United States General Accounting Office

GAO Report to Congressional Requesters

April 1995 INTERNATIONAL

BROADCASTING

Downsizing and

Relocating Radio Free

Europe/Radio Liberty

GAO/NSIAD-95-53

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-258686 

April 5, 1995

The Honorable Harold Rogers

Chairman

The Honorable Alan Mollohan

Ranking Minority Member

Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,

 State, and Judiciary

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

In response to your request, we reviewed issues related to Radio Free

Europe/Radio Liberty’s (RFE/RL) downsizing and its planned relocation

from Munich, Germany, to Prague in the Czech Republic. In particular, we

focused on (1) RFE/RL’s ability to meet congressionally mandated funding

ceilings and successfully operate in Prague, (2) the most pressing

management problems RFE/RL faces in Prague, and (3) RFE/RL’s view of its

role and mission in the 21st century.

Background In the 1950s, the U.S. government established RFE/RL as a private nonprofit

company to provide surrogate radio programming to and about Eastern

Europe and the former Soviet Union. Surrogate broadcasting takes the

place of free, uncensored local media and provides news about political,

social, and economic developments within the countries. This differs from

the role of the other major U.S. international broadcaster—the Voice of

America—which has a broader purpose to deliver news overseas about

the United States, U.S. policy, and the world. RFE/RL receives its grants and

policy direction from the Board for International Broadcasting (BIB), a

federal entity created to fund and oversee the operations of RFE/RL. During

the past several years, RFE/RL has received annual grants of more than

$200 million.

With the demise of the Cold War, the executive branch began questioning

the role and management of international broadcasting. President Clinton

called for the consolidation of all U.S. international broadcasting to better

address changing broadcasting requirements, and to meet his deficit

reduction goals. Executive branch officials believed that a new

management structure would reduce costs by promoting more rational

programming decisions and sharing engineering and other administrative

resources. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determined that a

consolidation could save $400 million during a 5-year period.

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

On April 30, 1994, the President signed into law the United States

International Broadcasting Act (Title III, P.L. 103-236), which consolidated

all nonmilitary, U.S.-funded international broadcasting activities under the

International Broadcasting Bureau within the United States Information

Agency (USIA). The legislation also authorized the establishment of a

Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to oversee the Broadcasting

Bureau; establish and maintain broadcasting standards; and assess the

quality, effectiveness, and professional integrity of all activities. BIB, which

currently oversees RFE/RL, is to be dissolved by October 1995. Additionally,

the act expressed the sense of Congress that the private sector should

assume all funding for the radios not later than the end of fiscal year 1999.

The authorizing legislation placed certain funding limits on RFE/RL and

restricted what it could do. It specified that grants to RFE/RL could not

exceed $75 million for any fiscal year after 1995 and limited salaries to

those paid to comparable personnel in the federal government overseas.

Additionally, the legislation specified that no fiscal years 1994 and 1995

funds could be used to relocate the radios from Germany unless

(1) Congress specifically approved a relocation in an appropriation or

pursuant to a reprogramming request and (2) BBG authorized a relocation

and submitted to Congress and the Comptroller General a detailed plan for

such relocation, or prior to the establishment of BBG, the President

certified that a significant national interest required a relocation.

On July 12, 1994, the President certified that significant national interest

required relocating the operations of RFE/RL from Munich, Germany, to

Prague in the Czech Republic before confirming a new BBG. Following a

review of the relocation plan, on August 20, 1994, Congress approved the

reprogramming request for the relocation.

Results in Brief Current and planned sources of revenue are insufficient to cover RFE/RL

downsizing and relocation costs and meet mission requirements through

1999. BIB estimates that the overall funding shortfall could reach as high as

$28 million. This shortfall is occurring in part because the cost of

downsizing and relocating the organization will greatly exceed the amount

OMB has budgeted for these purposes. Original estimates to consolidate

international broadcasting activities did not, for example, identify the need

for RFE/RL to pay millions of dollars in corporate liabilities for pensions and

post retirement medical benefits and understated the costs to terminate

the employment of staff in Germany. Furthermore, total revenue will be

less than envisioned: RFE/RL has not received the level of appropriations it

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

anticipated, and rather than realizing gains from exchange rate

fluctuations, it may now experience significant losses.

The move and operations in Prague may not occur as easily as RFE/RL has

anticipated. Some RFE/RL managers are concerned about their ability to

recruit the most qualified staff from within and outside the company.

Additionally, the move is already behind schedule, and any deviation from

the plans to refurbish the new headquarters in Prague could increase

costs.

In looking to the future, RFE/RL officials see an enduring, although changing

mission. They believe their broadcasts will continue to be needed to

provide accurate, objective news in support of democratic institutions and

to present journalistic standards that in-country media could emulate.

RFE/RL is also crafting a role for itself to directly assist in the democratic

development of the former Eastern bloc countries. Additionally, to prepare

for the eventual termination of U.S. financial support at the end of 1999,

RFE/RL is contemplating new services and activities, such as English

language print news reports, which are potentially marketable and

competitive with other private sector media organizations. It is too early to

tell if these activities would fall within the mission guidelines that

Congress authorized for RFE/RL. However, Congress clearly intended that

the new BBG approve any changes or additions to RFE/RL’s mission through

fiscal year 1999 and that U.S. assistance to emerging democracies be

coordinated among all U.S. agencies performing similar activities.

Downsizing Plan Calls

for Significant

Reductions in RFE/RL

Since the consolidation was first proposed in 1993, savings were expected

to occur by merging some RFE/RL and Voice of America resources,

eliminating duplicative language broadcasts, reducing staff, and

decreasing RFE/RL’s salary and compensation package.

In essence, the legislation required RFE/RL to completely reinvent itself.

Some administrative functions would be transferred to the Voice of

America, and all engineering and transmission activities would be merged

with the Voice of America’s engineering program. The legislation required

that the private sector assume responsibility for funding the Research

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

Institute as soon as possible1 and that RFE/RL reduce its salaries and

benefits to match those of comparable federal employees overseas. We

had found, for example, that salary and selected benefits, such as housing

allowances, for RFE/RL staff exceeded those of comparable Voice of

America federal employees in Germany by $13,000 a year at the lower

grades and $44,000 a year at the upper-management level.

As a result of the downsizing, RFE/RL’s annual fiscal year budget will be cut

from its fiscal year 1994 level of $143 million to $75 million for fiscal years

1996 through 1999. Its staff ceiling will be reduced from more than 1,000 to

419. The budget and staffing figures cited for fiscal year 1994 exclude the

amount for the Research Institute and engineering.

Radios May Not Have

Sufficient Funds to

Liquidate Liabilities

and Operate in Prague

RFE/RL believed it could operate within the $75 million annual cap Congress

set for fiscal years 1996 to 1999 as long as it had sufficient funding in fiscal

year 1995 to cover its downsizing and relocation costs. Fiscal year 1995 is

a pivotal transition year because RFE/RL will terminate staff, shut down

operations in Munich, and move to Prague. In 1993, OMB estimated that

$105 million would be needed in fiscal year 1995 to cover all downsizing

costs, and that approximately $152 million would cover operations in 1995,

for a total funding requirement of about $257 million.

Liabilities Higher Than

Anticipated

In September 1993, we reported that OMB had locked into an estimate of

$105 million for downsizing costs despite many unknowns. We noted that

there was no plan detailing which activities, sites, or staff would be

terminated. Furthermore, we pointed out that at the time it was not

possible to accurately calculate how much RFE/RL would have to pay its

terminated employees.2

 Of particular importance, German labor law

requires companies to compensate terminated staff for their job loss. In

addition to severance pay based on length of service, employees are

entitled to receive a “social compensation package” payment. The amount

of this payment is not based on a specific formula but rather is determined

through management and union negotiations and varies by individual

1

RFE/RL’s Research Institute has been comprised of four elements: analytic research, archives,

publication, and a media and opinion research section. Its archives was recognized as a source of

information about the East during the Cold War. In the summer of 1994, RFE/RL and the Open Society

Institute signed agreements creating the Open Media Research Institute in Prague to replace the

Research Institute. RFE/RL will fund first year start-up costs but thereafter pay only for specific

services it requires.

2

International Broadcasting (GAO/NSIAD-93-302R, Sept. 17, 1993).

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

according to factors such as marital status and number of dependents.

Only recently have all of these costs been determined.

In 1993, neither OMB nor BIB had foreseen that the radios would be moving

and incurring $19 million in relocation costs or that the sense of Congress

to secure private sector funding by the end of fiscal year 1999 would have

a financial impact on RFE/RL. Now RFE/RL estimates that to clear all debts by

that time, it will need to fund $34 million in post retirement medical

benefits and more than $30 million in the pension account.

In August 1994, BIB calculated that downsizing and relocation would cost

more than $200 million. To compensate for the difference between what

had been budgeted for these costs and actual costs, BIB determined RFE/RL

would have to use some of the funds originally budgeted for its operations

for the next 5 years. Rather than having $75 million available each year for

operations, RFE/RL would have only slightly more than $60 million each

year. Table 1 shows the RFE/RL budget that BIB developed for fiscal years

1995 through 1999.

Table 1: Actual Fiscal Year 1994 and Projected Operating Budget in Prague as of August 4, 1994

Actual Estimated

Operating budget by fiscal year

Dollars in millions

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Operating base $175.8 $134.3 $61.5 $61.6 $62.4 $62.6

Severance 24.6 36.9 0 0 0 0

Pension 0 10.2 6.3 6.3 5.5 5.3

Post retirement medical insurance 0 6.0 7.2 7.1 7.1 7.1

Litigation, etc. 2.5 10.2 0 0 0 0

Engineeringa 0 12.7 0 0 0 0

Social plan 5.0 25.2 0 0 0 0

Relocation 0.2 19.3 0 0 0 0

Subtotal $208.1 $254.8 $75.0 $75.0 $75.0 $75.0

Bureau for International Broadcasting 1.9 1.9 0 0 0 0

Total $210.0 $256.7 $75.0 $75.0 $75.0 $75.0

aThis is RFE/RL’s contribution to the costs of consolidating RFE/RL and Voice of America

engineering and technical services.

Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

Reduced Fiscal Year 1995

Appropriations and

Currency Losses

In December 1994, RFE/RL determined that it would not be able to pay off

its debts or have about $60 million available for operations as the budget

above indicates because it would not be receiving the revenue it

anticipated. First, Congress cut the fiscal year 1995 request of

$256.7 million to $229.7 million. Furthermore, in December 1994, BIB

projected that in fiscal year 1995 RFE/RL will not realize more than

$12 million in exchange rate currency gains it had anticipated. BIB had

assumed there would be currency gains believing that the dollar would

buy more German marks than originally estimated. BIB now believes that

RFE/RL could be faced with currency exchange rate losses of up to

$10 million in fiscal year 1995 because the value of the dollar against the

German mark has been declining. At this time, however, it appears that

RFE/RL will have available $5 million in unused construction funds and

$3.6 million in fiscal year 1994 currency exchange rate gains.

Congress has tried to ease RFE/RL’s financial burden. Technical

amendments to the legislation that consolidated international

broadcasting authorized the use of proceeds from the sale of the RFE/RL

headquarters in Munich for the one-time costs of consolidating broadcast

operations and relocating RFE/RL to Prague. Proceeds from the sale of the

site are expected to be approximately $13.5 million after structural repairs

are made to the property. Overall, BIB does not believe that this infusion of

funds will be sufficient to cover the current funding shortfall, which it

estimates could reach as high as $28 million.

BIB Believes Further

Deferrals May Not Be

Possible

To respond to the rising levels of liabilities and reduced income in fiscal

year 1995, BIB and RFE/RL are contemplating deferring the payment of some

liabilities. For example, they are studying the feasibility of delaying some

severance payments beyond fiscal year 1995. However, they are concerned

that they may be unable to do this for two reasons. First, they are unsure if

German labor law will permit them to postpone payments to terminated

staff. Second, even if this were legally permissible, BIB believes that such a

move would drastically hurt RFE/RL’s ability to meet mission requirements

because RFE/RL would have to pay these costs out of its fiscal years 1996

through 1999 operating budgets. BIB officials believe that RFE/RL could not

withstand additional cuts in its operating budget. They believe that the

approximately $62 million annual budget developed in August 1994 is

RFE/RL’s bottom-line requirement and already well below the annual

$75 million RFE/RL had expected for operations.

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

Moving and Operating

in Prague May Prove

More Difficult Than

Anticipated

President Clinton determined that relocating the stations to Prague would

offer significant advantages of economy and efficiency and bring an added

political benefit. Politically, Prague offers a location of great symbolic

value as the city becomes a crossroads of communication and culture for

the West and what was formerly considered the Eastern bloc countries.

RFE/RL’s plans to relocate and operate in Prague assume a new, innovative,

and cost-conscious management approach. Our review indicates that

RFE/RL has cost estimates to support its construction plans, but deviation

from them could cause costs to rise.

For example, RFE/RL plans to utilize existing space in a building that

housed the former Communist Parliament in Prague essentially as is and

spend as little money as possible to convert it for RFE/RL uses. Although

RFE/RL officials had originally budgeted $245,000 to remodel office space,

buy new furniture, and replace carpeting, they subsequently decided not to

do so. The planned construction of studios will neither meet the aesthetics

nor broadcasting standards that the Voice of America uses, but will meet

U.S. commercial broadcasting standards and cost several hundred

thousand dollars less. RFE/RL will not replace the aluminum electrical

wiring. Rather, it will only install copper wiring to support increased

electrical demand for studios and computer networks.

To reduce personnel costs, RFE/RL plans to redesign how it conducts its

business. For example, it plans to introduce digital production equipment

to reduce the number of people required to do a job. In addition, rather

than maintaining full-time staff for maintenance and other housekeeping

activities, RFE/RL plans to contract out for these services. RFE/RL said they

will also institute higher productivity standards for their staff because they

will not initially be under union-imposed management constraints as they

had been in Munich. Finally, to conform with U.S. legislation, RFE/RL has

designed a new pay and benefits package that will more closely parallel

those of federal employees in similar positions. We did not determine what

impact these plans would have on savings: however the move is behind

schedule and RFE/RL may find it difficult to recruit experienced staff for

Prague.

Move Is Behind Schedule RFE/RL developed ambitious time frames to shut down operations in

Munich, ready the new headquarters building and move staff to Prague.

Original plans called for relocating some staff by early December 1994.

However, as of February 1995, RFE/RL did not know the employees who

Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

would be moving to Prague since the German courts were still reviewing

whether RFE/RL has followed German labor law requirements in

terminating employees and offering positions in Prague. Until RFE/RL

knows who will move, it cannot finalize its staffing pattern or develop a

plan to find new staff.

The refurbishment of the building in Prague is also behind schedule. Most

nonelectrical construction was to have been completed by December 31,

1994. However, the lease on the building was not signed until 

December 20, 1994. As of February 1995, RFE/RL was still evaluating bids

for projects such as studio construction and electrical wiring.

The RFE/RL president has recognized that RFE/RL does not have managers

experienced in logistically relocating an organization. However, we were

informed that RFE/RL has recently developed a moving and management

plan and an assessment of technology or equipment needs.

Ability to Recruit and Train

Necessary Staff May Be

Difficult

There are indications that RFE/RL may face problems in obtaining the

experienced, talented RFE/RL staff it wants to move to Prague. RFE/RL plans

to recruit primarily from within the RFE/RL ranks from its third country, or

U.S. employees. The American staff members are concentrated in the top

positions and would fill the management ranks. Non-Americans are

predominately broadcasters. RFE/RL does not assume that any Germans will

be willing to make the move.

According to the RFE/RL president, almost all of the language service

directors as well as many of their most valued employees have indicated

they would accept a position in Prague. However, some BIB and RFE/RL

officials are skeptical that RFE/RL can recruit the people it wants because

(1)a number of the top U.S. managers appear unwilling to relocate and

(2)RFE/RL will not have the freedom to select only the best candidates

from among its non-U.S. staff. We were informed that RFE/RL attorneys

concluded that the company must follow German labor law procedures in

making employment offers. This requires RFE/RL to consider conditions

such as an employee’s seniority, marital status, number of dependents, and

disabilities rather than just performance.

Furthermore, one official predicted that among the lower grades, the best

staff are also the least likely to accept an offer because they would have

good employment prospects in Germany. According to some RFE/RL and BIB

Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

officials, a number of factors would inhibit top staff from accepting an

offer. For example:

• The compensation and benefits will be considerably less in Prague than

they were in Munich, and, therefore, potentially less attractive to current

employees.

• Non-Germans who leave the country relinquish their German residency

status, their ability to return to live in the country, and all claim to

government of Germany benefits such as unemployment compensation

which accrue to residents.

• The future of RFE/RL in Prague is uncertain beyond fiscal year 1999.

RFE/RL’s president believes, however, that if RFE/RL staff is unwilling to

move to Prague he can fill open positions with well-qualified broadcasters

from outside the organization. He cited the positive experience of the new

Open Media Research Institute, the former RFE/RL Research Institute. The

Institute advertised in two U.S. newspapers and one higher education

magazine for 50 job vacancies in the editing and analysis area. According

to the RFE/RL president, these ads attracted more than 500 applicants.

Finally, training could also be a problem. Though RFE/RL will be dependent

on the abilities of staff to utilize new technologically advanced equipment

to cut costs, money for formal training is not included in the budget. Staff

will have to learn on the job. Additionally, RFE/RL indicated that it may

utilize contract services rather than hire personnel to fill some support

positions, but no firm decisions on this had yet been made.

RFE/RL Seeks New

Role in the 21st

Century

The recent congressional and executive branch deliberations on the future

of RFE/RL indicates the breadth of opinions on the value and merit of

U.S.-funded surrogate broadcasting in the post-Cold War era. There were

questions about whether surrogate broadcasting was still needed, as well

as whether surrogate broadcasters should be completely independent

from the U.S. government. In the legislation which consolidated all

broadcasting, it was the sense of Congress to support surrogate

broadcasting to the region but only through the end of fiscal year 1999.

In presentations to Congress, BIB recognized that changing conditions in

the region required a rethinking of the purposes of the broadcasts. BIB

determined that the radios’ missions had evolved from a purely surrogate

task of providing objective news and analysis on internal events where no

such media were available, to compensating for the limitations of

Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

domestic media and setting a standard by which an emerging free press

could judge itself. Although the primary mission remains that of a

broadcaster, as discussed below, RFE/RL managers appear to see their role

in a broader context.

Potential Development

Role

Current managers see RFE/RL’s goals in a developmental context. RFE/RL

officials said that RFE/RL has three primary missions:

(1) To act as a traditional broadcaster by providing information and news

on important issues such as democracy and political organization, the

environment, and economic growth (their top priority).

(2) To provide assistance to indigenous radio stations.

(3) To train indigenous radio personnel and broadcasters.

The RFE/RL Director of Broadcasting described the mission as beyond that

of supplying the news. He said that RFE, for example, attempts to negotiate

agreements with host governments and media that not only meet RFE/RL

needs but also address the goal of developing independent media and

more democratic institutions.

The RFE/RL president informed us that RFE/RL has loaned equipment to local

stations and sent its technicians to help these stations modernize their

operations. RFE has included a developmental component in some of its

programs. For example, RFE planned, coordinated, and conducted live

debates prior to the first Latvian election after the collapse of the Soviet

Union. RFE/RL discussed plans with each of the 23 candidates, the Foreign

Ministry, and the Elections Commission and involved local media with the

intent that similar debates could be held in the future. Additionally, RFE/RL

has conducted exchanges with local media personnel.

Preparing for the

Termination of U.S.

Government Support

The president of RFE/RL believes that he must start positioning RFE/RL for

the eventual termination of U.S. government support. He concluded that

unless it builds a foundation of competitive goods and services now, RFE/RL

will not be in a position to market its products to the private sector in the

year 2000. He doubts that all of the broadcast services RFE/RL currently

supplies will attract the level of private financial support that Congress

envisions. For example, he believes it is unrealistic to expect private

support for broadcasts in small former Soviet Union countries that are not

Page 10 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

internationally important and where their private sectors are not strong. It

is within this context that he is considering how to best utilize the

strengths of his staff, the reputation of RFE/RL, and the new site in Prague.

The RFE/RL president told us he would like to completely recast the central

news function so that reporters would write stories in both English and

the language of the country from which they are reporting. The president

believes that adding an English capability would both internally aid

operations and help develop a product that private sources would be

willing to buy. He believes that RFE/RL is the definitive source of

information about events in the region to which private news and other

organizations would be willing to subscribe.

Although no firm plans have been developed, the RFE/RL president

envisions a new training program that will bring multilingual journalists to

Prague for intensive instruction in Western-style news gathering and

writing. They would then return to their home countries under contract to

RFE/RL and form a network of reliable reporters who can report in both

English and the host country language.

The RFE/RL president is looking for ways to utilize the new headquarters in

Prague. The building has well-appointed meeting facilities and could host

international conferences, seminars, and outreach programs. He believes

the site can be used by both private and U.S. government entities and

recently invited U.S. public affairs officers from USIA overseas missions to

discuss the potential uses of the building. With such cosponsors, he

believes the building could become an “internationally recognized symbol

of democratic dialogue.”

Legislation Limits RFE/RL

Mission and Requires

Coordination of

Democracy Building

Activities

Notwithstanding the potential merits of any planned RFE/RL activity,

Congress clearly intended to control RFE/RL activity and prevent unilateral

decisions on changes in roles and missions through fiscal year 1999. The

legislation consolidating all international broadcasting stipulated the

following:

• No activities should in any manner duplicate the activities of private sector

broadcasters.

• Funds are to be used only for the purpose of carrying out similar functions

that RFE/RL carried out on the day before enactment of the act.

• Funds are to be used for activities that the new BBG determines are

consistent with these functions.

Page 11 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

Additionally, the legislation also designated BBG as the ultimate authority

on all mission-related decisions. The initiatives RFE/RL is now

contemplating appear to be those that BBG need to review and coordinate.

As such, we question whether RFE/RL should make any changes or

additions to its mission at this time without BIB’s review or, when it is

constituted, BBG.

3

Furthermore, over the past year, Congress has indicated its concern over

the proliferation and overlap of U.S. agencies and U.S.-funded

organizations involved in democracy development activities. In an earlier

report, we noted that a variety of U.S. agencies were involved in delivering

democratic development assistance worldwide.4

 This included activities

such as media development and training and information exchanges of the

type RFE/RL is now contemplating. Specifically, the Office of International

Media Training in USIA trains foreign reporters, broadcasters, editors,

managers, and technicians. In operation since 1983, its training mission is

to provide practical training for foreign media personnel and support the

development of independent media on a global scale. By its own account,

the Office has trained more than 5,000 media personnel from over 130

countries and, since the end of the Cold War, has shifted its focus to East

and Central Europe, the Baltics, Russia, and the Newly Independent

States.

In light of the expansion of democratic development activities, Congress

determined that it is in the government’s interest to have a coordinated

approach. The 1994-95 Foreign Relations Authorization Act5

 requires the

President to report to Congress on the extent, goals, objectives, and

impact of U.S.-sponsored democracy programs.

Some of the activities RFE/RL is now undertaking, or contemplating

initiating, appear to fall under this mandate.

Recommendation Until the BBG is established, BIB is still responsible for supplying RFE/RL

policy direction. As such, we recommend that the Chairman of the BIB

review and evaluate any RFE/RL plans to change or add to its mission to

3

As of February 1995, President Clinton had not yet named the members of the BBG.

4

Promoting Democracy: Foreign Affairs and Defense Agencies Funds and Activities—1991 to 1993

(GAO/NSIAD-94-83, Jan. 4, 1994).

5

P.L. 103-236, Sec. 534 (1994).

Page 12 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

ensure that such plans are consistent with the legislation, do not duplicate

or overlap existing programs, and are fully coordinated with other

U.S.-funded organizations performing similar activities.

Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation

In commenting on a draft of this report, BIB agreed with our

recommendation and the areas of concern we identified. BIB emphasized

that the move to Prague is very much a work in progress and that BIB has,

and will continue to, provide the oversight necessary to address these

issues. (See app. I.) BIB also supplied us oral comments that we

incorporated as appropriate.

Scope and

Methodology

To assess RFE/RL’s ability to operate within congressional funding limits,

we reviewed documents, including studies prepared by BIB and Arthur

Andersen and Company, on the costs and issues associated with

downsizing and relocating RFE/RL. Also, we interviewed agency officials

concerning the move to Prague. We did not independently develop new

termination cost estimates but used those estimates we, OMB, and BIB had

developed in 1993 as a base from which we assessed the reasonableness of

current estimates. We compared these and operational budgets developed

by BIB, against known appropriations levels and other expected sources of

revenue. To determine the most pressing management issues facing RFE/RL

and plans for the future, we interviewed officials from BIB, USIA, and RFE/RL;

reviewed internal planning documents; and reviewed legislative authority

for activities. We interviewed officials and obtained documents in

Washington, D.C., Munich, and Prague. While in Prague, we examined

back-up data for cost estimates and visited RFE/RL’s new headquarters.

We conducted this review from July 1994 to February 1995 in accordance

with generally accepted government auditing standards.

We are sending copies of this report to the Chairman, Board for

International Broadcasting; the Director, United States Information

Agency; the Director, Office of Management and Budget; and appropriate

congressional committees. We will also make copies available to others

upon request.

Page 13 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
B-258686 

Please call me at (202) 512-4128 if you or your staff have any questions

concerning this report. The major contributors to this report were Charles

Schuler, Joan Slowitsky, John Butcher, and Cherie Starck.

Joseph E. Kelley

Director-in-Charge

International Affairs Issues

Page 14 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
Page 15 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
Appendix I 

Comments From the Board for International

Broadcasting

Page 16 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
Appendix I 

Comments From the Board for International

Broadcasting

Page 17 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
Appendix I 

Comments From the Board for International

Broadcasting

(711094) Page 18 GAO/NSIAD-95-53 International Broadcasting
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a

single address are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 6015

Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100

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

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

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

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

list from the past 30 days, please call (301) 258-4097 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Mail

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100