GRANTS MANAGEMENT

Improving the Timeliness of 

Grant Closeouts by Federal 

Agencies and Other Grants 

Management Challenges

Statement of Stanley J. Czerwinski, 

Director, Strategic Issues

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Federal 

Financial Management, Government 

Information, Federal Services, and 

International Security, U.S. Senate

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 2:30 p.m. EDT

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

GAO-12-704T

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-12-704T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Federal Financial 

Management, Government Information, 

Federal Services, and International Security, 

Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate

July 25, 2012

GRANTS MANAGEMENT

Improving the Timeliness of Grant Closeouts by 

Federal Agencies and Other Grants Management 

Challenges 

Why GAO Did This Study

As the federal government confronts 

long-term fiscal challenges, it is critical 

to improve the efficiency of federal 

grants processes, such as grant 

closeout procedures that allow for the 

return of unspent balances to the 

Treasury. In 2008, GAO reported that 

about $1 billion in undisbursed funding 

remained in expired grant accounts in 

the largest civilian payment system for 

grants—PMS. For this statement, GAO 

provides information from its April 2012 

report updating its 2008 analysis. GAO 

also describes federal grant spending 

over the last three decades and 

discusses other grant management 

challenges identified in its past work 

and that of others. 

This testimony addresses (1) the 

amount of undisbursed funding 

remaining in expired grant accounts; 

(2) actions OMB and agencies have 

taken to track undisbursed balances; 

(3) GAO recommendations to improve 

grant closeout; (4) recent and historical 

funding levels for federal grants; and 

(5) GAO’s ongoing and future work on 

grants management issues. 

What GAO Recommends

For grant closeout, GAO’s April 2012 

report recommended OMB revise 

future guidance to better target 

undisbursed balances and instruct 

agencies to take action to close out 

grants that are past their end date or 

have no undisbursed balances 

remaining. OMB staff said they 

generally agreed with and will consider 

the recommendations. 

What GAO Found

Closeout is an important final point of grants accountability. It helps to ensure 

that grantees have met all financial and reporting requirements. It also allows 

federal agencies to identify and redirect unused funds to other projects and 

priorities as authorized or to return unspent balances to the Department of the 

Treasury (Treasury). At the end of fiscal year 2011, GAO identified more than 

$794 million in funding remaining in expired grant accounts (accounts that were 

more than 3 months past the grant end date and had no activity for 9 months or 

more) in the Payment Management System (PMS). GAO found that undisbursed 

balances remained in some grant accounts several years past their expiration 

date: $110.9 million in undisbursed funding remained unspent more than 5 years 

past the grant end date, including $9.5 million that remained unspent for 10 years 

or more. Nevertheless, the more than $794 million in undisbursed balances 

remaining in PMS represents an improvement in closing out expired grant 

accounts with undisbursed balances in PMS compared to the approximately $1 

billion GAO found in 2008. This improvement is notable given that the overall 

amount of grant disbursements through PMS increased by about 23 percent from 

2006 to 2011.

When agencies made concerted efforts to address timely grant closeout, they 

and their inspectors general and auditors reported that they were able to improve 

the timeliness of grant closeouts and decrease the amount of undisbursed 

funding in expired grant accounts. GAO found that raising the visibility of the 

problem within federal agencies can also lead to improvements in grant 

closeouts. However, GAO’s review of agencies’ annual performance reports for 

fiscal years 2009 to 2011 found that systematic, agencywide information on 

undisbursed balances in grant accounts eligible for closeout is still largely 

lacking.

The challenge presented by undisbursed balances in expired grant accounts is 

just one of a number of grants management challenges identified in past GAO 

work. Addressing these challenges is critical to increasing the efficient and 

effective use of federal grant funds, which represent a significant component of 

overall federal spending. According to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), federal outlays for grants to state and local governments, including 

Medicaid, increased from $91 billion in fiscal year 1980 (about $221 billion in 

2011 constant dollars) to more than $606 billion in fiscal year 2011, accounting

for approximately 17 percent of total federal outlays. During this 30-year period 

there has been a shift in grant spending, increasing the percentage of grant 

funding of Medicaid while decreasing the percentage of funding of non-Medicaidrelated grant programs. 

GAO work on grants over the last decade has identified a range of issues related 

to the management of grant programs, including the streamlining of grants 

management processes, the measurement of grant performance, grant lessons 

learned from implementing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 

2009, and internal control weaknesses. GAO will be looking at each of these 

View GAO-12-704T. For more information, grants management issue areas in future work for this Subcommittee. contact Stanley J. Czerwinski at (202) 512-

6806 or czerwinskis@gao.gov or Beryl H. 

Davis at (202) 512-2623 or davisbh@gao.gov.
 

Page 1 GAO-12-704T 

Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Brown, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you today the findings from 

our recent report for you on the timeliness of grant closeout by federal 

agencies, as well as some of the new and ongoing work we are doing for 

this Subcommittee on other key grants management challenges.1

Closeout is an important final point of grants accountability that helps to 

ensure that grantees have met all financial and reporting requirements. It 

also allows federal agencies to identify and redirect unused funds to other 

projects and priorities as authorized, or to return unspent balances to the

Department of the Treasury (Treasury). (See appendix I for an illustration 

of how and when federal agencies may redirect unused funds.) In a 2008 

report to this Subcommittee, we found that timely grant closeout was a 

long-standing issue at federal agencies and that roughly $1 billion in 

undisbursed funding remained in the largest civilian payment system for 

grants.2 Assessing grants management practices, such as ensuring that 

agencies follow proper closeout procedures, is critical to increasing the 

efficient and effective use of federal grant funds, which represent a 

significant component of federal spending. In fiscal year 2011, federal 

grants outlays to state and local governments, including Medicaid, 

accounted for approximately 17 percent of total federal outlays.3

My testimony today is drawn from our recent report to you on the 

timeliness of grant closeout as well as federal grants funding data from 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). It will address (1) the 

amount of undisbursed funding remaining in expired grant accounts; (2) 

actions OMB and agencies have taken to track undisbursed balances in 

grants eligible for closeout; (3) GAO recommendations on how to improve 

Challenges involving grants management have been a repeated theme in 

our work over the last decade, and at your request, I will also briefly 

discuss some of the work we are doing for this Subcommittee on this 

important area.

 

1

GAO, Grants Management: Action Needed to Improve the Timeliness of Grant Closeouts 

by Federal Agencies, GAO-12-360 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 16, 2012). 

2

GAO, Grants Management: Attention Needed to Address Undisbursed Balances in

Expired Grant Accounts, GAO-08-432 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 29, 2008). 

3

Federal grant outlays include the federal share of Medicaid funds that are sent to the 

states. Medicaid is the largest federal grant program.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-12-704T 

grant closeout from our recent report; (4) recent and historical funding 

levels for federal grants; and (5) our ongoing and future work on grants 

management challenges.

To conduct our work on grant closeout, we analyzed data from the 

quarterly closeout reports provided to users of the Payment Management 

System (PMS), the largest civilian payment system for grants, which is 

administered by the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) 

Program Support Center (PSC). PMS closeout reports list all grant 

accounts that remain open more than 3 months past the grant end date 

and for which there has been no disbursement in the preceding 9 months. 

We analyzed data from “dormant account reports” provided to users of a 

second payment system, the Automated Standard Application for 

Payments (ASAP) system,4 which reports accounts for federal grants that 

remain inactive for 2 years or more. We also conducted a web-based 

search for audit reports we have issued and those issued by federal 

inspectors general. We interviewed agency officials, including officials 

from OMB, and reviewed OMB circulars and other guidance related to 

grants management and performance reporting. We reviewed 

performance reports for the 24 agencies required to issue audited 

financial statements under the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO 

Act) for information reported on undisbursed balances in grants eligible 

for closeout. More detailed information on our scope and methodology for 

the grants closeout work can found in our published report.5 To determine 

the level of federal grants funding and its changes over the last three 

decades, we used OMB data for fiscal years 1980–2011.6

We conducted our performance audit on grant closeout from May 2011 to 

April 2012 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

For a more 

accurate comparison of grant spending from year-to-year, we converted 

each fiscal year’s outlays to constant 2011 dollars.

 

4

The Automated Standard Application for Payments (ASAP) system is administered jointly 

by the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and the Federal Reserve Bank of 

Richmond.

5

GAO-12-360, pp. 35-44.

6

See Office of Management and Budget, Fiscal Year 2013, Historical Tables, Budget of 

the U.S. Government. Specifically, Table 12.3, Federal Outlays for Grants to State and 

Local Governments, by Function, Agency, and Program: 1940–2013.
 

Page 3 GAO-12-704T 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives. In addition, we are 

providing information on grants funding levels for the past three decades.

We found that as of September 30, 2011, more than $794 million in 

undisbursed balances remained in PMS in 10,548 expired grant 

accounts. These are accounts that were more than 3 months past the 

grant end date, had no activity for 9 months or more, and therefore should 

be considered for grant closeout. This is an improvement from 2008, 

when we reported that at the end of calendar year 2006, roughly $1 billion 

in undisbursed funding remained in expired PMS grant accounts. These 

expired grant accounts do not include accounts associated with grant 

programs for which the duration of the grant is not limited to a specific 

time period, such as payments to states for the Medical Assistance 

Program, known as Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy 

Families. This improvement is notable given that the overall amount of 

grant disbursements through PMS increased by about 23 percent from 

2006 to 2011. However, more work needs to be done to further improve 

the timeliness of grant closeout and reduce undisbursed balances. We 

have highlighted three areas in need of particular attention.

First, we found that undisbursed balances remained in grant accounts 

several years past their expiration date. We found that 991 expired grant 

accounts containing a total of $110.9 million in undisbursed funding were 

more than 5 years past the grant end date at the end of fiscal year 2011. 

Of these, 115 expired grant accounts containing roughly $9.5 million in 

undisbursed funding remained open more than 10 years past the grant 

end date. Federal regulations generally require that grantees retain 

financial records and other documents pertinent to a grant for a period of 

3 years from the date of submission of the final report. Over time, the risk 

increases that grantees will not have retained the financial documents 

and other grant information that federal agencies need to properly 

reconcile financial information and make the necessary adjustments to 

grant award amounts and amounts of federal funds paid to recipients. 

This could potentially result in the payment of unnecessary and 

unallowable costs.

Second, we found that a small percentage of grant accounts (a little more 

than 1 percent) with undisbursed balances of $1 million or more 

accounted for more than a third of the total undisbursed funds in expired 

Undisbursed Balances 

in Expired Grant 

Accounts Have 

Declined but More 

Action Is Needed
 

Page 4 GAO-12-704T 

grant accounts. Overall, 123 accounts from eight different federal 

agencies had more than $1 million in undisbursed balances at the end of 

fiscal year 2011 for a combined total of roughly $316 million in 

undisbursed balances. Accounts with undisbursed balances remaining 

after the grant end date can indicate a potential grant management 

problem. Data showing that some grantees have not expended large 

amounts of funding, such as $1 million or more, by the specified grant 

end date raise concern that the grantees may not have fully met the 

program objectives for the intended beneficiaries within the agreed-upon 

time frames.

Third, we found more than 28,000 expired grant accounts in PMS with no 

undisbursed balances remaining that had not been closed out as of the 

end of fiscal year 2011. According to data provided by PSC, PMS users 

were charged a total of roughly $173,000 per month to maintain the more 

than 28,000 expired grant accounts with zero-dollar balances listed on the 

year-end closeout report. This would represent roughly $2 million in fees 

if agencies were billed for these accounts for the entire year. While the 

fees are small relative to the size of the original grant awards, they can 

accumulate over time. If the grant has otherwise been administratively 

and financially closed out, then agencies are paying fees to maintain 

grant accounts that are no longer needed. However, the presence of 

expired grant accounts with no undisbursed funds remaining raises 

concerns that administrative and financial closeout—the final point of 

accountability for these grants, which includes such important tasks as 

the submission of financial and performance reports—may not have been 

completed.

In addition to data from PMS, we also reviewed data from the ASAP 

system and found that as of September 30, 2011, $126.2 million in 

undisbursed balances remained in 1,094 dormant grant accounts. 

Agencies can use the information in these reports to help identify 

accounts in need of attention and unspent funds available for 

deobligation. For example, agencies may want to focus attention on 

accounts where there has been no activity for a prolonged period. We 

found roughly $11 million in 179 accounts that had been inactive for 5 

years or more.
 

Page 5 GAO-12-704T 

We have found that when agencies made concerted efforts to address 

timely grant closeout, they, their inspectors general, and auditors reported 

that they were able to improve the timeliness of grant closeouts and 

decrease the amount of undisbursed funding in expired grant accounts. 

Agencies’ approaches generally focused on elevating timely grant 

closeouts to a higher agency management priority and on improving 

overall closeout processing. For example, in response to past audit 

reports, HHS officials reported increasing monitoring of grant closeout. 

Since fiscal year 2006, the HHS independent auditor had routinely 

reported on concerns with management controls over grant closeout, 

including a backlog of HHS grant accounts in PMS that were already 

beyond what the auditor considered a reasonable time frame for 

closeout.7 In fiscal year 2011, the independent auditor noted significant 

improvements in the closeout of grants in PMS. While we found that 

roughly three-fourths of all undisbursed balances in expired PMS grant 

accounts were from grants issued by HHS, we also found that the total 

undisbursed balances in these accounts represented the lowest 

percentage (2.7 percent) for any federal department included on the 

September 30, 2011, closeout report.8

In 2008, we recommended that OMB instruct all executive departments 

and independent agencies to annually track the amount of undisbursed 

balances in expired grant accounts and report on the status and 

In comments on our draft report, 

HHS reported that it had identified $116 million in undisbursed balances 

in PMS available for deobligation through a special initiative begun in 

2011 and is updating existing department policies and procedures to 

improve the grant closeout process going forward.

 

7

Independent auditors are independent accounting experts who conduct impartial audits 

of the financial statements of public and private organizations to ensure there are no 

misstatements, and assess whether organizations’ systems to detect and prevent fraud 

(internal controls) are effective. Independent auditors also provide consulting non-audit 

services in areas such as information technology.

8

We excluded grant accounts from our analysis that did not have a defined end date, 

including large Medicaid formula grants for the Medical Assistance Program. The purpose 

of the PMS closeout report is to alert awarding agencies of accounts in PMS that remain 

open after their posted end date. If a grant does not have a defined end date then HHS 

staff consider the PMS closeout report merely as a reminder to the awarding agency of 

the open account. We did not exclude grant accounts for similar programs that were 

identified in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance as Recovery-Act-related, 

because, to achieve the purposes of the Act, Congress explicitly directed federal 

departments and agencies to expend the funds made available in this Act as quickly as 

possible consistent with prudent management.

Raising the Visibility 

of Grant Closeout Can 

Lead to 

Improvements 
 

Page 6 GAO-12-704T 

resolution of the undisbursed funding in their annual performance reports. 

At the time, OMB supported the intent of our recommendations, but its 

comments did not indicate a commitment to implement our 

recommendations. Starting in 2010, OMB has issued guidance to track 

and report on undisbursed balances in expired grant accounts to only 

certain federal departments and entities covered by the Commerce, 

Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, as required 

by law. However, in its instructions, OMB equated “expired grant 

accounts” with expired appropriation accounts. Based on this definition, 

OMB’s guidance included grant accounts that were still available for 

disbursement and was not limited only to those grant accounts eligible for 

closeout. In our review of CFO Act agencies’ annual performance reports 

for fiscal years 2009 to 2011, we found that systematic, agencywide 

information on undisbursed balances in grant accounts eligible for 

closeout was largely lacking. 

In our 2012 grant closeout report, we reiterate our recommendation that 

OMB instruct all executive departments and independent agencies to 

report on the status and resolution of the undisbursed funding in grants 

that have reached the grant end date in their annual performance reports, 

the actions taken to resolve the undisbursed funding, and the outcomes 

associated with these actions. In addition, we recommend that the 

Director of OMB take the following three actions:

• Revise the definition of “undisbursed balances in expired grant 

accounts” in future guidance issued to agencies to focus on 

undisbursed balances obligated to grant agreements that have 

reached the grant end date and are eligible for closeout.

• Instruct agencies with undisbursed balances still obligated to grants 

several years past their grant end date to develop and implement 

strategies to quickly and efficiently take action to close out these 

grants and return unspent funds to the Treasury when appropriate.

• Instruct agencies with expired grant accounts in federal payment 

systems with no undisbursed balances remaining to develop and 

implement procedures to annually identify and close out these 

accounts to ensure that all closeout requirements have been met and 

to minimize any potential fees for accounts with no balances.

OMB staff said that they generally agreed with the recommendations and 

will consider them as they review and streamline grant policy guidance. 

GAO Recommends 

that OMB Issue 

Governmentwide 

Guidance to Track 

and Report on 

Undisbursed Balances 

in Grants Eligible for 

Closeout 
 

Page 7 GAO-12-704T 

OMB did not provide specific actions or time frames with which it would 

address the issues that we have raised. We will continue to monitor 

OMB’s action on our recommendations.

The challenge presented by undisbursed balances in expired grant 

accounts is just one of a number of grants management challenges we 

have identified in our past work. Grants continue to be an important tool 

used by the federal government to achieve national objectives. As the 

federal government confronts long-term and growing fiscal challenges, its 

ability to maintain the flow of intergovernmental revenue, such as through 

grant programs, could be constrained. To make the best use of federal 

grant funds, it is critical to address grants management challenges that 

could impact the efficiency and effectiveness of federal grants processes. 

Accordingly, the Subcommittee has requested that we examine a number 

of areas involving these issues in future work. However, before I discuss 

these I would like to put them in a broader context by briefly describing 

the level of recent federal grant spending and how it has changed over 

the last three decades.

Grants have been, and continue to be, an important tool used by the 

federal government to provide program funding to state and local 

governments. According to OMB, federal outlays for grants to state and 

local governments increased from $91 billion in fiscal year 1980 (about 

$221 billion in 2011 constant dollars) to over $606 billion in fiscal year 

2011.9 Although many federal departments and agencies award grants, 

HHS, which administers the Medicaid program, is by far the largest grantmaking agency, with grants outlays of almost $348 billion in fiscal year 

2011, or about 57 percent of the total federal grants outlays that year. 

Even when Medicaid’s outlays of $275 billion are excluded, HHS remains 

the largest federal grant-making department.10

 

9

We used OMB data on grants outlays to state and local governments for this testimony. 

Constant dollar amounts reflect adjustments for inflation (e.g., the purchasing power of the 

$91 billion spent in 1980 represents about $221 billion in fiscal year 2011 dollars).

Figure 1 shows the total 

federal outlays for grants to state and local governments over the period 

from fiscal years 1980 to 2011, in constant dollars, and the increasing 

amount of this total that went to Medicaid over time.

10All further references to total or overall federal grants outlays refer to outlays to state 

and local governments.

While Grants Have 

Consistently Been a 

Significant 

Component of 

Federal Spending, the 

Focus of Grants 

Outlays Has Shifted In 

the Last 30 Years
 

Page 8 GAO-12-704T 

Figure 1: Total Federal Outlays for Grants to State and Local Governments and Medicaid, in 2011 Constant Dollars, Fiscal 

Years 1980-2011

It is important to note that although federal outlays for grants have 

increased during the past three decades, as shown in Figure 2, grants 

outlays as a percentage of total federal outlays in fiscal year 2011 was at 

a roughly comparable level to what it was more than 30 years earlier 

(15.5 percent vs. 16.8 percent). At the same time, Medicaid outlays 

increased from over 2 percent of total federal outlays in 1980 to almost 8 

percent in 2011. The considerable increase in Medicaid outlays was 

offset by an approximately equivalent decrease in the share of outlays for 

all other grants.
 

Page 9 GAO-12-704T 

Figure 2: Total Federal Outlays for Grants to State and Local Governments and Medicaid as a Percentage of Total Federal 

Outlays, Fiscal Years 1980-2011

Given the federal government’s use of grants to achieve national 

objectives and respond to emerging trends, this Subcommittee has 

recently requested that we conduct a number of grant-related reviews in 

support of its oversight efforts. Today, I would like to briefly highlight four 

areas where our previous work and that of the inspectors general and 

others have identified challenges, and where we are beginning the work 

you requested related to the management of grant programs. Specifically, 

they are the streamlining of grants management processes; the 

measurement of grant performance; grant lessons learned from 

implementing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

(Recovery Act); and internal control weaknesses in grants management 

processes.

For more than a decade, the federal government has undertaken several 

initiatives aimed at streamlining governmentwide grants management. 

Ongoing and Future 

Work Targets Key 

Grants Management 

Issues 
 

Page 10 GAO-12-704T 

Over the years, Congress has expressed concern over the 

inconsistencies and weaknesses we and the inspectors general have 

found in grants management and oversight. In response to your request 

we plan to examine the progress OMB and federal grant governance 

bodies have made toward streamlining grants management. We also 

expect to assess what further actions should be taken to simplify 

processes, reduce unnecessary burdens, and improve the governance of 

streamlining initiatives. We plan to report our results next year.

We also expect to evaluate the extent to which there are governmentwide 

requirements for measuring and reporting grant performance and the 

extent to which federal agencies measure grant performance to report 

progress toward their goals, as well as offer assistance to grantees on 

collecting data and reporting grant performance. As with our streamlining 

work, the specifics of this grant performance reporting work are currently 

under development, and we anticipate a 2013 report. In our past work we 

have reported that effective performance accountability provisions are of 

fundamental importance in assuring the proper and effective use of 

federal funds to achieve program goals.

Under the Recovery Act, grants have played an important role in 

distributing federal funds in light of the most serious economic crisis since 

the Great Depression. As of June 2012, Treasury had paid out more than 

$250 billion in Recovery Act funds to state and local governments, much 

of it through grants. Given the significant investment made in the 

Recovery Act, and the considerable challenges facing our nation moving 

forward, this Subcommittee recognized the importance of collecting, 

analyzing, and sharing grant lessons and insights gained as a result of 

this process. Building on our previous reviews, we will examine lessons 

from the implementation of the Recovery Act—including specific 

examples of practices and approaches that worked as well as challenges 

encountered by federal, state, and local agencies. Among the potential 

issues to consider are the efforts to facilitate coordination and 

collaboration among federal, state, local, and nongovernmental partners 

and actions taken to enhance the organizational and administrative 

capacity of federal partners. Once again, we anticipate reporting to the 

Subcommittee next year.

Finally, in numerous reviews over the years, we have identified 

weaknesses in federal agencies’ processes for managing and overseeing 

grant programs. Among the issues we are planning to address in future 

work is how federal agencies can improve internal control over grants 

monitoring. We will also examine what improvements, if any, are needed 
 

Page 11 GAO-12-704T 

in federal agencies’ internal controls to help ensure the primary grantees 

are providing adequate oversight of subgrantees.

The improvements made in the timeliness of grant closeouts since our 

2008 report demonstrate that congressional oversight can lead agencies 

to focus attention on a specific grant challenge, and result in real 

progress. However, our recent update of our earlier analysis of 

undisbursed balances also shows that more still needs to be done to 

close out grants; agencies would use their resources most effectively by 

focusing initially on older accounts with larger undisbursed balances. As 

our review of past grant work suggests, there are numerous other issues 

where congressional attention could also likely pay dividends. This is all 

the more relevant because federal grant programs remain important tools 

to achieve national objectives and continue to be a significant component 

of federal spending. We look forward to continuing to support this 

Subcommittee’s efforts to examine the design and implementation of 

federal grants and participating in its active oversight agenda.

Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Brown, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be 

pleased to respond to any questions that you or other members of the 

Subcommittee may have.

If you or your staff have any questions about this testimony, please 

contact me at (202) 512-6806 or czerwinskis@gao.gov, or Beryl H. Davis, 

Director, at (202) 512-2623 or davisbh@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on 

the last page of this statement. GAO staff who made key contributions to 

this testimony are Phyllis L. Anderson, Assistant Director; Peter Del Toro, 

Assistant Director; Thomas M. James, Assistant Director; Kimberly A. 

McGatlin, Assistant Director; Laura M. Bednar, Maria C. Belaval, Anthony 

M. Bova, Amy R. Bowser, Virginia A. Chanley, Melissa L. King, Thomas 

J. McCabe, Diane N. Morris, and Omari A. Norman. Additional 

contributions were made by Andrew Y. Ching, Travis P. Hill, Jason S. 

Kirwan, Jennifer K. Leone, Cynthia M. Saunders, Albert C. Sim, and 

Michael Springer.

Concluding 

Observations 

Contacts and 

Acknowledgments 
Appendix I: Deobligating Undisbursed 

Balances in Expired Grant Accounts

Page 12 GAO-12-704T 

While there can be substantial variation among grant programs, figure 1 

illustrates how closing out grants could allow an agency to redirect 

resources toward other projects and activities or return unspent funds to 

Treasury.

Figure 1: Deobligating Undisbursed Balances in Expired Grant Accounts

Appendix I: Deobligating Undisbursed 

Balances in Expired Grant Accounts

(450984)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

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

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

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

cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

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

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.