 

by Congress.

Cumulative Results of Operations on the Consolidating Balance 

Sheets include immaterial balances of earmarked funds as 

defined in FASAB SFFAS No. 27. As further discussed in Notes 1 

and 2, earmarked balances are those reported in GSA’s Special 

Funds, within the Other Funds display on the Consolidating 

Balance Sheets. 

B. Unexpended Appropriations

Unexpended Appropriations consist of unobligated balances 

and undelivered orders, net of UFCOs in funds that receive 

appropriations. UFCOs are orders placed by GSA with vendors 

for goods and services that have not been received. Unfilled 

customer orders are reimbursable orders placed with GSA by 

other agencies, other GSA funds, or from the public, where GSA 

has yet to provide the good or service requested. At September 

30, 2008 and 2007, balances reported as unexpended 

appropriations were as follows (dollars in millions):

2008 2007

Unobligated Balances:

Available $ 18 $ 35

Unavailable 218 40

Undelivered Orders 54 64

Unfilled Customer Orders (10) (18)

Total Unexpended Appropriations $ 280 $ 121

⓯ Employee Benefit Plans

A. Background

Although GSA funds a portion of pension benefits for its 

employees under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) 

and the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), and 

makes the necessary payroll withholdings from them, GSA 

is not required to disclose the assets of the systems or the 

actuarial data with respect to accumulated plan benefits 

or the unfunded pension liability relative to its employees. 

Reporting such amounts is the direct responsibility of OPM. 

Reporting of health care benefits for retired employees is 

also the direct responsibility of OPM.

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

150 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
In accordance with FASAB SFFAS No. 5, Accounting for 

Liabilities of the Federal Government, GSA recognizes the 

normal cost of pension programs and the normal cost of 

other post-employment health and life insurance benefits, 

as defined in that standard, on the Consolidating Statements 

of Net Cost. While these costs will ultimately be funded 

out of direct appropriations made to OPM and do not 

require funding by GSA activities, they are an element 

of government-wide costs incurred as a result of GSA’s 

operations.

B. Civil Service Retirement System

At the end of FY 2008, 25.6 percent (down from 27.9 percent 

in FY 2007) of GSA employees were covered by the CSRS, 

a defined benefit plan. Total GSA (employer) contributions 

(7.5 percent of base pay for law enforcement employees, 

and 7.0 percent for all others) to CSRS for all employees 

amounted to $20 million and $22 million in FYs 2008 and 

2007, respectively.

C. Federal Employees Retirement System

On January 1, 1987, the FERS, a mixed system of defined 

benefit and defined contribution plans, went into effect 

pursuant to Public Law 99-335. Employees hired after 

December 31, 1983, were automatically covered by FERS 

and Social Security while employees hired prior to January 

1, 1984, elected to either join FERS and Social Security or 

remain in CSRS. As of September 30, 2008, 73.9 percent 

(up from 71.7 percent in FY 2007) of GSA’s employees 

were covered under FERS. One of the primary differences 

between FERS and CSRS is that FERS offers automatic 

and matching contributions into the Federal government’s 

Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) for each employee. Under CSRS, 

employees can invest up to 10 percent of their base pay in 

the TSP. Employees under FERS can invest up to 15 percent 

of base pay, plus GSA will automatically contribute one 

percent of base pay and then match employee contributions 

up to an additional four percent of base pay. During FYs 

2008 and 2007, GSA (employer) contributions to FERS 

(24.9 percent of base pay for law enforcement employees 

and 11.2 percent for all others) totaled $79 million and 

$73 million, respectively. Additional GSA contributions to 

the TSP totaled $31 million and $28 million in FYs 2008 and 

2007, respectively.

D. Social Security System

GSA also makes matching contributions to the U.S. Social 

Security Administration (SSA) under the Federal Insurance 

Contributions Act (FICA). For employees covered by FERS, 

GSA contributed matching amounts of 6.2 percent of gross 

pay (up to $102,000 in calendar year 2008, and $97,500 

in calendar year 2007) to SSA’s Old-Age, Survivors, and 

Disability Insurance (OASDI) program in calendar year 

2008. Additionally, GSA makes matching contributions for 

all employees of 1.45 percent of gross pay to the Medicare 

Hospital Insurance program in calendar year 2008. In both 

FYs 2008 and 2007, only 0.5 percent of GSA’s employees are 

covered exclusively by these programs. Payments to these 

programs in FYs 2008 and 2007 amounted to $59 million 

and $55 million, respectively.

E. Schedule of Unfunded Benefit Costs

Amounts recorded in FYs 2008 and 2007, in accordance 

with FASAB SFFAS No. 5 for imputed post-employment 

benefits are as follows (dollars in millions):

PENSION

BENEFITS

Health/Life

INSURANCE TOTAL

2008

FBF $ 13 $ 29 $ 42

ASF 11 16 27

Other Funds 7 11 18

Total $ 31 $ 56 $ 87 

2007

FBF $ 13 $ 29 $ 42

ASF 12 18 30

Other Funds 8 11 19

Total $ 33 $ 58 $ 91 

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 151
Notes to the Financial Statements

⓰ Reconciliation of Net Costs of Operations to Budget

The recognition of earning reimbursable budgetary resources and spending budgetary resources on the CSBR generally 

has a direct or causal relationship to revenues and expenses recognized on the Consolidating Statements of Net Cost. 

The reconciliation schedules below bridge the gap between these sources and uses of budgetary resources with the 

operating results reported on the Consolidating Statements of Net Cost for the fiscal years ending on September 30, 2008 

and 2007 (dollars in millions): 

Reconciliation of Net Costs of Operations to Budget

Federal 

Buildings Fund

Acquisition Services 

Fund

2008 2007 2008 2007

Resources Used to Finance Activities

Obligations Incurred $ 9,735 $ 9,083 $ 9,935 $ 9,304

Less: Spending Authority From Offsetting Collections

and Adjustments (9,661) (9,573) (10,022) (8,652)

Financing Imputed for Cost Subsidies 61 56 41 47

Other 7 39 (16) 9

Total Resources Used to Finance Activities 142 (395) (62) 708

Resources Used That Are Not Part of the Net Cost of Operations

(Increase)/Decrease in Goods and Services Ordered But

Not Yet Received (153) (42) (139) 42

Increase/(Decrease) in Unfilled Customer Orders 210 478 168 (787)

Costs Capitalized on the Balance Sheet (1,855) (1,665) (836) (775)

Financing Sources Funding Prior Year Costs (28) (97) 3 4

Other - (5) (9) (173)

Total Resources Used That Are Not Part of 

 the Net Cost of Operations (1,826) (1,331) (813) (1,689)

Costs Financed by Resources Received in Prior Periods

Depreciation and Amortization 1,047 1,029 432 417

Net Book Value of Property Sold 4 12 281 288

Other 29 10 (1) 158

Total Costs Financed by Resources Received

 in Prior Periods 1,080 1,051 712 863

Costs Requiring Resources in Future Periods

Unfunded Capitalized Costs 47 118 - -

Unfunded Current Expenses 6 (1) 1 (4)

 Total Costs Requiring Resources in Future Periods 53 117 1 (4)

Net (Income From) Cost of Operations $ (551) $ (558) $ (162) $ (122)

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

152 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Other Funds

LESS: INTRA-GSA

ELIMINATIONS

GSA Consolidated 

Totals

2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007

$ 719 $ 660 $ - $ - $ 20,389 $ 19,047

(480) (405) - - (20,163) (18,630)

86 24 35 33 153 94

(18) (111) - - (27) (63)

307 168 35 33 352 448

- (15) - - (292) (15)

(9) 5 - - 369 (304)

(11) (5) - - (2,702) (2,445)

(4) 3 - - (29) (90)

17 61 - - 8 (117)

(7) 49 - - (2,646) (2,971)

12 15 - - 1,491 1,461

- - - - 285 300

- - - - 28 168

12 15 - - 1,804 1,929

- - - - 47 118

(22) (7) - - (15) (12)

(22) (7) - - 32 106

$ 290 $ 225 $ 35 $ 33 $ (458) $ (488)

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 153
Notes to the Financial Statements

⓱ Acquisition Services Fund

The GSA Modernization Act was signed into law on October 6, 2006. This law merged the GSF and ITF into one new fund, 

the ASF. Implementation of the ASF, effective January 1, 2007, created a funding structure that allows greater efficiencies 

in operations and more focused financial management. In the current operating environment, elements of technology 

are highly integrated into most significant procurements. The separate funding structures and authorities of the GSF and 

ITF required segregation of technology from non-technology procurements, which significantly hindered the efficient 

management of procurements.

Displayed below, and on the next page is an unaudited summary schedule of the closing balances for the GSF and ITF as 

of December 31, 2006 (dollars in millions):

(Unaudited) GSF ITF TOTAL

ASSETS

Fund Balance with Treasury $ 541 $ 206 $ 747

Accounts Receivable, Net 414 709 1,123

Property and Equipment 2,751 16 2,767

Other Assets 277 6 283

Total Assets $ 3,983 $ 937 $ 4,920

LIABILITIES AND NET POSITION

Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses $ 220 $ 707 $ 927

Deferred Revenue and Advances 75 25 100

Other Liabilities 233 15 248

Total Liabilities 528 747 1,275

Net Position

Total Net Position 3,455 190 3,645

Total Liabilities and Net Position $ 3,983 $ 937 $ 4,920

Net Cost

Total Revenues: $ 826 $ 1,056 $ 1,882

Total Expenses: 772 1,071 1,843

Net Revenues From (Cost of) Operations $ 54 $ (15) $ 39

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

154 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
(Unaudited) GSF ITF TOTAL

Budgetary Resources

Unobligated Balance, Net - Beginning Balance $ 588 $ 1,234 $ 1,822

Prior Year Recoveries 15 93 108

Spending Authority 4,239 4,529 8,768

 Total Budgetary Resources $ 4,842 $ 5,856 $ 10,698

Status of Budgetary Resources

Obligations Incurred 973 1,918 2,891

Unobligated Balance - Available 3,869 3,938 7,807

Total Status of Budgetary Resources $ 4,842 $ 5,856 $ 10,698

Obligated Balance

Unpaid Obligations 1,159 3,260 4,419

Less: Uncollected Customer Payments (1,861) (3,914) (5,775)

Obligated Balance, Net - Ended December 31 $ (702) $ (654) $ (1,356)

Net Outlays

Gross Outlays 913 1,171 2,084

Less: Offsetting Collections (965) (1,189) (2,154)

Net Outlays $ (52) $ (18) $ (70)

F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 155
F i n a n c i a l S e ct i o n

156 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort

costs as defined by FASAB SFFAS No. 6, Accounting for 

Property, Plant, and Equipment, which is intended to report 

only maintenance items that would be expensed through 

the normal course of business. While maintenance projects 

are generally not deferred, the average building in the GSA 

inventory is 46 years old, and only 29 percent of these 

buildings have had extensive modernization. This has led 

to a large inventory of capital R&A work items of which 

approximately $7.3 billion has not yet been addressed by 

an ongoing PBS R&A project. This inventory is related to 

capitalizable improvements and modernization, and thus 

not considered deferred maintenance in accordance with 

SFFAS No. 6. For FY 2009, GSA has requested new obligational authority of approximately $692 million for the R&A 

program.

Required Supplementary Information

Deferred Maintenance

As of the end of FY 2008, GSA had no material amounts of deferred maintenance cost to report. GSA administers the Building Maintenance Management Program that, 

on an ongoing basis, maintains the Building Class inventory 

in acceptable condition, as defined by GSA management. 

GSA utilizes a condition assessment survey methodology, 

applied at the overall portfolio level, for determining reportable levels of deferred maintenance. Under this methodology, GSA defines “acceptable condition” and “acceptable 

level of service” in terms of certain National Performance 

Measures, formulated under the provisions of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993. 

GSA expenses normal repair and maintenance costs as 

incurred. GSA has no substantive deferred maintenance 

Construction of the NOAA Satellite Operations Facility in Suitland, MD. 
Performance Measures

• Summary Chart of Goals and Measures 159

• Performance Goals and Measures No Longer Reported 164

Management Challenges

• Office of Inspector General’s Assessment of 

GSA’s Major Management Challenges 166

• Agency Management Comments on the Inspector 

 General’s Assessment of GSA’s Major Management 

 Challenges 186

Improper Payments Information Act Reporting Details 189

Summary of Financial Statement Audit and Management Assurances

• Summary of Financial Statement Audit 190

• Summary of Management Assurances 190

Other, Agency-specific Statutorily Required Reports

• Debt Management 191

• Cash and Payments Management 191

Acronyms and Abbreviations 192

Other Accompanying 

Information
www.GSA.gov/green

What is LEED?

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, is a green building rating system that has become a nationally-accepted benchmark for the design, construction 

and operation of high-performance green buildings.

LEED is the most widely-used and accepted sustainable building rating system for new and 

existing buildings in the United States. GSA currently has 27 LEED certified buildings 

across the country.

NOAA Satellite Operations Facility

Suitland, MD

84%site area restored with native plants

99.9%non-equipment roof area planted

100%landscape is not irrigated

Social Security Administration Teleservice Center

Auburn, WA

42% water use reduction

16% recycled content value of the total materials

77% reuse of existing shell

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Manhattan, KS

30%recycled content value of the total materials

100% reflective white roof

90% spaces with views to the outside

Veterans Affairs Regional Office

Reno, NV

79%exterior water use reduction

30% materials were manufactured locally

43% interior water use reduction
As GSA moves toward complete integration of budget and performance, the Agency has replaced its stand alone Performance 

Plan with a Performance Budget. The following measures and targets were used in FY 2008 and were reflected in the FY 2009 

Congressional Justification. The 16 Key Performance Measures are highlighted in the Summary Chart of Goals and Measures below. 

