Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

Executive Summary 

For more than 200 years, a defining principle of American politics has been 

the use of an open, fair, and informed process to elect our Nation’s leaders. 

While many governmental and public interest organizations share in the 

responsibility to maintain this principle, 27 years ago the Congress passed 

the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) and two years later created a 

central role for the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The FEC, especially 

in its early years, appeared as a strong force in overseeing the Federal 

election system. However, with an increasingly complex and controversial 

campaign finance system, FEC effectiveness in accomplishing its statutory 

responsibilities is being questioned. 

As the agency charged with administering and enforcing the FECA, the FEC 

has four major statutory responsibilities: 

· Provide disclosure of campaign finance information 

· Ensure that candidates, political committees, and political parties 

comply with the limitations, prohibitions, and disclosure requirements 

of the FECA 

· Administer the certification of public funding for Presidential elections 

and ensure that all related expenditures comply with the FECA 

· Serve as a clearinghouse for information on election administration 

Project Scope. The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 

of 1998 (Public Law 105- 61) mandated that the General Accounting Office 

(GAO) contract for an independent technological and performance audit of 

the FEC on behalf of the Senate and House Appropriations and House 

Oversight Committees. In consultation with these committees, the GAO 

issued a statement of work on May 6, 1998, to conduct an evaluation of the 

FEC. The statement of work required an impartial assessment of the 

following areas: 

1. The overall effectiveness of FEC in meeting its statutory responsibilities 

2. The appropriateness and effectiveness of the FEC organizational 

structure, systems, and performance measures for accomplishing its 

mission 

3. The adequacy of the FEC human resource programs for obtaining and 

maintaining adequate staff expertise and organizational capacity 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Page ES- 1 
Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

4. The adequacy of the FEC strategic information resources management 

plan as a tool to increase FEC efficiency and effectiveness through the 

use of data-processing systems 

5. The adequacy and completeness of internal management and financial 

control systems to efficiently and effectively serve FEC management 

needs, as well as the reliability of information provided by these systems 

6. Regulated customer satisfaction with the products and services provided 

by the FEC 

Overview of Findings 

Today, the FEC finds itself in an electioneering environment vastly different 

from the one 25 ago when it was created. Where once campaigns were 

characterized by “volunteers” and “contributions,” the current election 

process has evolved into a high-velocity system of complex transactions 

and litigious recourse, punctuated by the actions of a few participants 

engaging in behavior designed to push the limits of the traditional 

campaign finance system. 

The FEC is basically a competently managed organization with a skilled 

and motivated staff, although it has shortcomings. The ability of the FEC to 

adapt to the changing election environment, however, has been hindered 

by the FECA statute itself, escalating campaign finance disclosure and 

compliance workloads, and an organizational culture that has attempted 

incremental change in a deadline-driven environment stretched by limited 

resources. As a result, notable strengths and weaknesses characterize the 

Commission. These are its general strengths: 

· The FEC has a strong organizational focus on facilitating voluntary 

compliance within the filing community to create an accurate public 

record of campaign finances. 

· The filing community is generally satisfied with the products and 

services provided by the FEC. 

· Productivity has increased in the processing, review, and dissemination 

of campaign finance transactions in the face of increasing workloads. 

· Confidentiality of potential and existing compliance matters is 

maintained throughout the report review, referral, audit, and 

enforcement processes. 

· Disclosure and compliance activities are executed without partisan 

bias. 

However, FEC operations have these shortcomings: 

Page ES- 2 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 
 

 

Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

· Campaign finance report disclosure and review activities rely on an 

antiquated paper-based and manual transaction coding, entry, 

verification, and clarification processes. 

· FEC organizational units operate in a compartmentalized and 

autonomous manner that leads to diminished communication, 

collaboration, and innovation. 

· Because of limited staff resources and increasing case complexity, 

current volumes of enforcement cases appear to exceed FEC disposition 

capacity. 

