a

GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to Congressional Requesters

June 2004 GEOSPATIAL 

INFORMATION

Better Coordination 

Needed to Identify and 

Reduce Duplicative 

Investments

GAO-04-703
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-703.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Linda D. 

Koontz at (202) 512-6240 or 

koontzl@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-04-703, a report to 

congressional requesters 

June 2004

GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION 

Better Coordination Needed to Identify 

and Reduce Duplicative Investments 

OMB, individual federal agencies, and cross-government committees and 

initiatives such as the Federal Geographic Data Committee and the 

Geospatial One-Stop project have taken actions to coordinate the 

government’s geospatial investments across agencies and with state and 

local governments. However, these efforts have not been fully successful in 

reducing redundancies in geospatial investments for several reasons. First, a 

complete and up-to-date strategic plan for doing so has not been in place. 

Second, agencies have not consistently complied with OMB guidance that 

seeks to identify and reduce duplication. Finally, OMB’s oversight of federal 

geospatial activities has not been effective because its methods—the annual 

budget review process, the federal enterprise architecture effort, and the 

Federal Geographic Data Committee’s reporting process—are insufficiently 

developed and have not produced consistent and complete information. As a 

result of these shortcomings, federal agencies are still independently 

acquiring and maintaining potentially duplicative and costly data sets and 

systems. Until these problems are resolved, duplicative geospatial 

investments are likely to persist. 

Entities That May Be Involved in Geospatial Data Collection and Processing Relating to a 

Single Geographic Location or Event 

From homeland security to 

tracking outbreaks of disease, to 

investigating the space shuttle 

disaster to responding to natural 

disasters, the collection, 

maintenance, and use of locationbased (geospatial) information has 

become critical to many federal 

agencies’ abilities to achieve their 

goals. Local governments and the 

private sector also rely on such 

data to support essential functions. 

GAO was asked to determine the 

extent to which the federal 

government is coordinating the 

sharing of geospatial assets, 

including through oversight 

measures in place at the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), in 

order to identify and reduce 

redundancies in geospatial data 

and systems. 

GAO is making recommendations 

to the Director of OMB and the 

Secretary of the Interior to direct 

development of a national 

geospatial strategic plan, and 

recommendations to the Director 

of OMB to develop criteria for 

assessing interagency coordination 

on proposals for potential 

geospatial investments, and 

strengthen its oversight of 

geospatial projects. In providing 

oral comments on a draft of this 

report, OMB and Department of the 

Interior officials generally agreed 

with its content and 

recommendations. 
Page i GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 3

Although Steps Have Been Taken to Coordinate Geospatial 

Activities, Redundant Investments Remain 19

Conclusions 34

Recommendations for Executive Action 35

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 36

Appendixes

Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology 38

Appendix II: Selected Agencies’ Geospatial Activities 40

Appendix III: Key Federal Laws, Policies, and Guidance Affecting 

Geospatial Information and Systems 44

Appendix IV: OMB Circular A-16 Data Themes, Descriptions, and Lead 

Agencies 46

Appendix V: Glossary 50

Tables Table 1: Summary of the NSDI, Geospatial One-Stop, and National 

Map Programs 23

Table 2: FEA Reference Models 29

Table 3: Selected Geospatial Activities at Federal Agencies 40

Table 4: OMB Circular A-16 Data Themes, Descriptions, and Lead 

Agencies 46

Figures Figure 1: GIS Layers or Themes 5

Figure 2: Columbia Recovery Map 7

Figure 3: Hurricane Isabel Tracking Map 9

Figure 4: Conceptual Diagram of Multiple Geospatial Data 

Collections and Processing Associated with a Single 

Geographic Location 16

Figure 5: Multiple Street Centerline Data Sets Covering the Same 

Location in Texas 17
Contents

Page ii GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Abbreviations

BLM Bureau of Land Management

BTS Bureau of Transportation Statistics

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DOC Department of Commerce

DOD Department of Defense

DOI Department of the Interior

DOT Department of Transportation

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FEA Federal Enterprise Architecture

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FGDC Federal Geographic Data Committee

FWS Fish and Wildlife Service

GIS geographic information system

GPS Global Positioning System

GSA General Services Administration

HHS Department of Health and Human Services

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

IT information technology

MMS Minerals Management Service

NILS National Integrated Land System

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service

NSDI National Spatial Data Infrastructure

NSGIC National States Geographic Information Council

OMB Office of Management and Budget

TIGER Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and 

Referencing

USACE U.S. Army Corp of Engineers

USCB U.S. Census Bureau

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USFS U.S. Forest Service

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

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

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

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

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

reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

June 23, 2004 Letr

The Honorable Adam H. Putnam

Chairman, Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy,

 Intergovernmental Relations and the Census

Committee on Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable Pete Sessions

House of Representatives

The federal government collects, maintains, and uses geospatial 

information—information linked to specific geographic locations—to help 

in decision making and to support many functions, including national 

security, law enforcement, health care, the environment, and natural 

resources conservation. States, counties, cities, tribal governments, and the 

private sector also use geospatial information to support essential 

functions. Among the many activities that can depend on critical analysis of 

geospatial information are conducting the decennial census, the 

maintenance of roads and other critical transportation infrastructure, and 

actions in response to natural disasters such as floods, tornadoes, and fires.

Federal agencies, states, and local governments may each provide services 

at the same geographic locations and may independently collect similar 

geospatial information about those locations, thus raising the question of 

how well the nation’s geospatial assets1

 are coordinated. You requested that 

we determine the extent to which the federal government is coordinating 

the sharing of geospatial assets, including through oversight measures at 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in order to identify and 

reduce redundancies in federal geospatial data and systems. To address 

this objective, we identified key federal geospatial projects and reviewed 

capital asset plans, project plans, and other project documentation; 

conducted interviews with agency and OMB officials; and conducted focus 

groups with state, local, and private-sector representatives. Details of our 

objective, scope, and methodology are provided in appendix I. We 

conducted our work from October 2003 through May 2004 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards.

1

Geospatial assets include geographic information systems (GIS), data, technology, and 

standards.
Page 2 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Results in Brief OMB, individual federal agencies, and cross-government committees and 

initiatives such as the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the 

Geospatial One-Stop project have each taken actions to coordinate the 

government’s geospatial investments across agencies and with state and 

local governments. FGDC, Geospatial One-Stop, and other 

cross-government entities have established Internet-based 

information-sharing portals to support development of the National Spatial 

Data Infrastructure (NSDI); one goal of this effort is to address redundancy 

and incompatibility of geospatial information collected by many different 

organizations and stored and maintained at many different physical 

locations. In addition, FGDC has led geospatial standards-setting activities, 

and conducted various outreach activities. Individual federal agencies have 

also taken steps to coordinate specific geospatial investments in certain 

cases—the Departments of Agriculture (USDA) and the Interior (DOI), for 

example, have collaborated on a land management system. Finally, OMB 

has attempted to oversee and coordinate geospatial investments by 

collecting and analyzing relevant agency information. 

However, these efforts have not been fully successful in reducing 

redundancies in geospatial investments for several reasons:

• A complete and up-to-date strategic plan has not been in place. The 

government’s existing strategic plan for the NSDI is out of date and does 

not include specific measures for identifying and reducing 

redundancies.

• Federal agencies have not always fully complied with OMB direction to 

coordinate their investments. Many agency geospatial data holdings are 

not compliant with FGDC standards or are not published through its 

Internet clearinghouse.

• OMB’s oversight methods have not identified or eliminated specific 

instances of duplication. The processes used by OMB to identify 

potentially redundant geospatial investments have not been effective, 

because the agency has not been able to collect key investment 

information from all agencies in a consistent way so that it could be 

used to identify redundancies.

As a result of these shortcomings, federal agencies are independently 

acquiring and maintaining potentially duplicative and costly data sets and 
Page 3 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

systems. Without better coordination, such duplication is likely to 

continue.

We are making recommendations to the Director of OMB and to the 

Secretary of the Interior to direct the development of a national geospatial 

data strategy with outcome-related goals and objectives; a plan for how the 

goals and objectives are to be achieved; identification of key risk factors; 

and performance measures. We are also making recommendations to the 

Director of OMB to encourage better agency compliance with Circular A-16 

by developing criteria for assessing the extent of interagency coordination 

on proposals for potential geospatial investments; and to strengthen 

oversight actions to better ensure that agencies do not invest in potentially 

redundant geospatial systems or data gathering efforts.

We received oral comments on a draft of this report from representatives of 

OMB’s Offices of Information and Regulatory Affairs and Resource 

Management and from the Assistant Secretary of the Interior—Policy, 

Management, and Budget. Both agencies generally concurred with the 

content of our report and our recommendations. In addition, the 

Departments of Defense and Health and Human Services, and the Bureau 

of the Census provided technical comments, which have been incorporated 

into the final report where appropriate.

Background Geospatial information describes entities or phenomena that can be 

referenced to specific locations relative to the Earth’s surface. For 

example, entities such as houses, rivers, road intersections, power plants, 

and national parks can all be identified by their locations. In addition, 

phenomena such as wildfires, the spread of the West Nile virus, and the 

thinning of trees due to acid rain, can also be identified by their geographic 

locations.

A geographic information system (GIS) is a system of computer software, 

hardware, and data used to capture, store, manipulate, analyze, and 

graphically present a potentially wide array of geospatial information. A 

GIS combines the disciplines of geography, cartography, computer science,
Page 4 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

and mathematics to permit users to query and analyze the attributes2 of any 

entity or phenomenon that has been identified by its geographic location, 

providing a powerful ability to integrate different kinds of location-based 

information. A fully functional GIS includes hardware and software to 

support data input, output, storage, retrieval, display, and analysis. A 

variety of platforms support GIS processing, ranging from large mainframe 

computers and minicomputers to scientific workstations and personal 

computers. In many cases, hardware used to support other applications 

(e.g., payroll, accounting, and digital image processing) can also be used.

A variety of technologies, including remote sensing systems and the Global 

Positioning System (GPS), are used to collect the geospatial data in a GIS.3

Remote sensing systems collect data that are either emitted or reflected by 

the Earth and the atmosphere from a distance—such as from a satellite, 

airplane, or balloon. The GPS is a constellation of orbiting satellites that 

provides navigational data to military and civilian users around the world. 

With the proper equipment, users can receive signals from these satellites 

to calculate time, location, and velocity. GPS equipment is now being used 

on aircraft, ships, and land-based vehicles, and mobile hand-held units 

provide individuals with these capabilities as well.

The primary function of a GIS is to link multiple sets of geospatial data and 

display the combined information as maps with many different layers of 

information. Assuming that all of the information is at the same scale and 

has been formatted according to the same standards, users can potentially 

overlay spatial information about any number of specific topics to examine 

how the layers interrelate. Each layer of a GIS map represents a particular 

“theme” or feature, and one layer could be derived from a data source 

completely different from the others. For example, one theme could 

represent all of the streets in a specific area. Another theme could 

correspond to all of the buildings in the same area, and others could show 

vegetation or water resources. As long as standard processes and formats 

have been used to facilitate integration, each of these themes could be 

based on data originally collected and maintained by a separate 

organization. Analyzing this layered information as an integrated whole can 

significantly aid decision makers in considering complex choices, such as 

2

Attributes describe the qualities or characteristics of an entity or phenomenon.

3

For more information on remote sensing systems, see U.S. General Accounting Office, 

Geospatial Information: Technologies Hold Promise for Wildland Fire Management, but 

Challenges Remain, GAO-03-1047 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 23, 2003).
Page 5 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

where to locate a new department of motor vehicles building to best serve 

the greatest number of citizens.

Typical geospatial data layers (or themes) include cadastral—describing 

location, ownership, and other information about real property; digital 

orthoimagery—containing images of the Earth’s surface that have the 

geometric characteristics of a map and image qualities of a photograph; 

and hydrography—describing water features such as lakes, ponds, streams 

and rivers, canals, oceans, and coastlines. Figure 1 portrays the concept of 

data themes in a GIS.

Figure 1: GIS Layers or Themes

Source: GAO.

Vegetation data

Integrated data

Buildings data

Street data

Data source Data layers
Page 6 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Geographic Information 

Systems and Data Provide a 

Broad Range of Benefits

State and local government agencies rely on geographic information 

systems to provide vital services to their customers. For example, local fire 

departments can use geographic information systems to determine the 

quickest and most efficient route from a firehouse to a specific location, 

taking into account changing traffic patterns that occur at various times of 

day. Highway departments use geographic information systems to identify 

intersections that have had a significant number of personal injury 

accidents to determine needs for improved traffic signaling or signage.

The usefulness of a GIS in disaster response situations was also 

demonstrated in connection with the Space Shuttle Columbia recovery 

effort. After the loss of Columbia on February 1, 2003, debris was spread 

over at least 41 counties in Texas and Louisiana (see fig. 2). Analysis of GIS 

data was critical to the efficient recovery and documentation of that debris. 

The Texas state GIS program provided authorities with precise maps and 

search grids to guide field reconnaissance and collection crews. Officials in 

charge of the effort used maps of debris fields, combined with GIS data 

about the physical terrain, to carefully track every piece of debris found.
Page 7 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Figure 2: Columbia Recovery Map

A GIS can also be an invaluable tool in helping to ensure homeland security 

by facilitating preparedness, prevention, detection, and recovery and 

response to terrorist attacks. For example, according to a March 2002

Source: Forest Resources Institute, Arthur Temple College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University.
Page 8 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Gartner report,4 New York City’s GIS system was pivotal in the rescue, 

response, and recovery efforts after the September 11, 2001, terrorist 

attacks. The city’s GIS provided real-time data on the area around the 

World Trade Center, so that the mayor, governor, federal officials, and 

emergency response agencies could implement critical rescue, response, 

and recovery efforts. Specifically, daily flyovers were performed to monitor 

changes in the elevation of the site to detect weaknesses in the 

underground structure. In addition, thermal imagery was compared with 

underground infrastructure maps to determine the locations where fires 

were still smoldering and to help the New York City Fire Department and 

emergency crews in detecting potential new explosion sites from nearby 

flammable substances. Further, maps generated by geospatial information 

systems were used to transmit critical information to the public and 

emergency personnel and provided the Army and Police Department with 

critical data on other potential terrorist targets such as bridges, tunnels, 

and reservoirs.

Another use for GIS is in the tracking and responding to natural disasters 

such as hurricanes. For example, the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency (FEMA) used its GIS capabilities and those of the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to generate maps to track 

hurricane Isabel in September 2003. FEMA officials generated maps that 

estimated Isabel’s track, and used a hurricane wind model to produce maps 

of projected damage-prone areas in affected states. These officials also 

produced wind damage estimates for structures and infrastructures, such 

as sewage treatment plants, nursing homes, schools, and hospitals. Further, 

the officials performed various demographic analyses that estimated the 

population and number of housing units in affected counties or other areas. 

Figure 3 shows an example of a hurricane-tracking map.

4

B. Keller and G. Kreizman, To The Rescue: GIS in New York City on Sept. 11 (Gartner Inc., 

Mar. 11, 2002), www.gartner.com (downloaded Mar. 10, 2004).
Page 9 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Figure 3: Hurricane Isabel Tracking Map

Similarly, many other federal departments and agencies use GIS technology 

to help carry out their primary missions. Examples include the following:

• The Department of Housing and Urban Development worked with the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop an enterprise 

Source: FEMA.
Page 10 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

geographic information system, which combines information on 

community development and housing programs with other types of 

data, including environmental and transportation data. The program 

provides homeowners and prospective home buyers with ready access 

to detailed local information about environmental hazards and other 

information that otherwise would likely be difficult to obtain.

• The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) uses GIS 

technology for a variety of public health functions, such as reporting the 

results of national health surveys. In addition, there are a variety of 

GIS-based atlases of national mortality from causes such as injury, 

cardiovascular disease, cancer, and reproductive health problems. Other 

GIS activities focus on disease surveillance and prevention of infectious 

diseases that are caused by environmental exposure. A variety of 

mapping tools are published on the Web to facilitate citizen access to 

public health resources and other information. 

• The Census Bureau maintains the Topologically Integrated Geographic 

Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) database to support its mission to 

conduct the decennial census and other censuses and surveys by 

spatially locating all habitations within the United States and reporting 

the resulting census estimates and counts. Census provides the spatial 

information (not individual addresses) in this publicly accessible 

database through its Web site at 

http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/index.html.

• NOAA provides access to maps and other geospatial information on 

subjects such as the weather and climate, oceans and fisheries, and 

satellite imagery used for global weather monitoring at 

http://www.noaa.gov.

• EPA maintains a variety of databases with information about the quality 

of air, water, and land in the United States. EPA’s Envirofacts system 

(http://www.epa.gov/enviro/index.html) provides public access to 

selected EPA environmental data.

Appendix II provides additional examples of federal geospatial activities.
Page 11 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Coordination of Federal 

Geospatial Activities

The federal government has for many years taken steps to coordinate 

geospatial activities both within and outside the federal government. In 

1953, the Bureau of the Budget5

 first issued its Circular A-16, encouraging 

expeditious surveying and mapping activities across all levels of 

government and avoidance of duplicative efforts. In 1990, OMB revised 

Circular A-16 to, among other things, establish FGDC within the 

Department of the Interior, to promote the coordinated use, sharing, and 

dissemination of geospatial data nationwide. 

Building on that guidance, the President in 1994 issued Executive Order 

12906, assigning to FGDC the responsibility to coordinate the development 

of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) to address redundancy 

and incompatibility of geospatial information. The infrastructure is defined 

by FGDC as the technologies, policies, and people necessary to promote 

sharing of geospatial data throughout all levels of government, the private 

and nonprofit sectors, and the academic community. The NSDI’s goals are 

to reduce duplication of effort among agencies; to improve quality and 

reduce costs related to geographic information; to make the benefits of 

geographic data more accessible to the public; and to establish key 

partnerships with states, counties, cities, tribal nations, academia, and the 

private sector to increase data availability.

Further, in August 2002, OMB again revised Circular A-16 to reflect changes 

in geographic information management and technology and to more clearly 

define agency and FGDC roles and responsibilities. In addition to the 

responsibilities identified for FGDC, Circular A-16 outlines responsibilities 

and reporting requirements for individual federal agencies to help ensure 

that geospatial resources are used efficiently and contribute to building the 

NSDI. Among other things, the circular requires that agencies prepare 

geographic information strategies, use FGDC data standards, and 

coordinate and work in partnership with federal, state, and local 

governments and the private sector. These responsibilities are assigned to 

all agencies that collect, use, or disseminate geographic information or 

carry out spatial data activities.

More recently, in December 2002, the E-Government Act of 2002 was 

signed into law, requiring OMB to coordinate with state, local, and tribal 

governments as well as public-private partnerships and other interested 

5

The Bureau of the Budget became the Office of Management and Budget in 1970.
Page 12 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

persons on the development of standard protocols for sharing geographic 

information to reduce redundant data collection and promote collaboration 

and the use of standards.6

In addition to its responsibilities for geospatial information under the 

E-Government Act, OMB has specific oversight responsibilities regarding 

federal information technology (IT) systems and acquisition 

activities—including GIS—to help ensure their efficient and effective use. 

For example, the Clinger-Cohen Act of 19967

 requires the Director of OMB 

to promote and be responsible for improving the acquisition, use, and 

disposal of information technology by the federal government to improve 

the productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness of federal programs. These 

requirements help to advance OMB’s federal IT management 

responsibilities under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,8

 which has a 

similar but more general requirement that the Director of OMB oversee the 

use of information resources to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of 

government operations to serve agency missions. Appendix III provides 

brief descriptions of key federal legislation, policies, and guidance that 

apply to IT and geospatial information and systems investments.

To help carry out its investment oversight role, OMB established 

requirements for the acquisition and management of IT resources in its 

Circular A-11. The circular establishes policies for planning, budgeting, 

acquisition, and management of federal capital assets. Specifically, it 

requires agencies to submit business cases to OMB for planned or ongoing 

major IT investments.9

 These business cases require agencies to answer 

questions to help OMB determine if the investment should be funded. 

6

P.L. 107-347, section 216.

7

40 U.S.C. § 11302(b).

8

44 U.S.C. § 3504(a)(1).

9

According to OMB Circular A-11, a major IT investment means a system or investment that 

requires special management attention because of its importance to an agency’s mission; the 

investment was a major investment in the fiscal year 2004 submission and is continuing; the 

investment is for financial management and spends more than $500,000; the investment is 

directly tied to the top two layers of the Federal Enterprise Architecture; the investment is 

an integral part of the agency’s modernization blueprint; the investment has significant 

program or policy implications; the investment has high executive visibility; or the 

investment is defined as major by the agency’s capital planning and investment control 

process. Investments that are e-government in nature or use e-business technologies must 

be identified as major investments regardless of their costs.
Page 13 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Agency business case submissions must also include (1) the type of data 

used by the IT investment, including geospatial data; (2) whether the data 

needed for the investment already exist at the federal, state, or local level, 

and plans to gain access to that data; (3) potential legal reasons why 

existing data cannot be transferred; and (4) compliance with FGDC 

standards. According to Circular A-11, agency responses to these questions 

are reviewed as part of OMB’s evaluation of the overall business case.

In addition to activities associated with Circulars A-11 and A-16, in a June 

2003 congressional hearing, OMB’s Administrator, Office of Electronic 

Government and Information Technology, stated that the strategic 

management of geospatial assets would be accomplished, in part, through 

development of a robust and mature federal enterprise architecture. In 

2001, the lack of a Federal Enterprise Architecture was cited by OMB’s 

E-Government Task Force as a barrier to the success of the 

administration’s e-government initiatives.10 In response, OMB began 

developing the FEA, and over the last two years it has released various 

versions of all but one of the five FEA reference models. According to 

OMB, the purpose of the FEA, among other things, is to provide a common 

frame of reference or taxonomy for agencies’ individual enterprise 

architecture11 efforts and their planned and ongoing investment activities.

State and Local Government 

and Private-Sector 

Geospatial Information and 

GIS Activities

State and local governments and the private sector independently provide 

information and services apart from those provided by the federal 

government, including maintaining land records for nonfederal lands, 

property taxation, local planning, subdivision control and zoning, and 

direct delivery of many other public services. These entities use geographic 

information and GIS to facilitate and support delivery of these services. In 

fact, local governments often possess more recent and higher resolution 

geospatial data than the federal government, and in many cases 

private-sector companies collect these data under contract to local 

government agencies.

10OMB’s E-Government Task Force identified 23 initiatives (two additional initiatives were 

subsequently added) aimed at improving service to individuals and businesses, 

intergovernmental affairs, and federal agency-to-agency efficiency and effectiveness. 

11An enterprise architecture is a blueprint, defined largely by interrelated models, that 

describes (in both business and technology terms) an entity’s “as is” or current environment, 

its “to be” or future environment, and its investment plan for transitioning from the current 

to the future environment.
Page 14 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

For example, the state of New York hosts a Web site to provide citizens 

with a gateway to state government services at 

http://www.nysegov.com/map-NY.cfm. Using this Web site, citizens can 

access information about state agencies and their services, and locate 

county boundaries, services, and major state highways. New York also 

developed a clearinghouse (http://www.nysgis.state.ny.us/) to disseminate 

information about statewide GIS programs and provide information and 

services including state maps, aerial photographs, and a help desk to 

provide support for both general questions and specific questions regarding 

the use of GIS software. Many other states, such as Oregon 

(http://www.gis.state.or.us/), Virginia 

(http://www.vgin.virginia.gov/index.html), and Alaska 

(http://www.asgdc.state.ak.us/), provide similar Web sites and services.

For local governments, GIS applications have become integral resources 

for public works, and financial, public safety, and economic developments. 

A 2003 survey sponsored by Interior showed that GIS technology is 

recognized as an essential tool by many local governments. For example, 

Fairfax County in Virginia developed GIS applications to provide online 

products and services to the public that include

• a digital map viewer to see and download property, zoning, topography, 

or contour maps;

• an aerial orthoimagery12 photo viewer to access aerial photographs of 

specific parcels, areas of interest, or addresses;

• a department of tax administration parcel finder to locate detailed 

information about a specific property and to view that parcel with the 

parcel viewer; and 

• a map gallery that contains many common maps produced by the 

Fairfax County GIS and Mapping Department. The maps are letter size 

and available in many formats for downloading and printing.

The private sector also plays an important role in support of government 

GIS activities because it captures and maintains a wealth of geospatial data 

and develops GIS software. Private companies provide services such as 

12Orthoimagery is imagery prepared from perspective photographs in which the 

displacement of features due to sensor tilt and terrain relief has been removed. 
Page 15 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

aerial photography, digital topographic mapping, digital orthophotography, 

and digital elevation modeling to produce geospatial data sets that are 

designed to meet the needs of government organizations.

Figure 4 provides a conceptual summary of the many entities—including 

federal, state, and local governments and the private sector—that may be 

involved in geospatial data collection and processing relative to a single 

geographic location or event. Figure 5 shows the multiple data sets that 

have been collected by different agencies at federal, state, and local levels 

to capture the location of a segment of roadway in Texas.
Page 16 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Figure 4: Conceptual Diagram of Multiple Geospatial Data Collections and Processing Associated with a Single Geographic 

Location
Page 17 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Figure 5: Multiple Street Centerline Data Sets Covering the Same Location in Texas 
Page 18 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Costs Associated with 

Gathering, Maintaining, and 

Using Geospatial Data Are 

Significant

Costs associated with collecting and maintaining geographically referenced 

data and systems for the federal government are significant. Specific 

examples of the costs of collecting and maintaining federal geospatial data 

and information systems13 include

• FEMA’s Multi-Hazard Flood Map Modernization Program—estimated to 

cost $1 billion over the next 5 years; 

• Census’s TIGER database—modernization is estimated to have cost 

over $170 million between 2001 and 2004;

• Agriculture’s Geospatial Database—acquisition and development 

reportedly cost over $130 million;

• Interior’s National Map—development is estimated to cost about $88 

million through 2008;14

• The Department of the Navy’s Primary Oceanographic Prediction, and 

Oceanographic Information systems—development, modernization, and 

operation were estimated to cost about $32 million in fiscal year 2003; 

and

• NOAA’s Coastal Survey—expenditures for geospatial data are estimated 

to cost about $30 million annually.

In addition to the costs for individual agency GIS systems and data, the 

aggregated annual cost of collecting and maintaining geospatial data for all 

NSDI-related data themes and systems is estimated to be substantial. 

According to a recent estimate by the National States Geographic 

Information Council (NSGIC), the cost to collect detailed data for five key 

data layers of the NSDI—parcel, critical infrastructure, orthoimagery, 

elevation, and roads—is about $6.6 billion. The estimate assumes that the 

data collection will be coordinated among federal, state, and local 

13The scope of these cost estimates varies and may include development, operation, or both. 

The examples are for illustrative purposes and are not intended to be compared. 

14This figure does not include costs for data acquisition. Some National Map data are 

acquired from Landsat satellites, which are estimated to cost about $95 million to operate 

through 2008.
Page 19 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

government agencies, and the council cautions that without effective 

coordination, the costs could be far higher.

Although Steps Have 

Been Taken to 

Coordinate Geospatial 

Activities, Redundant 

Investments Remain

OMB, individual federal agencies, and cross-government committees and 

initiatives such as the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the 

Geospatial One-Stop project have each taken actions to coordinate the 

government’s geospatial investments. FGDC and other cross-government 

entities have established Internet-based information-sharing portals to 

support development of the NSDI, led geospatial standards-setting 

activities, and conducted various outreach activities. In addition, individual 

federal agencies have taken steps to coordinate specific geospatial 

investments in certain cases—Agriculture and Interior have collaborated 

on a land management system. Finally, OMB has attempted to oversee and 

coordinate geospatial investments by collecting and analyzing relevant 

agency information. 

However, these efforts have not been fully successful in reducing 

redundancies in geospatial investments for several reasons. First, a 

complete and up-to-date strategic plan has not been in place. The 

government’s existing strategic plan for the NSDI is out-of-date and does 

not include specific measures for identifying and reducing redundancies. 

Second, federal agencies have not always fully complied with OMB 

direction to coordinate their investments. Many agency geospatial data 

holdings are not compliant with FGDC standards or are not published 

through the National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse. Third, OMB’s 

oversight methods have not identified or eliminated specific instances of 

duplication. The processes used by OMB to identify potentially redundant 

geospatial investments have not been effective, because the agency has not 

been able to collect key investment information from all agencies in a 

consistent way so that it could be used to identify redundancies.

As a result of shortcomings in all three of these domains, federal agencies 

are independently acquiring and maintaining potentially duplicative and 

costly data sets and systems. Without better coordination, such duplication 

is likely to continue.
Page 20 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

FGDC and Others Have 

Taken Steps to Coordinate 

GIS Activities 

Governmentwide, but Lack 

a Complete and Up-to-Date 

Strategic Plan to Guide 

Them

Both Executive Order 12906 and OMB Circular A-16 charge FGDC with 

responsibilities that support coordination of federal GIS investments. 

Specifically, the committee is designated the lead federal executive body 

responsible for (1) developing, implementing, and maintaining spatial data 

standards; (2) promoting and guiding coordination among federal, state, 

tribal, and local government agencies, academia, and the private sector in 

the collection, production, sharing, and use of spatial information and the 

implementation of the NSDI; (3) communicating information about the 

status of infrastructure-related activities via the Internet; and (4) preparing 

and maintaining a strategic plan for developing and implementing the 

NSDI. 

According to OMB Circular A-16, FGDC is to develop standards, with input 

from a broad range of data users and providers. Geospatial standards are 

intended to facilitate data sharing and increase interoperability among 

automated geospatial information systems. In addition, according to 

Circular A-16, the committee is to adopt national and international 

standards in lieu of federal standards, whenever possible, and restrict its 

standards-development activities to areas not covered by other voluntary 

standards-consensus bodies. 

To address these responsibilities, FGDC has created a standards working 

group that includes federal agencies, states, academia, and the private 

sector. The working group has developed, and the committee has endorsed, 

a number of different geospatial standards, including metadata15 standards, 

and are working to continue developing additional standards. The 

committee’s working group also coordinates with national and 

international standards bodies to ensure that potential users support their 

work.

Regarding coordination with federal and other entities and development of 

the NSDI, FGDC has taken a variety of actions. It established a committee 

structure with participation from federal agencies and key nonfederal 

organizations such as NSGIC, and the National Association of Counties, 

and established several programs to help ensure greater participation from 

federal agencies as well as other government entities. The committee 

structure is composed of (1) a steering committee that sets the high-level 

15Metadata refers to data that contain or define other data. For geospatial information, 

metadata provides information about, among other things, sources used, collection 

methods, and the date the data were collected.
Page 21 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

strategic direction for FGDC and (2) agency-led subcommittees and 

working groups. The subcommittees and working groups provide the basic 

structure for institutions and individuals to interact and coordinate with 

each other during the implementation of the NSDI. FGDC membership 

includes 19 federal agencies, with the Secretary of the Interior and the 

Deputy Director for Management, OMB, serving as Chair and Vice-Chair, 

respectively.

Key actions taken by FGDC to develop the NSDI include implementing a 

National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse and establishing a framework of 

data themes. The clearinghouse is a decentralized system of Internet-based 

servers that contain descriptions of available geospatial data—over 300,000 

metadata records, and information on over 2 million digital images are 

currently available through the clearinghouse. It allows individual agencies, 

consortia, or others to promote their available geospatial data. The 

framework of data themes is a collaborative effort in which commonly 

used data “layers” are developed, maintained, and integrated by public and 

private organizations within a geographic area. Local, regional, state, and 

federal organizations and private companies can use the framework as a 

way to share resources, improve communications, and increase efficiency. 

Appendix IV provides detailed descriptions of the framework data themes 

and other geospatial data layers.

OMB Circular A-16 also calls for FGDC to communicate information, via 

the Internet, about its activities related to NSDI development; committee 

memberships; and the status of agencies’ work on committees, 

subcommittees, and working groups. FGDC is also to provide a collection 

of technical publications, articles, and reports related to the NSDI. To 

address these responsibilities, FGDC has established a Web site at

www.fgdc.gov that provides information on its organizational structure and 

agencies’ activities on its committees and subcommittees—including 

minutes of meetings for each. The Web site also provides, among other 

information, technical articles, fact sheets, newsletters, and news releases. 

In addition to FGDC’s programs to support developing and implementing 

the NSDI, two other efforts are under way that aim to coordinate and 

consolidate geospatial information and resources across the federal 

government—the Geospatial One-Stop initiative and the National Map 

project.

Geospatial One-Stop. Geospatial One-Stop is intended to accelerate the 

development and implementation of the NSDI to provide federal and state 
Page 22 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

agencies with a single point of access to map-related data, which in turn 

will enable consolidation of redundant geospatial data. OMB selected 

Geospatial One-Stop as one of its e-government initiatives,16 in part to 

support development of an inventory of national geospatial assets, and also 

to support reducing redundancies in federal geospatial assets. The 

Department of the Interior was designated as the managing partner to lead 

the project, with development support from various other federal agencies. 

As of April 2004, over 9,000 metadata records were accessible through the 

Geospatial One-Stop portal, located at www.geodata.gov. According to the 

initiative’s executive director, the portal will continue to add metadata 

records by implementing a metadata “harvesting” program to actively 

gather metadata from many sources, beginning with the clearinghouse. In 

addition, the portal includes a “marketplace” that provides information on 

planned and ongoing geospatial acquisitions for use by agencies that are 

considering acquiring new data to facilitate coordination of existing and 

planned acquisitions.

The National Map. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is developing and 

implementing The National Map as a database to provide core geospatial 

data about the United States and its territories, similar to the data 

traditionally provided on USGS paper topographic maps. Through this 

project, USGS maintains an archive for the historic preservation of data 

and science applications; provides products and services that include 

paper maps, digital images, data download capabilities, and scientific 

reports; and promotes geographic integration and analyses. USGS relies 

heavily on partnerships with other federal agencies as well as states, 

localities, and the private sector to maintain the accuracy and currency of 

the national core geospatial data set as represented in The National Map.

According to Interior’s Assistant Secretary—Policy, Management, and 

Budget, FGDC, Geospatial One-Stop, and The National Map are 

coordinating their efforts in several areas, including developing standards 

and framework data layers for the NSDI, increasing the effectiveness of the 

clearinghouse, and making information about existing and planned data 

acquisitions available through the Geospatial One-Stop Web site.

16U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Selection and Implementation of 

the Office of Management and Budget’s 24 Initiatives, GAO-03-229 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 

22, 2002). 
Page 23 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Table 1 summarizes the NSDI, Geospatial One-Stop, and National Map 

programs.

Table 1: Summary of the NSDI, Geospatial One-Stop, and National Map Programs

 Source: GAO.

In addition to its other responsibilities, OMB Circular A-16 charges FGDC 

with leading the preparation of a strategic plan for the implementation of 

the NSDI. Such a plan could ensure coherence among the many geospatial 

coordination activities that are under way and provide ways to measure 

success in reducing redundancies. In 1994, FGDC issued a strategic plan 

that described actions federal agencies and others could take to develop 

the NSDI, such as establishing data themes and standards, training 

programs, and partnerships to promote coordination and data sharing. In 

April 1997, FGDC published an updated plan—with input from many 

organizations and individuals having a stake in developing the NSDI—that 

National Spatial Data 

Infrastructure Geospatial One-Stop The National Map

Description The technology, policies, 

standards, human resources, and 

related activities necessary to 

acquire, process, distribute, use, 

maintain, and preserve geospatial 

data.

An e-government initiative 

sponsored by OMB to enhance 

government efficiency and improve 

citizen service.

A resource to enable and 

communicate information related to 

geographic science.

Purpose To ensure that geospatial data from 

multiple sources (federal, state, 

local, and tribal governments, 

academia, and the private sector) 

are available and easily integrated 

to enhance the understanding of 

our physical and cultural world.

To develop a geospatial portal to 

make easier, faster, and less 

expensive access to geospatial 

information available for all levels of 

government and the public.

To provide trusted, integrated, 

seamless, and continually 

maintained geospatial base data 

and archives, along with related 

models and applications.

Data collected Data themes that include geodetic 

control, orthoimagery, elevation, 

transportation, hydrography, 

cadastral, and government units.

Seventeen data categories, 

representing all NSDI data themes.

Eight base data themes, including 

five NSDI framework themes, and 

related scientific models and 

applications.

Standards Common and repeated rules, 

conditions, guidelines, or 

characteristics for data and related 

processes. NSDI standards are 

developed and promulgated by 

FGDC using an established 

process with input from a broad 

range of data users and providers.

Adopts, adapts, or develops 

standards and Internet protocols 

necessary for effective 

implementation of the NSDI; 

currently completing work on 

FGDC information content 

standards for the NSDI framework 

data themes.

Encourages and promotes the use 

of standards for database creation 

and developing and assuring 

conformance to standards, 

guidelines, and characterizations 

of technology.

Web site www.fgdc.gov/nsdi/nsdi.html www.geo-one-stop.gov www.nationalmap.usgs.gov
Page 24 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

defined strategic goals and objectives to support the vision of the NSDI as 

defined in the 1994 plan. No further updates have been made.

As the current national geospatial strategy document, FGDC’s 1997 plan is 

out of date. First, it does not reflect the recent broadened use of geospatial 

data and systems by many government agencies. In conjunction with EPA, 

the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), for example, 

now makes geospatial information about housing available to potential 

home buyers over the Internet. This is one of several agency geospatial 

projects that did not exist in 1997. Second, significant governmentwide 

geospatial efforts—including the Geospatial One-Stop and the National 

Map projects—did not exist in 1997 and are therefore not reflected in the 

strategic plan. Finally, the 1997 plan does not take into account the 

increased importance that has been placed on homeland security in the 

wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks. Geospatial data and systems have 

a key role to play in supporting decision makers and emergency responders 

in protecting critical infrastructure and responding to threats.

In addition to being out of date, the 1997 document lacks important 

elements that should be included in an effective strategic plan. According 

to the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993,17 such plans 

should include a set of outcome-related strategic goals, a description of 

how those goals are to be achieved, and an identification of risk factors 

that could significantly affect their achievement. The plans should also 

include performance goals and measures, with resources needed to 

achieve them, as well as a description of the processes to be used to 

measure progress. 

While the 1997 NSDI plan contains a vision statement and goals and 

objectives, it does not include other essential elements. For example, 

FGDC’s plan does not include a set of outcome-related goals, with actions 

to achieve those goals, that would bring together the various actions being 

taken to coordinate geospatial assets and achieve the vision of the NSDI. 

Specifically, the plan does not include a description of how the 

development and implementation of geospatial standards could foster 

coordination of national geospatial investments, and what actions FGDC is 

taking to help ensure that standards are implemented to effectively support 

such coordination. The plan also does not identify how the programs that 

FGDC uses to promote coordination among federal agencies and other 

17P.L. 103-62, section 3.
Page 25 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

entities fit together in a cohesive approach to support and facilitate 

collaboration. 

In addition to not developing a plan that integrates each of FGDC’s 

activities to ensure that the actions it takes effectively contribute to its 

vision, the strategy does not identify key risk factors that could 

significantly affect the achievement of the goals and objectives. Identifying 

such risk factors would be the first step in mitigating them, helping to 

ensure that the plan’s goals and objectives are achievable.

Finally, the current plan does not include performance goals and measures 

to help ensure that the steps being taken are resulting in the development 

of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure. Performance goals and 

measures, with processes in place to measure progress, are important 

factors to ensuring the overall effectiveness of the plan and whether the 

objectives of the plan are being met.

FGDC officials, in consultation with the executive director of Geospatial 

One-Stop, USGS, and participating FGDC member agencies, have initiated 

a “future directions” effort to begin the process of updating the plan. 

However, this activity is just beginning, and there is no time frame as to 

when a new strategy will be in place. Until a complete and up-to-date 

national strategic plan, with measurable goals and objectives for 

developing the NSDI, is in place, coordination will continue to be limited, 

resulting in unnecessary duplication of geospatial assets and activities.

Individual Federal Agencies 

Have Coordinated Specific 

Geospatial Investments, but 

Have Not Fully Complied 

with OMB Guidance

OMB Circular A-16 directs federal agencies to coordinate their investments 

to facilitate building the NSDI. The circular lists 11 specific responsibilities 

for federal agencies, including

• preparing, maintaining, publishing, and implementing a strategy for 

advancing geographic information and related spatial data activities 

appropriate to their mission, in support of the NSDI;

• using FGDC standards, including metadata and other appropriate 

standards, documenting spatial data with relevant metadata; and 

• making metadata available online through a registered NSDI-compatible 

clearinghouse site.
Page 26 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

In certain cases, federal agencies have taken steps to coordinate their 

specific geospatial activities. For example, Agriculture’s U.S. Forest Service 

and Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) collaborated to develop 

the National Integrated Land System (NILS), which is intended to provide 

land managers with software tools for the collection, management, and 

sharing of survey data, cadastral data, and land records information. BLM 

and the Forest Service signed a formal interagency agreement at the outset 

of the project, coordinated project planning and management, and shared 

project funding. At an estimated cost of about $34 million, a single 

GIS—NILS—was developed that can accommodate the shared geospatial 

needs of both agencies, eliminating the need for each agency to develop a 

separate system. In another example, HUD and the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) worked together to develop an enterprise GIS 

that combines information on HUD’s community development and housing 

programs with EPA’s environmental data, as well as other agencies’ data, to 

provide homeowners and prospective home buyers with ready access to 

detailed local information about environmental hazards and other pertinent 

information, including data about roadways, population, and local 

landmarks.

However, despite such examples of coordination, agencies have not always 

complied with OMB’s broader geospatial coordination requirements. For 

example, only 10 of the 17 agencies that provided reports to FGDC 

reported having published geospatial strategies as required by Circular 

A-16. In addition, agencies’ spatial data holdings are generally not 

compliant with FGDC standards. Specifically, the annual report shows that, 

of the 17 agencies, only 4 reported that their spatial data holdings were 

compliant with FGDC standards. Ten agencies reported being partially 

compliant, and 3 agencies provided answers that were unclear as to 

whether they were compliant. Finally, regarding the requirement for 

agencies to post their data to the clearinghouse,18 only 6 of the 17 agencies 

indicated that their data or metadata were published through the 

clearinghouse, 10 indicated that their data were not published, and 1 

indicated that some data were available through the clearinghouse.

According to comments provided by agencies to FGDC in the annual report 

submissions, there are several reasons why agencies have not complied 

with their responsibilities under Circular A-16, including the lack of 

18According to Circular A-16, agencies are required to publish only data that they are able to 

share with the public. 
Page 27 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

performance measures that link funding to coordination efforts. According 

to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, few incentives exist for 

cross-agency cooperation because budget allocations are linked to 

individual agency performance rather than to cooperative efforts. In 

addition, according to the USGS, agencies’ activities and funding are driven 

primarily by individual agency missions and do not address interagency 

geospatial coordination. In addition to the information provided in the 

annual report, Department of Agriculture officials said there are no clear 

performance measures that link funding to interagency coordination. 

OMB’s Oversight of Federal 

Geospatial Assets and 

Activities Has Not Identified 

Redundant Investments

OMB has recognized that potentially redundant geospatial assets need to 

be identified and that federal geospatial systems and information efforts 

need to be coordinated. To help identify potential redundancies, OMB’s 

Administrator of E-Government and Information Technology testified in 

June 2003 that the agency uses three key sources of information:

• business cases for planned or ongoing IT investments, submitted by 

agencies as part of the annual budget process;

• comparisons of agency lines of business with the Federal Enterprise 

Architecture (FEA); and

• annual reports compiled by FGDC and submitted to OMB.

In addition, OMB has asked for detailed information from federal agencies 

on specific types of geospatial information and systems assets as an 

additional means of identifying and minimizing redundant IT investments.

None of OMB’s major oversight processes—the annual review process 

associated with development of the federal budget, the FEA effort, and the 

FGDC-administered Circular A-16 reporting process—have been effective 

tools to help OMB identify major redundancies in federal GIS investments. 

According to OMB officials responsible for oversight of geospatial 

activities, the agency’s methods have not yet led to the identification of 

redundant investments that could be targeted for consolidation or 

elimination. The OMB officials said they believe that, with further 

refinement, these tools will be effective in the future in helping them 

identify redundancies. However, until more effective oversight measures 

are in place, duplicative and potentially costly geospatial data and projects 

are likely to continue, resulting in inefficient use of limited resources.
Page 28 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

IT Investment Business Cases Do 

Not Completely Describe 

Geospatial Data Assets 

In their IT business cases submitted annually as part of the budget process, 

agencies must report the types of data that will be used, including 

geospatial data. According to OMB’s branch chief for information policy 

and technology, OMB reviews these business cases to determine whether 

any redundant geospatial investments are being funded. Specifically, the 

process for reviewing a business case includes comparing proposed 

investments, IT management and strategic plans, and other business cases, 

in an attempt to determine whether a proposed investment duplicates 

another agency’s existing or already-approved investment.

However, business cases submitted to OMB under Circular A-11 do not 

always include enough information to effectively identify potential 

geospatial data and systems redundancies because OMB does not require 

such information in agency business cases. For example, OMB does not 

require that agencies clearly link information about their proposed or 

existing geospatial investments to the spatial data categories (themes) 

established by Circular A-16. Geospatial systems and data are ubiquitous 

throughout federal agencies and are frequently integrated into agencies’ 

mission-related systems and business processes. Business cases that focus 

on mission-related aspects of agency systems and data may not provide the 

information necessary to compare specific geospatial investments with 

other, potentially similar investments unless the data identified in the 

business cases are categorized to allow OMB to more readily compare data 

sets and identify potential redundancies.

For example, FEMA’s fiscal year 2004 business case for its Multi-Hazard 

Flood Map Modernization project indicates that topographic and base data 

are used to perform engineering analyses for estimating flood discharge, 

develop floodplain mapping, and locate areas of interest related to hazard 

areas. However, FEMA does not categorize these data according to 

standardized spatial data themes specified in Circular A-16, such as 

elevation (bathymetric or terrestrial), transportation, and hydrography. As 

a result, it is difficult to determine whether the data overlap with other 

federal data sets. Similarly, Census’s fiscal year 2005 business case for its 

MAF/TIGER Enhancement project indicates that state, local, tribal, and 

private-sector spatial data are used for the realignment of the street 

centerlines and other features. However, like the Flood Map Modernization 

business case, the MAF/TIGER Enhancement business case does not 

categorize these data according to the Circular A-16 data themes, which 

would allow OMB to compare them with other agencies’ holdings. Without 

categorizing the data using the standard data themes as an important step 

toward coordinating that data, information about agencies’ planned or 
Page 29 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

ongoing use of geospatial data in their business cases cannot be effectively 

assessed to determine whether it could be integrated with other existing or 

planned federal geospatial assets.

The Federal Enterprise 

Architecture Is Not Yet Effective 

in Identifying Potentially 

Redundant Geospatial 

Investments

An FEA is being constructed that, once it is further developd, may help 

identify potentially redundant geospatial investments. It will comprise a 

collection of five interrelated “reference models” designed to facilitate 

cross-agency analysis and the identification of duplicative investments, 

gaps, and opportunities for collaboration within and across federal 

agencies. According to recent GAO testimony on the status of the FEA, 

although OMB has made progress on the FEA, it remains a work in process 

and is still maturing.19 The five FEA reference models are summarized in 

table 2. 

Table 2: FEA Reference Models

Source: GAO.

19U.S. General Accounting Office, Information Technology: The Federal Enterprise 

Architecture and Agencies’ Enterprise Architectures Are Still Maturing, GAO-04-798T

(Washington, D.C. May 19, 2004).

Reference model Description Status

Business Reference 

Model

Describes the business operations (lines of 

business) of the federal government independent of 

the agencies that perform them, including defining 

the services provided to state and local 

governments. 

Version 2.0 

released 

June 2003

Service Component 

Reference Model

Identifies and classifies IT service (i.e., application) 

components that support federal agencies and 

promote the reuse of components across agencies.

Version 1.0 

released 

June 2003

Technical Reference 

Model

Describes how technology is supporting the delivery 

of service components, including relevant standards 

for implementing the technology. 

Version 1.1 

released 

August 2003

Performance 

Reference Model

Provides a common set of general performance 

outputs and measures for agencies to use to 

achieve business goals and objectives. 

Version 1.0 

released 

September 

2003 

Data and Information 

Reference Model

Describes, at an aggregate level, the types of data 

and information that support program and business 

line operations, and the relationships among these 

types. 

Not yet 

released 
Page 30 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

OMB has identified multiple purposes for the FEA. One purpose cited is to 

inform agencies’ individual enterprise architectures and to facilitate their 

development by providing a common classification structure and 

vocabulary. Another stated purpose is to provide a governmentwide 

framework that can increase agencies’ awareness of IT capabilities that 

other agencies have or plan to acquire, so that they can explore 

opportunities for reuse. Still another stated purpose is to help OMB 

decision makers identify opportunities for collaboration among agencies 

through the implementation of common, reusable, and interoperable 

solutions. GAO supports the FEA as a framework for achieving these ends.

According to OMB’s branch chief for information policy and technology, 

OMB reviews all new investment proposals against the federal 

government’s lines of business in its Business Reference Model to identify 

those investments that appear to have some commonality. Many of the 

model’s lines of business include areas in which geospatial information is 

of critical importance, including disaster management (the cleanup and 

restoration activities that take place after a disaster); environmental 

management (functions required to monitor the environment and weather, 

determine proper environmental standards, and address environmental 

hazards and contamination); and transportation (federally supported 

activities related to the safe passage, conveyance, or transportation of 

goods and people). 

The Service Component Reference Model includes specific references to 

geospatial data and systems. It is intended to identify and classify IT 

service components (i.e., applications) that support federal agencies and 

promote the reuse of components across agencies. The model includes 29 

types of services—including customer relationship management and 

visualization service, which defines capabilities that support the 

conversion of data into graphical or picture form. One component of 

visualization service is associated with mapping, geospatial, elevation, and 

GPS services. Identification of redundant investments under the 

visualization service could provide OMB with information that would be 

useful in identifying redundant geospatial systems investments. 

Finally, the Data and Information Reference Model would likely be the 

most critical FEA element in identifying potentially redundant geospatial 

investments. According to OMB, it will categorize the government’s 

information along general content areas and describe data components 

that are common to many business processes or activities. 
Page 31 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Although the FEA includes elements that could be used to help identify 

redundant investments, it is not yet sufficiently developed to be useful in 

identifying redundant geospatial investments. While the Business and 

Service Component reference models have aspects related to geospatial 

investments, the Data and Information Reference Model may be the critical 

element for identifying agency use of geospatial data because it is planned 

to provide standard categories of data that could support comparing data 

sets among federal agencies. However, this model has not yet been 

completed and thus is not in use. Until the FEA is completed and OMB 

develops effective analytical processes to use it, it will not be able to 

contribute to identifying potentially redundant geospatial investments. 

FGDC-Administered Agency 

Reporting Does Not Provide 

Adequate Information for 

Identifying Redundant 

Geospatial Investments

OMB Circular A-16 requires agencies to report annually to OMB on their 

achievements in advancing geographic information and related spatial data 

activities appropriate to their missions and in support of the NSDI. To 

support this requirement, FGDC has developed a structure for agencies to 

use to report such information in a consistent format and for aggregating 

individual agencies’ information. Using the agency reports, the committee 

prepares an annual report to OMB purportedly identifying the scope and 

depth of spatial data activities across agencies.

For the fiscal year 2003 report, agencies were asked to respond to a 

number of specific questions about their geospatial activities, including (1) 

whether a detailed strategy had been developed for integrating geographic 

information and spatial data into their business processes, (2) how they 

ensure that data are not already available prior to collecting new geospatial 

data, and (3) whether geospatial data are a component of the agency’s 

enterprise architecture. However, additional information that is critical to 

identifying redundancies was not required. For example, agencies were not 

requested to provide information on their specific GIS investments or the 

geospatial data sets they collected and maintained. According to the FGDC 

staff director, the annual reports are not meant to provide an inventory of 

federal geospatial assets. As a result, they cannot provide OMB with 

sufficient information to identify redundancies in federal geospatial 

investments.

Further, because not all agencies provide reports to FGDC, the information 

that OMB has available to identify redundancies is incomplete. Eight of the 

FGDC partner agencies, including the Departments of Energy, Justice, and 

Homeland Security, and the National Science Foundation, did not provide 

reports for fiscal year 2003. In addition, nonpartner agencies, including the 

Departments of Education, Labor, Veterans Affairs and the Treasury, did 
Page 32 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

not provide reports, although all agencies that collect, use, or disseminate 

geospatial information, regardless of whether they are FGDC partners, are 

required to do so. According to OMB’s program examiner for the 

Department of the Interior, OMB does not know in detail how well agencies 

are complying with the reporting requirements in Circular A-16. Until the 

information reported by agencies is consistent and complete, OMB may not 

be able to effectively use what information they do have to identify 

potential geospatial redundancies.

OMB’s Supplemental Data 

Requests Have Not Provided 

Sufficient Information to Identify 

Potentially Redundant 

Investments

In addition to the three tools OMB uses to identify potentially redundant 

geospatial investments, it has also issued special requests to agencies to 

report on their geospatial investments to help support its oversight 

function for geospatial information, as required by OMB Circular A-16. For 

example, as part of the 2004 budget cycle, OMB initiated a pilot project to 

collect detailed cost information on one geospatial data theme—elevation 

data. Despite specifying criteria for identifying elevation data, the pilot 

encountered problems. 

FGDC developed criteria for this pilot process, but OMB did not follow it. 

Budget examiners at OMB modified the criteria to take into account the 

agencies’ widely varying missions, and broadened the criteria for individual 

agencies to make it easier for them to identify elevation data in the same 

way they tracked the data internally. As a result, elevation data were not 

reported consistently and could not be compared across agencies.

A data collection effort associated with the fiscal year 2005 budget process 

raised the same questions as the 2004 effort about its effectiveness to 

support OMB’s oversight responsibilities. As part of the fiscal year 2005 

budget cycle, OMB again requested supplemental information from federal 

agencies to identify which agencies are collecting geospatial data, for what 

purposes, and covering which geographic areas; federal expenditures 

related to data collection and the extent of leveraging of those 

expenditures; the extent of sharing of and public access to federal 

geospatial data; and the use of standards. Specifically, OMB asked agencies 

that spend $500,000 or more on any geospatial data to report information 

on all types of geospatial data, with a focus on the seven types of 

framework data identified by FGDC. However, because the earlier 

problems have not been addressed, the 2005 supplemental data request is 

also unlikely to provide useful information for OMB to identify redundant 

federal geospatial investments.
Page 33 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Federal Agencies Continue 

to Collect and Maintain 

Duplicative Data and 

Systems

Without a complete and up-to-date strategy for coordination or effective 

investment oversight by OMB, federal agencies continue to acquire and 

maintain duplicative data and systems. According to the initial business 

case for the Geospatial One-Stop initiative, about 50 percent of the federal 

government’s geospatial data investment is duplicative. Such duplication is 

widely recognized. Officials from federal and state agencies and OMB have 

all stated that unnecessarily redundant geospatial data and systems exist 

throughout the federal government. The Staff Director of FGDC agreed that 

redundancies continue to exist throughout the federal government and that 

more work needs to be done to specifically identify them. DHS’s Geospatial 

Information Officer also acknowledged redundancies in geospatial data 

acquisitions at his agency, and said that DHS is working to create an 

enterprisewide approach to managing geospatial data in order to reduce 

redundancies. Similarly, state representatives to the National States 

Geographic Information Council have identified cases in which they have 

observed multiple federal agencies funding the acquisition of similar data 

to meet individual agency needs.

We found that USGS, FEMA, and the Department of Defense (DOD) each 

maintain separate elevation data sets: USGS’s National Elevation Dataset, 

FEMA’s flood hazard mapping elevation data program, and DOD’s elevation 

data regarding Defense installations. FEMA officials indicated that they 

obtained much of their data from state and local partners or purchased 

them from the private sector because data from those sources better fit 

their accuracy and resolution requirements than elevation data available 

from USGS. Similarly, according to one Army official, available USGS 

elevation data sets generally do not include military installations, and even 

when such data are available for specific installations, they are typically 

not accurate enough for DOD’s purposes. As a result, DOD collects its own 

elevation data for its installations. In this example, if USGS elevation 

data-collection projects were coordinated with FEMA and DOD to help 

ensure that the needs of as many federal agencies as possible were met 

through the project, potentially costly and redundant data-collection 

activities could be avoided. According to the USGS Associate Director for 

Geography, USGS is currently working to develop relationships with FEMA 

and DOD, along with other federal agencies, to determine where these 

agencies’ data-collection activities overlap.

In another example, officials at the Department of Agriculture and the 

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) both said they have 

purchased data sets containing street-centerline data from commercial 

sources, even though the Census Bureau maintains such data in its TIGER 
Page 34 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

database. According to these officials, they purchased the data 

commercially because they had concerns about the accuracy of the TIGER 

data. The Census Bureau is currently working to enhance its TIGER data in 

preparation for the 2010 census, and a major objective of the project is to 

improve the accuracy of its street location data. However, despite 

Agriculture and NGA’s use of street location data, Census did not include 

either agency in the TIGER enhancement project plan’s list of agencies that 

will be affected by the initiative. Without better coordination, agencies 

such as Agriculture and NGA are likely to continue to need to purchase 

redundant commercial data sets in the future. 

Further, in a recent report on coastal mapping and charting, the National 

Research Council cited numerous examples of redundant activity in coastal 

mapping, including aerial imaging, shoreline mapping, and habitat 

mapping.20 The council noted that redundancy in data collection is of most 

concern, as it is by far the most expensive of geospatial activities, and 

concluded that agencies do not have an efficient means of determining 

whether an area of interest has been previously mapped. Without 

better-coordinated activities, federal agencies are likely to continue to 

duplicate data collection.

Conclusions The longstanding problem of effectively coordinating federal geospatial 

investments to reduce unnecessary redundancies and their concomitant 

costs has not yet been resolved. A number of activities have been initiated 

with the aim of better coordinating geospatial investments, including the 

OMB-required activities of FGDC, as well as the Geospatial One-Stop 

initiative and other projects such as The National Map. In addition, 

individual agencies have collaborated on specific geospatial projects, and 

OMB has adopted several processes for identifying redundant geospatial 

investments. 

However, these efforts have not been very successful in reducing 

redundancies in geospatial investments. A complete and up-to-date 

strategic plan to coordinate the government’s various geospatial activities 

is lacking, and federal agencies have not fully complied with OMB’s 

Circular A-16 guidance. Similarly, OMB’s processes for identifying 

duplicative federal geospatial investments have not proven effective.

20National Research Council, A Geospatial Framework for the Coastal Zone: National 

Needs for Coastal Mapping and Charting (Washington, D.C., 2004).
Page 35 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Until a comprehensive national strategy is in place, the current state of 

ineffective coordination is likely to remain, and the vision of the NSDI will 

likely not be fully realized. In addition, without effective oversight by OMB, 

agencies might not have adequate incentives to fully coordinate their 

geospatial activities, and OMB will not be able to identify potentially 

duplicative geospatial investments. Until these shortcomings are 

addressed, cost savings from eliminating duplicative geospatial 

investments will not materialize. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

In order to encourage more coordination of geospatial assets, reduce 

needless redundancies, and decrease costs, we recommend that the 

Director of OMB and the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the 

FGDC, establish milestones for the development of an updated national 

geospatial data strategic plan, ensuring that the plan includes

• outcome-related strategic goals and objectives;

• a plan for how the goals and objectives are to be achieved;

• identification of key risk factors that could significantly affect the 

achievement of the general goals and objectives and a mitigation plan 

for those risk factors; and

• performance goals and measures that will be used to ensure that the 

goals and objectives of the NSDI are being met.

To encourage better agency compliance with Circular A-16, we also 

recommend that the Director of OMB develop criteria for assessing the 

extent of interagency coordination on proposals for potential geospatial 

investments. Based on these criteria, funding for potential geospatial 

investments should be delayed or denied when coordination is not 

adequately addressed in agencies’ proposals.

Finally, we recommend that the Director of OMB strengthen the agency’s 

oversight actions to more effectively coordinate federal geospatial data and 

systems acquisitions and thereby reduce potentially redundant 

investments. Specifically, OMB should 

• require that information about planned geospatial data acquisitions 

provided in agencies’ business cases include specific categorizations of 
Page 36 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

all geospatial data according to the standardized data themes defined by 

FGDC and described in OMB Circular A-16; and

• require that all federal agencies submit annual reports to FGDC on their 

GIS investments, including geospatial systems and data sets already in 

place.

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

We received oral comments on a draft of this report from representatives of 

OMB’s Offices of Information and Regulatory Affairs and Resource 

Management and from the Assistant Secretary of the Interior—Policy, 

Management, and Budget. The officials from both agencies generally 

agreed with the content of our draft report and our recommendations and 

provided technical comments, which have been incorporated where 

appropriate. In addition, the Departments of Defense and Health and 

Human Services and the Bureau of the Census also provided oral technical 

comments, which have been incorporated where appropriate.

Concerning our recommendation that OMB strengthen its oversight to 

more effectively coordinate federal geospatial data and systems 

acquisitions, the OMB representatives stated that they are planning to 

institute a new process to collect more complete information on agencies’ 

geospatial investments by requiring agencies to report all such investments 

through the Geospatial One-Stop Web portal. OMB representatives told us 

that reporting requirements for agencies would be detailed in a new 

directive that OMB expects to issue by the end of summer 2004.

The Department of the Interior’s Assistant Secretary of the 

Interior—Policy, Management, and Budget noted that our report 

emphasizes geospatial investments rather than the broader and more 

comprehensive geospatial strategies outlined in OMB Circular A-16, and 

pointed out that encouraging the growth of a national spatial data 

infrastructure—versus tracking geospatial investments and minimizing 

duplication—required different approaches. In the department’s view, 

activities by FGDC and the Geospatial One-Stop initiative to develop an 

infrastructure for information sharing have established business practices 

that can result in sound investments. We agree with the department that 

these are valuable activities that can promote sound investments. 

Moreover, a detailed strategic plan, coupled with improved oversight and 

agency compliance with coordination guidance, remain critical steps to 

achieving the objective of reducing duplication in federal geospatial 

investments.
Page 37 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

We are sending copies of this report to the Chairman and Ranking Minority 

Member, House Committee on Government Reform, and the Ranking 

Minority Member, Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, 

Intergovernmental Relations and the Census. In addition, we are providing 

copies to the Director of OMB and the Secretary of the Interior, and the 

report is available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

Should you have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 

512-6240 or John de Ferrari, Assistant Director, at (202) 512-6335. We can 

also be reached by e-mail at koontzl@gao.gov and deferrarij@gao.gov, 

respectively. Other key contributors to this report were Michael Holland, 

Steven Law, and Elizabeth Roach.

Linda D. Koontz

Director, Information Management Issues
Page 38 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Appendix I

Objective, Scope, and Methodology ApApenednxidexiIs

Our objective was to determine the extent to which the federal government 

is coordinating the sharing of geospatial assets, including through oversight 

measures in place at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in order 

to identify and reduce redundancies in federal geospatial data and systems.

To address this objective, we reviewed relevant federal guidance and 

legislation, including The E-Government Act of 2002; The Clinger-Cohen 

Act of 1996; The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; Executive Order 12906: 

Coordinating Geographic Data Acquisition and Access; OMB Circular A-11: 

Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget; OMB Circular A-16: 

Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data 

Activities; and OMB Circular A-130: Management of Federal Information 

Resources. Appendix III provides additional information about each. We 

also reviewed agency IT business cases, known as Exhibit 300s, submitted 

as part of the annual budget process. In addition, we evaluated the Federal 

Enterprise Architecture reference models and various FGDC documents 

and interviewed officials from the following federal agencies in the 

Washington, D.C. metropolitan area:

• Department of Agriculture;

• Department of Commerce, including the Census Bureau and the 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;

• Department of Defense, including the National Geospatial-Intelligence 

Agency;

• Department of Health and Human Services;

• Department of Homeland Security, including the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency;

• Department of the Interior, including the Bureau of Land Management 

and the U.S. Geological Survey;

• Environmental Protection Agency; and

• Office of Management and Budget.

We interviewed program officials representing key federal geospatial 

projects, including the Federal Geographic Data Committee, Geospatial 

One-Stop, The National Map, and the TIGER Modernization project. For 
Appendix I

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Page 39 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

these projects, we reviewed key documents such as capital asset plans, 

project plans, and other project documentation. 

To better understand federal efforts to coordinate with state and local 

governments and the private sector, we interviewed state and local 

government and private sector officials at several conferences, including 

the ESRI Federal User Conference and the National Association of 

Counties Legislative Conference. In addition, we conducted focus groups at 

three national conferences in March 2004: (1) The National League of Cities 

Congressional City Conference; (2) the Management Association for 

Private Photogrammetric Surveyors Federal Programs Conference; and (3) 

the National States Geographic Information Council Midyear Conference. 

At these focus groups we asked state and local government and private 

sector officials for their views on what the federal government was doing to 

coordinate its geospatial activities with them and what could be done to 

improve the coordination of federal geospatial activities. A total of 34 state 

and local government and private sector officials attended these focus 

groups.

In addition, to determine the extent of state and local participation in the 

National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse and the Geospatial One-Stop 

portal, we obtained information from FGDC officials about the metadata 

records contained in the clearinghouse and conducted analyses of the data 

referenced in the Geospatial One-Stop portal. 

We conducted our work from October 2003 through May 2004 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Page 40 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Appendix II

Selected Agencies’ Geospatial Activities ApendxiI

Many federal agencies have established geospatial activities to help them 

achieve their specific goals and objectives. Table 3 highlights selected 

federal geospatial activities at certain agencies. The table is not intended to 

be a comprehensive list of agency geospatial activities.

Table 3: Selected Geospatial Activities at Federal Agencies

Agency Activities

Department of Agriculture 

(USDA)/Forest Service

The Forest Service uses GIS to provide information on vegetation, water, fire, and soil for 

specified forests. The agency also develops digital orthophoto quad images and maintains a 

clearinghouse with geospatial metadata. In addition, the Forest Service is working with Interior’s 

Bureau of Land Management to develop the National Integrated Land System, to support the 

management of cadastral records and land parcel information.

USDA/National Cartography and 

Geospatial Center (NCGC)

NCGC Internet Mapping offers Web access to view samples of hydrography, digital 

orthophotography, digital topographic data, and other integrated data layers. In addition, NCGC 

supports an Aerial Photography Field Office with a library of over 10 million images dating from 

1955 to the present.

USDA/Natural Resources 

Conservation Service (NRCS)

The NRCS Geospatial Data Gateway provides easy and consistent access to natural resource 

data by geographic area such as county or state. Users can search for data by theme, such as 

digital orthoimagery, digital elevation models, or soils.

USDA/Farm Service Agency (FSA) The FSA is implementing software that will be important in the maintenance of the Common 

Land Unit (CLU), which will track all farming activity across the country. The CLU should be 

completed nationwide in fiscal year 2005.

Department of Commerce 

(DOC)/Census Bureau

The Census Bureau developed the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and 

Referencing (TIGER) database, which automates the mapping and related geographic activities 

required to support the decennial census and the bureau’s sample survey programs. Census is 

also working on the Master Address File/TIGER (MAF/TIGER) Accuracy Improvement Project, 

which seeks to improve accuracy in TIGER by acquiring and using, as a first priority among data 

sources, digital files prepared and provided by state, local, and tribal governments. In addition, 

Census maintains the TIGER Enhancement Database, which includes metadata about state and 

local geospatial data. Census also conducts the Boundary and Annexation Survey to update the 

information it has about the legal boundaries, names, governmental status, and types of 

municipalities in the United States. 

DOC/National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

NOAA makes extensive use of GIS technology to store the large quantity of data it collects. For 

example, the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center 

collect data about the physical and biological characteristics of the Bering Sea and the Gulf of 

Alaska, which are then stored in a GIS. In addition, NOAA’s Coastal Services Center develops 

products and services through project partnerships that address specific technical needs and 

capacities of the coastal management community. These projects typically focus on data access 

and distribution, Internet mapping, and spatial data analysis and visualization as a means of 

addressing coastal hazards, smart growth, marine protected areas, or coastal permitting issues.

Department of Defense 

(DOD)/National Geospatial 

Intelligence Agency (NGA)

NGA provides timely, accurate, global aeronautical, topographical, and maritime geospatial 

information in support of national security objectives. 
Appendix II

Selected Agencies’ Geospatial Activities

Page 41 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Agency Activities

DOD/Army Corps of Engineers The Army Corps of Engineers collects hydrographic data along the Inland Waterway to ensure 

that navigation channels are dredged to authorized depths; aerial photography and elevation 

data of authorized projects to support a variety of planning- and construction-related activities, 

and uses geospatial technologies as part of its water control, real estate, planning and 

reconnaissance studies, emergency management, regulatory, environmental restoration, 

engineering and reconstruction missions.

DOD/Navy The Navy’s Oceanographic Information System collects, analyzes, processes, manages, 

produces, and distributes classified and unclassified oceanographic data and products. In 

addition, the system functions as the initial collection and processing entity for mapping and 

charting geodesy data and information. 

Department of Energy (DOE)/Los 

Alamos National Laboratory

The Los Alamos National Laboratory’s GISLab supplies geospatial information for internal and 

external users of geospatial data. Current projects include fire-related spatial data, floodplain 

mapping and hydrological modeling, field mapping for forest management, and mesoscale 

climate change modeling. 

DOE/National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory site provides dynamically generated maps of 

renewable energy resources that determine which energy technologies are viable solutions in 

the United States. These maps include GIS Clean Cities Map, Wind Map, Transportation 

Technologies Map, Map of Indian Lands, Solar Maps, and Federal Energy Management Program 

Maps.

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS)/Agency for Toxic 

Substances and Disease Registry

The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry manages a geospatial data warehouse 

that contains base map, sociodemographic, emergency response, environmental, hazard, and 

health resource data.

HHS/Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention engages in a variety of GIS activities that serve 

disease surveillance and prevention themes. The National Center for Injury Prevention and 

Control publishes Web-based maps on injury statistics and mortality atlases; the National 

Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Heath Promotion uses GIS to analyze and publish 

geospatial data, such as mapping risk factor data and the prevalence of fluoridated water 

systems, cardiovascular mortality atlases, etc.; and the National Center for Environmental 

Health (NCEH) has recently deployed the Environmental Public Health Geography Network, a 

system designed to publish and share geospatial data, metadata and maps. NCEH also 

deployed the Spatial Epidemiology and Emergency Management System, a Web-based system 

to provide easy and rapid access to and mapping of geospatial data.

HHS/National Institutes of 

Health/National Cancer Institute

The National Cancer Institute maintains the Cancer Mortality Maps & Graph Web Site, which 

provides information on geographic patterns and time trends of cancer death rates from 1950 to 

1994 for more than 40 types of cancer. 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS)

Various DHS components are frequent users of geospatial information, including the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Bureau of Transportation Security, the Coast 

Guard, and the Secret Service. 

DHS/Federal Emergency Management 

Agency (FEMA)

FEMA provides a full range of GIS services to all FEMA program offices, including storm tracking 

and damage prediction maps, remote sensing maps, maps of federally declared counties in an 

affected state, basic census demographics about an affected area by county and census block, 

street locations, and summaries of teleregistered and service center applicants, housing 

inspection numbers, Help-line calls, disaster unemployment claims, Small Business 

Administration applicants, etc. In addition, FEMA’s Flood Map Modernization Program will 

update FEMA’s current stock of flood maps in order to produce more accurate and accessible 

digital flood maps and make those maps accessible via the Internet. 

(Continued From Previous Page)
Appendix II

Selected Agencies’ Geospatial Activities

Page 42 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Agency Activities

Department of the Interior 

(DOI)/Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) 

BLM uses GIS to store and analyze public land and administrative jurisdiction information. In 

addition, BLM is working with the Forest Service to develop the National Integrated Land System 

(NILS) to provide business solutions for the management of cadastral records and land parcel 

information in a GIS environment.

DOI/Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) The Fish and Wildlife Service uses GIS technology to: maintain wetlands data, as referenced in 

OMB Circular A-16, and share that data through a cooperative agreement with The National 

Map; create and share a variety of information on endangered species, fisheries and habitat 

conservation, and national wildlife refuges; make metadata available on the NSDI through a 

cooperative agreement with USGS; and share an interactive mapping application with basic 

information on Fish and Wildlife Service offices through Geospatial One-Stop.

DOI/National Park Service The National Park Service uses geospatial data to enhance preservation of park resources with 

scientific spatial analysis and modeling, enhance visitor experiences with GPS tools and tips; 

provide an Interactive Map Center to deliver base maps and park brochure maps for geographic 

reference and navigation to and within parks; and provide search and rescue maps. 

DOI/U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) USGS’s Cooperative Topographic Mapping program works with partners in other federal 

agencies; in state, county, and local governments, and in the private sector to ensure that 

accurate, current, and complete data that locate and describe the Earth's features are available 

and that products such as the USGS topographic series maps are kept up to date. The 

Geographic Analysis and Monitoring program conducts research to understand the rates, 

causes, and consequences of landscape change over time and uses that research to model 

change processes for predicting future conditions. The Land Remote Sensing program, working 

with NASA, NOAA, commercial satellite companies, state and local governments, and 

international programs, collects, maintains, and distributes millions of images acquired from 

satellite and aircraft sensors. In addition, USGS provides a site that serves as a node of the 

NSDI for finding and accessing USGS spatial data related to hydrography. In addition, USGS is 

developing and implementing The National Map as a database to provide core geospatial data 

about the United States and its territories similar to the data provided on USGS paper 

topographic maps. Through this project, USGS maintains an archive for the historic preservation 

of data and science applications; provides products and services that include paper maps, digital 

images, data download capabilities, and scientific reports; and promotes geographic integration 

and analyses.

Department of Justice/Justice 

Programs Office for Victims of Crime

Uses GIS to map crime victim services.

Department of Transportation 

(DOT)/Bureau of Transportation 

Statistics (BTS)

The Bureau of Transportation Statistics maintains the National Transportation Atlas Data 

Shapefile Download Center, which is a set of transportation-related geospatial data for the 

United States, including transportation networks, transportation facilities, and other spatial data 

used as geographic reference. 

DOT/Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center 

The Volpe National Transportation Systems Center uses GIS to identify data such as county 

boundaries, roadways, and railroads, measure ambient noise levels, and search for locations 

such as historic beacon sites and environmental data.

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA)

EPA uses a variety of geospatial data in order to support its mission to protect human health and 

the environment. Specific examples of activities supported by geospatial information include: 

conducting analyses to help manage urban/suburban growth, responding to oil spills and other 

emergency situations, identifying sources of pollution for source water protection, tracking toxic 

substances, cleaning up and monitoring Superfund sites, detecting and evaluating landscape 

patterns and changes, analyzing the relationship between health and environmental 

contaminants, and monitoring water quality. EPA also maintains the Environmental Information 

Management System (EIMS), the EPA node on the Federal Geographic Data Committee 

Clearinghouse. Users can obtain metadata about EPA Geospatial data through EIMS.

(Continued From Previous Page)
Appendix II

Selected Agencies’ Geospatial Activities

Page 43 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Source: GAO.

Agency Activities

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) and the 

Environmental Protection Agency

The Enterprise Geographic Information System combines information on HUD’s community 

development and housing programs with EPA’s environmental data, and other agencies’ data, to 

provide location, type, and performance of HUD-funded activities in every neighborhood across 

the country and select EPA information on brownfields, hazardous wastes, air pollution, and 

wastewater discharges. It also provides information on population, transportation and roadways, 

and local landmarks.

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA)

NASA’s Global Change Master Directory enables users to locate and obtain access to Earth 

science data sets and services relevant to the global change and Earth science research. The 

database holds more than 15,000 descriptions of Earth science data sets and services covering 

all aspects of Earth and environmental sciences.

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) The TVA provides an interactive map of the entire TVA power system, a network of reservoirs 

and power plants.

(Continued From Previous Page)
Page 44 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Appendix III

Key Federal Laws, Policies, and Guidance 

Affecting Geospatial Information and Systems ApendxiI

The E-Government Act of 2002, Section 216: Common Protocols for 

Geographic Information Systems. The purposes of this section are to (1) 

reduce redundant data collection and information and (2) promote 

collaboration and use of standards for government geographic information. 

It requires the Director of OMB to oversee (1) an interagency initiative to 

develop common geospatial protocols; (2) the coordination with state, 

local, and tribal governments, public private partnerships, and other 

interested persons of effective and efficient ways to align geographic 

information and develop common protocols; and (3) the adoption of 

common standards.

The Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. The Clinger-Cohen Act directs the OMB 

Director to promote and improve the acquisition, use, and disposal of 

information technology by the federal government to improve the 

productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness of federal programs, including 

through dissemination of public information and the reduction of 

information collection burdens on the pubic.

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This legislation directs the OMB 

Director to oversee the use of information resources to improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of government operations to serve agency 

missions, including burden reduction and service delivery to the public. 

This includes developing, coordinating, and overseeing the implementation 

of federal information resources management policies, principles, 

standards, and guidelines.

Executive Order 12906: Coordinating Geographic Data Acquisition and 

Access. The National Spatial Data Infrastructure. This order, originally 

issued in 1994 and revised in 2003, establishes FGDC as the interagency 

coordinating body for the development of the NSDI and directs FGDC to 

involve state, local, and tribal governments in the development and 

implementation of the NSDI. The executive order also establishes a 

National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse, directs FGDC to develop 

standards for implementing the NSDI, and requires that federal agencies 

collecting or producing geospatial data shall ensure that data will be 

collected in a manner that meets all relevant standards adopted through the 

FGDC process. In addition, the executive order requires the Interior 

Secretary to develop strategies for maximizing cooperative participatory 

efforts with state, local, and tribal governments, the private sector, and 

other nonfederal organizations to share costs and improve efficiencies of 

acquiring geospatial data.
Appendix III

Key Federal Laws, Policies, and Guidance 

Affecting Geospatial Information and 

Systems

Page 45 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

OMB Circular A-11: Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the 

Budget. Part 7, Planning Budgeting, Acquisition, and Management of 

Capital Assets. This circular establishes policy for planning, budgeting, 

acquisition, and management of federal capital assets and instructs 

agencies on budget justification and reporting requirements for major IT 

investments. It requires agencies to submit business cases to OMB for 

planned or ongoing major IT investments1

 and to answer questions to help 

OMB determine if the investment should be funded.

OMB Circular A-16: Coordination of Geographic Information and 

Related Spatial Data Activities. This circular calls for a coordinated 

approach to developing the NSDI, establishes FGDC and identifies its roles 

and responsibilities, and assigns agency roles and responsibilities for 

development of the NSDI. The document states that “implementation of 

this Circular is essential to help federal agencies eliminate duplication, 

avoid redundant expenditures, reduce resources spent on unfunded 

mandates, accelerate the development of electronic government to meet 

the needs and expectations of citizens and agency programmatic mandates, 

and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public management.”

OMB Circular A-130: Management of Federal Information Resources. 

This circular requires agencies to ensure that improvements to existing 

information systems and the development of planned information systems 

do not unnecessarily duplicate IT capabilities within the same agency, at 

other agencies, or in the private sector. The OMB Director is designated to 

provide overall leadership and coordination of federal information 

resources management within the executive branch

1

According to OMB Circular A-11, a major IT investment means a system or investment that 

requires special management attention because of its importance to an agency’s mission; the 

investment was a major investment in the fiscal year 2004 submission and is continuing; the 

investment is for financial management and spends more than $500,000; the investment is 

directly tied to the top two layers of the Federal Enterprise Architecture; the investment is 

an integral part of the agency’s modernization blueprint (EA); the investment has significant 

program or policy implications; the investment has high executive visibility; or the 

investment is defined as major by the agency’s capital planning and investment control 

process. Investments that are e-government in nature or use e-business technologies must 

be identified as major investments regardless of the costs.
Page 46 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Appendix IV

OMB Circular A-16 Data Themes, 

Descriptions, and Lead Agencies ApendxiIV

Table 4: OMB Circular A-16 Data Themes, Descriptions, and Lead Agencies

Data theme Description

Lead department 

or agencya

Framework 

themeb

Baseline 

(maritime)

Baseline represents the line from which maritime zones and limits are measured. 

Examples of these limits include the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, and 

exclusive economic zone. 

DOC/NOAA, 

DOI/MMSc

No

Biological 

resources

This data set includes data pertaining to or descriptive of (nonhuman) biological 

resources and their distributions and habitats, including data at the 

suborganismal (genetics, physiology, anatomy, etc.), organismal (subspecies, 

species, systematics), and ecological (populations, communities, ecosystems, 

biomes, etc.) levels. 

DOI/USGS No

Buildings and 

facilities

Includes federal sites or entities with a geospatial location deliberately 

established for designated activities; a facility database might describe a factory, 

military base, college, hospital, power plant, fishery, national park, office building, 

space command center, or prison. 

GSAc No

Cadastral Describes the geographic extent of past, current, and future right, title, and 

interest in real property, and the framework to support the description of that 

geographic extent. 

DOI/BLM Yes

Cadastral 

(offshore)

Offshore Cadastre is the land management system used on the Outer 

Continental Shelf. It extends from the baseline to the extent of U.S. 

jurisdiction.

DOI/MMS Yes

Climate Climate data describe the spatial and temporal characteristics of the Earth's 

atmosphere/hydrosphere/land surface system. These data represent both 

model-generated and observed environmental information, which can be 

summarized to describe surface, near surface and atmospheric conditions over a 

range of scales.

USDA/NRCS, 

DOC/NOAA

No

Cultural and 

demographic 

statistics

These geospatially referenced data describe the characteristics of people, the 

nature of the structures in which they live and work; the economic and other 

activities they pursue; the facilities they use to support their health, recreational, 

and other needs; the environmental consequences of their presence; and the 

boundaries, names, and numeric codes of geographic entities used to report the 

information collected.

DOC/USCBc No

Cultural 

resources

The cultural resources theme includes historic places such as districts, sites, 

buildings, and structures of significance in history, architecture, engineering, or 

culture. Cultural resources also encompass prehistoric features as well as 

historic landscapes.

DOI/NPS No

Digital 

orthoimagery

Georeferenced images of the Earth's surface, where image object displacement 

has been removed for sensor distortions, orientation, and terrain relief. 

DOI/USGS Yes

Earth cover The Earth Cover theme uses a hierarchical classification system based on 

observable form and structure, instead of function or use. This system transitions 

from generalized to more specific and detailed class divisions, and provides a 

framework within which multiple land cover and land use classification systems 

can be cross-referenced. This system is applicable everywhere on the surface of 

the Earth. This theme differs from the vegetation and wetlands themes, which 

provide additional detail.

DOI/USGS No
Appendix IV

OMB Circular A-16 Data Themes, 

Descriptions, and Lead Agencies 

Page 47 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Data theme Description

Lead department 

or agencya

Framework 

themeb

Elevation 

bathymetric

Highly accurate bathymetric (i.e., the measurement of water depths) sounding 

information.

DOC/NOAA, 

DOD/USACEc

Yes

Elevation 

terrestrial

Georeferenced digital representations of terrestrial surfaces, natural or 

manmade, that describe vertical position above or below a datum surface.

DOI/USGS Yes

Federal land 

ownership 

status

Federal land ownership status includes information describing all title, estate, or 

interest of the federal government in a parcel of real and mineral property. 

DOI/BLM No

Flood hazards The National Flood Insurance Program has prepared flood hazard data for 

approximately 18,000 communities. The primary information prepared for these 

communities is for the 1 percent annual chance (100-year) flood and includes 

documentation of the boundaries and elevations of that flood.

DHS/FEMA No

Geodedic 

control

Geodetic control provides a common reference system for establishing 

coordinates for all geographic data. 

DOC/NOAA Yes

Geographic 

names

This data set contains data or information on geographic place names deemed 

official for federal use by the U.S. Board on Geographic Names as pursuant to 

Public Law 80-242. Geographic names information includes both the official 

place name (current, historical, and aliases) and direct (i.e., geographic 

coordinates) and indirect (i.e., state and county where place is located) 

geospatial identifiers. This information is categorized as populated places, 

schools, reservoirs, parks, streams, valleys, and ridges.

DOI/USGS No

Geologic The geologic spatial data theme includes all geologic mapping information and 

related geoscience spatial data (including associated geophysical, geochemical, 

geochronologic, and paleontologic data) that can contribute to the National 

Geologic Map Database as pursuant to Public Law 106-148.

DOI/USGS No

Governmental 

units

These data describe, by a consistent set of rules and semantic definitions, the 

official boundary of federal, state, local, and tribal governments as reported to the 

Census Bureau by responsible officials of each government for purposes of 

reporting the nation's official statistics.

DOC/USCB Yes

Housing Geographic data on homeownership rates, including many attributes such as 

HUD revitalization zones, location of various forms of housing assistance, firsttime home buyers, underserved areas, and race. 

HUD No

Hydrography Includes surface water features such as lakes, ponds, streams and rivers, canals, 

oceans, and coastlines. 

DOI/USGS Yes

International 

boundaries

Includes both textual information to describe, and GIS digital cartographic data to 

depict, both land and maritime international boundaries, other lines of separation, 

limits, zones, enclaves/exclaves, and special areas between states and 

dependencies.

Department of 

State

No

Law 

enforcement 

statistics

Describes the occurrence of events (including incidences, offenses, and arrests) 

geospatially located, related to ordinance and statutory violations and the 

individuals involved in those occurrences. Also included are data related to 

deployment of law enforcement resources and performance measures.

Department of 

Justice

No

Marine 

boundaries

Marine boundaries depict offshore waters and seabeds over which the United 

States has sovereignty and jurisdiction.

DOC/NOAA, 

DOI/MMS

No

(Continued From Previous Page)
Appendix IV

OMB Circular A-16 Data Themes, 

Descriptions, and Lead Agencies 

Page 48 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Source: OMB Circular A-16.

Data theme Description

Lead department 

or agencya

Framework 

themeb

Offshore 

minerals

Includes minerals occurring in submerged lands. Examples of marine minerals 

include oil, gas, sulfur, gold, sand and gravel, and manganese.

DOI/MMS No

Outer 

Continental 

Shelf 

submerged 

lands

Includes lands covered by water at any stage of the tide—as distinguished from 

tidelands, which are attached to the mainland or an island and cover and uncover 

with the tide. Tidelands presuppose a high-water line as the upper boundary, 

whereas submerged lands do not.

DOI/MMS No

Public health Public health themes relate to the protection, improvement and promotion of the 

health and safety of all people. For example, public health databases include 

spatial data on deaths and births, infectious and notifiable diseases, incident 

cancer cases, behavioral risk factor and tuberculosis surveillance, hazardous 

substance releases and health effects, hospital statistics, and other similar data.

HHS No

Public land 

conveyance 

(patent) 

records

The records that describe all past, current, and future rights, titles, and interest in 

real property. 

DOI/BLM No

Shoreline Represents the intersection of the land with the water surface. 

The shoreline shown on NOAA charts represents the line of contact between the 

land and a selected water elevation. 

DOC/NOAA No

Soils Consists of georeferenced map data, describing the spatial distribution of the 

various soils that cover the Earth's surface, and attribute data, describing the 

proportionate extent of the various soils as well as the physical and chemical 

characteristics of those soils. The physical and chemical properties are based on 

observed and measured values, as well as model-generated values. Also 

included are model-generated assessments of the suitability or limitations of the 

soils to various land uses.

USDA/NRCS No

Transportation Transportation data are used to model the geographic locations, 

interconnectedness, and characteristics of the transportation system within the 

United States. The transportation system includes both physical and nonphysical 

components representing all modes of travel that allow the movement of goods 

and people between locations.

DOT/BTS Yes

Transportation 

(marine)

The Navigation Channel Framework consists of highly accurate dimensions 

(geographic coordinates for channel sides, centerlines, wideners, turning basins, 

and river mile markers) for every federal navigation channel maintained by the 

Army Corps of Engineers. The navigation framework will provide the basis for the 

marine transportation theme of the geospatial data framework. 

DOD/USACE Yes

Vegetation Describes a collection of plants or plant communities with distinguishable 

characteristics that occupy an area of interest. 

USDA/USFSc No

Watershed 

boundaries

This data theme encodes hydrologic watershed boundaries into topographically 

defined sets of drainage areas, organized in a nested hierarchy by size and 

based on a standard hydrologic unit coding system.

DOI/USGS, 

USDA/NRCS

No

Wetlands Provides the classification, location, and extent of wetlands and deepwater 

habitats.

DOI/FWS No

(Continued From Previous Page)
Appendix IV

OMB Circular A-16 Data Themes, 

Descriptions, and Lead Agencies 

Page 49 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

a

Certain federal agencies have lead responsibilities for coordinating the national coverage and 

stewardship of specific spatial data themes. According to OMB Circular A-16, lead federal agencies 

are responsible for (1) providing leadership and facilitating the development and implementation of 

needed FGDC standards, (2) providing leadership and facilitating the development and 

implementation of a plan for nationwide population of each data theme, and (3) preparing goals that 

support the NSDI strategy.

b

According to OMB Circular A-16, framework themes are data themes that provide the core, most 

commonly used set of base geospatial data. 

c

General Services Administration (GSA); Minerals Management Service (MMS); U.S. Army Corp of 

Engineers (USACE); U.S. Census Bureau (USCB); and U.S. Forest Service (USFS).
Page 50 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Appendix V

Glossary ApendxiV

Attribute A characteristic of an object or feature on a map. 

Base map A map that shows the horizontal position of features on which additional 

information may be placed.

Bathymetry The measurement and study of water depths.

Cadastral Pertaining to extent, value, and ownership of land. 

Cartography The science and art of making maps and charts.

Digital elevation model A digital file containing an array of regularly spaced elevations.

Digital orthoimagery Georeferenced images of the Earth’s surface, where image object 

displacement has been removed for sensor distortions, orientation, and 

terrain relief.

Ellipsoid A geometric surface whose plane sections are either ellipses or circles.

Geodesy The science of the measurement and mathematical depiction of the size 

and shape of the Earth and its gravitational field.

Geodetic control A set of surveyed features with their locations referenced to particular 

survey monuments by latitude, longitude, and height above the ellipsoid. 

Geospatial data Information that pertains to the geographic location and character of 

natural or constructed features and boundaries on the Earth.
Appendix V

Glossary

Page 51 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Geographic information 

system 

A system of computer hardware, software, and data that collects, manages, 

manipulates, analyzes, and displays a potentially wide array of information 

associated with geographic locations.

 Global Positioning System A constellation of orbiting satellites that provides navigation data to 

military and civilian users around the world.

Hydrography The science dealing with the physical features of oceans, lakes, rivers, and 

other surface waters often conducted in support of marine navigation and 

nautical charting.

Metadata Data containing descriptive information about other data.

National Spatial Data 

Infrastructure

A national structure of policies, standards, technologies, and human 

resources that supports and facilitates the management and use of 

geographic information.

Orthophotograph An image reproduction prepared from a perspective photograph in which 

the displacement of features due to sensor tilt and terrain relief has been 

removed.

Photogrammetry The science of obtaining reliable measurements or information from 

images.

Raster data A row of descriptive elements, such as pixels, represented as a regular twodimensional arrangement of data values at discrete points, normally 

arrayed line by line across a given surface or area.

Remote sensing Imaging or recording of physical phenomenon, at a distance, by detecting 

emitted or reflected energy.
Appendix V

Glossary

Page 52 GAO-04-703 Geospatial Information

Remote sensing systems Remote sensing systems collect these data from a distance—such as from a 

satellite or an aerial platform—that are either emitted or reflected by the 

Earth and the atmospheres.

Rectification The process of removing displacement in a photograph caused by the tilt of 

the recording device or variations in terrain relief.

Spatial data Geographically referenced features that are described by geographic 

positions and attributes in an analog or computer-readable (digital) form.

Topography The form of the physical features of a land surface or sea bottom; also 

called relief.

Topologically Integrated 

Geographic Encoding and 

Referencing

A database maintained by the Census Bureau that automates the mapping 

and related geographic activities required to support the decennial census 

and the bureau’s sample survey programs.

(310391)
GAO’s Mission The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of 

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities 

and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal government 

for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal 

programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other 

assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 

decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

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

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this 

list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to 

e-mail alerts” under the “Order GAO Products” heading.

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A check 

or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO 

also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single 

address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

U.S. General Accounting Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

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

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

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

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Public Affairs Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Service Requested

Presorted Standard

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00