The actual results for the non-key performance measures are not available in time for inclusion in the PAR. They will be published 

on GSA’s Web site, GSA.gov, in December 2008. A list of measures reported in the FY 2007 PAR that are no longer externally reported 

can be found in the next section, Performance Goals and Measures No Longer Reported. 

Summary Chart of Goals and Measures

Program Performance Measures

FY 2005 

ACTUAL

FY 2006 

ACTUAL

FY 2007 

ACTUAL

FY 2008 

TARGET

FY 2008 

ACTUAL Result

STEWARDSHIP

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Percentage of government-owned assets with an 

ROE of at least 6%.

79.2% 76.4% 78.3% 76.5% 80.5% Met

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Percentage of government-owned assets achieving a 

positive FFO.

84.3% 82.7% 87.5% 84.9% Not 

Available

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Percentage of vacant space in the governmentowned inventory.4.6% 4.4% 5.6% ≤5% Not 

Available

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Customer satisfaction with government-owned space. 77.6% 83.0% 78.3% 80.0% 81.0% Met

PBS (Leasing) Percent of vacant space in leased inventory. 1.2% 1.5% 1.1% ≤1.5% Not 

Available

PBS (Leasing) Percent of leased revenue available after 

administering the leased program.

2.20% 1.50% 0.01% 0.00%-2.00% Not 

Available

PBS (New 

Construction)

Percent of New Construction program that is 

certified for LEED.

17% 0% 0% 25% Not 

Available

PBS (New 

Construction)

Percent of New Construction program registered for 

LEED.

9.1% 100% 100% 75.0% 100% Met

PBS (New 

Construction)

Percent of newly constructed buildings 

independently verified for achievement of 

established operational requirements. 

21.9% 100% 100% 35.0% Not 

Available

PBS (Real Property 

Disposal)

Percent of public sales awarded within 170 days. 92.0% 100% 100% 100% Not 

Available

FAS (Vehicle 

Acquisition)

Number of vehicles purchased per full-time 

equivalent (FTE).

1,498 1,676 1,845 1,320 Not 

Available

FAS (Vehicle 

Acquisition)

Percentage discount from invoice price. 40.6% 39.0% 32.0% >28.7% 29.0% Met

FAS (Fleet) Number of vehicles managed per onboard. 329 352 355 345 Not 

Available

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

Percentage of new task orders subject to 

competition/fair opportunity process.

92.0% 92.0% 92.7% 96.0% Not 

Available

FAS (Card ServicesSmartPay)

Government-wide spend per GSA SmartPay®

contract administration FTE.

$4.99B $5.31B $5.44B $5.11B Not 

Available

OCFO Interest penalties paid. N/A $574,462 $452,014 $400,000 $403,395 Not Met

OCHCO Percentage of employees that have individual 

performance plans and receive ratings at end of 

rating cycle.

95% 96% 97% 95% Not 

Available

OCIO IT Infrastructure Library processes adopted. N/A N/A N/A 15% Not 

Available

(continued on next page)

Performance Measures

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 159
Performance Measures

Program Performance Measures

FY 2005 

ACTUAL

FY 2006 

ACTUAL

FY 2007 

ACTUAL

FY 2008 

TARGET

FY 2008 

ACTUAL Result

STEWARDSHIP (continued)

OCIO IT network and server availability. N/A N/A 99.77% 98.27% Not 

Available

OCIO Percentage certification and accreditation completed. 100% 100% 100% 100% Not 

Available

OCIO Percentage of major IT investment business cases 

rated highly by OMB.

N/A 100% 100% 100% Not 

Available

OGP Percentage of OGP initiatives meeting their 

scheduled development milestones.

75% 100% 100% 88% Not 

Available

OGP Percentage of OGP initiatives meeting their 

scheduled cost targets.

100% 80% 86% 100% Not 

Available

SUPERIOR WORKPLACES

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Percent of minor R&A budget obligated on planned 

projects.

87% 85% 83% 75% Not 

Available

PBS (Leasing) Satisfied tenant customer satisfaction rating (4 and 5 

responses) in leased space surveyed.

78.0% 78.0% 78.4% 76.0% 78.0% Met

PBS (Leasing) Percent of existing lease inventory reviewed for 

beneficial opportunities.

N/A 100% 100% 100% Not 

Available

PBS (New 

Construction)

Construction projects on schedule. 100% 84.0% 78.8% 88.0% 80.4% Not Met

FAS (Fleet) Percentage of GSA Fleet leasing rates below 

commercial rates on the GSA Vehicle Leasing 

Schedule.

43.13% 39.06% 42.38% 29.50% 40.90% Met

FAS (Fleet) GSA Fleet external customer satisfaction survey 

score.

85.9 84.5 84.9 83.2 Not 

Available

FAS (Global 

Supply-Distribution 

Operations).

Blended mark-up. 31.60% 32.71% 31.80% 30.00% 31.90% Not Met

BEST VALUE

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Percent within the private sector benchmarks 

for cleaning and maintaining office and similarly 

serviced space.

-5.8% -0.6% +4.0 +/-5.0% 0.6% Met

PBS (Leasing) Cost of leased space relative to industry market rates. -9.2% -9.2% -10.6% -9.0% Not 

Available

PBS (Leasing) Percent of customers who say they received their 

leased space when they needed it.

82% 67% 82% 86% Not 

Available

PBS (Leasing) Percent of expiring leases using the National Broker 

Contract.

N/A 48% 58% 80% Not 

Available

PBS (New 

Construction)

Number of days to complete new courthouse 

construction projects.

2,928 3,458 3,575 <3,100 Not 

Available

PBS (Real Property 

Disposal)

Percentage of utilization and donation (U&D) 

property awarded within 240 days.

39% 97% 100% 95% Not 

Available

PBS (Real Property 

Disposal)

Percent of disposal transactions that “exceed” or 

“greatly exceed” customer expectations.

93% 97% 99% 93% Not 

Available

PBS (Real Property 

Disposal)

Cost of reimbursable sales as a percentage of sales 

proceeds.

0.13% 0.12% 0.53% 1.08% Not 

Available

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

Percent of satisfied customers (American Customer 

Satisfaction Index (ACSI) survey).

N/A N/A 73.5 75.0 71.1 Not Met

(continued on next page)

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

160 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Program Performance Measures

FY 2005 

TARGET

FY 2006 

TARGET

FY 2007 

ACTUAL

FY 2008 

TARGET

FY 2008 

ACTUAL Result

BEST VALUE (continued)

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

Percent of negotiated award dates for services and 

commodities that are met or bettered.

86.3% 92.3% 68.7% 97.0% Not 

Available

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

Number of calendar days from receipt of modification 

request to issuance of modification for services and 

commodities. (Regional IT/Professional Services).

N/A N/A 14 55 Not 

Available

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

Number of calendar days from receipt of modification 

request to issuance of modification for services and 

commodities. (National IT/Professional Services).

N/A N/A 30 40 Not 

Available

FAS (Assisted 

Acquisition Services)

Direct cost as a percentage of gross margin. N/A 80.3% 73.0% 77.0% Not 

Available

FAS (Global 

Supply-Distribution 

Operations)

External customer satisfaction. 77.3 80.3 80.9 80.5 Not 

Available

FAS (Global 

Supply-Distribution 

Operations)

Direct cost as a percentage of revenue. 10.6% 10.5% 10.1% 10.4% Not 

Available

FAS (Global 

Supply-Distribution 

Operations)

Percentage of domestic, non-hazardous orders 

shipped within 24 hours.

83.1% 83.8% 80.5% 85.0% Not 

Available

FAS (GSS-Acquisition 

Operations)

External customer satisfaction (Multiple Awards 

Schedule).

71.4 73.0 71.9 73.8 Not 

Available

FAS (GSS-Acquisition 

Operations)

Direct Costs as a percent of gross margin (Multiple 

Awards Schedule).

29.8% 26.9% 23.6% 25.0% Not 

Available

FAS (GSS-Acquisition 

Operations)

Cycle time (days) to process offers from vendors 

(Multiple Award Schedule).

97.8 87.8 72.3 79.0 Not 

Available

FAS (GSS-Acquisition 

Operations)

Cycle time (days) to process contract modifications 

(Multiple Award Schedule).

20.0 14.0 16.1 17.5 Not 

Available

FAS (Integrated 

Technology Services) 

IT Acquisition Center cycle time to process offers 

(days).

126.4 117.8 118.8 115.0 Not 

Available

FAS (Integrated 

Technology Services) 

IT Acquisition Center cycle time to process 

modifications (days).

19.9 25.2 20.1 23.0 Not 

Available

FAS (Integrated 

Technology Services) 

External customer satisfaction ITS (IT Acquisition 

center).

71.4 73.0 67.7 76.3 Not 

Available

FAS (Integrated 

Technology Services)

Cost avoidance/savings achieved by ITS Portfolio 

programs.

$632M $720M $766M $743M $782M Met

FAS (Integrated 

Technology Services) 

ITS direct costs for all programs as a percentage of 

ITS gross margin.

11.74% 31.58% 33.36% 36.00% Not 

Available

FAS (Personal 

Property)

Cycle time for disposal process (days). 56 52 49 55 Not 

Available

FAS (Personal 

Property)

External customer satisfaction survey score. 74.6 82.3 75.1 75.6 Not 

Available

FAS (Personal 

Property)

Operating cost per $100 business volume. $15.23 $18.77 $8.10 $21.00 Not 

Available

FAS (Personal 

Property)

Direct cost of Sales Program as a percent of revenue. 34.70% 47.49% 20.00% 44.00% Not 

Available

FAS (National 

Furniture Center)

Timeliness to award new contracts (days). 97.8 73.5 71.1 70.0 Not 

Available

FAS (National 

Furniture Center)

Timeliness to award contract modifications to add 

products and services (days).

19.8 18.1 9.8 9.5 Not 

Available

(continued on next page)

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 161
Performance Measures

Program Performance Measures

FY 2005 

TARGET

FY 2006 

TARGET

FY 2007 

ACTUAL

FY 2008 

TARGET

FY 2008 

ACTUAL Result

BEST VALUE (continued)

FAS (National 

Furniture Center)

Percentage of projects where cost and Procurement 

Administrative Lead (PALT) schedule variances are 

within 10% of the approved project plan for projects 

over $5,000,000.

N/A N/A 100% 100% Not 

Available

FAS (National 

Furniture Center)

Number of schedule task orders solicited using GSA 

e-Buy.

41,179 8,207 12, 438 13,000 Not 

Available

FAS (National 

Furniture Center)

Direct operating expenses as a percentage of gross 

margin.

51.34% 52.09% 42.08% 41.50% Not 

Available

FAS (National 

Furniture Center)

Ratio of full-time equivalents (FTE) to business 

volume.

0.0000062% 0.0000056% 0.0000042% 0.0000039% Not 

Available

FAS (Vehicle 

Acquisition)

GSA Automotive external customer satisfaction score. 79.3 77.9 78.6 80.1 Not 

Available

FAS (Fleet) Program support and operating expense per vehicle 

year of operation.

$508.00 $496.00 $487.84 $495.00 Not 

Available

FAS (Travel) Direct cost as a percent of revenue. 65.6% 37.8% 54.3% 62.0% Not 

Available

FAS (Travel) External customer satisfaction score. 73.6 75.4 63.2 75.6 Not 

Available

FAS (Travel) Percentage of Business Reference Model (BRM) 

agencies migrating to E-Gov Travel.

29.20% 54.17% 75.00% 100% Not 

Available

FAS (Travel) Percentage of vouchers serviced through E-Gov 

Travel.

1.0% 6.7% 18.8% 30.7% Not 

Available

FAS (Travel) FedRooms percentage off consortia rate. N/A 29% 28% 27% Not 

Available

FAS (Travel) City Pair Program (CPP) percentage off the lowest 

published full economy fare.

N/A N/A 67% 66% Not 

Available

FAS (Transportation) External customer satisfaction survey. 73.3 78.8 76.0 77.5 Not 

Available

FAS (Transportation) Direct cost as a percent of gross margin. 51.6% 48.0% 41.4% 47.0% Not 

Available

FAS (Transportation) Freight savings. N/A 40.0% 25.0% 25.5% Not 

Available

FAS (Transportation) Household goods savings. N/A 58.0% 6.0% 6.5% Not 

Available

FAS (Transportation) Express and Ground Domestic Delivery Services 

Savings-Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative (FSSI).

N/A N/A 62.2% 62.4% Not 

Available

FAS (Transportation 

Audits)

Percent of audits performed electronically. 94.0% 92.4% 95.9% 97.0% Not 

Available

FAS (Transportation 

Audits)

Percent of claims processed within 120 days. 69.3% 78.9% 75.0% 77.0% Not 

Available

FAS (Card Services 

-SmartPay)

Overall customer satisfaction of GSA SmartPay® 

Program.

N/A N/A 75.8 65.0 Not 

Available

FAS (Card Services 

-SmartPay)

GSA SmartPay® Conference satisfaction as 

determined by attendee survey results.

95.0% 91.2% 91.4% 93.5% Not 

Available

FAS (Card Services 

-SmartPay)

Timeliness of report submission. N/A N/A 89.1% ≥90.0% Not 

Available

(continued on next page)

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

162 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Program Performance Measures

FY 2005 

TARGET

FY 2006 

TARGET

FY 2007 

ACTUAL

FY 2008 

TARGET

FY 2008 

ACTUAL Result

BEST VALUE (continued)

OCIO Number Major/Non major Development, Modernization and Enhancement (DME) projects identified in 

Enterprise Architecture (EA) Transition Strategy and 

Sequence Plan.

N/A N/A 34.2% 30.0% Not 

Available

OCIO IT service desk responsiveness. N/A N/A 96.73% 96.00% Not 

Available

OCIO IT service desk first call resolution. N/A N/A 54.52% 60.00% Not 

Available

OCIO IT local support resolution. N/A N/A 59.11% 85.00% Not 

Available

OCSC USAContact and Web Solutions Task Orders. 6 14 3 new, 

total 17

5 new, 

total 22

Not 

Available

OCHCO Number of days to fill a vacancy. 26.3 30.1 29.0 45.0 32.0 Met

INNOVATION

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Percent reduction in energy consumption over the 

FY 2003 baseline.

-35.3% -4.4% -8.3% -9.0% -9.7% Met

OCSC Citizen touchpoints. 122.7M 133.0M 222.3M 210.8M 213.8M Met

OCSC Government-wide Website ACSI Satisfaction 

benchmark.

72.0 73.7 73.6 74.0 Not 

Available

OCSC Cost per touchpoint (in dollars). $0.315 $0.315 $0.213 $0.230 Not 

Available

OGP Extent to which OGP policy initiatives achieve 

improvement targets.

71% 100% 98% 88% 100% Met

OGP Percentage of key policy stakeholders and agency 

users who rate OGP policy initiatives effective.

N/A 54% 70% 60% 79% Met

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 163
Performance Measures

Performance Goals and Measures No Longer Reported

Program Performance Goals Performance Measures

STEWARDSHIP

CFO Increase the percentage of vendor invoices received 

electronically by Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) 

or through the Internet.

Percent of invoices received electronically.1

OCIO Obtain a high rating of major IT initiatives by OMB 

for Enterprise Architecture-FY 2005 Exhibit 300 

Submission.

Percent of major IT initiatives by OMB for 

Enterprise Architecture-FY 2005 Exhibit 300 

Submission.2

OCSC Disseminate strategic information messages to all 

audiences by providing integrated and coordinated 

communications to GSA associates and news media.

Strategic Messages (Favorable, Neutral, and 

Unfavorable).3

FAS (Long Distance) Award and effectively manage the Network Service 

Contracts.

Complete the Networx Transition Planning 

versus actual.4

FAS (Regional 

Telecommunications)

Provide quality telecommunications services 

through appropriate consistency in the acquisition 

management process from pre-award through 

closeout.

Percentage of task and delivery orders subject 

to the fair opportunity process.4

Percentage of schedule task orders solicited 

using e-Buy.4

SUPERIOR WORKPLACES

PBS (Asset 

Management)

89% of repairs and alterations (R&A) projects on 

schedule by FY 2007.

R&A projects on schedule.5

PBS (Asset 

Management)

Maintain the percent of escalations on repairs and 

alterations (R&A) projects at less than or equal to 

1.0% by FY 2007.

Percent of escalations on R&A projects.5

BEST VALUE

FAS (Global Supply) Achieve timely delivery for all customer orders. Compliance rate with DoD Time Definite 

Delivery (TDD) shipment processing 

standards.4

FAS (Long Distance) Provide robust portfolio of telecommunications 

services and value added solutions to satisfy diverse 

customer requirements.

Percentage of solutions reviewed compliant 

with policy and regulations, internal polices 

and procedures.4

Overall customer satisfaction.4

FAS (Long Distance) Provide substantially lower cost service to customer 

agencies.

Savings provided to customers.4

Percentage of Network Service prices are 

below best commercial prices.4

FAS (Long Distance) Award and effectively manage the Network Services 

contracts.

Complete the Networx Transition Planning 

versus actual.4

FAS (Long Distance) Improve the financial condition of the Fund. Total Long Distance program expenses as a 

percentage of gross margin.4

FAS (Professional 

Services)

Improve performance against business performance 

metrics, including timeliness, cost-effectiveness, 

and efficiency to verify best value and effective 

acquisition management are achieved.

Percentage of negotiated award dates for 

services and commodities that are met or 

bettered.4

FAS (Professional 

Services)

Provide quality services through appropriate 

consistency in the acquisition management process 

from pre-award through closeout.

Percentage of task and delivery orders subject 

to the fair opportunity process.4

Percentage of schedule task orders solicited 

using e-Buy.4

FAS (Professional 

Services)

Manage acquisitions to ensure industry provides 

solutions that meet client agencies’ mission needs.

Percentage of dollar value of eligible service 

orders awarded with performance-based 

statements of work.4

FAS (Professional 

Services)

Improve the financial condition of the program. Total program expenses as a percentage of 

gross margin.4

(continued on next page)

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

164 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Program Performance Goals Performance Measures

BEST VALUE (continued)

FAS (Regional 

Telecommunications)

Manage acquisitions to ensure industry provides 

solutions that meet client agencies mission needs.

Percentage of dollar value of eligible service 

orders awarded with performance based 

SOWs.4

Percentage of projects meeting agreed 

performance according to the Quality 

Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).4

FAS (Regional 

Telecommunications)

Improve performance against business performance 

metrics, including timeliness, cost-effectiveness, 

and efficiency to verify best value and effective 

acquisition management are achieved.

Percentage of negotiated award dates for 

services and commodities that are met or 

bettered.4

FAS (Regional 

Telecommunications)

Provide cost management for solutions delivery. Percentage of solutions that are met at or 

below initial cost estimates.4

FAS (Regional 

Telecommunications)

Improve the financial condition of the Fund. Total Regional Telecommunications program 

expense as a percentage of gross margin.4

FAS (IT SolutionsNational)

Improve performance against business performance 

metrics, including timeliness, cost-effectiveness, 

and efficiency to verify best value and effective 

acquisition management are achieved.

Percentage of negotiated award dates for 

services and commodities that are met or 

bettered.4

FAS (IT SolutionsNational)

Manage acquisitions to ensure industry provides 

solutions that meet client agencies’ mission needs.

Percentage of dollar value of eligible service 

orders awarded with performance-based 

SOWs.4

FAS (IT SolutionsNational)

Provide quality IT solutions services through 

appropriate consistency in the acquisition 

management process from pre-award through 

closeout.

Percentage of task and delivery orders subject 

to the fair opportunity process.4

FAS (IT SolutionsNational)

Improve the financial condition of the Fund. Total program expenses as a percentage of 

gross margin.4

FAS (IT SolutionsRegional)

Improve performance against business performance 

metrics, including timeliness, cost-effectiveness, 

and efficiency to verify best value and effective 

acquisition management are achieved.

Percentage of negotiated award dates for 

services and commodities that are met or 

bettered.4

FAS (IT SolutionsRegional)

Provide cost management for solutions delivery. Percentage of solutions that are met at or 

below initial cost estimates.4

FAS (IT SolutionsRegional)

Provide quality IT solutions services through 

appropriate consistency in the acquisition 

management process from pre-award through 

closeout.

Percentage of task and delivery orders subject 

to the fair opportunity process.4

FAS (IT SolutionsRegional)

Improve the financial condition of the Fund. Total program expenses as a percentage of 

gross margin.4

INNOVATION

OCSC Enable a citizen-centric government by sharing the 

FirstGov infrastructure and E-Gov expertise with the 

President’s E-Gov initiatives.

Citizen visits to USA.Gov Web sites.3

Uptime for FirstGov.3

Number of search queries through FirstGov 

and FirstGov search.3

1 The Office of the Chief Financial Officer had minimal control of this measure and its results.

2 This measure was discontinued because it continuously reflected good EA scores on the 300’s, which made this metric no longer useful. 

3 These measures are not aligned with the mission of the program office.

4 Due to the PART assessment these measures no longer align with the new FAS organization.

5 Due to the PART assessment these measures did not appropriately measure performance improvement.

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 165
Management Challenges

MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES A. WILLIAMS

 ACTING ADMINISTRATOR (A) 

FROM: BRIAN D. MILLER 

 INSPECTOR GENERAL (J) 

SUBJECT: GSA’s Major Challenges 

Attached is a copy of our office’s updated assessment of the major challenges currently 

facing GSA. The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, Public Law 106-531, requires that 

each Office of Inspector General (OIG), prepare, for inclusion in agency Performance 

and Accountability Reports, a statement summarizing what the Inspector General 

considers to be the most significant management and performance challenges facing the 

agency and briefly assessing the agency’s progress in addressing those challenges. The 

Act requires the OIG to provide the assessment to the head of the agency 30 days before 

the due date of the Performance and Accountability Report. 

We are hereby providing you with our assessment to afford you the opportunity to review 

and prepare any comments you wish to append. 

If you have any questions or wish to discuss this, please call me at 202-501-0450. If your 

staff needs any additional information, they may contact Andrew Patchan, Jr., Assistant 

Inspector General for Auditing, at 202-501-0374. 

Attachment

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

166 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Office of Inspector General’s Updated Assessment of GSA’s Major 

Management Challenges

October 2008

Acquisition Programs

Management Controls

Information Technology

Federal Buildings Fund

Human Capital

Protection of Federal Facilities and Personnel

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 167
Management Challenges

1

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL’S UPDATED ASSESSMENT OF GSA’S MAJOR 

MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES

OCTOBER 2008

ACQUISITION PROGRAMS

ISSUE: GSA provides Federal agencies with products and services valued in the billions 

of dollars through various types of contracts it establishes and administers. Among other 

contracting programs and vehicles, GSA is responsible for the Multiple Award Schedule 

(MAS) program, a significant number of Multiple Award Contracts, and Government Wide 

Acquisition Contracts (GWAC). Although our specific concerns vary somewhat depending 

on the contracting program or vehicle, management challenges in this area generally 

center on the contract evaluation and award process, and involve the often-related issues 

of 1) competition, 2) pricing, and 3) implementation of statutory or regulatory compliancetype requirements. 

The MAS Program provides Federal agencies with a simplified procurement process for 

the purchase of a diverse range of commercial supplies and services from multiple 

vendors at prices associated with volume buying. MAS contracts are awarded to 

contractors supplying the same generic types of items or services at varying prices for 

delivery within the same geographic areas. Federal agencies then simply order supplies 

or services from the schedules at the prenegotiated prices and pay the contractors directly 

for their purchases. GSA administers approximately 40 schedules that produced an 

estimated $36 billion in sales in fiscal year (FY) 2007, and the business volume continues 

to grow.

Our Office is concerned that, with the growth of the MAS program and the broadening of 

what is included under the program, the importance of certain program fundamentals –

including pricing objectives and other pricing tools – has diminished. These 

fundamentals, which are set by regulation, include the mandate for most-favored 

customer (MFC) pricing, the requirement to perform meaningful price analysis when 

awarding or extending contracts, and the use of preaward audits to assist in negotiating 

contracts. MFC pricing ensures that MAS contract pricing harnesses the Federal 

government’s collective buying power for pricing purposes. Price analysis is the key 

substantive step a contracting officer performs for the purpose of arriving at fair and 

reasonable prices. Preaward reviews are the main tool by which a contracting officer can 

be assured that a vendor’s pricing is appropriate. Such audits also provide contracting 

officers with additional details regarding a vendor’s pricing and sales practices in 

anticipation of negotiations. 

In past reviews, we reported that contracting officials were not consistently negotiating 

most favored customer prices, many MAS contract extensions were accomplished without 

adequate price analysis, and available tools were not being used effectively to negotiate 

better MAS prices. Contracting officials have expressed concern that because of an 

extremely heavy workload, they often feel pressure to award contracts even though price 

analysis has not been done. In a February 2005 report, the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) found that, although a postaward quality review of contracts – a process that 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

168 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
2

has identified deficiencies in contract file documentation – had been developed, the 

underlying causes of these deficiencies and the actions needed to address them had not 

been determined. GAO concluded that as a result, GSA cannot be assured that fair and 

reasonable prices have been negotiated for its MAS contracts.

As in past years, with the support and endorsement of the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), GSA has provided us additional financial support enabling us to markedly 

increase the number of preaward contract reviews we perform. A MAS Working Group, 

comprised of Agency and OIG representatives, has developed guidance for contracting 

officers regarding the performance and use of preaward MAS contract reviews. Over the 

past two years, the OIG has found flaws in approximately 70 percent of the proposals 

audited that amounted to over $2 billion in proposed contract price reductions and tens of 

millions in recoveries. We have found that vendors can go to great lengths to conceal 

their actual selling prices. 

In March 2008, former Administrator Lurita Doan commissioned the Multiple Award 

Schedule Advisory Panel to provide guidance on pricing policies and price reduction 

clauses. The panel is reviewing the most favored customer provisions, price reduction 

policies and provisions, and current commercial pricing practices. In July, Congressman 

Waxman questioned the prudence of continuing with a panel that no official or company 

outside of GSA expressed a need for and the idea of a panel was not discussed with any 

other GSA official, according to former Acting Administrator David Bibb. The panel has 

already approved a recommendation to have GSA eliminate the Price Reduction Clause 

for MAS contracts and require competition at the task order level. This clause affords the 

government protection, under certain circumstances, when a contractor offers commercial 

customers special discounts by allowing the government to obtain similar discounts. 

In addition, the broad scope of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) definition of a 

commercial item is a management challenge for GSA. Under the current definition, a 

commercial item is any item and many services “of a type” customarily used by the 

general public. Thus, the current FAR definition of a commercial item does not require a 

vendor to have any commercial, competitive sales of a product or service. The MAS 

Policy operates under the premise that: (1) GSA vendors would routinely sell their 

commercial products and services to the general public in a competitive open market; (2) 

this competitive process would establish “market prices” (fair and reasonable prices); and 

(3) GSA contracting officers could use market prices as a starting point in negotiations to 

establish a government price that was equal to a like buyer in the private sector.

Based on this expanded definition of a commercial item, it has been our experience that 

many MAS vendors have only Federal government sales and sometimes only MAS sales. 

There are also vendors who have commercial sales but who organizationally segregate 

units that do commercial business from those that do government business. We have 

also seen commercial items that are actually special purpose items that are only 

purchased by specific government customers. An example is a weapon system tool kit. 

In addition, we have found that, although a commercial market exists for a vendor’s 

services; its commercial contracts are typically awarded on a firm fixed price basis, while 

its GSA schedule clients have been mainly doing business on a time and materials basis. 

All of these scenarios present difficult challenges in terms of comparability and impact a 

contracting officer’s ability to do valid price analyses.

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 169
Management Challenges

3

AGENCY ACTION: There is an on-going program for pre-negotiation clearances to 

ensure the quality of its most significant contract negotiations. In this process, the 

contract negotiator presents to a panel a summary of his or her actions in developing 

negotiation objectives including market research, contractor responsibilities, and price 

analysis. Also, there are several initiatives that may have an effect on the program in FY 

2009. For example, as previously discussed, the Multiple Award Schedule Advisory 

Panel, is reviewing pricing issues under the MAS program and is expected to issue 

recommendations to the Administrator this year. The Federal Acquisition Service (FAS)

established a new office to develop and implement consistent acquisition policy and 

guidance for the MAS program that is currently housed under several different offices 

within FAS. FAS will use the Lean Six Sigma approach to evaluating its contracting 

process, emphasizing process efficiency and effectiveness. Further, FAS has contracted 

with a company to perform a pricing study that was agreed to as part of its Memorandum 

of Agreement (MOA) with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), its largest customer.

GWACs are multiple award contracts for information technology (IT). GWACs are 

awarded to a limited number of vendors. Once the contract is awarded, solicitations of 

proposals for task orders are limited to those vendors. One important issue facing GSA in 

this area are the upcoming audits of the Client Support Centers (CSCs) as required by the

National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181). Prior CSC 

audits identified improper contracting practices, including instances where CSC officials 

breached government procurement laws and regulations, and processed procurement 

transactions totaling more than $100 million through a fund when the goods and services 

were well outside the fund’s legislatively authorized purposes. More recent audits 

indicated that the Agency has made substantial progress in addressing these issues. If 

the upcoming audits, to be completed in FY 2010, find that a CSC has not followed 

government procurement laws and regulations, and agreed-upon policies, DoD’s ability to 

conduct business with the CSC in question will be subject to a written determination from 

the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. This written 

determination must state that it is necessary to the interest of the DoD to procure property 

and services through GSA during the fiscal year. If no such written determination is 

made, DoD is limited to procurements with the CSC that are at or below the simplified 

acquisition threshold. 

AGENCY ACTION: In December 2006, DoD and GSA entered into an agreement to 

outline a series of steps GSA will take to alleviate Defense concerns about interagency 

contracting. The agreement defines some ambiguous aspects of existing acquisition 

policy regarding interagency contracting. In addition, it establishes responsibility and 

clarifies rules applying to acquisitions conducted on DoD’s behalf. GSA and DoD 

procurement officials are still continuing to work on the development of consistent policies 

and procedures for GSA and DoD interagency contracting. 

ISSUE: Other issues affecting these programs include the merger of the Federal Supply 

Service (FSS) and the Federal Technology Service (FTS) and major contract transitions. 

On October 6, 2006, the General Services Administration Modernization Act authorized 

the creation of FAS from the merger of FSS and FTS. Management, tasked with merging 

two services with diverse cultures and methodologies into one cohesive organization, 

faced new challenges as it streamlined organizational structures and strengthened GSA’s 

capability to provide excellent acquisition services to customer agencies. While FAS 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

170 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
4

accomplished successes with regard to its development, challenges exist that impact FAS 

employees and customer agencies, such as managing and maintaining legacy systems; 

maintaining a strong and dedicated management council; administrative challenges; and 

assessing the fee structure to ensure that it meets the financial needs of the new 

organization in the most efficient manner. Further, employees located in FAS regional 

offices face the challenge of balancing their local responsibilities with their responsibilities 

to their national reporting organizations. 

Card Service Transition: Established in 1998, GSA’s SmartPay® is the largest 

government charge card program in the world, serving over 350 Federal agencies, 

organizations, and Native American tribal governments. The government relies heavily on 

charge cards to support its mission delivery. GSA administers the current SmartPay® 

program that provides cards for Federal entities with a secure, convenient, and efficient 

payment and procurement tool to purchase goods and services. GSA negotiates master 

contracts with card-issuing banks on behalf of Federal users, who then negotiate 

agreements with the banks to specify services and requirements for their card programs. 

Through these contracts agencies are able to obtain purchase, travel, and fleet charge 

cards to support mission needs, including office supplies, fuel for government vehicles, 

and airline and hotel visits for employees on official travel. In FY 2007, Federal entities 

used cards to purchase more than $27 billion of goods and services which involved more 

than 90 million transactions.

The current GSA SmartPay® master contracts expire on November 29, 2008, and 

agencies/organizations cannot extend their current task orders beyond that date. 

Contracts for the future program, GSA SmartPay® 2 or “SP2” becomes effective 

November 30, 2008. Transition to the new program includes re-issuance of over three

million new cards across 350 organizations in a relatively short period of time. Ten 

agencies represent approximately 90 percent of the business; however, these agencies 

are large and complex organizations. GSA will need to diligently work with the agencies 

to ensure the transition is completed on time.

Networx Transition: The transition of government agencies from the FTS2001 and 

Crossover contracts to the Networx contracts (Universal and Enterprise) could be the 

largest telecommunications services transition ever undertaken by the Federal 

government. It will involve more than 135 agencies, more than 50 services, and 

thousands of voice and data circuits. The transition will require coordination between 

agencies, GSA, and a host of telecommunications contractors. Each agency has 

identified transition managers who will facilitate this coordination and ensure that the 

transition proceeds as smoothly as possible. The Networx contracts are valued at $68.2 

billion divided between Networx Universal and Networx enterprise. 

GSA has a long-standing history of providing leading-edge telecommunications services 

to the Federal government at best value from FTS2000’s award in 1988, replaced by 

FTS2001 in 1998 and 1999, and subsequently the Crossover contracts in 2006 and 2007. 

In an effort to decrease the immediate transition burden on agencies migrating from the 

existing FTS2001 contracts, GSA awarded Bridge contracts that provide for continued 

service beyond the expiration of FTS2001 in 2006 and 2007. The Bridge/Crossover 

contracts expire in May and June 2010.

AGENCY ACTIONS: Since the establishment of FAS, management has taken steps to 

build an organization that will meet its needs and goals to provide products and services 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 171
Management Challenges

5

to customer agencies. Some of its accomplishments include integrating its technological 

assets for uniformity; implementing various process improvement initiatives, as Lean Six 

Sigma, new performance measures, and the FAS Management Council; assessing 

geographical locations in the Washington, DC area; and managing a new financial fund. 

Further, FAS has made progress toward achieving both its human capital and 

administrative goals. Management has developed a five-year Human Capital Strategic 

Plan, reduced its full-time staff by nearly 13 percent, and is working to implement an 

employee recognition program. Finally, FAS has developed a Strategic Business Plan for 

the entire organization.

Additionally, in addressing controls over the upcoming transition to the new SmartPay® 2 

program, GSA is focusing on improvements in the following areas based on customer 

feedback: new products and services; enhanced customer service; security of systems 

and data; enhanced data capture; improved ability to analyze data and produce 

information; and tax reclamation.

GSA worked with the Interagency Management Council, a body representing the 

customers of FAS, to identify lessons learned for the new transition to Networx, in 

particular, the need for GSA and agencies to determine the funding for transition early to 

ensure that resources are available. Of the 27 improvements identified for FTS2001, 

corrective actions for planning, executing, and monitoring are being developed to ensure 

that the Networx transition takes place in a straightforward manner. The need to bring 

and unite all agencies on board for this transition is critical. GSA issued a Transition 

Strategy and Management Plan in April that highlights the issues and approach to the 

transition. 

MANAGEMENT CONTROLS

ISSUE: As multiple management controls are replaced with fewer and broader controls, it 

has become increasingly essential that the remaining controls be emphasized and 

consistently followed. The matter of weak internal controls in business practices will 

impact GSA’s credibility to its customers, and underlies several of the other management 

challenges discussed elsewhere in this document. We have also found that 

inconsistencies among operating groups could potentially impact customer satisfaction.

Budgetary Accounting: During the FY 2007 audit, the Independent Public Accountant 

(IPA) noted that tangible progress had been made by management to address the Public 

Buildings Service (PBS) budgetary control weaknesses. However, PBS budgetary control 

weaknesses continue to exist. These control weaknesses relate to the design and 

operating effectiveness of management’s controls. During their testing of internal 

controls, the IPA noted that the design of the mitigating control over obligations is not 

extensive enough to ensure that all material populations of transactions are addressed. 

As a result, reliance cannot be placed upon the validity and completeness of the recorded 

obligations to determine the timely removal of liquidated obligations and accurate 

classification between undelivered orders and accounts payable at year-end. Due to 

inadequate controls over the management of obligations, management performed 

statistical sampling procedures on the records supporting the unfilled customer order

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

172 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
6

(UFCO), undelivered order (UDO), and delivered order balances; as a consequence, 

adjustments were made.

AGENCY ACTIONS: In response to the control weaknesses reported by GSA’s IPA, 

PBS management implemented nationwide training in February 2008 on the process to 

verify documents for UDO and UFCO with Pegasys (GSA’s accounting system) 

balances. PBS also established Reimbursement program presences in all regional 

offices, and provided additional training in Level 1 Reimbursable Work Authorizations.

In continuing efforts to address its control weaknesses, PBS performed frequent reviews 

and validation of budgetary balances, such as:

• Semi-annual review of budgetary balances as of November 2008 (UDO & UFCO).

• Additional reviews of UDO balances of $50,000 or more not reviewed during the 

first round of reviews completed in March.

• Additional reviews of UFCO balances of $25,000 or more not reviewed during the 

first round of reviews completed in March.

• Performed a statistical sample over budgetary account balances as of March 31.

• Performed a statistical sample over budgetary account balances as of July 31.

• Develop a high-risk report of UDOs and UFCOs.

The Reimbursable Work Authorization (RWA): The RWA process allows customer 

agencies to obtain repairs and alterations of government owned or leased space on a 

reimbursable basis through the PBS. RWAs are established to capture and bill the costs 

of altering, repairing, renovating or providing services in space managed by GSA, over 

and above the basic operations financed through rent, and in other properties managed 

by the Federal community. A properly executed RWA provides written documentation to 

ensure there is a formal agreement between the customer and PBS. The RWA must 

include a clear, concise statement identifying the requesting agency's specific need and 

clearly establishing the financial arrangements between the requesting agency and PBS. 

The Office of Audits performed a study of PBS’s RWA activities and found multiple issues. 

In many cases, the RWAs did not have a documented scope of work or the underlying 

estimate for the work when PBS accepted the RWA. The lack of scope and estimates 

raises concerns about the bona fide need of the client, as in some cases the RWA funding 

was used for customer work outside of the scope originally cited in the RWA or work was 

performed well after the receipt of the RWA, sometimes in the next fiscal year. In 

addition, RWAs were sometimes left open after the work was completed and the funding 

used for other projects. Also, PBS did not always follow the appropriate procurement 

regulations when contracting for the repairs and alterations.

Further, RWA policies were unclear regarding whether work needed authorization from 

Congress when the costs are expected to be above the prospectus threshold. 

Additionally, in some cases project costs were allocated to the wrong building or were 

allocated inconsistently. Finally, for RWAs in leased space, often a single person was 

responsible for all aspects of the RWA rather than having the duties segregated to ensure 

proper internal controls.

AGENCY ACTIONS: PBS recognized that RWA management is a problem area affecting 

its financial controls and relationships with clients, and in recent years has been 

undertaking significant initiatives to improve RWA performance. In May 2005, PBS issued 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 173
Management Challenges

7

a RWA National Policy Document to consolidate pre-existing RWA policy and guidance, 

ensure a standardized RWA process from initiation to closure, and serve as the primary 

resource for PBS staff for guidance on RWA policy. In July 2006, PBS created a national 

RWA project management team (National Team) to review and assess the RWA program. 

The National Team issued a draft report in January 2007 that made recommendations for 

improving (1) standardized policy interpretation, (2) financial management and reporting, 

(3) the project management process, (4) RWA management and training and (5) 

ownership over the RWA.

Alliant Contracts: The Alliant contracts encountered difficulties when a recent protest by 

unsuccessful offerors sought review of the award process. In 2006, FAS issued 

solicitations to provide Federal agencies with a broad range of IT solutions to replace the 

Millennia contracts. The value of the contracts is $50 billion over a 10-year term with 

another $15 billion for Alliant Small Business contracts. As part of the award process, 

vendors submitting proposals for the Alliant and Alliant Small Business contracts were 

subject to a past performance evaluation. FAS awarded a Past Performance Support task 

order to a contractor to obtain past performance information to be used in past 

performance evaluations. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims concluded in March 2008 

that the Agency failed to take adequate steps to ensure past performance information it 

received from the contractor was relevant to the evaluation factors, and also failed to 

ensure that information obtained from the contractor was accurate. Additionally, the Court 

concluded that GSA failed to account for price and to make appropriate tradeoff decisions. 

These insufficiencies obliged the court to set aside the award in question and required 

FAS to reevaluate all of Alliant proposals. Given the Court’s conclusion and the 

reevaluation of proposals, the OIG initiated a review of the Past Performance Support

contract to determine to what extent FAS followed applicable laws, regulations, and 

guidance in the award and administration of the task order. The review identified that FAS 

did not always adhere to relevant policies and procedures during award and 

administration. 

AGENCY ACTIONS: The Agency is re-evaluating the proposals for both Alliant and 

Alliant Small Business and anticipates award before the end of the calendar year in 

response to the Court’s decision. In relation to the findings regarding the insufficiencies in 

award and administration of the Calyptus Past Performance Support task order, FAS’s 

Integrated Technology Services (ITS) is instituting a Contract Review Board to provide 

management oversight to the pre and post award contracting activities of all task orders 

within the portfolio. Additionally, ITS has shifted all internal ITS contract administration 

activities to a full-time Contracting Officer Representative to mitigate the risk of improper 

contract administration. 

Data Integrity: In passing the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, 

Congress emphasized that the usefulness of agencies’ performance data depends, to a 

large degree, on the reliability and validity of those data. Past audit work has shown that 

the absence of controls or non-compliance with existing controls has resulted in poor 

quality data at the operational levels of many GSA programs, negatively affecting 

customer expectations.

Managers need to consider the impact of bad data since poor data quality affects all 

reporting, including to Congress and the public. Inaccurate, incomplete, and untimely 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

174 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
8

information can result in bad decision-making. There is a temptation to dismiss the data 

quality problem as consisting of only a series of anecdotes, but the anecdotes are far too 

numerous. There are frequent examples of data problems.

In FY 2006 and 2007, PBS was challenged with the data integrity of its rental rates. 

According to PBS’s pricing policy, the rental rates for GSA-owned buildings should be 

based on independent appraisals of the buildings. However, OIG and PBS reviews 

indicated problems with courthouse appraisals; GSA personnel were extensively 

modifying some appraisals and, as a result, rental rates were being questioned. Due to 

these and other issues, PBS is putting controls in place to ensure the data integrity of 

appraisals as well as for lease and other building information.

Our concern is that GSA needs to create an awareness of the problem and its impact, 

which is the first step toward the resolution of a problem. Data quality cannot be improved 

unless the poor data problem is first recognized. 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

ISSUE: Support for GSA missions and programs requires improved planning, 

development, and implementation of IT systems. GSA management faces challenges in 

ensuring that structured system development methods and disciplined processes for 

selecting, monitoring, and evaluating IT investments are followed. GSA systems 

commonly experience development schedule delays and cost overruns; need frequent 

redesign; do not satisfactorily meet user requirements; and often times do not fully 

integrate with the Agency’s complex legacy systems. The Agency’s IT governance 

structure and related processes have not ensured the efficient allocation of resources to 

those systems that most align to strategic business goals or in flagging potential system 

problems prior to expenditure of significant resources. These issues have led to 

increasing costs for operating and maintaining the Agency’s legacy IT environment.

 

GSA’s IT portfolio has an annual budget of approximately $557 million, 85 percent of 

which is for maintenance and operations of existing information systems at current 

performance levels. The remainder is allocated to new investments or 

changes/modifications to existing systems. Challenges in reengineering business 

processes across the Agency have led to multiple, duplicative systems that are costly to 

maintain and operate. Many GSA IT projects attempt to minimize development cost and 

deployment schedules through implementation of existing commercial-off-the-shelf 

(COTS) software packages. The majority of COTS packages, however, require 

modifications to meet GSA’s requirements and integrate with existing legacy systems and 

business processes.

GSA faces challenges in implementing its enterprise architecture to modernize legacy 

systems and meet customer needs. Performance metrics and a governance model to 

outline and communicate the responsibilities of enterprise architecture stakeholders are 

key activities in ensuring much needed buy-in of Agency Services/Staff Offices/Regions. 

The Agency also must ensure that GSA’s strategic goals are integrated within the 

enterprise architecture, and demonstrate the viability of the approach to assist with 

systems planning and implementation.

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 175
Management Challenges

9

AGENCY ACTIONS: The GSA Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is in the 

process of updating its strategic assessment of IT in GSA through development of a 

revised IT Strategic Plan for years 2009 – 2013. As part of this effort, GSA has identified 

strategic goals and objectives related to standardizing business processes agency-wide, 

improving the quality of information to support decision-making, and enhancing GSA’s IT 

governance process. Specific initiatives that the GSA-OCIO has identified to achieve 

these goals and objectives include development and implementation of enterprise-wide 

service oriented architecture, implementation and maintenance of standards for system 

interoperability to improve the quality of information, and improving customer and 

stakeholder clarity in the IT decision-making process. Challenges for successful 

implementation of GSA’s IT Strategic plan include development of (1) policies and 

procedures to promote business process standardization and information sharing, (2) a 

unified understanding and application of enterprise architecture to align IT with strategic 

goals, and (3) decision-making models to facilitate the development of integrated systems 

and minimize duplicative system functionality.

ISSUE: Implementing a risk-based IT security program requires extensive coordination, 

collaboration, and accountability to ensure success.

Part of the long-term challenge for GSA leadership is to improved processes and controls 

to address evolving IT security risks and requirements established by the Federal 

Information Security Management Act (FISMA). Ensuring that system security officials 

comprehensively evaluate risks, and implement necessary controls for agency IT systems 

through the agency’s certification and accreditation process remains a key challenge for 

GSA’s IT Security Program. Further, programmatic improvements are needed to ensure 

the integration of critical information security activities into the systems development 

processes. This would help to reduce costly security enhancements/modifications that 

need to be made to GSA systems to address security control weaknesses once 

implementation has occurred.

AGENCY ACTIONS: GSA’s management efforts to address IT security issues with the 

Business Systems Council, Information Technology Council (ITC), and the Information 

Technology Architecture Planning Committee, have successfully raised awareness levels, 

but require continued senior management support and individual accountability if they are 

to succeed. The importance of Agency efforts to secure data and systems is also evident 

from the increasing allocations of limited IT resources to system security. FY 2008 

system security costs of approximately $43 million represent 7.8 percent of GSA’s $557 

million IT budget.

 

Coordination, collaboration, and accountability across the agency is needed to address 

high priority risk areas related to (1) access controls, (2) oversight of contractor supported 

systems, and (3) controls for sensitive data. For example, the GSA Privacy Act Program 

is managed by the Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) who is responsible for ensuring 

that GSA fulfills the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974. Because the Chief 

Information Officer (CIO) manages the GSA IT Security program, the CIO shares 

responsibility with the CHCO for protecting sensitive information, including Personally 

Identifiable Information (PII). Other types of sensitive information include credit card 

numbers, building specifications/drawings, and security documentation. Significant 

weaknesses in access controls for GSA systems has put at risk sensitive information, 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

176 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
10

including PII, and system transactions. Agency oversight of security for contractor 

provided systems/solutions remains a high-risk area as GSA implements e-government 

solutions and relies on contractors for various phases of systems development, 

operations, and maintenance. Development and implementation of adequate 

management, operational, and technical controls to (1) prevent the loss of, or 

unauthorized access to, sensitive data, (2) detect unauthorized disclosures or IT security 

breaches, and (3) recover or restore systems and data remains a significant challenge for 

GSA’s Privacy and Information Technology Security Programs.

AGENCY ACTIONS: To strengthen access controls across the Agency, the ITC formed 

an Identity and Access Management Working Group (IDAMWG), comprised of 

representatives from various GSA Services and Staff Offices. The IDAMWG is tasked 

with analyzing various approaches to help standardize access controls across GSA and 

for developing a business case with proposed solutions by March 2009. The GSA-OCIO 

is also leading a pilot project for two-factor authentication for network access using the 

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12) smartcards. Challenges 

associated with utilizing HSPD-12 smartcards for two-factor authentication to information 

systems includes development of an integrated infrastructure, including card readers, to 

support HSPD-12 goals, and the modification of Agency systems to utilize HSPD-12 

credentials. 

ISSUE: Agency-wide IT infrastructure support services initiative is depending on 

successful implementation of best practices. With the GSA Information Technology 

Global Operations (GITGO) initiative, the agency has undertaken an ambitious project to 

consolidate IT infrastructure support services, such as desktop computing, networking, 

and messaging, with a $200 million contract award to a small business firm. The overall 

goal of this IT infrastructure support consolidation approach is to provide an opportunity 

for GSA to improve the cost effectiveness, security and reliability of its IT infrastructure. 

Among other things, the GITGO initiative entails (1) combination of 40 disparate IT 

support contracts into one consolidated contract, (2) alignment of IT functions performed 

by various GSA Staff Offices/Regions within the OCIO, and (3) establishment of a 

consolidated helpdesk for all IT infrastructure issues.

AGENCY ACTIONS: Under the GITGO initiative, the GSA-OCIO has established a 

centralized IT Service Desk, to serve as a single point of contact for IT related issues 

across GSA, and has established goals to adopt certain best practices for IT service 

management stipulated in the Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL). 

Further, outreach activities have been initiated by the GSA-OCIO to communicate planned 

benefits with GITGO and obtain feedback from the user community on experiences to 

date. 

An initiative of this magnitude will impact GSA’s IT infrastructure operations for years to 

come. As part of GITGO, GSA must address:

 

 Oversight of prime and subcontractor performance;

 Key roles and responsibilities for IT infrastructure support, including system 

administration and IT security functions;

 Development of performance goals and measures to assess customer satisfaction 

and realization of cost savings;

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 177
Management Challenges

11

 Alignment of GITGO to evolving requirements for OMB’s IT Infrastructure 

Optimization Initiative Line of Business;

 Adequacy of general and application controls including security and privacy 

controls to manage operations with GITGO; and

 Delivery of requirements for sub-tasks, including Program Management, Client 

Management, Helpdesk Support, Local Support, and Network Operations.

Realization of expected benefits for GITGO requires that GSA successfully address each 

of these challenges and implement newly adopted best practices related to IT 

configuration and change management, capacity management and service continuity, 

service level agreement management, and incident management and problem resolution.

FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND

ISSUE: GSA’s Public Buildings Service (PBS) is one of the largest real property 

organizations in the world. Its building inventory consists of over 8,600 assets, mostly 

general-purpose office space in Federal buildings and leases, with 352 million square feet 

of rentable space and housing over a million Federal employees. Over the past 40 years, 

the majority of the growth in PBS’s inventory has been through leasing. From 1967 to 

2007, the leased inventory increased from 46.4 million square feet to 175.5 million, while 

the owned inventory has grown from 155.5 million square feet to 176.4 million square feet.

PBS funds its real property operations through the Federal Buildings Fund (FBF). The 

FBF is similar to a revolving fund in that rents collected by PBS are deposited into the 

fund. In addition to the funding provided from rental income, Congress may appropriate 

funding to the FBF as it deems necessary. Those funds are then used to not only make 

lease payments and operate government-owned buildings, but also for investment in the 

capital program to repair and modernize facilities and construct new buildings in support 

of customer agency missions. However, as part of the annual appropriation process, 

limits are placed on how much of the fund can be used in a given fiscal year and how 

much can be used to support the major real property functions. This includes approval of 

the capital program’s major new construction and major repair and alteration projects as 

well as the funds needed for these projects. 

By law, rent prices are required to approximate commercial rates for comparable space 

and services. As such, PBS usually prices government-owned space based on an 

appraisal of comparable properties that sets a market comparable rent rate for a five-year 

period. Leased space is generally priced to customer agencies as a pass-through of the 

underlying PBS lease contract rent, plus a PBS fee and security charges. Each space 

assignment in PBS-controlled space has an occupancy agreement between PBS and the 

customer agency, stating the financial terms and the conditions for occupancy. 

Although PBS has substantial growth in its leased inventory, it requires funding for its 

capital program of major new construction and repair and alteration projects. To meet the 

Federal government needs, PBS needs funding to construct new courthouses, border 

stations, and Federal buildings. It also needs funding to repair and modernize buildings 

that are currently owned and operated. The buildings in PBS’ owned portfolio have an 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

178 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
12

average age of 45 years and require approximately $7.4 billion in reinvestment for repairs 

and alterations.

However, funding for capital projects has been decreasing. In FY 2006, the funding for 

the capital program included $792 million for major new construction, $861 million for 

major repairs and alterations, $435 million for basic repairs and alterations, and $22 

million for the design program. In FY 2008, the funding has dropped to $531 million for 

major new construction, $403 million for major repairs and alterations, $319 million for 

basic repairs and alterations, and $0 for the design program. This funding decrease is 

exacerbated by increasing construction costs, which leads to fewer projects at the same 

funding level.

In recent history, the capital program has been subject to cost escalations in excess of the 

approved funding on its major new construction and major repair and alteration projects. 

GSA has the authority to fund cost escalations up to 10 percent of the approved funds 

using savings from past projects without seeking Congressional approval. If the cost 

escalation is greater than 10 percent, Congressional approval is needed. However, due 

to recent cost escalations, the cost savings available to fund cost escalations has been 

depleted. 

PBS is now heavily reliant on its operations to replenish the FBF and provide funds for the 

capital program. However, its net income has been falling. In FY 2005, PBS’s net income 

was $974 million, but that fell to $558 million in FY 2007. Likewise, PBS’s primary 

measure for tracking the incoming funds from operations known as Funds from 

Operations (FFO), which is essentially net income before depreciation is deducted (or 

total revenue less all expenses except depreciation) has also dropped. PBS’s FFO 

peaked in FY 2005 at $1.762 billion and dropped to $1.643 billion in FY 2007. PBS’ net 

income and FFO have been falling due to a combination of factors. Net income from 

government-owned buildings has been impacted by cost increases in all aspects of 

business – construction as well as building operations, maintenance, and utilities –

combined with a lack of growth in revenues. In addition, net income has also been 

impacted by PBS’s leasing operations, which lost money in FY 2007.

PBS’s revenue will likely be under pressure in the future. PBS cannot arbitrarily raise 

rents for owned space to increase revenue as rents are based on market appraisals and 

leases are supposed to be priced so that they are revenue neutral – incurring neither a 

profit nor a loss. Additionally, several recent policy changes actually work to decrease 

PBS’s revenue. Starting in FY 2008, PBS’s leasing revenue will be affected by the 

reduction of its leasing fee from eight percent to seven percent (from six to five percent for 

non-cancelable leases). Starting in FY 2009, PBS’s revenue may also be affected by its 

new MOA with the U.S. Courts. According to the MOA, a new pricing methodology based 

on return on investment will be implemented for some government-owned properties in FY 

2009 as well as for some buildings that are built in the future. Although this may be more 

beneficial than using market pricing for new buildings that are brought on line in the future, 

this change will most likely reduce revenue for current properties that switch to this 

methodology. Finally, PBS’s revenue is also affected by construction project delays as 

expected revenue from the buildings is postponed until construction is complete and the 

buildings are occupied.

In addition, PBS costs are difficult to cut. PBS cannot cut back on building operations as it 

would impact the mission of customer agencies. In addition, PBS has limited ability to 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 179
Management Challenges

13

reduce building operations costs such as cleaning, and operations and maintenance on 

an ad hoc basis as most of these functions are now performed using contracts. Currently, 

utility costs have been rising nationwide and usage is difficult to cut without additional 

investment in more energy efficient systems. 

The financial strain on the FBF is a major management challenge. The capital 

reinvestment needs of PBS’s government–owned buildings have been growing. Without 

the necessary funding for reinvestment, buildings will continue to deteriorate and as a 

result, rent prices may also be lower as the building conditions are reflected in the rent 

appraisals leading to even lower revenue. Using leasing as a long-term solution may not 

be feasible as lease operations are only expected to break even and have recently been 

losing money.

AGENCY ACTIONS: To address this challenge, PBS is taking action in several different 

ways. In the short term, PBS has requested $525 million in new appropriations in its FY 

2009 budget request. These funds are needed to ensure PBS capital program stays on 

plan in the near term. PBS also requested $4.2 million to fund the Building Performance 

Improvement Program to provide a comprehensive review of all aspects of physical 

performance and tenant satisfaction resulting in an estimated five percent reduction in 

energy consumption. In the long term, PBS has implemented a portfolio strategy to 

maximize income-producing properties and identify underperforming assets. PBS has 

also adjusted its priorities to address these issues.

In 2003, PBS began implementing a strategy for restructuring the owned building 

inventory. The strategy envisions a combination of actions including disposals, 

exchanges, public/private partnerships, outleases, and new construction. With the 

Portfolio Restructuring Initiative, PBS has been implemented a three-tiered approach in 

prioritizing the inventory, using a series of asset diagnostic tests or measures, each with a 

performance target or threshold that will assist in categorizing individual buildings. The 

first test simply seeks to determine whether the property produces sufficient income to 

meet both operating expenses and a reserve for replacement. The second test measures 

an asset’s financial performance in terms of return on investment. Other tests address 

operating efficiency, customer satisfaction, rental rate and vacancy levels, and current 

repair and replacement needs. After this review, each asset is categorized as either 

performing, under-performing, or non-performing. GSA consults with affected agencies 

on appropriate resolution strategies for each troubled asset. GSA has briefed 

congressional subcommittees with jurisdiction over GSA, and they are supportive of this 

effort, as are OMB and GAO. Since FY 2002, PBS has reported 271 assets as excess.

In FY 2007, the PBS Commissioner also identified PBS’s priority areas, several of which 

affect the capital program. His priorities include improving PBS’s real property capital 

project planning and delivery. To achieve this, PBS is developing project monitoring and 

mitigation tracking tools, and establishing national program standards for ownership of 

project data accuracy. PBS is also executing a national training strategy and action plan 

for project managers, as well as developing future leadership in the Office of Chief 

Architect. The primary goal of these efforts is to deliver projects on time, on budget and 

within scope. 

PBS’s priorities also include exploring ways to leverage funding of real property capital 

projects to help offset the growing burden of capital funds. PBS is examining increased 

investment in real property through the use of alternative financing options as an 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

180 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
14

opportunity to support further investment and reinvestment in its portfolio. To do this, PBS 

is sought to use authorities identified under Section 412 of the FY 2005 appropriation law. 

Under this authority, PBS was given the authority to not only deposit proceeds from the 

disposal of GSA owned property into the FBF, but also the ability to out-lease GSA owned 

property and then lease it back. With these authorities, PBS would out-lease properties in 

need of reinvestment to an entity that would perform the needed repairs and alterations 

and then leaseback the renovated property from that entity. Thus the reinvestment costs 

will be financed through a lease arrangement rather than being funded directly through the 

FBF. Further, under proposed legislation, GSA would be permitted to use the proceeds 

from the sale of excess or surplus property for activities related to Federal real property 

asset management and disposal. 

HUMAN CAPITAL

ISSUE: Since 1998, the OIG has consistently cited human capital management as one of 

the major management challenges facing GSA resulting from a loss of both knowledge 

and critical skills. GAO added this issue in 2001 to its high-risk series of issues facing 

Federal agencies, and it continues as an issue on the March 2008 list. Strategic human 

capital planning and organizational alignment, leadership continuity and succession 

planning, recruitment and retention of staff with the right skills, and results-oriented 

organizational cultures were identified as key areas needing attention.

GSA has undergone a major transformation in its workforce resulting from the merger of 

FSS and FTS into FAS. In 1999, the workforce was approximately 14,000 and today it is 

around 12,000. As with many Federal agencies, a large portion of the staff has reached 

or is nearing retirement age. Hard-to-fill positions and retention issues continue to be 

human capital concerns. Coupled with the FAS reorganization and the ripple effect of 

changes related to Assisted Acquisition Services reassignments, many staff find 

themselves in unfamiliar positions and uncertain as to their reporting role in the 

organization.

There are three major human challenges facing GSA: succession management strategies 

to mitigate the risk of projected retirements of the leadership cadre; addressing the 

mission critical gaps in numbers and capability; and optimization of the organizational 

structures of GSA services. GSA retirement projections emphasize the need for 

succession planning and leadership development. Approximately 40 percent of the 

current Senior Executive Service workforce will be eligible to retire in five years. 

Increasing leadership attrition rates and forecasted future losses cause concerns about 

the adequacy of GSA’s leadership replenishment and retention strategies. In addition to 

change management, other changes impact supervisory expectations and competencies, 

as managing contractor outcomes, flexible work arrangements, increased focus on 

performance management, increased communication demands, and project management 

skills are newer competency needs and challenges.

 

As the Federal government's leading acquisition agency, GSA continues to strengthen its 

acquisition workforce by leveraging various recruitment and retention tools. The need for 

a highly qualified acquisition workforce continues and GSA recognizes the challenge of 

having to continuously improve its competitive edge among other Federal agencies. A 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 181
Management Challenges

15

critical element in succession planning recognizes that GSA is experiencing an increased 

supervisory (GS-14/GS-15) attrition rate. More than 36 percent of the current supervisory 

workforce will be eligible for optional retirement within three years or before FY 2010. The 

overall impact and health of GSA’s leadership talent pool must be fully considered. Not 

only are GSA’s leadership positions filled predominately by internal nonsupervisory GS 

13-15’s, but that group (nonsupervisory, GS 13-15) also suffers its own attrition losses

With government procurement as GSA's primary mission and the act of issuing contracts 

"an inherent government responsibility," we foresee a continuing need for competent 

contracting officers. There is a question as to whether GSA has enough qualified trained 

contracting officers with the knowledge, education, and negotiating skills to deal with the 

complex MAS contracts in place, especially service contracts pricing. Although staffing 

has recently increased to some extent, FAS noted in its October 2006 Business Plan for 

the Schedules program that hiring experienced contracting personnel remains a challenge 

as the number of offers and modifications continue to increase. Further, a fairly high 

percentage of FAS personnel are eligible for retirement within the next five years. 

A related challenge is that many contracting officers currently have responsibility for over 

100 contracts, many of which are in the services area. Some contracts, especially in the 

computer equipment and supplies area, require substantial effort to administer due to 

constant changes to products and prices that have to be added or deleted to the contract 

via contract modifications, which for some contracts number in the hundreds. Last year

we identified that FAS could facilitate workload distribution by improving the quality and 

accuracy of data used to manage MAS work, and could further adopt a more strategic 

approach in managing the Schedules program. Further, FAS could improve consistency 

and effectiveness in achieving best value for customer agencies and taxpayers by 

improving guidance for contracting personnel and enhancing performance measures 

related to increased emphasis on costs. 

AGENCY ACTIONS: GSA has moved out on several fronts to meet identified human 

capital challenges, continuing to implement strategies and programs to mitigate the risk of 

projected retirements of the leadership cadre. The Agency completed an agency-level 

workforce analysis in FY 2006 that has assisted management in making informed human 

capital decisions. Identified mission critical occupations are particularly emphasized in 

recruitment and retention strategies. During FY 2007, over 87 percent of GSA’s 

supervisory vacancies were filled with internal GSA employees prompting GSA to launch 

a mentoring program to foster future leadership and compliment its succession planning. 

The mentoring program pairs talented, experienced employees (mentors) with employees 

(protégés) who need to enhance their leadership and other business skills.

The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) selectively uses human resource 

flexibilities to compete for employees in the mission-critical occupations, as 

acquisition/contracting, realty, finance, and information technology. It has developed 

recruitment, relocation, and retention strategies with the help of the U.S. Office of 

Personnel Management (OPM) and employee focus groups, and uses the compelling job 

offer technique to convince potential employees of the importance of the position. In 

OPM’s FY 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey, employees ranked GSA among the top 

10 Federal workplaces in three of four broad categories. 

GSA has a number of initiatives regarding employee orientation, engaging existing 

employees, and developing leaders within GSA, along with a commitment to provide a 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

182 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
16

workplace and work environment to meet current and future needs of its employees. New 

employees are provided the opportunity to attend an intensive introduction to the Agency 

and orientation to the individual’s specific organization. As part of its human capital 

strategy, and to address planning needs, the OCHCO launched the GSA Leadership 

Institute in February 2002, and has continued to add programs and training opportunities 

to develop new supervisors and managers, and equip them for senior-level positions in 

the Agency. Also, OCHCO has begun an initiative to review compensation management, 

benefits management and personnel action processing. Additionally, GSA has 

implemented a Telework Program as an innovative family-friendly workplace solution, and 

provided security and safety measures for emergency preparedness through its Continuity 

of Operations Plan. Management recently raised its goal for regular telework (one day per 

week) from 20 to 30 percent by the end of 2008. 

In response to the review of the MAS program’s contract workload management 

recommendations, GSA has completed action on a majority of the action plan steps for 

more effectively managing contract actions in the Schedule program. Remaining recently 

changed actions still awaiting completion pertain to the MAS Advisory Panel’s 

recommendations on guidance related to price analysis and price negotiations.

PROTECTION OF FEDERAL FACILITIES AND PERSONNEL

ISSUE: Providing a safe, healthful, and secure environment for over one million workers 

and visitors to approximately 8,600 owned and leased Federal facilities nationwide is a 

major multifaceted responsibility of GSA. Increased risks from terrorism have greatly 

expanded the range of vulnerabilities traditionally faced by building operations personnel. 

In March 2003, the Federal Protective Service (FPS) was transferred from GSA to the 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). While FPS is no longer part of GSA, the 

Agency will have a continual need to closely interact with security personnel due to GSA’s 

mission of housing Federal agencies. GSA and FPS/DHS operate under a MOA for 

obtaining services, such as basic security for buildings, contract guards, law enforcement, 

background suitability determinations for contractors (including Child Care), pre-lease 

security checks, occupant emergency plan support, and continuity of operations plan 

activation support. Ensuring that Federal employees have a secure work environment 

and that building assets are adequately safeguarded must remain a primary consideration 

for GSA.

One concern relates to the future funding for upgrades and replacement of the security 

countermeasure equipment initially authorized directly by Congress. As equipment ages 

and technology advances, the cost to maintain the security of GSA’s buildings could 

significantly impact availability of funds for other building needs, and could result in higher 

rent costs to tenants resulting from upgraded security. Under the existing MOA, security 

fixtures and mandatory security equipment countermeasures valued above the 

prospectus-level, or installed in prospectus-level projects, are purchased and installed by 

GSA on a prioritized, funds available basis, with PBS Assistant Regional Administrators 

reserving the right not to implement mandatory measures, after consulting with DHS. 

With the exception of prospectus-level equipment or projects, security equipment 

determined by FPS to be a mandatory countermeasure is supposed to be funded by DHS 

or tenant agencies through Security Work Authorizations, on a prioritized, funds-available 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 183
Management Challenges

17

basis. However, FPS has been experiencing major funding shortfalls and is reevaluating 

its structure and mission, which could affect the services it provides to GSA. In fact, an 

ongoing GAO review has noted that FPS is experiencing difficulties in fully meeting its 

facility protection mission due to staffing and operational issues. 

PBS has been an active participant in several Interagency Security Committee (ISC) 

working groups which have been addressing significant areas such as revised standards 

for facility security level determinations and baseline standards for existing facilities. The 

new MOA to be negotiated during FY 2009 will have to take into account ISC security 

standards, security equipment maintenance and the impact of FPS’ policy change to 

transition to an inspector based workforce. In view of the many issues facing PBS, we are 

concerned about the level of security under the MOA and will be monitoring the situation 

closely.

Additionally, GSA did not complete the next phase of HSPD-12 implementation by OMB’s

original milestone date of October 27, 2007, due to the late award of a Managed Service 

Office (MSO) contractor and the limited Personal Identity Verification (PIV) card 

production capability of that contractor. By this date, all contractors and employees with 

15 years or less of service were required to be issued PIV II compliant cards. Instead, 

GSA is focused on issuing the cards to all employees and contractors by October 27, 

2008. In addition to issues with the MSO contractor, GSA is faced with other obstacles 

affecting its ability to implement HSPD-12. One issue is the absence of a centralized 

database capturing GSA-wide contractor information with access to GSA systems. This 

makes it difficult to identify those contractors who do not have completed background 

investigations.

AGENCY ACTIONS: Effective June 1, 2006, GSA and FPS entered into a new, more 

comprehensive, MOA that clearly addresses the roles, responsibilities, and operational 

relationships between FPS and GSA concerning the security of GSA-controlled space. 

FPS continues to provide law enforcement services, conduct Building Security 

Assessments, and identify security countermeasures that can be implemented to reduce 

vulnerabilities and potential threats to Federal facilities. Building specific security 

measures include contract guards, security equipment, and security fixtures. Further, 

GSA has formed a Building Security and Policy Division within the PBS, including a 

Regional Security Network, while taking an active role on Interagency Security Committee 

working groups.

While it has experienced some setbacks, GSA is moving forward to adopt a credential as 

part of the Federal government’s implementation of HSPD-12, which mandates a common 

identification standard for Federal employees and contractors. The credential, with an 

embedded smart chip, will identify each employee visually and electronically for both 

identification and physical access purposes. GSA has met OMB’s first two deadlines 

requiring issuance of operating procedures by October 27, 2005, and the production of a 

PIV II compliant card by October 27, 2006. GSA is also continuing to move forward in 

such aspects of HSPD-12 implementation as processing employee and contractor 

background investigations, developing plans for logical and physical access, and updating 

its general HSPD-12 policies.

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

184 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
MEMORANDUM FOR BRIAN D. MILLER

INSPECTOR GENERAL (J) 

FROM: JAMES A. WILLIAMS

ACTING ADMINISTRATOR (A) 

SUBJECT: Inspector General’s Assessment of the General Services Administration’s

Major Challenges

Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to review your assessment of the major challenges currently facing the 

U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and the Agency’s progress in addressing those specific challenges. We have 

continued to direct efforts toward the six management challenges the Office of Inspector General (OIG) believes are facing 

GSA today: Acquisition Programs, Management Controls, Information Technology (IT), Federal Buildings Fund (FBF), 

Human Capital, and Protection of Federal Facilities and Personnel. The attachment highlights and provides information 

and clarification on several items covered in the Inspector General’s (IG) Updated Assessment. 

As you observe, GSA has acknowledged these challenges and is implementing a broad range of measures to address these 

challenges, including renegotiating our Memorandum of Agreement with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s 

(DHS) Federal Protective Service for the protection of Federal facilities and personnel; through policy and oversight 

requiring agencies to move toward firm fixed price orders in our Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) program wherever 

possible; and continuing to focus on pricing objectives, pricing tools, and management controls in the MAS program. GSA 

is acutely aware of the Human Capital management challenge. This is an issue that is government-wide and not unique 

to GSA. While we are confident that all of the measures we have undertaken to address the full range of management 

challenges cited are appropriate, we are continually measuring our progress. Your audits and reviews provide useful 

information and insights as we move forward.

As in the past, GSA management has been responsive in implementing appropriate OIG recommendations. GSA recognizes 

that the OIG can provide invaluable assistance to GSA management in our stewardship of taxpayer resources. 

I look forward to continuing to work with the OIG to minimize, if not eliminate, waste, fraud, and abuse and promote 

greater government effectiveness and efficiency.

Attachment

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 185
Management Challenges

the assessment gives only a partial definition of commercial 

item, emphasizing only “of a type customarily used by the 

general public” in making the point that a vendor is not 

required to have commercial, competitive sales. The item/

service need only be commercial in nature (but may have 

minor modifications for government requirements). 

The statement that preaward reviews are the main tool by 

which a contracting officer can be assured that a vendor’s 

pricing is appropriate is misleading. The preaward reviews 

are just one tool, yet valuable, that can be utilized by the 

contracting officer. GSA contracting officers rely on market 

research, existing pricing on schedule contracts, their 

judgment, and other pricing tools in making a determination 

that the prices are fair and reasonable.

The OIG’s assertion that over the past two years they have 

found flaws in approximately 70 percent of the proposals 

audited which amounted to over $2 billion in proposed 

contract price reductions and tens of millions of dollars in 

recoveries is unsubstantiated. The OIG states that vendors 

can go to great lengths to conceal their actual selling prices. 

We assume these statements relate to initial proposals 

rather than the contract prices or actual customer task order 

pricing. In addition, we question the basis of the $2 billion 

in proposed contract price reductions. The statement that 

vendors can go to great lengths to conceal their actual 

selling prices is unsupported.

In response to the statement, “In addition, we have found 

that, although a commercial market exists for a vendor’s 

services, its commercial contracts are typically awarded on 

a firm fixed price basis, while its GSA schedule clients have 

been mainly doing business on a time and materials basis,” 

our MAS contracts have provisions for both firm fixed price 

Acquisition Programs

The MAS program encourages, and in many cases requires, 

a statement of work and additional price competition at 

the task order level. The assessment implies that there 

is significant growth in the program whereas there is a 

controlled and modest increase in sales. There has not 

been a substantial “broadening” of the program. The 

program continues to focus on pricing objectives, pricing 

tools, audits, and management control of the direction of 

the program. 

The assessment describes the MAS program contract award 

process and ordering procedures and does not accurately 

summarize the program as is currently set forth in Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 8.4. Under the MAS 

program, indefinite-delivery contracts are awarded in order 

to provide Federal agencies with the ability to obtain supplies 

and services at stated prices for given periods of time (FAR 

8.402(a)). Pursuant to the applicable ordering procedures, 

Federal agencies issue orders off the schedule contracts and 

pay the contractors directly for their purchases. 

The use of the phrase “mandate for most-favored customer 

(MFC) pricing” is incorrect. GSA Manual (GSAM) 538.70 

sets forth a “goal” for obtaining MFC pricing during contract 

negotiation and not a “mandate.”

The MAS Advisory Panel has not formally submitted 

its recommendations to the GSA Acting Administrator. 

Therefore, it is premature to discuss any of the panel’s 

potential recommendations, including any related to the 

Price Reduction clause.

It is important to note that the definition of “commercial 

item” is statutorily based—see 41 U.S.C. 403(12). Further, 

Agency Management Comments on the

Inspector General’s Assessment of GSA’s

Major Management Challenges

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

186 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
and time and material orders. Increasingly, policy and 

oversight entities have been requiring agencies to move 

toward firm fixed price orders whenever possible. We 

have not seen comparative studies identifying qualitative 

differences between government and commercial markets 

concerning similar task orders. 

The assessment of the Government Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWAC) program is difficult to follow. It 

discusses GWACs and then discusses the long completed 

Client Support Centers audits, which really are not directly 

related to GWACs. The discussion has little, if anything, to 

do with GWACs and to the Assisted Acquisition Services 

(AAS) organization. 

The statement discussing the 2006 U.S. Department of 

Defense (DoD) and GSA agreement to outline a series 

of steps GSA will take to alleviate DoD concerns about 

interagency contracting fails to address the entire actions 

of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to define 

new parameters and operating principles for interagency 

contracting that take effect in November 2008. It also fails 

to address important procurement reforms and legislative 

initiatives that will impact interagency contracting that 

supplant and replace in many instances the existing DoD/

GSA Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). This is a real and 

substantial management challenge, but is not addressed 

in this document. The mentioned issue in the 2008 

Management Challenges is essentially now overcome by 

events, including the aforementioned changes in legislation 

and policy.

Management Controls

The listing of the findings regarding the Calyptus issues 

relating to the Alliant contract is misstated. The real issue 

was the award and administration of a $300,000 support 

contract that had an adverse impact on the Alliant and Alliant 

Small Business award. The remaining issue for the Federal 

Acquisition Service (FAS) relates to the completion of the 

award in accordance with the judge’s opinion in the Alliant 

protest and the correction of the past performance issues 

identified for both the Alliant and Alliant Small Business 

contracts. The presentation of this issue does not clearly 

state the important management challenge being faced.

Information Technology

GSA management has no additional comments on IT.

Federal Buildings Fund

The assessment raises concern with data integrity in the 

Public Buildings Service’s (PBS) rental rates. PBS continues 

to employ mechanisms to adhere to the Government 

Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 to ensure 

reliable and valid billing data. To address rental rate issues, 

PBS initiated a series of Appraisal Reforms that have led to 

much improved data integrity and oversight of the entire 

appraisal process. PBS’s ongoing Rent Appraisal Quality 

Evaluation (an on-site review of appraisal files and quality) 

has indicated that quality is much improved, post reforms, 

and is still improving. Post-reform appraisal activity has 

been consistently passing all of our quality thresholds in the 

recent management reviews. Pre-reform appraisals have 

been corrected or the properties have been re-appraised. 

Rent appraisals are now subject to a four-tier review process 

that greatly improves the data quality. We are also updating 

the appraisal instructions to the contract appraisers and to 

the regions to address areas of concern annually. PBS hosts 

frequent training forums and annual conferences to create 

an awareness of the importance of data quality, accurate 

pricing, and proper billing. To address data integrity issues, 

in 2007, PBS implemented the Rent Bill Management (RBM) 

program, which serves a two-fold purpose to:

■ Address concerns of our customers relative to: (1) 

conflicts with the lease contract and market appraisal, 

(2) inaccurate reflection of the customer’s current space 

holdings, and (3) billing for services not received. 

RBM is an integral part of our management controls in 

ensuring that these items are corrected.

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 187
Management Challenges

■ Provide a proactive means of addressing the problems 

of rent bill inaccuracies. The RBM program emphasizes 

the importance of accuracy, consistency, and a required 

adherence to national policy. Processes are in place 

to ensure and require source documentation prior to 

processing changes in rent and before beginning the 

rent billing cycle. The information is entered directly 

from source documents (a lease, Occupancy Agreement, 

and Appraisal) without alterations or interpretations. 

Under the PBS’s RBM program, PBS is checking billing 

requests against the appraisal for verification before 

processing the billing cycle. 

Human Capital

The assessment that FAS could improve consistency and 

effectiveness in achieving best value for customer agencies 

and taxpayers by improving guidance for contracting 

personnel and enhancing performance measures related to 

increased emphasis on costs is misplaced. The contracting 

officers should be focusing on “price” not cost, and then only 

as one of many factors in the best value determination. 

Protection of Federal Facilities and

Personnel

The June 1, 2006, MOA between the GSA and DHS’s Federal 

Protective Service is currently being renegotiated and 

updated. 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

188 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Improper Payments Information Act Reporting Detail

Due to the inherent lag in reviewing and evaluating improper payments, GSA received approval from OMB to report prior year Improper Payments Information Act (IPIA) and Recovery Audit results for current year reporting, in an effort to obtain 

more accurate estimates of improper payments and recovery effectiveness. In FY 2008, GSA performed a simplified risk assessment 

which evaluates improper payments from GSA’s recovery audit program and considers any significant legislative, programmatic, 

funding, and/or other program changes to conclude that none of GSA programs are high risk. OMB defines a high risk program 

as having improper payments above $10 million and over 2.5 percent of program disbursements. 

Recovery Audit Program

Table 1: Recovery Auditing Results 

Current Year (FY 2007) and Prior Years (FY 2002 through FY 2006) 

Agency 

Component

Amount 

Subject to 

Review for 

CY Reporting

Actual 

Amount 

Reviewed and 

Reported CY

Amounts 

Identified for 

Recovery CY

Amounts 

Recovered 

CY

Amounts 

Identified 

for Recovery 

PYs

Amount 

Recovered 

PYs

Cumulative 

Amounts Identified 

for Recovery 

(CY+PYs)

Cumulative 

Amounts 

Recovered 

(CY+PYs)

N/A $14.5B $15.6B $13.5M $10.6M

(79 Percent)

$174.2M $78.2M

(45 Percent)

$187.5M $88.8M

(47 Percent)

GSA made $14.5 billion in payments subject to review for 

reporting in FY 2007. This amount includes the total payments 

made by GSA less payments made for payroll and external 

clients. To avoid duplication of efforts, payments in programs 

subject to other independent audits are also excluded from 

review. These programs are: Construction, where payments are 

subject to an independent audit upon completion of projects; 

Fleet, where payments are subject to independent audit by the 

Loss Prevention Team within FAS for fraud, waste, abuse, and 

improper payments; and Transportation, where payments are 

subject to independent audit by the GSA Office of Transportation 

Audits. Each year, the emphasis of the recovery audit changes 

based on identified risks. In FY 2007, the recovery audit 

included $13.7 billion of PBS and FAS payments made between 

October 1, 2005 and March 31, 2007; an in-depth review of $1.9 

billion of PBS leases in three of the 11 regions; FY 2007 reviews 

excluded lease rents, utility payments, and telecom payments.

The results of the recovery audits are provided in Table 1. 

In FY 2007, GSA was successful in recovering 79 percent of 

the dollars identified as improperly paid through the recovery 

audits. Table 2 presents detailed Agency costs and an overview 

of payment errors identified. The overall cost of GSA’s recovery 

audit program in FY 2007 was $1.2 million. All amounts 

recovered are returned to the original program, excluding 

the contingency fee paid the recovery audit contractor upon 

successful collection. 

Table 2: GSA’s FY 2007 Recovery Audit Program Results

(in dollars)

Recovery Audit Program Costs $ 1,215,869

Agency Salaries & Expenses $ 68,083

Total Contracted Expenses $ 1,147,786

 Paid $ 1,030,927

 Due $ 116,860

Total Payment Errors Identified $ 13,475,102 

Discovered By Contractor $ 7,216,504 

 Amount Unrecoverable $ -

 Amount Recovered $ 5,696,210

 Amount Outstanding $ 1,520,294 

Discovered Internally By GSA $ 6,258,598 

 Amount Unrecoverable $ 926,944

 Amount Recovered $ 4,917,790

 Amount Outstanding $ 413,176

Based on the payments subject to recovery audit, the overall 

improper payment rate in FY 2007 was 0.09 percent of the 

FY 2007 disbursements of $14.5 billion. GSA attributes its low 

improper payment rates to a comprehensive recovery audit 

program and a strong system of internal controls surrounding 

the disbursement process. Results of recovery audits are 

monitored monthly, root causes of improper payments are 

reviewed, and controls are reviewed annually and tested as 

part of the A-123 assessment of internal controls over financial 

reporting. GSA views the recovery auditing program as a key 

element of its overall program of effective internal controls 

over the payment process.

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 189
Summary of Financial Statement Audit

Table 1. Summary of Financial Statement Audit

Audit Opinion: Unqualified

Restatement: No

Material Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Ending Balance

Financial Management 

Systems, Internal Controls, 

and Financial Reporting

0 1 0 0 1

Total Material Weaknesses 0 1 0 0 1

Summary of Management Assurances

Table 2. Summary of Management Assurances

Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial Reporting (FMFIA § 2)

Statement of Assurance: Qualified

Material Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

Financial Management 

Systems, Internal Controls, 

and Financial Reporting

0 1 0 0 0 1

Total Material Weaknesses 0 1 0 0 0 1

Effectiveness of Internal Control over Operations (FMFIA § 2)

Statement of Assurance: Qualified

Material Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

Financial Management 

Systems, Internal Controls, 

and Financial Reporting

0 1 0 0 0 1

Total Material Weaknesses 0 1 0 0 0 1

Conformance with Financial Management System Requirements (FMFIA § 4)

Statement of Assurance: Systems do not fully conform to financial management system requirements

Non-Conformances Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

Financial Management 

Systems, Internal Controls, 

and Financial Reporting

0 1 0 0 0 1

Total Non-Conformances 0 1 0 0 0 1

Compliance with Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA)

Agency Auditor

Overall Substantial Compliance No No

1. System Requirements No

2. Accounting Standards No

3. USSGL at Transaction Level No

Summary of Financial Statement Audit

and Management Assurances

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

190 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
Other, Agency-specific Statutorily Required Reports

Debt Management

G SA reported $169.8 million of outstanding debt from non-Federal sources and $14.5 million of delinquent 

debt at the end of FY 2008, which is 8.5 percent of the 

outstanding debt. The amount of delinquent debt increased 

from $11.1 million in FY 2007 to $14.5 million. Non-Federal 

receivables consist of debts owed on third-party claims, 

travel advances, proceeds from the sale of real property, 

and other miscellaneous receivables.

To comply with the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 

1996, GSA transmits delinquent claims each month to the 

U.S. Treasury, Financial Management Service for collection 

cross-servicing. From October 1, 2007 to September 30, 

2008, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) 

referred over $3.6 million of delinquent non-Federal claims 

to the U.S. Treasury for cross-servicing collection activities. 

Collections on non-Federal claims during this period 

exceeded $255.2 million and administrative offsets resulted 

in additional collections of $9.7 million. GSA also collected 

121 Pre-Authorized Debits totaling $64,597 of non-Federal 

claims from October 1, 2007 to September 30, 2008. 

GSA actively pursues delinquent non-Federal claims using 

installment agreements, salary offset, administrative wage 

garnishment, and any other statutory requirement or 

authority that is applicable. Through an outside contract 

arrangement, GSA actively reviews and pursues overpayments 

in conjunction with its PBS, FAS, and the OCFO. GSA is 

continuing to remove all non-paying claims over two-yearsold from its accounts receivable subsidiaries.

Cash and Payments Management

The Prompt Payment Act, along with the Debt 

Collection Improvement Act of 1996, requires the 

timely payment of commercial obligations for supplies and 

services using electronic funds transfer (EFT). GSA reviews 

and modifies, if needed, its procedures continuously to 

ensure prompt payment utilizing EFT. GSA has shown 

improvement this year over last year in the percentage 

of invoices paid electronically and the amount of interest 

penalties paid. The statistics for the current and preceding 

two fiscal years are as follows:

FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

Total Number of Invoices Paid 1,285,710 1,136,760 1,223,824

Total Dollars Disbursed $16.2 Billion $14.8 Billion $15.2 Billion

Total Dollars of Interest Penalties $575,461 $452,014 $403,395

Interest Paid per Million Disbursed $30.84 $26.80 $26.50

Percentage of Invoices Paid On Time 98.7% 99.0% 98.6%

Percentage of Invoices Paid Late 1.3% 1.0% 1.36%

Percentage of Invoices Paid Electronically 94.0% 95.5% 96.8%

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 191
Acronyms and Abbreviations

3PS Policy Portfolio Performance System

AAS Assisted Acquisition Service

ACSI American Customer Satisfaction Index 

AFV Alternative Fuel Vehicle 

AICPA American Institute of Certified Public 

Accountants 

ALDP Advanced Leadership Development Program 

ASF Acquisition Services Fund 

AWA Alternative Workplace Arrangements 

BIM Building Information Modeling 

BOMA Building Owners and Managers Association 

BPA Blanket Purchase Agreement 

BRM Business Reference Model 

Btu British Thermal Unit 

Btu/GSF British Thermal Units per Gross Square Foot 

C&A Certification and Accreditation 

CAO Chief Acquisition Officer 

CAPS Credit Card Accounts Payable

CBCA Civilian Board of Contract Appeals 

CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection

CCR Central Contractor Registration 

CDC Centers for Disease Control

CEAR Certificate of Excellence in Accountability 

Reporting

CFL Computers For Learning 

CFO Chief Financial Officer 

CGAC Common Government-wide Accounting 

Classification

CHAMP Centralized Household Goods Traffic 

Management Program

CHCO The Chief Human Capital Officer

CIO Chief Information Officer 

CNG Compressed Natural Gas

COE Center for Policy Evaluation

COOP Continuity of Operations Plan 

COTS Commercial-Off-The-Shelf 

CPI Consumer Price Index 

CPP City Pair Program

CSBR Combining Statement of Budgetary Resources 

CSC Client Support Center 

CSM Commercial Services Management

CSRS Civil Service Retirement System 

DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

DLA Defense Logistics Agency

DME Development, Modernization, and Enhancement

DOC U.S. Department of Commerce

DoD U.S. Department of Defense 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DOI U.S. Department of the Interior 

DOJ U.S. Department of Justice 

DOL U.S. Department of Labor 

EA Enterprise Architecture

EDI Electronic Data Interchange 

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity

eFAS e-Federal Asset Sales

EFT Electronic Funds Transfer 

E-Gov Electronic Government 

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

192 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EPEAT Electronic Product Environment Assessment 

Tool

EUAS Energy Usage and Analysis System 

ExGDDS Express and Ground Domestic Delivery 

Services 

FACA Federal Advisory Committee Act

FAIM FAS Accounting Interface Module

FAIR Federal Activities Inventory Reform 

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation 

FAS Federal Acquisition Service 

FASAB Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board 

FBF Federal Buildings Fund 

FCICF Federal Citizen Information Center Fund 

FECA Federal Employees Compensation Act 

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 

FERS Federal Employees Retirement System 

FFATA Federal Funding Accountability and 

Transparency Act

FFB Federal Financing Bank 

FFMIA Federal Financial Management Improvement 

Act 

FFO Funds From Operations 

FICA Federal Insurance Contribution Act 

FIPS Federal Information Processing Standards 

FISMA Federal Information Security Management Act 

FIT FAIR Act Inventory Tool 

FMFIA Federal Manager’s Financial Integrity Act 

FMLoB Financial Management Line of Business

FMP Freight Management Program

FMR Federal Management Regulation 

FPDS-NG Federal Procurement Data System-Next 

Generation 

FPS Federal Protective Service 

FRPC Federal Real Property Council 

FSIO Financial Systems Integration Office 

FSS Federal Supply Service 

FSSI Federal Strategic Sourcing Initiative 

FTE Full-Time Equivalent 

FTS Federal Technology Service 

FY Fiscal Year 

GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principles 

GAO Government Accountability Office 

GITGO GSA IT Infrastructure Technology Global 

Operations 

GM&A General Management and Administration 

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act 

GSA U.S. General Services Administration 

GSAM GSA Manual

GSF General Supply Fund 

GSS General Supplies and Services 

GWAC Government Wide Acquisition Contract 

HCA Human Capital Advisor

HCAAF Human Capital Assessment and Accountability 

Framework

HCSP Human Capital Strategic Plan 

HEV Hybrid Electric Vehicle 

HPO High Performance Organization

HSPD-12 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 

HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 193
Acronyms And Abbreviations

IAE Integrated Acquisition Environment

IDAMWIG Identity and Access Management Working 

Group

IDIQ Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity 

IG Inspector General 

IP Internet Protocol

IPA Independent Public Accountant 

IPIA Improper Payments Information Act 

ISSO Information Systems Security Officers

IT Information Technology 

ITC Information Technology Council

ITF Information Technology Fund 

ITIL Information Technology Infrastructure Library

ITOMS Integrated Task Order Management System

ITS Integrated Technology Services 

ITSS IT Solutions Shop 

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental 

Design 

LMI Logistics Management Institute 

LNS Leadership for New Supervisors

MAS Multiple Award Schedule 

MCC Management Control Centers

MFC Most-Favored Customer 

MOA Memorandum of Agreement 

MSO Managed Service Office 

MTS Metrics Tracking System

NCC National Contact Center 

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology 

NOAA National Oceanic & Atmospheric 

Administration 

NPIC National Passport Information Center

OASDI Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance 

OCA The Office of the Chief Architect

OCAO Office of the Chief Acquisition Officer 

OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

OCHCO Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer 

OCIA Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental 

Affairs 

OCIO Office of the Chief Information Officer 

OCR Office of Civil Rights 

OCS Office of Citizen Services 

OCSC Office of Citizen Services and Communications 

OERR Office of Emergency Response and Recovery 

OGC Office of General Counsel 

OGP Office of Governmentwide Policy 

OIG Office of Inspector General 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

OMIS Office of IT Integration Management 

Information System

OMS Office of Management Services

OPI Office of Performance Improvement 

OPM U.S. Office of Personnel Management 

OSBU Office of Small Business Utilization 

PADC Pennsylvania Avenue Development 

Corporation 

PALT Procurement Administrative Lead Time

PAR Performance and Accountability Report 

PART Program Assessment Rating Tool 

PBS Public Buildings Service 

PCMM Policy Change Management Model

PEV Patient Evacuation Vehicle

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

194 FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort
PII Personally Identifiable Information

PIP Project Information Portal 

PIV Personal Identity Verification 

PMA President’s Management Agenda 

PMP Performance Management Process 

PMT Performance Measurement Tool 

POR+ Program of Requirements Plus 

PPM Personal Property Management

PRT Program Review Tool

PUA Policy Utilization Assessment

PwC PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP 

QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 

R&A Repairs and Alterations 

RBM Rent Bill Management

RentEst Rent Estimate 

ROADS Requisitioning, Ordering and Documentation 

System 

ROE Return on Equity 

RRB Ronald Reagan Building 

RSF Rentable Square Feet 

RWA Reimbursable Work Authorization

SAS Statement on Auditing Standards 

SAT Senior Assessment Team 

SES Senior Executive Service 

SFFAS Statement of Federal Financial Accounting 

Standards 

SIOR Society of Industrial and Office Realtors 

SSA U.S. Social Security Administration 

TARPS Transportation Accounts Receivable and 

Payables System

TDD Time Definite Delivery

TMVCS Travel, Motor Vehicles, and Card Services 

TOPS Telecommunications Ordering and Pricing 

System 

TOS Tracking and Ordering System 

TSP Thrift Savings Plan 

U&D Federal Personal Property Utilization, 

Donation, and Sales Program 

U.S. United States 

U.S. Treasury U.S. Department of the Treasury

U.S.C. United States Code

UDO Undelivered Order

UFCO Unfilled Customer Order 

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development

USSGL U.S. Standard General Ledger 

VETS GWAC Veterans Technology Services Government 

Wide Acquisition Contract

WAN Wide Area Network

WCF Working Capital Fund

O t h e r A cc o m p a n y i n g I n f o r m a t i o n

FY 2008 Annu a l Per f orm a nce a nd Account a bilit y R e p ort 195
The FY 2008 Performance and Accountability Report is a collaborative endeavor on 

the part of many GSA employees and contractors. We would like to acknowledge 

and thank them for their hard work and commitment in successfully preparing 

this report and supporting the audit effort of the financial statements.

This report is available through our Web site at www.gsa.gov/annualreport. 

Also, linked to that site is GSA’s 2009 Congressional Performance Budget Justification 

and our past performance and accountability publications.

For additional copies contact

General Services Administration

Office of Financial Policy and Operations

1800 F. Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20405

(202) 501-0560

Other GSA Web pages of possible interest:

GSA Homepage: www.gsa.gov

Gobierno

Información oficial en español
FY 2007 Certificate of Excellence 

in Accountability Reporting
U.S. General Services Administration

1800 F Street, NW

Washington, DC 20405

www.gsa.gov