· Absence of a descriptive offense categorization approach to monitor 

and analyze compliance violations and closed enforcement matters 

limits Commissioner, policy maker, and public awareness of emerging 

FECA offense trends and how the FEC has allocated resources to 

respond to these changes. (Other Federal law enforcement agencies 

have developed these categorization profiles to track offender changes 

and readjust enforcement strategies.) 

Assessment Findings for Six Specific Study Topics 

1. With its current level of resources and escalating workloads, the FEC 

accomplishes its disclosure responsibilities, but struggles to meet its 

compliance mission. The agency operates in a fair, impartial manner, 

maintaining strict confidentiality and a low tolerance for errors. It discloses 

campaign finance activity in a manner that effectively furthers the intent of 

the FECA. The FEC operates in an electoral environment where the vast 

majority of participants comply with the spirit and letter of the law. Against 

this background, however, the FEC applies its compliance and enforcement 

tools in a somewhat disjointed manner. Efficiency and productivity remain 

secondary considerations behind confidentiality, impartiality, and mistake 

avoidance. 

The organization places a premium on facilitating voluntary compliance, 

and the regulated community values the products and services designed 

and employed by the FEC to enhance this voluntary compliance. The 

Commission’s disclosure of the sources of campaign funds provides the 

electorate with opportunities to make informed choices. The process is 

highly customer focused and produces timely products; however, the FEC 

processes to review and disclose reported information involve many 

inefficient activities related to data coding, entry, and transaction 

clarification. More intelligible and useful information at less cost could be 

provided if the FEC made a number of enhancements to its filing, 

disclosure, and reports analysis processes. 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Page ES- 3 
Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

The FEC compliance program seeks to ensure compliance with FECA 

prohibitions and limitations on the sources and amounts of funds and 

disclosure requirements. Unlike the disclosure program, the compliance 

program is not a unified process with predictable workflows. Because of 

limited staff resources and increasing case complexity, current volumes of 

enforcement cases appear to exceed FEC disposition capacity. 

The Commission’s Enforcement Priority System (EPS) is a system for 

prioritizing enforcement matters in the face of limited staff resources. The 

EPS is a reasonable triage approach and operates without evident partisan 

bias. EPS allows the FEC to exercise prosecutorial judgment while providing 

sufficient structure to differentiate among cases for Commissioner 

disposition. Improvements to strengthen the accountability of the caseactivation process and an increase in enforcement resources to expand the 

number of cases activated for disposition would enhance compliance 

effectiveness. 

Exhibit ES- 1 summarizes the FEC disclosure and compliance programs 

along the assessment criteria of mission achievement, results orientation, 

fairness, and efficiency. 

Exhibit ES- 1 

FEC Disclosure and Compliance Program Assessment Summary 

Mission Achievement. Do the core FEC programs further the letter and intent of the law? 

Yes, with qualification. 

Disclosure Compliance 

· Disclosure deadlines routinely met 

· Disclosure enhances enforcement of 

FECA 

· Accurate public record of campaign 

finances ensured by reviewing and 

clarifying transactions 

· Disclosure database provides 

electorate with detailed campaign 

receipt, but not expenditure, 

information with which to make 

informed choices 

· FEC seeks to enforce full FECA 

spectrum 

· FEC internal referrals yield more cases 

of “reporting” noncompliance, while 

external complaints yield more cases 

of “finance” noncompliance 

· 1,179 cases closed (1/1/94- 9/30/98) 

• 2% Suit authorization (29) 

• 22% Conciliation (262) 

• 1% Probable Cause To Believe* (13) 

• 12% Reason To Believe* (140) 

• 3% No Reason To Believe (36) 

• 33% Low-priority dismissal (388) 

• 23% Staleness dismissal (273) 

• 3% Other dismissal (37) 

*With No Further Action taken. 

Note: Percentages do not add to 100 percent because of rounding. In 1995, the FEC 

found one case with No Probable Cause To Believe with No Further Action taken. That 

case is not shown in the details above. 

Page ES- 4 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 
 

 

Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

Results Orientation. Does the FEC produce strategic outcomes that add value to the 

Federal election system? Yes, with qualification. 

Disclosure Compliance 

· High customer satisfaction with 

products and services 

· High value associated with public 

information 

· Reporting of campaign finance 

transactions are a significant part of 

the election process 

· Focus on facilitating regulated 

community voluntary compliance to 

create an accurate public record of 

campaign finances 

· Uncertainty as to whether FEC selects 

the right cases to respond to emerging 

compliance offense trends 

Fairness. Are FEC programs conducted in an impartial, ethical, and independent 

manner? Unqualified yes. 

Disclosure Compliance 

· No partisan bias apparent in 

document processing, coding, entry, 

or reports analysis 

· No partisan bias evident in release of 

public records or information 

· No partisan bias evident in reports 

analysis leading to internal audit or 

enforcement referrals 

· High level of confidentiality 

maintained 

· No partisan bias apparent in the 

Enforcement Priority System 

· FEC staff generally perceived by filers 

and those who practice before the 

FEC as independent and nonpartisan 

· High ethical standards espoused 

throughout organization 

Efficiency. Does the FEC use its resources to achieve consistent performance in 

conducting its business? Yes, with qualification. 

Disclosure Compliance 

· 33% of total FEC FY 1998 FTEs 

· Productivity varies with odd and even 

election cycle years 

· Productivity has increased for reports 

processing and Requests for 

Additional Information (RFAIs) 

· Manual paper-based coding and data 

entry disclosure processes cause 

inefficiencies related to time, 

accuracy, cost, and compliance 

· Technology is improving productivity 

· 31% of total FEC FY 1998 FTEs 

· 29% of Audit resources 

· 50% of Office of the General Counsel 

resources consumed by enforcement 

cases 

• 50% of monthly pending cases 

activated for disposition 

• Decreasing case closure times 

· 17% of Office of the General Counsel 

resources consumed by litigation 

2. The FEC employs effective systems to establish performance objectives, 

measure results, and allocate resources to accomplish its key functions. 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Page ES- 5 
Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

However, the current FEC organizational structure limits the degree of 

communication and the efficient achievement of some of its business 

objectives. To measure its success in meeting its mission, the FEC develops 

annual performance plans with many specific measures for each of its four 

core programs. The agency maintains automated and manual systems to 

track actual results against planned accomplishments to adjust resources as 

necessary and to estimate budgetary needs. While the Office of the General 

Counsel currently tracks case status and enforcement resources manually, it 

is implementing a case management system to automate data collection 

and reporting. 

Many FEC organizational units operate in a compartmentalized and 

autonomous manner. These “stovepipes” appear to have led to the 

following problems: 

· An uneven understanding throughout the organization of how each unit 

performs its functions and the decision-making processes behind 

workflows 

· Multiple handoffs between units that result in redundancies, rework, 

and extra concurrence processes 

· Diminished sharing of “lessons learned” and “best practices” 

throughout the organization 

The FEC needs to take steps to increase collaboration and communication 

among its work groups. Greater use of existing and new multidisciplinary 

teams to address reoccurring business problems will facilitate efforts to 

streamline work processes to better manage growing workloads. Until most 

campaign finance reports are filed electronically, however, limited 

opportunities exist to further streamline FEC disclosure and reports review 

operations. The Commission should continue efforts to streamline 

compliance functions by examining ways to reduce the number of handoffs 

among compliance offices and the levels of review within the Office of the 

General Counsel. 

3. FEC human resource practices support the maintenance of a strong 

institutional knowledge of the FECA. But in so doing, FEC staff have 

developed norms on the “ways things get done” that limit the ability to 

change. FEC staff members are dedicated to the FECA and believe that they 

are making a difference. Overall, human resource recruitment, selection, 

and retention procedures are standardized and consistently used throughout 

the agency. Most senior managers feel that they are recruiting qualified 

candidates. However, there are a number of organizational culture issues 

that stem from long-tenured staff that discourage innovation and limit 

Page ES- 6 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 
 

 

Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

needed organizational communication. Because many of the senior staff 

have been with the FEC for almost 20 years and may retire in the near 

future, the Commission needs to begin taking a more strategic and 

proactive approach to managing its workforce to maintain its organizational 

capacity. 

4. Since 1996, the FEC has made substantial progress in enhancing and 

upgrading its computing capabilities, but much remains to be done. A 

strong reliance on its information systems strategic plan helps the FEC 

maintain a disciplined approach on technology deployment. Deploying 

improved information systems remains critical to the future effectiveness 

and efficiency of the FEC. The FEC pursues opportunities to employ 

technologies that increase disclosure and compliance program 

effectiveness. Program process efficiencies have been achieved by the 

following means: 

· The migration to a client/server information technology environment 

with document-imaging and group-messaging capabilities 

· The implementation of a limited electronic filing system to automate 

manual data entry and as the first step toward improving internal 

document receipt and review processes 

· The transfer of the point-of-entry for House candidate committee filings 

to the FEC 

· The ongoing implementation of an automated case management system 

in the Office of the General Counsel 

Despite these accomplishments, important issues remain that must be 

addressed, such as the coordination and redesign of business processes 

based on new computer technologies, implementing methods to increase 

use of electronic filing techniques, and replacement of antiquated software 

used for the disclosure database system. Significant improvements in FEC 

effectiveness will require that these opportunities be addressed. 

5. The FEC maintains a comprehensive management information system 

that reliably captures detailed program performance and financial 

information used for formulating budget justifications. This information is 

used by the FEC Finance Committee and senior staff to formulate budget 

justifications. The FEC effectively monitors its budget and allocation of FTEs 

and nonpersonnel resources, and its accounting and financial reporting 

systems appear to adhere to Federal financial reporting standards. FEC 

performance and financial information is comprehensive and has been in 

place for years, but it could be applied to a broader range of management 

planning and decision making throughout the organization. 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Page ES- 7 
Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

6. On balance, the surveyed filing community is quite satisfied with the 

products and services provided by the FEC. While the level of usage of 

products and services varies, the degree of satisfaction is consistently 

positive. A telephone survey of 353 randomly selected filers was used to 

assess satisfaction, and those surveyed filers generally perceived the 

Commission to be fair and nonpartisan. On a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 

means poor and 10 means excellent, surveyed filers gave the FEC an 

average rating of 8 on how well it was doing its job. Moreover, anecdotal 

interviews with other FEC stakeholders and practitioners agree that the FEC 

staff act in an impartial and independent manner and that the Commission’s 

disclosure program adds value to the Federal election system. On the other 

hand, as some would expect, public interest advocates and legal 

practitioners engaged in adversarial actions with the FEC expressed 

dissatisfaction for a variety of reasons with the way the Commission selects, 

pursues, and disposes of compliance matters. 

Growing Workload and Resource Issues 

Workload for the FEC has been escalating over the years. For example, 

during the 1996 election cycle with a Presidential election, candidate and 

committee disbursements exceeded $2.7 billion, up dramatically from the 

$1 billion election cycles in the late 1980’s. During FY 1997 through FY 

1998, the FEC coded and entered roughly 1.9 million transactions, 

compared with 800,000 transactions entered during the FY 1990- 1991 

period. Approximately 90,000 reports filed by more than 8,000 committees 

have been reviewed during the 1996 election cycle to date. To clarify 

reported transactions, more than 17,000 first and second Requests for 

Additional Information were sent to committees during this same period, an 

increase of five percent over the 1994 election cycle. The Reports Analysis 

Division referred 200 potential audits after the 1996 election cycle, 

compared with roughly 100 referrals each made after the 1994 and 1992 

cycles. While the total number of enforcement cases pending at the end of 

FY 1998 declined to 195 from a level of 263 at the end of FY 1997, the 

complexity of those cases increased as measured by the monthly average 

number of respondents per pending case, which increased from 7 in FY 

1997 to 11.5 at the end of FY 1998. As the number of respondents 

increases per case, each investigative step in the enforcement process 

consumes an increasing amount of resources to move the case forward. 

Current and future workloads require increased productivity in the FEC 

disclosure and compliance programs. The Congress increased the FEC FY 

1999 appropriation by $4.85 million over its FY 1998 level of $31.65 

million (an increase of 15.3 percent). It also authorized a personnel ceiling 

Page ES- 8 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 
 

 

Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

of 347 full-time equivalents (FTEs), an increase of 34 FTEs (10.8 percent) 

over the FY 1998 authorization of 313 FTEs. As shown in Exhibit ES- 2, FEC 

FTE levels for FY 1999 have recovered from the effects of its FY 1995 

appropriation recision, with an overall increase of 10 percent. The 

Commission will be assigning its new FTE resources to its Audit, Data 

Systems, and General Counsel activities. 

Exhibit ES- 2 

FEC FTEs for FY 1995–FY 1999 

FEC 

Division/Office 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999* % Change ‘95− 

1998 1999 

Commissioners 19.1 16.3 15.6 15.2 20.0 -20% 5% 

Staff Director 26.1 25.8 24.0 23.4 24.0 -10% -8% 

Administration 19.2 20.0 19.5 18.5 21.0 -4% 9% 

Audit 31.3 37.3 33.6 31.8 42.0 2% 34% 

Information 13.5 12.7 12.9 12.2 13.0 -10% -4% 

General Counsel 104.3 95.3 92.8 99.4 115.0 -5% 10% 

Clearinghouse 6.0 5.2 4.8 4.8 5.0 -20% -17% 

Data Systems** 35.0 36.9 38.0 40.6 47.5 16% 36% 

Public Disclosure 14.6 14.6 12.5 13.5 14.0 -8% -4% 

Reports Analysis 41.9 40.4 39.0 39.6 42.0 -5% 0% 

Inspector General 3.8 4.0 4.0 3.7 4.0 -3% 5% 

TOTAL 314.8 308.5 296.7 302.7 347.5 -4% 10% 

Source: FEC FY 1999 and FY 2000 Budget Request Justification, FEC FY 1999 Management 

Plan. 

* FY 1999 shows authorized FTEs allocated according to FEC FY 1999 Management Plan. All 

other years are actual. 

**Includes Automated Data Processing and Electronic Filing System initiatives of 6.2 FTEs in 

1996 and 1997, 10 FTEs in 1998, and 8.5 FTEs in 1999. 

The FEC faces an increasing and volatile workload with the year 2000 

election cycle, which features a nonincumbent Presidential election. 

Increased FTE and automated data processing initiative resources should 

facilitate improved FEC FY 1999 program performance. Depending on the 

number of Presidential candidate committees, the size of the enforcement 

caseload, and the Commission desire to increase case-activation rates, 

additional compliance resources in FY 2000 may be warranted above 

normal inflation-adjusted levels. FY 2000 appropriations should be 

conditioned on the agency’s continued progress in implementing 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Page ES- 9 
Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

opportunities to increase productivity in its disclosure and compliance 

programs. 

To date, through incremental changes to management practices and 

beginning automation of business processes, the FEC has increased the 

productivity of its disclosure, audit, and enforcement activities in the face of 

escalating workloads. Future opportunities for improving efficiency need to 

focus on the FEC disclosure and compliance programs. The statutory 

construct of the Presidential public funding system and the minimal 

resources associated with the Office of Election Administration makes these 

programs a lower priority for improvement efforts. 

As discussed in Section 3, FEC Organizational Assessment, and Section 4, 

Program Process Assessment, a number of short- and long-term changes 

could be made by the FEC to increase operational productivity to make it a 

high-performance organization. 

Recommended Actions 

While the study identified 33 opportunities for improvement to increase 

overall FEC performance, Section 5, Summary of Recommendations, 

identifies the 21 changes that will yield the greatest benefit. These changes 

range from incremental short-term activities that could be conducted 

entirely by the FEC to significant and long-term changes that would require 

Congressional action. A summary of these improvement actions that would 

increase FEC efficiency and effectiveness follow. 

The Congress and the FEC need to initiate actions that will eventually allow 

the FEC to shift some resources from its disclosure activities to its 

compliance programs by the following means: 

· Develop a comprehensive, mandatory electronic data filing system for 

the major filers in conjunction with a significant business process 

reengineering throughout the FEC 

· Redesign disclosure processes (using industry standard software) and 

realign organizational units to improve processing time, accuracy, and 

cost 

· Monitor compliance with the FECA through a computer-based 

exception reporting system to verify transaction accuracy, content, and 

disclosure thresholds 

Unless the paper-based, manual disclosure processes are changed to a 

mandatory and fully functional electronic filing system, the current wellregarded FEC disclosure function faces deterioration under the rapidly 

Page ES- 10 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 
 

 

Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

increasing volume of campaign finance transactions expected in future 

election cycles. 

Because of case complexity and the increasing number of respondents, 

important enforcement actions may not be activated in the future or may be 

dismissed for lack of resources. Increasing the number of enforcement 

personnel will increase case activation and closure rates. However, 

consideration of further increases in enforcement staff levels should be 

linked with implementation of steps to increase compliance and 

enforcement productivity in the following ways: 

· Move nondeliberate and straightforward reporting violations such as 

failure to meet reporting deadlines away from the enforcement process 

and into an administrative fine system which will allow enforcement 

resources to focus on more significant violations 

· Establish workload and performance standards for all compliance 

matters to better allocate and manage available resources 

· Aggregate data about compliance matters by descriptive offense 

category to better coordinate screening criteria and prioritize 

compliance resources for the strategic outcomes desired by the 

Commissioners 

· Reassess the roles and responsibilities of the Office of the General 

Counsel to reduce staff time consumed in repetitive legal reviews of 

enforcement matters and to harmonize the reports review and auditscreening referral criteria to expedite case activation 

Finally, the FEC needs to renew itself by conducting a broad range of 

organizational development activities to strengthen leadership and 

accountability, to enhance human resource management, and to nurture 

increased communication and collaboration throughout the organization. 

Conclusion 

While the FEC has accomplished much in its 25-year history, its future 

success will require that it aggressively pursue both incremental and 

significant changes in organization, work processes, technology, and 

management practice. 

The threat of the increasing volume and volatility of workload for the FEC is 

real and near. Failure to change will lessen the FEC capacity to meet its 

basic FECA requirements, while at the same time it will require everincreasing staff resources to meet those minimal requirements. 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Page ES- 11 
Management Review of the Federal Election Commission 

There is now a window of opportunity to renew the organization with the 

recent appointment of three new Commissioners, the need to appoint a 

permanent Staff Director and recruit a new Director of Personnel, and 

heightened attention to improving the Federal election process. 

Change will not be easy, but it will be necessary if the FEC is to meet the 

difficult challenges it faces. Change will have to come from both inside and 

outside the FEC. This study has identified many steps that the FEC can take 

on its own to streamline operations, enhance management practices, and 

redesign business processes to leverage technology initiatives. However, 

several actions such as the authorization for mandatory electronic filing, the 

establishment of an administrative fine system, and the institution of a 

single point-of-entry for all registered committees will require Congressional 

action. Without these authorizations, it will be difficult for the FEC to 

capitalize on the many opportunities identified. 

Agency Comments 

A draft of this report was provided the FEC on January 15, 1999, for review 

and comment. Their comments on the report are presented in full in 

Section 6, FEC Comments. As the Commission stated: 

We take the recommendations seriously, and in the coming 

months, we will study them and try to find ways to 

implement those that will enable us to serve the public 

better and to more effectively carry out our mission of 

administering and enforcing the Federal election laws. 

While the recommendations are helpful, in some cases they 

are not sufficiently specific to be implemented without 

further definition and exploration. As a first step in 

responding to the report, therefore, we will seek, where 

appropriate, to undertake cost/benefit analyses and to define 

the specifics of the recommendations in the report. 

In addition, their comments reiterated the FEC accomplishments identified 

in the report, endorsed the overarching themes of the recommendations, 

and recognized the influence of outside factors on FEC operations and the 

public’s perception of the value that the FEC adds to the election process. 

This report in its entirety is posted on the Internet at 

www.gao.gov/special.pubs/publist.htm 

Page ES- 12 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP