January 2001 Major Managem

Challenges and 

Program Risks

Department of the Inter

GAO-01-249

Page 1 GAO-01-249 Int

Letter 

Overview 

Major 

Performance 

and 

Accountability 

Issues

Related GAO 

Products

Performance 

and 

Accountability 

Series
Page 2 GAO-01-249 Interi
of th

Page 3 GAO-01-249 Int

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

January 2001

The President of the Senate

The Speaker of the House of Representati

This report addresses the major performa

accountability challenges facing the Depa

Interior as it seeks to strike a balance betw

basic mandates—to protect and preserve 

resources for the benefit of future generat

the same time accommodating demands fo

use and consumption. It includes a summ

that Interior has taken and that are under w

these challenges. It also outlines further a

GAO believes are needed. This analysis sh

new Congress and administration carry ou

responsibilities and improve government 

of the American people.

This report is part of a special series, first 

January 1999, entitled the Performance an

Accountability Series: Major Management 

and Program Risks. In that series, GAO ad

Congress that it planned to reassess the m

and criteria used to determine which fede

government operations and functions sho

highlighted and which should be designat

risk.” GAO completed the assessment, con

comments provided on a publicly availabl

draft, and published its guidance docume

Determining Performance and Accountab

Challenges and High Risks (GAO-01-159SP

November 2000.

This 2001 Performance and Accountabilit

contains separate reports on 21 agencies—

each cabinet department, most major inde
Page 4 GAO-01-249 Interi

agencies, and the U.S. Postal Service. The se

includes a governmentwide perspective on p

and management challenges across the fede

government. As a companion volume to this 

is issuing an update on those government op

and programs that its work identified as “hig

because of either their greater vulnerabilitie

fraud, abuse, and mismanagement or major c

associated with their economy, efficiency, or 

effectiveness.

David M. Walker

Comptroller General 

of the United States
Page 5 GAO-01-249 Int
Page 6 GAO-01-249 Int

The Department of the Interior has jurisd

about 450 million acres of land—about on

total U.S. landmass—and about 1.5 billion 

Outer Continental Shelf. As the guardian o

resources, the Department is entrusted to 

nation’s most awe-inspiring landscapes, su

beauty of the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, an

national parks; our most historic places, l

Independence Hall and the Gettysburg ba

such revered national icons as the Statue 

the Washington Monument. At the same ti

to provide for the environmentally sound 

oil, gas, minerals, and other resources fou

nation’s public lands; honor the nation’s o

American Indians and native Alaskans; pro

sustain fish and wildlife; help manage wat

the western states; and provide scientific 

information to allow for sound decision-m

resources. In recent years, the Congress h

appropriated about $7 billion to $8 billion 

meet these responsibilities. With these res

Interior employs about 66,000 people in e

agencies and bureaus at over 4,000 sites a

country. 

Interior’s management of this vast federal 

largely characterized by the struggle to ba

demand for greater use of its resources w

conserve and protect them for the benefit 

generations. GAO and others have identif

management problems facing the Departm

made many recommendations to improve 

and programs. In some cases, Interior has 

significant improvements; in others, progr

slow. As a result, several major performan

accountability challenges remain.
Page 7 GAO-01-249 Int

The National Park 

Service

The National Park Service, with almost 30

visitors to its national park system annual

the public with some of the best recreatio

opportunities in the country. In recent yea

for its services have increased, so have th

the Park Service and the number of units 

park system. Among other things, these tr

placed new strains on the National Park S

to meet visitors’ recreational needs in a sa

enjoyable manner while simultaneously p

preserving, and maintaining the natural, c

historic treasures in its care.

The Park Service acknowledges its shortc

many areas and has taken steps to adopt f

approaches to address its considerable ne

however, has shown that these efforts hav

in several significant areas. First, the Serv

a higher priority on collecting more comp

• Improve management of national park

• Address persistent management prob

Indian trust programs

• Improve management of ecosystem re

efforts

• Address challenges in managing an e

land base
Page 8 GAO-01-249 Interi

scientific information on the condition of the 

in its care to ensure that its planning and fun

processes focus on the most pressing needs. 

Service needs to gather more accurate data o

backlog of maintenance problems to better s

for projects and to budget accordingly. Third

improve park managers’ accountability for a

results. Current Park Service policy allows in

park managers to determine whether their pr

budgets are consistent with overall departm

agency priorities and goals. Fourth, the Servi

address persistent management problems in 

concessions program. Specifically, the Servic

ensure that concession specialists and contr

are adequately qualified and trained and sho

discontinue its use of outdated practices to m

chronic backlog of expired contracts. 

Finally, the Service needs to better manage it

fire safety program for the over 30,000 struct

its responsibility. The Service should, at a mi

perform risk assessments at each unit within 

system, develop plans to correct identified n

ensure that all new construction complies wi

accepted fire codes. Whereas visitor and em

safety remains a high priority within the Depa

the Service, park managers have yet to emph

program in their operating and budget priori

Indian Trust 

Programs

Although the Department of the Interior man

$3 billion in Indian trust funds and over $1.8 

budgeted resources for tribes, it cannot assu

account holders that their balances are accu

their assets are being properly managed. In o

report on the Department’s management cha

demonstrated that problems continue to plag

fund program despite recent improvements. 

has shown that the Department needs to con

updating its trust fund management informat
Page 9 GAO-01-249 Int

and to ensure the accuracy of its trust fun

correcting thousands of inaccurate, incom

outdated entries. 

In addition, the Department continues to 

budget formulation problems impeding tr

determination policy—a national policy p

tribal participation in and management of 

programs. Specifically, the Bureau of India

primary federal agency charged with prov

services—needs to target future budget in

tribes to ensure that the hundreds of milli

allocated directly to them meets their mo

needs. Furthermore, the Department and 

need to work with the Congress to find wa

budget shortfalls in tribal self-determinati

According to tribes, these shortfalls in con

costs limit their ability to contract for and 

programs.

Ecosystem 

Restoration

Management problems hinder the Departm

to effectively direct its efforts to maintain 

natural systems. These efforts range from 

significant ecosystems, such as the Florid

to managing the use of fire to reduce the a

of hazardous fuels, such as small trees an

in forested ecosystems. These ecosystem 

projects, which focus on ecological, scien

economic, and social factors that extend b

administrative jurisdiction of Department 

require collaboration with outside entities

federal agencies, states, and private lando

Our past work found that the Department 

several actions to improve its ability to m

efforts. First, the Department needs to wo

outside entities to develop plans and strat

achieve restoration and management goal

Department needs to improve its coordin
Page 10 GAO-01-249 Interi

multiple entities involved in these efforts by 

coordination procedures are in place and tha

to resolve conflicts exists. Lastly, to prepare 

expected attrition of its most experienced pe

Department needs to develop a succession p

replacing the individuals who currently man

suppress fire outbreaks on federal lands. 

Land Exchanges The Department oversees transactions to ex

acquire, or dispose of lands in the federal lan

now manages about 450 million acres of fede

reserved for such purposes as parks, wildlife 

recreational areas, forests, and historical and 

sites. The Department currently does not list 

management of its land transactions as a str

performance goal. However, the number of l

transactions has the potential to increase dra

particularly under the Department’s new Lan

Initiative and the recently passed Federal La

Transaction Facilitation Act. We believe that 

number of transactions increases, the Depar

efforts to manage these transactions will bec

challenging. 

In the last year, our work has shown that the 

Department, particularly the Bureau of Land 

Management, needs to better demonstrate (1

land exchange is necessary and (2) that exch

are of approximately equal value. If these co

cannot be met, the Congress should conside

discontinuing the program. Additionally, the 

needs to guarantee that funds used in the ex

transactions are properly managed and cont

Finally, the Department should highlight the 

increased funding to operate and maintain n

acquired lands when reporting its budget to 

Congress. 
Page 11 GAO-01-249 Int

Follow-Through 

Needed

Interior has acknowledged the need to ad

these challenges, and for the most part, ha

steps to rectify these shortcomings. To me

management challenges the Department a

agencies need to make fundamental impro

areas such as strategic planning, human c

organizational alignment and control, and 

management and internal controls. Action

taken by the Department to meet the Gov

Performance and Results Act will move th

and its agencies in the right direction. How

remains to be done, such as completing fi

information systems for Indian trust fund

resources, and for operation and mainten

acquired lands. It is still too early to deter

corrective actions that the Department ha

will be effective.

In order to ensure that Interior follows th

efforts to deal with the major performanc

management challenges that we and othe

identified, the Congress needs to monitor 

Department’s progress by reviewing the D

and agencies’ annual performance plans a

some instances, such as the need to impro

for Indian trust funds, management probl

standing, and will take several years to imp

cases, such as problems with ensuring the 

federal lands exchanged, the Congress ma

pursue legislative remedies, such as provi

alternative means of federal land disposal 

lands exchanges outright.
Page 12 GAO-01-249 Int

y 

As caretaker of the nation’s most precious 

cultural treasures and steward of trust res

to American Indians and native Alaskans, 

Department of the Interior helps define th

spirit of our common national heritage. In 

Interior’s programs and activities affect th

Americans and the world community in m

public lands, parks, and waterways under 

jurisdiction provide recreational opportun

400 million visitors annually. Commoditie

natural gas, minerals, and timber—with a 

market value of over $20 billion—are extr

land and water resources under the Depa

purview each year. In addition, Interior pr

educational, social, and other services to 

Indian tribes.

The overarching management challenge th

Interior is the constant need to maintain a 

between its two basic mandates—to prote

conserve resources for the benefit of futu

while at the same time accommodating th

their greater use and consumption. To ful

mandates, the Department has developed 

that include protecting the environment a

our nation’s natural and cultural resource

recreation opportunities for America; man

resources for a healthy environment and s

economy; and meeting trust responsibiliti

tribes and commitments to island commu

Each year, the Department establishes pe

plans to achieve these strategic goals and 

long-term goals. In recent years, our work 

a number of management challenges facin

limit its progress in achieving these goals. 

challenges are the result of Interior’s agen

manage the difficult trade-offs inherent in 

two basic mandates. However, in today’s c

smaller federal government, the need to r
Page 13 GAO-01-249 Int

approaches to help achieve increased effe

efficiency is imperative. We have made a n

recommendations to Interior on how to b

accomplish its goals in this climate.

Improve 

Management of 

National Parks 

The Department, and specifically the Nati

Service, has strategic goals to protect and 

natural, historic, and cultural resources en

care while providing the public safe and en

However, the Park Service continues to fa

significant management challenges, and w

recommended that it take the following a

to achieve these goals:

• First, it should give higher priority to c

better scientific information on the co

resources to ensure that its planning a

processes address the most pressing n

• Second, the Service needs to obtain m

data on its backlog of maintenance pro

better set priorities for projects and to 

accordingly.

• Third, it should improve park manager

accountability for achieving results. Th

important for the Park Service, which 

park managers determine local prioriti

budgets that may or may not be consis

overall departmental and agency prior

• Fourth, the Service needs to address p

management problems in its concessio

Agency concession specialists and con

are not adequately qualified and traine

Service still uses outdated practices to 

chronic backlog of expired contracts.

• Finally, the Service needs to better ma

structural fire safety program for the o

structures in its care, including hotels, 

cabins, visitor centers, and historic bu
Page 14 GAO-01-249 Interi

Although visitor and employee safety rem

priority within the Department and the Se

managers have not emphasized this progr

in their operating and budget priorities.

The Park Service has made progress in addr

of these management challenges, but, as disc

below, more remains to be done.

Park Service Does 

Not Know Condition 

of Many Resources

A fundamental part of the Park Service’s mis

the caretaker of many of this nation’s most p

natural and cultural resources, ranging from 

ecosystems of Arches National Park in Utah

historic structures of Philadelphia’s Indepen

to the granite faces of Mount Rushmore in S

Dakota. Although the Park Service acknowle

its policies emphasize, the importance of ma

parks on the basis of sound scientific inform

resources, such information management is 

deficient. Frequently, baseline information ab

and cultural resources is incomplete or none

making it difficult for park managers to clear

the condition of resources and whether reso

deteriorating, improving, or staying the same

same time, many park resources face signific

including air pollution, vandalism, and nearb

development. However, even when these thr

known, the Park Service has limited scientif

knowledge about their severity and possible 

affected resources. For example, as figure 1 

while the Ellis Island immigration hall has be

beautifully restored, other structures on the 

deteriorated and are in serious need of repai
Page 15 GAO-01-249 Int

Figure 1: Some Park Service Resources Like Those on Ellis Island, New York, Re

Repair 

Source: GAO photographs

To reduce threats to park resources, we h

recommended, among other things, that t

Service identify the number, types, and so

threats; set priorities and develop action p

About 20 other structures, however, remain in seriously 

deteriorated condition.

Some artifacts are stored in rooms th

roofs and peeling walls.

The Immigration Museum is one of a few buildings that has been beautifully restored.
Page 16 GAO-01-249 Interi

mitigate these threats; and monitor the resul

actions and revise them as needed. 

According to the Park Service, initial steps h

taken to improve the situation. Specifically, in 

2000, the Congress increased funding for the 

Natural Resources Inventory and Monitoring 

by $8 million, to a level sufficient to fully fun

natural resource inventories. In addition, in f

2001, a $1.75 million increase for vegetation 

more than doubles the Service’s capacity to p

these vital inventories. The Service also rece

$4.2 million to establish the initial phase of a 

monitoring program in parks with extensive 

resources. The Park Service has also noted 

improvement in its efforts to catalogue cultu

specimens and has begun efforts to preserve 

and historic desert sites.

Undoubtedly, additional progress in improvi

scientific knowledge base about park resour

costly. Dealing with this challenge will requir

Service, the administration, and the Congres

difficult choices about how parks are manag

budgets are formulated. However, unless it a

better information on the condition of its ass

Park Service will continue to face difficultie

efforts to (1) shift existing resources among 

priorities to accomplish its goals and objectiv

priorities so that the most pressing issues re

most attention; (3) link the planning process 

budget decisions to have a greater impact on 

allocation of new limited resources; and (4) 

program results aimed at preserving and pro

resources entrusted to it.
Page 17 GAO-01-249 Int

Park Service Does 

Not Know Extent of 

Maintenance 

Problems

Interior also needs to safeguard its key re

Currently, the Park Service maintains 16,0

structures, 8,000 miles of roads, 1,500 brid

housing units, about 1,500 water and wast

systems, 200 radio systems, more than 40

more than 200 solid waste operations. The

include numerous cultural historic buildin

structures, complex utility systems, and a

network of roads and trails to be maintain

operational level that ensures continued p

preservation, and serviceability. 

Despite the importance of its maintenanc

Park Service has yet to accurately assess t

maintenance needs. For example, in Janu

Park Service estimated its deferred maint

backlog to be about $6.1 billion. Most of t

about $5.6 billion, or 92 percent—had bee

construction projects, which, for the mos

meant to correct maintenance problems a

facilities. However, we found that over 21 

Park Service’s estimated maintenance bud

used to construct new facilities, such as $2

bike path at the Colonial National Historic 

Virginia and $16.6 million to replace a visi

construct a park entrance at Acadia Natio

Maine. While we did not question the need 

facilities, we did question whether these n

construction projects should have been in

estimate of the maintenance backlog. We c

the Park Service’s lack of a common defin

should be included in the maintenance ba

contributed to an inaccurate and out-of-da

We also noted that the Department’s effor

standardize such a definition for all of its 

should, if implemented properly, address 

In September 1999, however, Interior’s Ins

General reported that the Park Service’s S
Page 18 GAO-01-249 Interi

estimate of $3.6 billion for deferred maintena

comply with federal accounting standards or 

departmental guidance. As a result, the Park 

little assurance that its deferred maintenanc

accounting and budget data were current, co

verifiable. According to the Inspector Gener

condition occurred because the Park Service 

(1) conduct all needed assessments to identi

conditions, (2) document its estimated defer

maintenance costs, or (3) establish adequate 

ensure compliance with federal and departm

deferred maintenance guidance. 

Park Service officials stated that they have in

actions to correct deficiencies in their maint

program. First, the Service established a univ

definition of deferred maintenance. Second, 

replaced existing facilities management com

software with a commercial package that, ac

Park Service officials, has been successfully 

Park Service officials stated that the new sof

provides, among other things, an accurate, c

and updated list of priority backlog maintena

projects; nationwide data on asset quantity a

condition; and performance measures for lin

expenditures with defined outcomes and res

fiscal year 2001, the Park Service will test th

at additional parks. The Service believes the 

will help it to adhere to the Department and 

accounting standards and reporting requirem

addition, the Department and the Park Servi

developing a 5-year plan for funding priority 

and evaluating alternative methods to maint

structures. 

These efforts should, if properly implemente

agency better manage its maintenance progr

However, acquiring the necessary data and s

the needed processes will take several years

processes to support these initiatives are no
Page 19 GAO-01-249 Int

developed and implemented, the Congres

continue emphasizing the importance of t

implementation. 

Accountability of 

Park Managers Needs 

Improvement

Historically, Interior has been a highly dec

agency. For the most part, it has allowed i

agencies to develop their own systems and 

managing their programs. Within the Park 

individual park managers reach spending 

operating priorities within their respectiv

limitation of this approach is that the Park 

not accumulate data on results achieved o

Our past work has shown that regional or 

staff rarely, if ever, discussed with park m

Service’s operating priorities or the result

accomplished with the funds provided. Ke

were missing to hold park managers acco

as processes for setting results-oriented e

monitoring outcomes. No expectations we

for the goals that are to be achieved in the 

result, the agency lacked any means to mo

toward achieving its goals and to hold par

accountable for the results of park operat

Accountability for results is especially im

agency like the Park Service, which sets p

develops budgets at the park-unit level. 

The Park Service has issued plans and rep

consistent with the requirements of the G

Performance and Results Act (GPRA). It n

strategic plan that sets forth its mission, lo

and means of measuring progress toward 

Furthermore, individual parks are expect

the strategic and annual performance plan

implement the agency’s strategic plan. Ho

because the Park Service is decentralized 

broad discretion to park managers, it face

challenges in implementing the top-down 

system required by GPRA. As we discusse
Page 20 GAO-01-249 Interi

performance and accountability report, to fu

GPRA’s management approach, Park Service 

must begin to define, in measurable terms, h

activities at their park contribute to achievin

wide goals established in the Park Service’s 

plan. 

According to Park Service officials, beginnin

year 1999, park superintendents are being he

accountable for their accomplishments again

park’s annual performance plans in their ann

performance evaluations. We believe that su

congressional attention to the agency’s imple

of GPRA would underscore the importance t

Congress attaches to the success of this proc

improve the accountability of park managers

Management 

Problems Continue 

to Plague the 

Concessions Program

Concessionaires play a critical role in provid

to many of the almost 300 million visitors to t

park system each year. Concessionaires are 

businesses that operate under contracts with 

National Park Service to provide facilities an

such as lodging, food, merchandising, marin

various guided services. In 1998, the latest ye

which data are available, 630 concessionaire

visitor services in park units that grossed ab

million in revenues.

For many years, we have joined the Congres

Office of the Inspector General, and Park Se

in raising concerns about the need for better 

management of the agency’s concession pro

March 2000, we identified basic problems wi

Service’s overall approach to managing the c

program. These management problems cent

areas: (1) human capital issues, including ina

qualifications and training of the agency’s co

specialists and concessions contracting staff

acquisition management issues, including th
Page 21 GAO-01-249 Int

out-of-date practices in handling its contr

workload and chronic backlog of expired 

(3) organizational control issues, includin

accountability within the concessions pro

of these management problems, the Park 

frequently has difficulty managing the per

its concessionaires to ensure a consistent 

and safety in the services and facilities the

To increase the effectiveness of the Park S

concessions management program, we re

that the Service improve the qualification

concession staff (including improving the

writing and administering contracts), con

services, or use some combination of the 

approaches. The agency could contract fo

certain functions while developing expert

for other functions. However, both option

the agency better manage its human capit

selects, trains, develops, and manages con

with the skills needed to realize improvem

program. 

Interior generally agrees with these propo

Park Service has already begun to take ac

address some of its concessions program 

problems. For example, the Park Service h

with a private firm to analyze its organizat

and advise it on reengineering its busines

The Service is also developing a certificati

hospitality management with a focus on b

financial skills and a contracting certifica

Park Service officials also stated that they 

aggressively recruiting students from top 

schools to hire as full-time concession pe

needed. In addition, the Service is conside

sourcing complex financial components o

concession program, developing a funding 

address the need for centralized and cons

oversight, and updating its contracting pr
Page 22 GAO-01-249 Interi

include performance based contracting. We 

these actions are a positive step and, if comp

implemented, will help improve the program

The Park Service Is 

Not Meeting Safety 

Responsibilities in 

Many of Its 

Structures 

The Park Service is responsible for ensuring 

buildings and artifacts entrusted to it are pro

that the people who visit or work in them ar

undue hazards or risks. Today, the Park Serv

steward for over 30,000 structures and over 

artifacts nationwide. These structures includ

motels; cabins; visitor centers; interpretative 

and historic buildings, such as many former 

homes. However, structural fire safety effort

national parks we visited were not effective. 

Service’s structural fire activity lacks many e

components required for any effective fire sa

These gaps include such fundamental things 

inadequate fire training for employees, inade

nonexistent fire inspections, and—for many 

inadequate or nonexistent fire detection or s

systems. These situations create many fire s

hazards. As a result of these conditions, the 

park visitors, employees, buildings, and artifa

jeopardized, making the structures and artifa

vulnerable to fire that could inevitably cause 

destruction, severe injury, and even the loss 

2 illustrates this problem at the Ford Nationa
Page 23 GAO-01-249 Int

Figure 2: Boxes Impeding Effectiveness of Fire Sprinkler in Storage Area of the F

Theatre, Washington, D.C.

Source: GAO photograph

Parks lack an effective structural fire safe

because the Park Service (1) has not fully 

minimum standards individual parks mus

(2) has placed little emphasis on structura

a result, park managers have assigned this 

operations a low priority, which is incons

Park Service’s strategic goals and its asser

health and safety issues are a top agency p

enable the Park Service to meet its structu

responsibilities, we recommended that th

complete and implement initiatives that s

minimum, (1) establish minimum structur

requirements throughout the park system

fire safety risk assessment at each unit of 
Page 24 GAO-01-249 Interi

system, (3) develop plans to correct identifie

and (4) ensure that all new construction com

generally accepted fire codes. Furthermore, 

that park managers elevate the priority given 

addressing structural fire safety needs, we 

recommended that park managers be held ac

for developing and implementing effective st

safety programs. 

The Park Service is aware that major weakn

in its structural fire safety effort and has beg

address them. For example, the Service has 

with an engineering firm to conduct structur

assessments of selected high-priority buildin

also committed to filling structural fire mana

officer positions in each region. In addition, 

accordance with Interior’s fiscal year 2001 

appropriations bill, the Service has develope

funding estimate for upgrading all its facilitie

structural fire safety requirements. Although 

recent initiatives should help correct the def

the Service’s structural fire safety program, t

require sustained follow-through and sufficie

complete. 

We found another safety concern in the natio

system’s lodging facilities. Each year, the Par

provides visitors to our national parks a vari

overnight lodging accommodations, includin

mid-scale, and economy rooms. In some cas

lodging facilities are the only ones located in 

park. Concessionaires manage these lodging 

under contract with the Park Service. Althou

Service has standards for lodging facilities in 

parks, similar industry standards impose add

requirements, including more safety measur

example, smoke detectors, dead-bolt locks, a

viewports—all required by the lodging indust

required by Park Service standards. Althoug

rooms we inspected had safety and security 
Page 25 GAO-01-249 Int

some rooms either contained devices that 

function or had none at all. To improve lo

accommodations throughout the park sys

recommended that the Park Service estab

process for performing periodic independ

inspections of the concessionaires’ lodgin

The Department acknowledged the need t

rehabilitate, and upgrade some of its lodg

and stated that these situations will be ad

funding becomes available. In addition, th

is conferring with the hotel industry to rev

lodging standards. These revised standard

additional safety requirements. However, 

Service has been attempting to revise thes

since 1998; as of October 2000, the new st

not yet final. We believe that the Congress 

monitor the agency’s progress in this and 

fire safety area. 

Key Contact Barry T. Hill, Director

Natural Resources and Environment

(202) 512-3841

hillb@gao.gov

Address Persistent 

Management 

Problems in Indian 

Trust Programs 

As the department responsible for admini

federal government’s trust responsibilities 

individual Indians, Interior manages $3 bi

trust funds and provides more than $700 m

annually for basic tribal services such as s

police, and natural resource management

years, we have reported on Interior’s poor 

of these trust funds and programs. In the 

Interior has taken specific actions to addr

management problems, but significant ch

remain. Despite Interior’s efforts, inadequ

and information systems, poor record-kee
Page 26 GAO-01-249 Interi

internal controls, and other weaknesses prev

Department from ensuring the funds are pro

managed. In addition, management issues im

tribes’ progress toward self-determination, th

participation in and management of program

previously administered on their behalf by th

government. 

Indian Trust Funds 

and Assets Need to 

Be More Effectively 

Managed

The Secretary of the Interior is responsible f

administering the government’s trust respon

tribes and individual Indians, including abou

in Indian trust funds and about 54 million acr

lands. Management of Indian trust funds and 

long been characterized by inadequate finan

management, such as poor accounting and in

systems; untrained and inexperienced staff; 

appraisals, determinations of ownership, and 

keeping; the lack of a master lease file or acc

receivable system; inadequate written polici

procedures; and poor internal controls. As a 

account holders have no assurance that thei

balances are accurate, or that the fund’s asse

managed properly. 

In April 1998, Interior launched a major initia

incorporating 11 subprojects to solve these p

The initiative called for correcting administr

records for trust accounts, clarifying land tit

resource management information, eliminati

backlogs, and reviewing and changing the ap

system for trust lands. In February 2000, the 

issued an update on its progress in implemen

subprojects. According to the report, the De

completed one subproject, which establishe

trust fund accounting and investment system

continues to make progress on the other sub

including record management improvements 

completed in May 2002. While the Departmen
Page 27 GAO-01-249 Int

steps in the right direction, its many mana

problems persist and will take several yea

In September 2000, we reported on the pr

another of the subprojects included in the 

acquisition of a new system to manage tru

found that Interior had taken key steps to 

processes, practices, and discipline to suc

guide the acquisition. The officials respon

managing the trust now recognize the imp

disciplined system acquisition, developme

processes. Interior has adopted a life cycle

system, which defines the management ex

the system from conception to deploymen

It has also developed several plans and po

enhance system management; strengthen

processes for the system; and begun devel

architecture. 

Still, we found some shortcomings and re

that the Department develop key compon

information systems technology architect

has not yet issued complete policies and p

trust fund management or cleaned up tho

inaccurate, incomplete, or outdated trust 

In addition, the Department disagrees wit

that the business processes that the syste

need to be reengineered. Until these matt

addressed, the Department will continue t

significant challenges to ensuring that the 

operate efficiently and effectively. 

Management Issues 

Impede Progress 

Toward SelfDetermination

The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is the p

agency charged with implementing federa

and administering the federal trust respon

million American Indians and native Alask

provides basic services to the tribes throu

United States, including social services, c

services, and natural resources managem
Page 28 GAO-01-249 Interi

federally recognized tribes have two ways of 

the programs that affect them. First, they can 

BIA to allocate a portion of the Bureau’s bud

programs that the tribes choose. The funds, 

account for nearly half of BIA’s budget, are d

through a process called tribal priority alloca

Second, under the Indian Self-Determination 

can establish self-determination contracts to 

some of the programs that BIA has tradition

managed on their behalf. 

BIA’s budget formulation and execution proc

specifically its distribution of tribal priority a

funds, is not responsive to changes in the rel

of the tribes. Furthermore, there is no assura

funds are effectively targeting the most pres

among tribes. In fiscal year 2000, about $700 

allocated with the participation of individual 

1998, we found that BIA’s distribution to eac

based largely on historical factors, that is, th

available to a tribe generally remained uncha

year to year. This method did not consider a 

changing needs. 

In response to our report, the Congress direc

develop alternate methods of distributing tri

allocations. In its 1999 task force report on tr

funds, BIA acknowledged that funding inequ

among the tribes but decided—with the conc

the tribes—that the current distribution of fu

not be changed to address those inequities. I

concluded that future increases in funding sh

targeted at tribes that need greater funding. 

accomplish this, we believe BIA would have 

criteria for determining tribes’ needs and to e

factors that will determine funding levels. BI

done this, and until it does, funding inequitie

persist. 
Page 29 GAO-01-249 Int

To compound the tribes’ difficulties in col

for self-determination, tribes have not rece

funds to cover the costs of supporting Ind

determination contracts. Over half of BIA

including some tribal priority funds, is pro

through contracts. Tribes use these funds 

the indirect and administrative costs for c

However, total shortfalls in this area reach

million in fiscal year 1997. These losses re

underway since 1995. [See fig. 3]

Figure 3: BIA’s Contract Support Cost Shortfall

1995-2000

Source: GAO analysis of BIA data.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 

Fiscal year

Dollars in millions
Page 30 GAO-01-249 Interi

According to tribes, these shortfalls have eith

reduction in the services available to tribal m

caused tribes to use their own limited resour

prohibiting the further development of tribal 

or supplemental services. Most significantly, 

shortfalls led the Congress to place a morato

contracting for BIA programs for fiscal year 

Although the Congress did not implement a m

in fiscal year 2000, one was contemplated, an

likely in the future unless a remedy to these 

found. To avoid further moratoriums, we dev

alternatives for the Congress to consider in f

contract support costs. In 2000, the Congress 

an alternative funding mechanism but did no

legislation. Unless this problem is resolved, w

the matter will continue to impede tribal con

programs.

None of these management issues will be res

or within a short time frame. Interior will ne

continue its efforts to resolve deficiencies in 

management of Indian trust funds and place 

priority on solving these problems. In additio

response to reports from BIA, the National C

American Indians, and us, the Congress has 

hearings in the last few years and proposed r

legislation to address some of these issues. I

determination will stay at the forefront of an

appropriations’ debates, as will the long-term 

over the course of federal Indian policy.

Key Contact Barry T. Hill, Director

Natural Resources and Environment

(202) 512-3841

hillb@gao.gov
Page 31 GAO-01-249 Int

Improve 

Management of 

Ecosystem 

Restoration Efforts 

To achieve its strategic goal of protecting a

the nation’s natural resources, Interior est

long-term plan to restore and maintain he

systems. This effort includes the restorati

significant national ecosystems, such as th

Everglades, and the reintroduction of fire 

ecosystems such as those located in the w

The Department has adopted an ecosystem 

approach intended to protect and maintai

ecological systems. 

Ecosystem management focuses on ecolo

scientific, economic, and social factors th

extend beyond the administrative bounda

Department’s agencies and other entities. 

management requires the collaboration of 

Department and its agencies with each ot

entities, such as states and private landow

develop a common vision for the future c

the lands, waters, habitat and overall ecos

Currently, the Department has several larg

management projects underway, including 

Fire Management policy; the restoration o

Florida ecosystem, including the Everglad

Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Mana

Project; and the Northwest Forest Plan. 

Since 1995, the Department of the Interior 

Department of Agriculture-which manage

Service-have sought to return fire to the f

ecosystems of the western states, yet man

problems have hindered this effort. The ac

vegetation, which provides fuels for large

uncontrollable, and destructive wildfires, 

the most extensive and serious problems 

forests. The danger of increased fuels was 

Cerro Grande fire of May 2000, when a pr

to reduce fuels got out of control and burn

acres and many homes. 
Page 32 GAO-01-249 Interi

In 2000, the need for fuels reduction was ree

after huge wildfires in the western United St

6.9 million acres, or twice the 10-year averag

has shown that fuel reduction will take sever

will require the departments to target the eff

land management agencies. The Congress di

departments to develop fuel reduction plans 

to the 2000 fire season. However, neither dep

has issued a final strategy for targeting fuel r

efforts without causing short-term damage t

ecosystems. According to Interior officials, in 

2000, the departments reported to the Congr

plans to address excess fuels in high-risk are

communities. 

The Cerro Grande fire highlighted managem

problems inherent in the prescribed burns p

restore the forested ecosystems of the West. 

raised concerns about the readiness of the fe

management agencies to support and admin

prescribed burns. The management problem

procedural gaps or a lack of clarity about ho

are to be implemented. Specifically, the plan 

prescribed burn was not independently revie

someone with technical competence; suffici

resources for fighting the fire once it got out 

were not readily available; and more effectiv

coordination and cooperation between feder

and nearby jurisdictions was needed before t

underway. We recommended several change

interagency fire policy developed in 1995, in

peer review of fire plans, (2) better coordina

federal agencies in developing plans, and (3) 

documentation and analysis of the decision t

with a prescribed burn. In response to the 20

season, the agencies requested an additional 

in funding but did not clarify how they plann

resolve these management problems. 
Page 33 GAO-01-249 Int

We have also identified potential human c

concerns related to personnel shortages t

the agencies’ firefighting abilities in catas

and recommended the agencies develop a 

plan to deal with this matter. As with man

agencies, a large number of experienced p

retire in the next few years. Replacements 

to find for several reasons, including the r

and a waning interest of some employees 

taking the training required. Developing a 

qualified fire management personnel coul

years, because an individual must receive 

hours of training to become an incident c

Although the agencies reported in Septem

their priority would be to ensure all neces

suppression efforts are available, these 

recommendations depend on budgets rec

Interior’s human capital problems can be 

a broader pattern of human capital shortc

have eroded mission capabilities across th

government. See our High-Risk Series: An 

01-263, January 2001) for a discussion of h

as a newly designated governmentwide hi

Management problems could also hinder 

most significant environmental restoratio

undertaken by the Department—the resto

South Florida ecosystem. The restoration 

least 20 years, to increase the quantity of 

improve the quality of water currently bei

polluted in the ecosystem. The restoration 

seeks to increase and restore natural habi

make urban and natural systems more co

Because the ecosystem covers 18,000 squ

overlaps many jurisdictions, the restoratio

joint coordination and collaboration of m

federal, state, and local governments; Ind

private groups—to ensure the success of 

ecosystem management efforts. Interior, a
Page 34 GAO-01-249 Interi

multi-agency task force on the restoration, fa

and coordinates these multiple efforts. In 19

recommended that the task force develop a 

plan to identify how the restoration will occu

resources will be used, and how the overall r

goals link to annual goals and resources. Alt

task force established three goals for the res

did not develop a strategic plan for how the 

would be accomplished until July 2000. Cong

requested the development of the strategic p

response to our recommendations, has also 

that we review the plan. 

In addition, the task force has yet to complet

actions to improve the organizational alignm

control of the restoration initiative. Specifica

recommended in 1999 that the Department, 

the task force, develop a conflict resolution 

improve coordination among those participa

restoration initiative. In 2000, we also recom

that the Department and the task force deve

plan to coordinate multiple land acquisitions

that without such coordination, individual re

projects and the overall progress of the resto

could be delayed. For example, a critical pro

restore the South Florida ecosystem, underw

the early 1990s, has yet to be completed. A m

component of the project, which will send m

through the lower end of Everglades Nationa

been built and operated under emergency co

has not received final state operating permits 

disagreements over the amount and quality o

will be involved. 

According to Department officials, the task f

contracted with the Florida Conflict Resolut

Consortium to provide conflict resolution ser

task force. The task force heard the results o

Consortium’s initial work in November 2000 

scheduled to take action to approve a metho
Page 35 GAO-01-249 Int

January 2001. The Department and the tas

still considering our recommendation to c

multiple land acquisitions. Until final decis

on these issues, we cannot determine whe

actions will be sufficient to resolve our co

The ecosystem management approach, wh

solution to several management challenge

Department, also presents new difficultie

approach requires the Department to be in

efforts that may entail actions beyond its 

will require continued efforts at coordinat

Northwest Forest Plan was one of the firs

scoped, ecosystem-based plans to be deve

implemented by the Department’s Bureau 

Management and the Department of Agric

Service. The use of the ecosystem manage

approach, coupled with a sense of urgenc

leadership, enabled the agencies to resolv

problems and achieve their goal of remov

injunction on timber cutting in the Northw

The application of ecosystem managemen

has, however, raised organizational alignm

control matters for Interior. Our work has 

problems arise when assessments and pla

scale ecosystems focus on small-scale iss

limited-range plant and animal species. Ec

assessments and plans should be conduct

geographic areas that coincide with the is

addressed. In reviewing Interior’s final Co

Basin Plan, which was released in April 20

recommended that the agencies include th

plans for smaller geographic zones. 

Increased demand for goods and services 

lands means that the Department is likely 

continuing conflicts and face many resour

deterioration problems. In their attempts 
Page 36 GAO-01-249 Interi

restore natural resources, the Department an

agencies will likely continue to apply and ref

concepts of ecosystem management. Curren

management laws focus on particular resour

Legislation to resolve conflicts in long-term p

and resource use, which would make the sus

of the ecosystem a management priority, has 

considered but not passed. This matter will c

influence the debate over how federal lands 

managed. 

Key Contact Barry T. Hill, Director

Natural Resources and Environment

(202) 512-3841

hillb@gao.gov

Address Challenges 

in Managing An 

Expanding Land 

Base

The Department manages about 450 million 

federal lands for many different purposes, an

its duties, oversees transactions to exchange

dispose of lands in the federal land base. Wh

sound management of land transactions is no

Department’s strategic or performance goals

Department continues to encounter several 

when managing these transactions. With the 

for increased federal land acquisition under 

initiatives, such as the Department’s Lands L

Initiative, prudent management of federal lan

transactions will become increasingly impor

Land Exchanges and 

Appraisals Have Not 

Always Ensured 

Value and Protected 

the Public Interest

The Department is the steward of numerous 

forests, grasslands, wetlands, and other natu

some of which are interspersed with state, lo

privately owned lands. The National Park Se

manages about 80 million acres of parks, his

monuments, and preserves. The Bureau of L

Management manages 264 million acres of p

and the subsurface minerals on more than 56
Page 37 GAO-01-249 Int

acres. The Fish and Wildlife Service is resp

million acres of refuges and wetlands. To 

preserve the health of our public lands an

efficiency and remove barriers to resourc

and management, Department agencies se

consolidate and protect federal lands by a

exchanging, or, in some cases, receiving d

Land exchanges involve the mutually agre

of federal lands for those owned by corpo

individuals, or state and local government

In the last few years, Interior’s Inspector G

have determined that the land exchanges 

the Department’s Bureau of Land Manage

have not ensured the lands being exchang

appropriately valued or protected the pub

exchanging lands, federal agencies are req

the Federal Land Policy and Management 

determine, among other things, whether t

values of the lands being exchanged were 

equal or if the exchange served the public 

financial management and controls have p

Bureau, and the Department, from ensurin

value of the lands being exchanged. From 

1997, in several cases documented by the 

General and us, the Bureau of Land Manag

always appropriately value the land it exc

because the appraisals used to determine 

value were not valid or were not complete

accordance with federal standards. For ex

Inspector General estimated that the valu

5,000 acres of federal lands in four differe

was underestimated by as much as $24 m

cases, the Bureau could not demonstrate 

the land it received. 

Furthermore, under the umbrella of its ex

authority, the Bureau actually sold federal 

the cash in escrow accounts, and then use

buy nonfederal lands. We found that the f
Page 38 GAO-01-249 Interi

tracked in the agency’s financial systems and 

determined that this practice was not allowe

federal law. Six of the agency’s state offices h

of $4.3 million in 20 such escrow accounts at 

fiscal year 1999. 

In 1998, the Bureau formed a team to review 

exchanges that are of high value or are cons

controversial. Beginning this year, all land ex

proposals are reviewed by the state director 

a technical review by the land exchange team

addition, the Bureau has recommended chan

internal guidance on land exchanges and inc

training of its personnel. However, land exch

inherently difficult to manage because the la

exchanged have to be of approximately equa

because estimates of market value are diffic

determine, especially when the properties be

are unique or when the market is speculative

This inherent difficulty, when combined with 

deficiencies the Inspector General and we fo

the program, led us to recommend that the C

consider discontinuing the Bureau’s land exc

program. As this has not yet occurred, we be

matter warrants continued attention from th

Department. The Congress has recognized th

difficulties inherent in land exchanges. In 19

the Southern Nevada Public Land Manageme

facilitate sales of federal land in one of the a

troubled by high land prices and speculation

provide up to 85 percent of the proceeds to a

environmentally sensitive lands in southern 

Not only are land exchanges difficult to man

use of appraisals as a financial or internal co

the land exchange and acquisition process m

insufficient to ensure that federal interests a

protected, particularly in cases where the pr
Page 39 GAO-01-249 Int

large, unique tract of land of significant na

The Department, under the President’s dir

initiated a program called the Lands Lega

save nationally significant parks, refuges, 

public lands from encroaching developme

purchasing surrounding tracts of land. Ho

review of one of the Bureau’s acquisitions 

two similar acquisitions by the Departmen

Agriculture’s Forest Service in 1998 and 2

that although the appraisal process was fo

assumptions used in the appraisal could h

the value of the property. 

Problems with the acquisition of lands by 

agencies, such as the Fish and Wildlife Se

National Park Service, indicate that prope

of land transactions is also a concern for 

in the Department. For example, in a 1998 

Inspector General found that the Fish and 

Service might have overpaid for parcels it 

because of problems with the appraisals o

Inspector General reported in 1999 that th

Park Service did not ensure that just com

properly established before purchasing ea

some of its regions. 

The pressure for growth and developmen

adjacent to public lands will continue to i

foreseeable future as will the pressure an

Department of protecting and preserving 

resources. A market approach to managin

acquisition and sale of federal lands, as w

in Nevada, may be better than the approa

exchanges, but neither we nor the Depart

formally reviewed the results of the Neva

The Congress will continue to be involved 

interested in the matter of federal land ac

exchanges. It recently passed the Federal 

Transaction Facilitation Act, which autho

Bureau (and the Forest Service) to sell pa
Page 40 GAO-01-249 Interi

and to use the proceeds to acquire inholding

adjacent to federally designated areas that c

exceptional resources. The Department will 

ensure that its organization and processes ar

both to protect singular pieces of land and to 

public’s financial interests. 

Expanded Land Base 

Creates Budgetary 

Difficulties 

As the Department acquires new lands throu

acquisition or exchange, it faces the addition

of finding funding for the increasing amount 

operations and maintenance required for the 

any facilities on them. For fiscal year 2001, t

Department received $1.6 billion to fund fed

state government land acquisitions, conserva

and historic preservation. The Department is 

buy lands in the New Jersey-New York water

South Florida, in the Chesapeake watershed

California desert. As the federal agencies acq

lands, they incur additional costs for managi

resources on them. Such management includ

conducting resource surveys and manageme

identifying resource problems that will need 

treated, such as exotic species infestation; d

appropriate environmental impact statement

support management of the lands; and makin

appropriate improvements on the lands. 

In some cases, the Department has not kept 

Congress informed of potential operations a

maintenance needs for new lands. For exam

February 2000, we found that the Fish and W

Service did not report estimated future oper

maintenance costs to the Congress when it e

refuges, particularly when these refuges wer

from donated lands. We recommended the D

instruct the Fish and Wildlife Service to prov

information during budget deliberations. The 

taking actions to improve its reporting of co

these improvements will not be completed fo
Page 41 GAO-01-249 Int

years. According to Department officials, 

cannot yet identify operation and mainten

all their lands, or the costs that will be inc

manage additional lands. However, the of

that the agencies are developing automate

track these costs and have begun to docu

increased needs for operations and maint

expanded federal lands. For fiscal year 20

Department received $100 million for mai

acquired lands.

Key Contact Barry T. Hill, Director

Natural Resources and Environment

(202) 512-3841

hillb@gao.gov
Page 42 GAO-01-249 Int

Managing National 

Parks

Federal Lands: Agencies Need to Assess t

Personal Watercraft and Snowmobile Use

(GAO/RCED-00-243, September 15, 2000).

Park Service: Need to Address Manageme

That Plague the Concessions Program 

(GAO/T-RCED-00-188, May 24,2000).

Park Service: Agency Is Not Meeting Its S

Safety Responsibilities (GAO/RCED-00-15

May 22, 2000).

Park Service: Need to Address Manageme

That Plague the Concessions Program

(GAO/RCED-00-70, March 31, 2000).

National Park Service: The Condition of L

Facilities Varies Among Selected Parks 

(GAO/RCED-98-238, August 6, 1998).

National Park Service: Efforts to Identify 

the Maintenance Backlog (GAO/RCED-98

May 14,1998).

Park Service: Managing for Results Could 

Accountability (GAO/RCED-97-125, April 

National Parks: Park Service Needs Bette

to Preserve and Protect Resources (GAO/

February 27, 1997).

Managing Indian 

Trust 

Responsibilities 

Indian Trust Funds: Improvements Made t

Management of New Asset and Accountin

Significant Risks Remain (GAO/AIMD-00-

September 15, 2000).
Page 43 GAO-01-249 Int

Indian Trust Funds: Challenges Facing Int

Implementation of New Trust Asset and A

Management System (GAO/T-AIMD-99-238

1999).

Indian Self-Determination Act: Shortfalls 

Contract Support Costs Need to Be Addre

(GAO/RCED-99-150, June 30, 1999). 

Indian Trust Funds: Interior Lacks Assura

Improvement Plan Will Be Effective (GAO

April 28, 1999).

Indian Programs: Tribal Priority Allocatio

Target the Neediest Tribes (GAO/RCED-98

July 17, 1998).

Indian Trust Funds: Status of Department 

Interior’s Plan for Improving Trust Fund M

(GAO/AIMD-98-169R, May 28, 1998).

Financial Management: Recommendation

Trust Fund Strategic Plan Proposals (GAO

November 26, 1997).

Preserving and 

Restoring 

Ecosystems 

Reducing Wildfire Threats: Funds Should 

the Highest Risk Areas (GAO/T-RCED-00-

September 13, 2000).

Fire Management: Lessons Learned From 

Grand (Los Alamos) Fire and Actions Nee

Fire Risks (GAO/T-RCED-00-273, August 1

South Florida Ecosystem Restoration: A L

Acquisition Plan Would Help Identify Lan

to Be Acquired (GAO/RCED-00-84, April 5
Page 44 GAO-01-249 Interi

Federal Wildfire Activities: Current Strategy 

Needing Attention (GAO/RCED-99-233, Augu

Federal Land Management: Comments on Se

Provisions of S. 1320 − A Bill to Revise Fede

Management Planning (GAO/T-RCED-99-270

1999)

Ecosystem Planning: Northwest Forest and I

Columbia River Basin Plans Demonstrate Imp

in Land-Use Planning (GAO/RCED-99-64, Ma

South Florida Ecosystem Restoration: An Ov

Strategic Plan and a Decision-Making Proces

Needed to Keep the Effort on Track (GAO/RC

April 22, 1999).

Western National Forests: A Cohesive Strate

Needed to Address Catastrophic Wildfire Th

(GAO/RCED-99-65, April 2, 1999).

Prudently Managing 

Federal Resources 

in Land 

Transactions

BLM and The Forest Service: Land Exchange

Reflect Appropriate Value and Serve the Pub

(GAO/RCED-00-73, June 22, 2000).

Federal Land Management: Land Acquisition 

Related to the Baca Ranch Appraisal (GAO/R

March 2, 2000).

Fish and Wildlife Service: Agency Needs to I

Congress of Future Costs Associated with La

Acquisitions (GAO/RCED-00-52, February 15

Federal Land Management: Appraisal of Hea

Forest Properties (GAO/RCED-99-52, Decem

1998).
Page 45 GAO-01-249 Int

Federal Land Management: Appraisal of C

Mines’ New World Property (GAO/RCED-

May 29, 1998).
Page 46 GAO-01-249 Int

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Governmentwide Perspective (GAO-01-24

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Agriculture (GAO-01-242)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Commerce (GAO-01-243)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Defense (GAO-01-244)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Education (GAO-01-245)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Energy (GAO-01-246)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Health and Human Service

(GAO-01-247)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Housing and Urban Develo

(GAO-01-248)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of the Interior (GAO-01-249)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Justice (GAO-01-250)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Labor (GAO-01-251)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of State (GAO-01-252)
Page 47 GAO-01-249 Int

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Transportation (GAO-01-25

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of the Treasury (GAO-01-254)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Department of Veterans Affairs (GAO-01-2

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Agency for International Development (G

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Environmental Protection Agency (GAO-0

Major Management Challenges and Progr

National Aeronautics and Space Administ

(GAO-01-258)

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (GAO-01

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Small Business Administration (GAO-01-2

Major Management Challenges and Progr

Social Security Administration (GAO-01-2

Major Management Challenges and Progr

U.S. Postal Service (GAO-01-262)

High-Risk Series: An Update (GAO-01-263
Ordering 

Information

The first copy of each GAO report is free. Addi

reports are $2 each. A check or money order sh

out to the Superintendent of Documents. VISA 

credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a 

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

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

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available r

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the dai

from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-60

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide 

how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet:

For information on how to access GAO reports 

send an e-mail message with “info” in the body 

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at: 

http://www.gao.gov

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, or Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact one:

• Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraud

• e-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering syst

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested