HOUSING AND 

URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT

Strategic Human 

Capital and Workforce 

Planning Should be an 

Ongoing Priority

Report to Congressional Committees

March 2013

GAO-13-282

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-282, a report to 

congressional committees 

March 2013 

HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

Strategic Human Capital and Workforce Planning 

Should be an Ongoing Priority

Why GAO Did This Study

HUD has faced challenges accurately 

determining the staff resources it 

needs to fulfill its mission of creating 

strong, sustainable, inclusive 

communities and quality affordable 

homes for all. GAO’s prior work has 

shown that strategic human capital

management, including efficient and 

effective workforce planning, helps 

ensure agencies have people with the 

skills needed to carry out their 

missions. GAO was directed to review 

the status of HUD’s workforce planning 

efforts. GAO reviewed (1) HUD’s

strategic human capital and workforce 

planning efforts; (2) the extent to which 

HUD’s resource management systems 

reflects identified standards; and 

(3) how clearly HUD presents its 

rationale behind staff resource 

requests in the budget request. GAO 

reviewed department-wide human 

capital and resource management 

efforts and selected four of the largest 

HUD program offices for further review. 

GAO reviewed documentation of HUD 

planning efforts and interviewed HUD 

officials and relevant congressional 

staff. The results from the reviews of 

the four program offices cannot be 

generalized to all offices within HUD. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the Secretary of 

HUD follow through on developing and 

maintaining human capital and 

workforce plans that clearly incorporate 

key principles; create incentives for staff 

to report accurate data for managing 

staff resources; and consult with 

congressional decision makers to 

determine what additional information 

about resource decisions should be 

presented, and how, in its CBJ. HUD 

agreed with GAO’s recommendations. 

What GAO Found

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reports that it is 

moving forward with strategic human capital and workforce planning efforts after 

several years of delays. HUD’s most recent workforce plan expired in 2009 and 

since then HUD has launched several planning efforts. According to HUD, these 

efforts were preempted by other important priorities, such as responding to the 

economic crisis. HUD undertook initiatives such as training key program office 

staff on the need to determine up front the staff HUD could afford to hire. In 

HUD’s latest effort, a contractor is expected to complete human capital and 

workforce plans no later than fiscal year 2014. In June 2012, an Office of 

Personnel Management (OPM) review found that HUD’s human capital and 

workforce planning activities did not always follow key principles for planning, 

implementing, and evaluating the results of human capital management policies 

and practices. For example, the review found that HUD’s human resources 

policies and programs are not aligned with the organization’s mission, strategic 

goals, or performance outcomes. As a result of these weaknesses, OPM 

concluded that HUD cannot continually assess and improve human capital 

planning and investments or measure the impact on mission accomplishment.

HUD is reexamining its resource management processes, which do not fully 

consider all standards identified by the National Academy of Public 

Administration in a 1999 report on ways that HUD could address its resource 

management challenges. GAO’s review found that HUD provides central 

guidance on how work is defined and collected, and involves headquarters and 

field staff in the workload definition process. However, HUD has not created 

incentives or accountability for staff to report accurate workload data. GAO found 

that HUD’s program offices selectively use the department’s resource estimation 

and allocation process (REAP) to define workload and estimate resources and 

there is no widespread agreement that the process produces the quality of data 

needed to effectively estimate resources. As a result, staff are entering 

information into the Total Estimation and Allocation Mechanism (TEAM), REAP’s 

validation component (which compares actual staff time to estimated staff time) 

on an inconsistent basis and officials report that the information is often not used 

to inform decision-making.

HUD’s budget submission could more clearly explain the underlying rationale for 

HUD’s budget request, even though primary users acknowledge that 2013 was 

an improvement over prior years. The primary users of the congressional budget 

justification (CBJ) are appropriations staff who said that CBJs from fiscal years 

2008 to 2012 generally contained data tables for some program areas and did 

not always contain narrative that explained or justified the full-time equivalent 

request. According to HUD officials, HUD provided data tables because prior 

submissions with more detail did not prompt questions from Congress. Users of 

the CBJs GAO spoke to agreed that the fiscal year 2013 changes which provided 

more detail improved the clarity and utility of the justifications, but some still 

raised questions about the lack of adequate, consistent information available to 

help Congress make resource allocation decisions. View GAO-13-282. For more information, 

contact Michelle Sager at (202) 512-6806 or 

sagerm@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

Letter 1 

Scope and Methodology 2

Background 3

HUD Reports That it is Moving Forward with Strategic Human 

Capital and Workforce Planning Efforts after Several Years of 

Delays 7

HUD Is Reexamining Its Resource Management Processes, which 

Do Not Fully Consider Identified Standards 12

HUD’s Budget Submission Could More Clearly Explain the 

Underlying Rationale for Its Request 18

Conclusions 19

Recommendations for Executive Action 19

Agency Comments 20

Appendix I Original Design of the Resource Estimation and 

Allocation Process (REAP) 21

Appendix II NAPA-Identified Standards for HUD’s Resource 

Management System 22

Appendix III HUD Program Office Descriptions 24

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 26

Tables 

Table 1: Original Design of the Resource Estimation and Allocation 

Process (REAP) 21

Table 2: NAPA-Identified Standards for HUD’s Resource 

Management System 22

Figures

Figure 1: Original Design of the Resource Estimation and 

Allocation Process (REAP) 5

Contents 
Page ii GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

Figure 2: Timeline of HUD’s Human Capital, Workforce Planning, 

and Staff Resource Management Efforts 6

Abbreviations

CBJ congressional budget justification

FTE full-time equivalent

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act of 1993

GPRMA Government Performance Results Modernization Act of 2010

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

NAPA National Academy of Public Administration

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OPM Office of Personnel Management

REAP Resource Estimation and Allocation Process

TEAM Total Estimation and Allocation Mechanism

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

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

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

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

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

United States Government Accountability Office 

Washington, DC 20548

March 15, 2013

The Honorable Patty Murray, Chairwoman

The Honorable Susan Collins, Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing 

and Urban Development and Related Agencies

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Thomas Latham, Chairman

The Honorable Ed Pastor, Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing 

and Urban Development and Related Agencies

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

In the past, we have reported that the U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD) has faced challenges accurately determining 

the staff resources it needs to fulfill its mission of creating strong, 

sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all.1

Our prior work has shown that strategic workforce planning helps 

agencies use staff efficiently by (1) aligning an organization’s human 

capital program with its current and emerging mission and programmatic 

goals and (2) developing long-term strategies for acquiring, developing, 

and retaining staff to achieve programmatic goals.

The collapse of the housing and mortgage markets in 2008 created 

additional demand on HUD’s resources, increasing the importance of 

HUD having employees with the skills needed to address these crises 

while using its existing resources as efficiently as possible. Further, the 

current fiscal environment and the continued recovery from the housing 

crisis necessitate effective human capital and workforce planning and 

resource management and increase the need to use existing staff as 

efficiently as possible.

2

 

1

GAO, Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, 

Further, effective staff 

GAO-03-103 (Washington, D.C.: January 2003).

2

GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, 

GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 2003).

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

management assists an agency in identifying full-time equivalent (FTE) 

needs and informs an agency’s budget formulation and execution 

processes.

To facilitate the use of a resource estimation and allocation process for 

future budget estimates and submissions, Congress directed us to review 

and report on the status of HUD’s workforce planning efforts and its staff 

resource management tools.3 Our objectives were to review (1) HUD’s 

strategic human capital and workforce planning efforts (2) the extent to 

which HUD’s resource management system reflects identified standards 

and (3) how clearly HUD presents its rationale behind staff resource 

requests in the budget request.

We reviewed department-wide human capital and resource management 

efforts for all objectives. We also selected four HUD program offices for 

further review that (1) had the largest number of FTEs, (2) were included 

in HUD’s agency priority goals for fiscal years 2012 to 2013, and (3) 

appeared in HUD’s annual performance plans for fiscal years 2012 to 

2013. Three of the program offices—the Office of Community Planning 

and Development, the Office of Public and Indian Housing, and the Office 

of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity—provide illustrative examples of 

planning and processes. In addition to those three offices, we used our 

prior work to gather information about HUD’s planning and processes in a 

fourth program office, the Office of Housing, which is HUD’s largest 

program office.4

To review HUD’s strategic human capital and workforce planning efforts, 

we compared HUD’s planning efforts to the Office of Personnel 

Management’s (OPM) Human Capital Assessment and Accountability 

Framework.

The findings from this work cannot be generalized to 

those we did not include in our review.

5

 

3

H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 112-284, at 312 (2011) accompanying the Consolidated and Further 

Continuing Appropriations Act of 2012, Pub. L. No.112- 55, 125 Stat. 552.

We also reviewed OPM’s June 2012 report on HUD’s 

human capital management and the key principles described in our prior 

4

GAO, Federal Housing Administration: Improvements Needed in Risk Assessment and 

Human Capital Management, GAO-12-15 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 7, 2011).

5

5 C.F.R. §§ 250.101 – 250.203. 

Scope and 

Methodology
 

Page 3 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

reports on workforce planning to inform our efforts.6

To review the extent to which HUD’s resource management system 

reflects identified standards, we reviewed HUD documents describing its 

activities and compared them to the identified standards in the National 

Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) report for developing an 

effective resource management system for HUD.

We reviewed OPM’s 

methodology and found that it was reasonable for our purposes.

7

To understand how clearly HUD presents its rationale behind staff 

resource requests, we reviewed congressional budget justifications (CBJ) 

and met with HUD appropriations subcommittee staff, as they are the 

primary users of this information. For all objectives, we interviewed 

relevant HUD officials in the offices of the Chief Financial Officer and the 

Chief Human Capital Officer and in the selected program offices.

We conducted this performance audit from July 2012 to March 2013 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

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

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

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

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

As noted earlier, HUD has faced longstanding challenges with staff 

resource estimation and management. To improve its ability to estimate 

FTEs and support budget requests, in 1999, HUD partnered with NAPA to 

develop standards for a resource estimation and allocation process.8

 

6

Office of Personnel Management, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 

Human Capital Management Evaluation Report, Quarter 3 – FY 2012 (June 2012). See 

also GAO, Workforce Planning: Interior, EPA, and the Forest Service Should Strengthen 

Linkages to Their Strategic Plans and Improve Evaluation, 

NAPA identified standards for HUD to (1) adopt a resource management 

GAO-10-413 (Washington, 

D.C.: Mar. 31, 2010), and GAO-04-39. 

7

National Academy of Public Administration, Aligning Resources and Priorities at HUD: 

Designing a Resource Management System (Washington, D.C.: 1999). The resource 

management system identified by NAPA includes estimation, validation, and allocation. 

8

H.R. Conf. Rept. 105-119, at 112 (1997) directed HUD to enter into a contract with NAPA 

to examine HUD’s practices for estimating human resource needs.

Background
 

Page 4 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

methodology with estimates and allocations based on anticipated work 

and where it is to be performed; (2) include all of the departmental 

responsibilities in a resource estimation system; (3) identify work that can 

be accomplished with current staffing levels, which tasks must be done 

less often or are no longer required, and which tasks are to be contracted 

out; and (4) include a resource validation component that accurately 

measures actual staff activities. HUD agreed and appendix II provides 

additional detail on these standards.

HUD intended that the resource estimation and allocation process it 

developed known as REAP would produce analytically-based data upon 

which HUD could accurately determine staff needs in relation to program 

requirements. REAP is composed of three components: resource 

estimation, validation, and allocation. Figure 1, an interactive graphic, 

illustrates the original design of REAP (see appendix I for more 

information). While the allocation component was piloted in the Office of 

Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, ultimately it was not implemented 

agency-wide.
Figure 1: Original Design of the Resource Estimation and Allocation Process (REAP) Interactive graphic

Page 

Roll over each bar to see more information regarding HUD's Resource 

and Estimation Allocation Process.

Directions:

Source: GAO analysis of HUD's documents.

Step 1:

Resource Estimation and 

Allocation Process

REAP

Specfic Category

Step 2:

Step 3:

GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning
 

Page 6 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

As shown in the timeline in Figure 2, HUD’s present staff resource 

management efforts began with the development of REAP.

Figure 2: Timeline of HUD’s Human Capital, Workforce Planning, and Staff 

Resource Management Efforts

Within HUD, the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer has 

responsibility for developing HUD’s department-wide human capital and 

workforce plans. These plans set the tone for identifying an agency’s 

workforce goals and determining the activities and initiatives needed to 

achieve those goals. The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer is also 

responsible for providing guidance to program offices in assessing their 

needs, performing workload analyses, and creating hiring plans.
 

Page 7 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer oversees HUD’s budget 

formulation and submission to Congress. In addition, each program office 

has its own budget office that formulates requests for its individual 

program office. These budget offices submit their requests to the Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer for consideration. According to the officials, this 

approach provides the program offices with flexibility to estimate their 

workload and staff resource needs.

In April 2012, the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer began 

soliciting a contractor to help HUD conduct a workforce analysis and 

update both the human capital and workforce plans. However, HUD 

placed award of the contract on hold while related initiatives were being 

evaluated. HUD then delayed this effort when its newly appointed Deputy 

Secretary requested information on the workforce planning process that 

established a workforce planning task force, among other things.

The original target date for completion of these plans was September 30, 

2012. However, as a result of the delay stemming from the creation of the 

new workforce planning task force, HUD signed the contract for the 

development of the workforce and human capital strategic plans in 

September 2012. According to officials, HUD has since modified the 

timeline for deliverables and the plans are now expected to be completed 

no later than fiscal year 2014.9

 

9

This contract will result in two plans, which, prior to modification, had costs totaling 

$591,000. 

Although this contract is an example of 

HUD’s centralized efforts to prioritize human capital and workforce 

planning, the contract does not specify which years the plans will cover 

HUD Reports That it 

is Moving Forward 

with Strategic Human 

Capital and 

Workforce Planning 

Efforts after Several 

Years of Delays

HUD Has Awarded 

Contracts to Further 

Planning Efforts
 

Page 8 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

and calls for development of “multi-year” plans, starting in fiscal year 

2012. HUD officials said that they will align the end date for the plans with 

the department’s strategic plan, which is currently applicable through 

2015. By definition, plans should be forward looking, but once HUD’s 

plans are completed, the first two years—fiscal years 2012 and 2013—

will have elapsed. In comments on a draft of this report, HUD stated its 

intention to modify the contract deliverables to reflect fiscal years 2014 

and future years. Further, HUD stated in its comments that the 

deliverables will also be amended based on any changes caused by a 

revision to HUD’s strategic plan.

According to the contract, the human capital plan is to be developed to 

align with OPM’s Human Capital Assessment and Accountability 

Framework.10

• provide a roadmap for accomplishing the mission and implementing 

HUD’s strategic plan goals; 

The contract states that the plans are supposed to outline 

the desired outcomes and, among other things, identify strategies to:

• recruit, retain, and train a workforce with the skills and abilities to fulfill 

HUD’s responsibilities; and

• provide metrics to determine the effectiveness of the plan.

According to HUD, the plan will support decision-making and prioritization 

of human capital initiatives.

Separately, the contract states that the workforce plan must identify the 

human capital required to meet HUD’s organizational goals, conduct 

analyses to identify and close competency gaps, develop strategies to 

 

10The Office of Personnel Management’s Human Capital Assessment and Accountability 

Framework details concepts and systems that broadly outline key principles for planning, 

implementing, and evaluating the results of human capital management policies and 

practices. These key principles are as follows: (1) promote the alignment of human capital 

management strategies with agency mission, goals, and objectives; (2) ensure continuity 

of leadership; (3) promote a diverse, high-performing workforce; (4) address competency 

gaps, particularly in mission-critical occupations; and (5) monitor and evaluate the results 

of its human capital management policies, programs, and activities. OPM’s framework 

aligns with our key principles for strategic human capital and workforce planning. See 

GAO-10-413 and GAO-04-39. 
 

Page 9 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

address human capital needs, and ensure that HUD is appropriately 

structured. The workforce plan is also to:

• link directly to HUD’s strategic plan and be used in decision-making 

for structuring and deploying the workforce;

• ensure mission-critical occupations and competencies are identified 

and documented;

• identify current and future workforce competencies; and

• implement a business forecasting process that identifies probable 

workforce changes, enabling HUD’s managers to anticipate changes 

in human capital that require action to ensure mission 

accomplishment.

While HUD is continuing centralized planning efforts, some of its program 

offices are performing workload or workforce analysis to produce more 

specific information at the program level. For example, the Office of 

Community and Planning Development maintains a workforce and 

staffing plan that outlines all of the current positions and historical 

vacancies within the office. Similarly, the Office of Public and Indian 

Housing maintains a workload management tracking report that manages 

and tracks work activities that directly impact critical strategic and 

management plan goals. Both the Office of Community Planning and

Development and the Office of Public and Indian Housing submit hiring 

plans to the Offices of the Chief Human Capital Officer and the Chief 

Financial Officer for review and input. Further, in 2011, we reported that 

the Federal Housing Administration addressed staffing challenges in its 

Office of Single Family Housing to some extent by hiring more 

contractors; increasing overtime; sharing resources among 

homeownership centers; and changing business processes to minimize 

loan reviews.11

 

11

In 2012, the Federal Housing Administration developed a 

workforce analysis and succession plan for the Office of Single Family 

Housing that included its future workforce planning priorities and 

strategies. Workforce analysis at the program office level is necessary 

GAO-12-15. 

Program Offices 

Developed Processes to 

Inform Human Capital 

Decisions
 

Page 10 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

and provides the offices flexibility and foresight in decision-making and 

devising FTE requests.

Our prior work has shown that human capital and workforce planning are 

essential elements of an agency’s infrastructure. Each agency is 

responsible for ensuring that its human capital program capitalizes on its 

workforce’s strengths and addresses related challenges in a manner that 

is clearly linked to achieving the agency’s mission, goals, and 

objectives.12

HUD’s most recent human capital and workforce plans expired in 2009. 

Although HUD has since launched several workforce planning efforts, it 

reported that these efforts were preempted by other priorities.

Operationally, HUD interprets workforce planning and 

human capital planning as separate processes that are intended to 

support each other. According to an official in the Office of the Chief 

Human Capital Officer, workforce planning identifies the positions, skills, 

and competencies that will be required to continue HUD’s mission and 

service delivery requirements into the future. Separately, human capital 

planning in HUD is focused on current employees and includes activities 

such as performance management and employee retention.

According to HUD, when the administration changed in 2009, HUD was 

immediately immersed in the economic crisis that fell upon the housing 

market and nearly all of its attention was focused on implementation of 

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Nonetheless, 

HUD leadership initiated an effort to develop a comprehensive, new 

strategic plan. In February 2010, HUD engaged key program office staff 

in training that emphasized the need to determine upfront the staff HUD 

could afford to hire. In mid-2010, HUD’s Office of Administration planned 

to initiate a workforce analysis based on HUD’s new Strategic Goal 5, 

 

12Our model of strategic human capital management identifies aspects of human capital 

management that enable agencies to maximize their employees’ contributions, such as (1) 

the continuing attention of senior leaders and managers to valuing and investing in their 

employees; (2) an investment in human capital approaches that acquires, develops, and 

retains the best employees; and (3) the use of performance management systems that 

elicit the best results-oriented performance from the staff, and indicators to measure the 

effectiveness of human capital approaches. These factors, plus strategic workforce 

planning are the cornerstones of an effective human capital program. GAO, A Model of 

Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: 

Mar. 15, 2002).

Other Priorities Delayed 

HUD’s Human Capital 

Planning Activities
 

Page 11 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

“Transform the Way HUD Does Business”. However, at the same time, 

reorganization efforts incorporated the Office of Administration into the 

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer and new employees were hired 

to conduct a workforce analysis and update the human capital and 

workforce plans. Subsequent restructuring and management turnover that 

occurred from 2010 through 2011 caused further delays and, as 

previously discussed, HUD renewed efforts to complete these plans in 

April 2012. Nonetheless, until HUD completes planning efforts, it cannot 

ensure it is using resources efficiently and is making decisions informed 

by strategic direction.

The success of HUD’s current workforce planning efforts is particularly 

important. In June 2012, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

reported on its review of HUD’s human capital management and found 

that HUD’s human capital and workforce planning activities did not always 

follow certain Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework 

standards, or key principles. The framework outlines an ongoing process 

of human capital management in five systems: strategic alignment, 

leadership and knowledge management, results-oriented performance 

culture, talent management, and accountability. The strategic alignment 

system includes both human capital and workforce planning activities. 

Specifically, OPM found:

• Human resources policies and programs are not aligned with 

organizational mission, strategic goals, and performance outcomes.

• Workforce planning is not approached strategically and in an explicit 

documented manner.

• Mission-critical occupations are identified, but there needs to be 

additional analysis to identify gaps and strategies to close the gaps.

• Agency workforce planning and management practices should, but do 

not include strategies such as restructuring, competitive sourcing, 

redeployment, retraining, and technology solutions.

As a result of these weaknesses, OPM concluded that HUD cannot 

continually assess and improve human capital planning and investments 

or measure the impact on mission accomplishment.

In HUD’s response to OPM’s evaluation, it acknowledged deficiencies in 

these areas and outlined planning initiatives that are currently under way 

The Office of Personnel

Management Identified a 

Need for Reinvigorated 

HUD Planning Efforts
 

Page 12 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

to develop and deliver workforce and strategic human capital plans. For 

instance, HUD officials told us that on August 7, 2012, HUD entered into 

an inter-agency agreement with the Department of Treasury to design a 

new system that is meant to (1) explain FTE needs and match FTEs with 

the workload; (2) propose for management consideration the allocation of 

FTEs; (3) identify FTE trends which can assist management in aligning 

future workload to strategic goals and operational and performance plans; 

(4) assist managers in aligning work with staff; and (5) provide succession 

planning and identify gaps in mission critical occupations and 

competencies.13 HUD officials told us that they system will be available by 

September 30, 2013.

In 2012, HUD began taking steps to reexamine its resource management 

process. Officials in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer reported that 

HUD is working to develop a consistent methodology for the budget 

process. HUD plans to use a comprehensive approach to estimating its 

resources by integrating all aspects of HUD’s activities including budget 

planning, workforce and human capital planning, and information 

technology, among other areas. Officials in the Office of the Chief 

Financial Officer also told us that they are encouraging program offices to 

focus on the main reason for requesting a specific number of FTEs and 

the total cost of producing an outcome rather than the separate 

component costs, such as salary.

 

13This inter-agency agreement has five components: (1) staff acquisition, (2) performance 

management, (3) talent management, (4) human resources case management, and 

(5) separations management. This agreement along with other initiatives is part of HUD’s 

broader efforts to change its management of staff resource estimation and allocation. 

HUD Is Reexamining 

Its Resource 

Management 

Processes, which Do 

Not Fully Consider 

Identified Standards

HUD Is Reexamining Its 

Resource Management 

Processes
 

Page 13 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

HUD’s workforce planning task force, established by the Deputy 

Secretary in 2012, is reviewing the usefulness of REAP studies and how 

the studies inform the workforce planning process as part of the 

reexamination process. The task force is to also consult with another 

contractor with whom HUD awarded a 40-week contract in September 

2012 to (1) conduct an assessment of HUD’s existing workforce planning 

tools, including, but not limited to, a review of the REAP methodology, 

and (2) research resource estimation best practices and systems at other

government agencies and private sector entities.14 The contractor’s final 

report is expected by July 2013.

In addition to the principles OPM identified that strategic workforce 

planning should address irrespective of the context in which the planning 

is done, NAPA’s 1999 report identified HUD-specific standards for 

effective resource management. This report emphasized that using 

analytically-based data would increase HUD’s ability to develop human 

capital requirements based on meaningful measures. Further, it outlined 

the underlying requirements of an effective overall resource management 

system. According to the NAPA report, HUD’s system should:

• comprehensively define HUD’s workload;

• provide central guidance on how work is defined and data collected;

• allow program assistant secretaries to retain decision-making 

authority over the systems used in their organizations;

• involve headquarters and field staff in the workload definition process;

• link workload and resources so that Government Performance and 

Results Act (GPRA)-required performance goals can be matched with 

resources to accomplish the goals;15

 

14This is the second of the two contracts HUD awarded in September 2012. The cost of 

this second contract is $750,000.

15The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Pub. L. No. 103-62, 

107 Stat. 285 (1993), as amended by the Government Performance and Results Act 

Modernization Act of 2010, Pub. L. No.111-352, 124 Stat. 3866 (2011). GPRA provides for 

the establishment of strategic planning and performance measurement in the federal 

government.

HUD’s Resource 

Management Processes Do 

Not Fully Consider 

Standards Identified by 

NAPA
 

Page 14 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

• measure how resources used are related to results; and

• create incentives for staff to report accurate data for the system.

The following summarizes our review of the extent to which HUD has 

incorporated NAPA-identified standards.

Comprehensively define HUD’s workload. NAPA reported that a more 

analytical and well-documented approach to defining workload and 

determining needs would be helpful in understanding the agency’s 

justification. HUD and its program offices use various tools and processes 

to define and analyze workload. Centrally, the Office of Field and Policy 

Management tracks manager and staff projects and reports on progress, 

budget, and timelines for achieving strategic goals. The HUD Offices of 

Community Planning and Development, Public and Indian Housing, and 

Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity reported using REAP data as a 

starting point to project workload and to prepare their workload 

justification submissions for the salaries and expenses section of the 

budget requests. These program offices also reported using other tools 

and processes to define workload and estimate resources. Although 

officials from the program offices we spoke with described individual 

efforts, officials from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer indicated that 

budget requests are not predicated on a comprehensive analysis of the 

agencies’ workload. Instead, budget requests are based on a budget 

amount predetermined by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. 

Program offices then work backwards to determine what work can be 

accomplished with that amount.

Provide central guidance on how work is defined and data collected. 

HUD’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer provides central budget 

formulation guidance to the program offices on how work is defined and 

data are collected. In addition, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

issues a memorandum to the program offices detailing technical guidance 

on how to develop a congressional budget justification. The memorandum 

directs the program offices to include legislative policy proposals 

associated with significant new initiatives and staffing requirements 

derived from REAP. According to the guidance, the program offices 

should provide a narrative that clearly explains what the program office 

requests funding for, the expected results of that funding level, and the 

effect decreased funding would have on the taxpayers and communities 

the program serves. Additionally, Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

guidance includes decisional outlines for the salaries and expenses 
 

Page 15 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

portion of the budget request and requires that program offices explain 

any change in requests from one fiscal year to another.

Allow program assistant secretaries to retain decision-making 

authority over the systems used in their organizations. Budget 

decisions involve tradeoffs that HUD and the program offices make to 

ensure HUD has the resources needed to meet its mission. HUD’s 

program assistant secretaries and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

provide input during budget deliberations. For example, program assistant 

secretaries discuss the effect of funding decreases on program activities. 

Officials from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer told us that HUD’s 

priority goals had a direct impact on program office decisions.

Involve headquarters and field staff in the workload definition 

process. With the implementation of REAP in 2002, HUD changed how it 

estimated its FTE needs by engaging both headquarters and field staff in 

the process. The most recent REAP estimation study was conducted in 

2009 and included all work completed by headquarters and field 

operations staff, as well as work completed by contractors.16 As part of 

the estimation studies, the REAP working teams typically surveyed HUD 

staff across six field offices to collect information on how many hours it 

should take to perform their duties. At the completion of the estimation 

study, program coordinators reviewed the data for accuracy and 

compared current entries with the prior entries reported by HUD 

employees.17

 

16The 2009 REAP study was for the Single Family Housing Homeownership Centers. For 

this study, the REAP working team visited the four existing centers.

HUD continues to accumulate staffing information through 

the validation process. Officials from the three HUD program offices we 

met with reported they selectively used data from REAP’s validation 

component, known as the Total Estimation and Allocation Mechanism 

(TEAM), as a starting point for budget formulation and staff allocation 

decisions. TEAM compares actual staff time to estimated staff time. As 

previously discussed, HUD hired a contractor in September 2012 to 

review its resource estimation and workforce planning processes and 

17Program coordinators are located in headquarters and field offices and are responsible 

for managing REAP at the local program level. The REAP working team that participated 

in the 2009 REAP study included an analyst from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, 

a contractor, a subject matter expert from headquarters representing the program area, 

and field staff which included analysts, supervisors, and program coordinators.
 

Page 16 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

assess whether the resource estimation process enables the field offices 

to use it for the distribution of FTEs and workload.

Link workload and resources so that GPRA-required performance 

goals can be matched with resources to accomplish the goals, and 

measure how resources used are related to results. HUD has made 

efforts to link its performance goals with the resources needed to achieve 

them and has planned additional actions related to strategic human 

capital and workforce planning that should enable it to measure how 

resources used are related to results. GPRA requires an agency to create 

an annual performance plan that establishes goals and performance 

measures.18

Create incentives for staff to report accurate data for the system.

HUD does not have an incentive structure to encourage staff to report 

accurate data into its resource management system. As a result, resource 

management decisions may not be based on full and complete 

information. As previously discussed, HUD’s program offices selectively 

use REAP to help define workload and estimate resources. Data are 

Further, agencies are to report on their performance, 

providing updates at least annually. As part of these updates, agencies 

are to compare actual performance achieved with the performance goals 

established in the agency’s annual performance plan. These updates also 

are to include a review of the performance goals and an evaluation of the 

performance plan as it relates to the agency’s strategic human capital 

management. In its annual performance plan for fiscal years 2012 to 

2013, HUD linked the department’s resources to the goals and subgoals 

in its strategic plan for fiscal years 2010 to 2015. For example, according 

to the annual performance plan, to meet HUD’s strategic goal of 

transforming the way HUD does business, HUD established a 

performance management and accountability process that is meant to 

align HUD’s program and support functions with its strategic goals and 

mission. In the past, program areas provided detailed data that was not in 

a format that facilitated management’s understanding of how resources 

related to results. Moreover, data focused on personnel costs. According 

to a HUD official, for fiscal year 2014, at the direction of the Deputy 

Secretary, HUD plans to organize budget information in a format that 

facilitates management review and that encompasses both personnel 

(e.g., FTE) and nonpersonnel (e.g., travel and training) costs with results.

 

1831 U.S.C. § 1115(b). 
 

Page 17 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

generated with the support of all HUD staff who enter their workload into 

REAP’s validation component, TEAM, each quarter, during a randomly 

selected 2-week period.19

Moreover, there are no routine data reliability checks on the information 

REAP produces and there is no widespread agreement that REAP 

produces the quality of data needed to accurately determine resource 

needs. For example, Office of Community Planning and Development 

officials told us that the work categories in TEAM are either too narrowly 

defined, resulting in too large a number of categories to choose from 

overall, or too broad to be meaningful. Similarly, the Office of Public and 

Indian Housing reported that REAP studies are performed infrequently 

and often do not account for near-term and future changes in workload. 

Additionally, Office of Public and Indian Housing officials told us that 

REAP’s data collection through TEAM for a 2-week period every quarter 

yields data that is of little value since, in their opinion, it is not 

representative of all work performed throughout the year. As a result, staff 

are entering information into TEAM on an inconsistent basis and 

information is often not used to inform decisionmaking. Finally, HUD 

officials told us that management did not implement the third component 

of REAP, the allocation module, because they believed that the system 

did not track the program workload accurately and often negatively 

affected FTE requests.

The validation data are verified by the system 

coordinator against the time and attendance system. For the first 5 years 

of REAP’s implementation, HUD provided funding and designated staff to 

maintain the system. Subsequently, such support diminished and officials 

from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer told us that the data are no 

longer consistently used to make final decisions.

 

19REAP’s validation component, TEAM, records workload and generates productivity 

reports that combine both time and workload information. HUD’s time and attendance 

system records time staff spent performing their duties and has the ability to generate time 

reports that are checked against the National Finance Center’s payroll data. 
 

Page 18 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

Primary users of the congressional budget justification (CBJ) have raised 

questions about HUD’s budget presentation. The primary users of the 

CBJ are appropriations subcommittee staff. They said that CBJs from 

fiscal years 2008 through 2012 generally contained data tables for some 

program offices and did not always contain narrative that explained or 

justified the FTE request. According to HUD officials, HUD provided data 

tables because prior submissions with more detail did not prompt 

questions from Congress. However, for fiscal year 2012, Congress 

directed HUD to prepare detailed budget justifications for each office 

within the department, including an organizational chart for each 

operating area within the department.20

Some of the users we interviewed said that HUD’s CBJs have improved 

over the years and include sufficient information for their purposes. When 

HUD submitted the CBJ for fiscal year 2013 it provided more detailed 

explanations about the changes in FTE requests. For example, the Office 

of Public and Indian Housing specified in its request that an increase of 

48.7 FTEs will target particular priority areas such as the prevention of 

homelessness, among other select areas. In addition, these users 

explained that with any CBJ process there is negotiation between the 

committee and HUD over FTE decisions. But overall, the users report that 

there has been an improvement in the quality of information HUD 

submits.

These justifications were required 

to include a detailed justification for existing staff and for the incremental 

funding increases, decreases, and FTE fluctuations being requested by 

program, project, or activity. HUD was also directed to include more 

detailed information on its salaries and expenses costs, as well as 

nonpersonnel related expenses, including travel by program office, and 

that any significant deviations from prior budgets be fully explained and 

justified. Further, HUD was directed to modify or improve REAP or other 

resource management systems or processes.

Although primary users of the CBJs agree that the fiscal year 2013 

changes improved the clarity and utility of the justifications, some have 

raised additional questions about the uniformity and reliability of the 

information presented. These users said that more organized and 

consistent data collection, analysis, and reporting processes are needed 

 

20H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 112-284, at 312 (2011) accompanying the Consolidated and Further 

Continuing Appropriations Act of 2012, Pub. L. No.112-55, 125 Stat. 552. The Conference 

Report also incorporated statements made in S. Rep. 112-93 (2011).

HUD’s Budget 

Submission Could 

More Clearly Explain 

the Underlying 

Rationale for Its 

Request
 

Page 19 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

to ensure quality budget submissions. As a result, these users do not feel 

that they have adequate, consistent information from HUD that justifies 

the budget request.

HUD has experienced longstanding challenges determining the staff 

resources it needs to fulfill its mission and recently took steps to improve 

its workforce planning ability. Prior to this latest effort, HUD began 

numerous other efforts to establish human capital and workforce plans 

and then, due to competing priorities, were unable to complete these 

plans. Recently, HUD has renewed efforts to reexamine staff resource 

management processes.

HUD has shown it has an understanding of the key principles of human 

capital and workforce planning as demonstrated by the concepts outlined 

in the contract with the consultant responsible for developing future 

human capital and workforce plans. However, because future 

deliverables and their timing are not explicit in the contract, the years the 

plans will cover are subject to interpretation and portions may not help 

HUD plan a path forward LI they cover years that have elapsed. It will 

be important for HUD to maintain ongoing planning efforts to achieve

its goals.

HUD continues to lack consistent, analytically-based data generated from 

an effective resource management system. This is in part because HUD 

staff have little incentive to accurately report data that are not routinely 

used. As a result, management may not have complete information upon 

which to make effective resource estimation and allocation decisions.

While primary users of HUD’s CBJs agree that the fiscal year 2013 

changes improved the quality of the justifications, additional questions 

remain about the information presented. Without ongoing consultations, 

primary users of the CBJ may not have the most relevant information to 

facilitate the congressional budget decisionmaking process.

To improve the human capital planning, workforce planning, and resource 

management processes at HUD, we recommend that the Secretary of 

HUD take the following three actions:

1. follow through on developing and maintaining strategic human capital 

and workforce plans;

Conclusions

Recommendations for 

Executive Action
 

Page 20 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

2. ensure that human capital and workforce plans clearly incorporate key 

principles; and

3. collect data that are used for decision-making, thus creating 

incentives for staff to report accurate data for the resource 

management system.

To improve the quality of HUD’s CBJ, we further recommend that the 

Secretary of HUD take the following action:

4. consult with users of the CBJ, such as congressional decision 

makers, to determine what additional information about resource 

decisions should be presented, and how, in its CBJ.

We provided a draft of this report to the Secretary of the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for review and comment. HUD 

did not provide formal comments, but agreed with all of our 

recommendations. HUD provided technical comments, which we 

incorporated into the report as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of HUD, relevant 

congressional committees, and other interested parties. In addition, this 

report will be available at no charge on GAO’s website at 

http://www.gao.gov. If you have any questions concerning this report, 

please contact me on (202) 512-6806 or by email at sagerm@gao.gov. 

GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are listed in 

appendix IV. Contacts for our office of Congressional Relations and 

Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report.

Michelle Sager

Director

Strategic Issues

Agency Comments
Appendix I: Original Design of the Resource 

Estimation and Allocation Process (REAP)

Page 21 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

The following table outlines the processes within each step of REAP as 

depicted in figure 1.

Table 1: Original Design of the Resource Estimation and Allocation Process (REAP) 

REAP: Staff resource management tool 

REAP uses results from component processes to assist HUD in defining and 

estimating FTEs and to inform its budget formulation and execution process.

Step 1: Estimation

HUD staff conduct studies to estimate the baseline number of hours it should 

take to perform their work. 

Step 2: Validation

A web-based computer system, called the Total Estimation and Allocation 

Mechanism (TEAM), accumulates staffing information and helps HUD 

determine how resource estimates align with how staff spend their time. 

Step 3: Allocation

Information gathered through the estimation and validation processes are 

intended to inform staffing and budget allocation decisions.

Source: GAO analysis of HUD’s documents.

Appendix I: Original Design of the Resource 

Estimation and Allocation Process (REAP) 
Appendix II: NAPA-Identified Standards for 

HUD’s Resource Management System 

Page 22 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

In designing a resource management system, the National Academy of 

Public Administration (NAPA) worked with a Department of Housing and 

Urban Development (HUD) advisory group to determine what elements 

should be included and identified the following.

Table 2: NAPA-Identified Standards for HUD’s Resource Management System

Aspect of resource management Identified standard

Underlying principles for the overall 

resource management system

• HUD’s workload must be defined comprehensively. HUD should identify all process and 

knowledge work.

• Program assistant secretaries should retain decision-making authority over the systems to 

be used in their organizations.

• There should be some central guidance on how work is defined and how data are 

collected.

• The field should be involved in the workload definition exercise and in setting workload 

priorities.

• There needs to be an incentive for staff to report accurate data for the system.

• The system should link workload and resources so that the Government Performance and 

Results Act (GPRA) performance goals and indicators can be matched with resources 

required to accomplish the goals.

• The system should have some means to measure how resources used are related to 

accomplishments so that the standards used to estimate resources are validated and 

updated.

Criteria for an effective resource 

estimation system

• Develop requests for resource needs—for current and proposed policies and programs—to 

prepare departmental budget justifications that clearly indicate what work can be 

accomplished at different resource levels.

• Develop budget requests based on factors beyond the immediate HUD environment, such 

as the real estate market, public assistance policies, and relevant economic data.

• Provide sufficient information to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and 

Congress so they can gauge the resources needed to fulfill HUD’s mission and meet the 

requirements of HUD’s programs.

• Determine what work can be accomplished with HUD staff and what work would be done 

more efficiently if contracted out, and facilitate cost comparisons for use of in-house staff 

versus contractors.

• Include justifications from staff at working levels in the field and headquarters.

• Develop resource estimates in sufficient time so that HUD’s Budget Office can evaluate 

them in conjunction with workload data, have time for give and take with the submitting 

program offices, and provide information useful for subsequent discussions with OMB and 

Congress.

Appendix II: NAPA-Identified Standards for 

HUD’s Resource Management System
Appendix II: NAPA-Identified Standards for 

HUD’s Resource Management System

Page 23 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

Aspect of resource management Identified standard

Criteria for an effective resource 

allocation system

• Relate the resources allocated to accomplishments as identified in the GPRA-required 

annual performance plans and HUD’s business and operating plans.

• Make informed resource allocation decisions when there are not enough resources to do 

all assigned work, and be flexible enough to reassign resources when needs change.

• Obligate funds for annual contracts early in the year, so contract amendments do not have 

to be issued on a monthly basis.

• Know resources, by budget object class, for the full fiscal year.

• Ensure that programs that operate well receive adequate resources so that they continue 

to function well and that troubled programs receive sufficient resources to improve.

• Link resources to essential functions of current programs and specify secondary activities 

that can only be met if additional resources are provided.

Criteria for an effective resource 

validation system

• Ensure resources are spent as Congress intended.

• Validate the outputs of the resource estimation and allocation system through time and 

workload reporting.

• Tie staff utilization to performance measurement systems, especially those related to 

GPRA. 

• Be sufficiently simple that staff do not view system requirements as onerous.

• Generate reports that enable HUD managers and staff to see how the data they input 

provide information useful to managing HUD programs and operations.

Source: National Academy of Public Administration, Aligning Resources and Priorities at HUD: Designing a Resource Management 

System (Washington, D.C.: 1999). 
Appendix III: HUD Program Office Descriptions 

Page 24 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

The Office of Public and Indian Housing oversees the administration of 

programs that provided affordable housing to approximately 3.2 million 

households nationwide in 2012. Congress provides funds to the Office of 

Public and Indian housing for the modernization of housing stock, 

improvement of program management by approximately 4,100 public 

housing authorities, and facilitation of programs to address crime and 

security and provide supportive services and tenant opportunities. Office 

of Public and Indian Housing programs include Homelessness Initiative 

(Families Homelessness), Veterans Homelessness Initiative, and Choice 

Neighborhoods, among others.

The Office of Community Planning and Development seeks to develop 

viable communities by promoting integrated approaches that provide 

decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expand economic 

opportunities for low and moderate income persons. The office operates 

through partnerships among all levels of government and the private 

sector, including for-profit and nonprofit organizations and supports more 

than 1,200 formula grantees through staff-provided technical assistance, 

monitoring, and customer service. The Office of Community and Planning 

Development’s major programs include the Community Development 

Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership Program, Homelessness 

Assistance Grants, and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS and 

Capacity Building.

The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity administers federal 

laws and establishes national policies that ensure that all Americans have 

equal access to the housing of their choice. Additionally, the Office of Fair 

Housing and Equal Opportunity (1) manages the Fair Housing Assistance 

Program; (2) awards and administers Fair Housing Initiatives Program 

Grants; (3) interprets policy, processes complaints, and performs 

compliance reviews and provides technical assistance to local housing 

authorities and community development agencies; and (4) conducts 

oversight of the government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie Mae and 

Freddie Mac, to ensure consistency with the Fair Housing Act of 1968. 

The Office of Housing provides public services through its nationally 

administered programs. It oversees the Federal Housing Administration, 

the largest mortgage insurer in the world, as well as regulates housing 

industry business. The mission of the Office of Housing is to contribute to 

building and preserving healthy neighborhoods and communities; 

maintain and expand homeownership, rental housing and healthcare 

opportunities; stabilize credit markets in times of economic disruption; 

operate with a high degree of public and fiscal accountability; and 

Appendix III: HUD Program Office 

Descriptions 
Appendix III: HUD Program Office Descriptions 

Page 25 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

recognize and value its customers, staff, constituents and partners. Within 

the Office of Housing are four business areas: Single Family Housing, 

Multifamily Housing, HealthCare Programs, and Regulatory Programs.
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 26 GAO-13-282 HUD’s Strategic Human Capital Planning 

Michelle Sager, (202) 512-6806 or sagerm@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Carol Henn, Assistant Director; 

Sonya Phillips, Analyst-in-Charge; and Ulyana Panchishin made key 

contributions to this report. Other contributors were Melissa Emery-Arras, 

Robert Gebhart, Cindy Gilbert, Robert Robinson, and Sabrina Streagle.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(450976)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

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

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

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

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

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

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

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

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

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

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

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

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

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

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

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

Contact:

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

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

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

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

7125, Washington, DC 20548

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

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

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.