Report to the Honorable John D. 

Rockefeller IV, U.S. Senate 

United States General Accounting Office

GAO 

January 2003 VA HEALTH CARE 

Improved Planning 

Needed for 

Management of 

Excess Real Property 

GAO-03-326 
The Great Lakes network has developed or implemented alternative use or 

disposal plans for 21 of the 30 unneeded, vacant buildings. VA has leased 10 

of the buildings to the Chicago Medical School and is negotiating a lease for 

3 buildings with Catholic Charities of Chicago. Four buildings were 

demolished, and 4 buildings will be demolished in order to construct new 

facilities or to expand an existing cemetery. 

The network identified three obstacles that hinder alternative use or 

planning for the remaining buildings: 

• VA has been unable to find organizations interested in using the vacant, 

unneeded buildings due primarily to their location or physical condition. 

• VA may spend more to demolish buildings than it would spend to 

maintain the buildings as is. 

• VA is reluctant to transfer disposal responsibility for the buildings to the 

General Services Administration, primarily because (1) VA would incur 

costs for environmental and other requirements that could exceed 

potential savings through avoidance of routine maintenance costs, and 

(2) any proceeds may only be used for the construction of VA nursing 

homes. 

Source: VA. 

Vacant building at the health care facility in Milwaukee, Wis., for which the Great Lakes network has 

no alternate use or disposal plan. 

VA HEALTH CARE 

Improved Planning Needed for 

Management of Excess Real Property 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-326.

To view the full report, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Cynthia A. 

Bascetta at (202) 512-7101. 

Highlights of GAO-03-326, a report to the 

Honorable John D. Rockefeller IV, U.S. 

Senate 

January 2003 

The Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA) has changed from a hospitalbased system to primary reliance on 

outpatient care. As a result, VA 

expects that the number of 

unneeded buildings will increase. 

Veterans’ needs could be better 

served if VA finds ways to minimize 

resources devoted to these 

buildings. VA must have an 

effective process to find alternate 

uses or dispose of unneeded 

property. In August 2002, VA 

completed a pilot test for realigning 

its health care system in the Great 

Lakes network. The pilot identified 

30 buildings that are no longer 

needed to provide health care to 

veterans. VA is currently studying 

how to realign assets in its 20 

remaining networks. GAO was 

asked to review VA’s management 

of unneeded buildings in its Great 

Lakes network. 

GAO recommends that the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

conduct a pilot test in the Great 

Lakes network of its newly 

developed model for managing 

vacant buildings and make 

modifications, if needed, to ensure 

that it will provide an effective 

decision-making tool that could be 

used in the remaining networks. 

VA concurred with this 

recommendation. 
Page i GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 3

VA’s Management of 30 Vacant Buildings in Its Great Lakes 

Network 6

Obstacles to Alternate Use or Disposal of 9 Vacant Buildings 7

Conclusions 9

Recommendation for Executive Action 9

Agency Comments 9

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 11 

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Veterans 

Affairs 12 

Abbreviations 

CARES Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services 

GSA General Services Administration 

VA Department of Veterans Affairs 

Contents 
Page 1 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

January 29, 2003 

The Honorable John D. Rockefeller IV 

United States Senate 

Dear Senator Rockefeller: 

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) operates one of our nation’s 

largest health care delivery systems, comprising 21 health care delivery 

networks that operate and maintain over 4,700 buildings. Over the past 

decade, VA’s system has undergone a dramatic transformation, shifting 

from predominantly hospital-based care to primary reliance on 

community-based VA and non-VA providers for a full continuum of health 

care delivered largely on an outpatient basis. As a result, vacant and 

underutilized buildings at VA’s inpatient locations have become more 

common. 

Because the cost to operate and maintain these underutilized and vacant 

buildings consumes resources that could otherwise be used to provide 

health care services for veterans,1

 VA initiated its Capital Asset 

Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) process. Under CARES, VA’s 

Undersecretary for Health has directed networks to develop assetrestructuring plans to guide future capital investment decisions that would 

involve constructing new facilities or renovating or closing existing ones 

for the purpose of delivering health care more efficiently in existing 

locations or closer to where veterans live. 

Through CARES, VA plans to develop a nationwide strategic plan that 

identifies capital assets needed to meet veterans’ health care needs, as 

well as those assets that are no longer needed. In August 2002, VA 

announced the results of its CARES pilot test—a plan to realign capital 

assets to improve health care delivery in its Great Lakes network. This 

plan described how VA intends to restructure its inpatient facilities as well 

as open new outpatient clinics in community settings to provide health 

 1

U.S. General Accounting Office, VA Health Care: Capital Asset Planning and Budgeting 

Need Improvement, GAO/T-HEHS-99-83 (Washington D.C.: Mar.10, 1999), VA Health Care: 

Challenges Facing VA in Developing an Asset Realignment Process, GAO/T-HEHS-99-173

(Washington D.C.: July 22 1999), and VA Health Care: Improvements Needed in Capital 

Asset Planning and Budgeting, GAO/HEHS-99-145 (Washington D.C.: Aug. 13, 1999). 

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

care to veterans. Also, VA identified 30 vacant buildings that are no longer 

needed to meet veterans’ health care needs.2

 

Currently VA is conducting CARES studies in its 20 other health care 

networks. VA’s goal is to make realignment decisions by October 2003, and 

it expects that many additional buildings will be considered excess, given 

its extensive inventory of buildings nationwide. As such, timely disposal or 

alternate use of excess buildings could play a critical role in VA’s 

realignment efforts by avoiding maintenance costs or generating revenue 

to enhance services for veterans such as financing needed renovations to 

existing buildings. 

In your capacity as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ 

Affairs, you asked us to review VA’s management of vacant buildings in 

the Great Lakes CARES pilot to better understand the potential 

implications of excess property for the entire CARES process. 

Accordingly, we assessed the Great Lakes Network’s efforts to develop 

alternate use or disposal plans for vacant buildings and identified 

obstacles that hinder effective management. 

To conduct our work, we visited medical facilities in the Great Lakes 

network, where we also did physical inspections of vacant buildings. We 

reviewed documents related to the 30 vacant buildings, as well as the 

network’s plans for managing these buildings. We discussed these plans 

and asset disposal issues with officials responsible for asset management 

in VA’s headquarters, in the Great Lakes network office, and at the 

network’s health care facilities. We also discussed federal disposal 

policies, procedures, and practices with officials of the General Services 

Administration (GSA) as well as representatives of the National Trust for 

Historic Preservation. We performed our review from January 2002 

through January 2003 in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards. Appendix I contains a more detailed description of our 

scope and methodology. 

VA has developed or implemented alternative use or disposal plans for 

21 of its 30 unneeded, vacant buildings in the Great Lakes network. For 

 2

As part of the restructuring of inpatient services, VA also plans to close the Lakeside 

Division of its Chicago Health Care System and transfer patients to the system’s West Side 

Division and, as needed, to the Hines VA hospital, by December 2003. In addition, VA 

identified three other network buildings that may become vacant over the next 3 years. 

Results in Brief 
Page 3 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

13 buildings, VA expects to generate revenue through Enhanced-Use 

Leases3

 primarily with nonprofit organizations. Enhanced-Use Lease 

partners have demolished 4 buildings, and VA expects 4 additional 

buildings will be demolished to meet higher priority needs, such as 

additional cemetery capacity or parking for patients, visitors, and others 

when using VA health care facilities. 

For the remaining 9 vacant buildings, network officials identified three 

obstacles that hinder effective management. First, despite significant 

efforts to find alternate uses, they have been unable to find organizations 

interested in using the buildings due primarily to their location or physical 

condition. Second, network officials believe that it may cost more to 

demolish buildings than to continue to incur routine maintenance costs 

although in many cases the network has not determined the cost to 

demolish the vacant buildings. Third, although disposal responsibility for 

these buildings can be transferred to GSA, network officials have been 

reluctant to pursue this option primarily because VA would incur costs for 

environmental and other requirements that could exceed potential savings 

through avoidance of maintenance costs. However, the network has not 

determined whether such transfer costs actually exceed potential savings. 

VA also does not consider this to be an attractive option because any 

proceeds could only be used for construction of VA nursing homes. 

We are making a recommendation to improve the decision-making process 

for assessing alternative ways to deal with excess buildings. VA concurred 

with our recommendation. 

VA spent about $21 billion to provide health care services, including acute 

medicine, surgery, mental health, and long-term care, to about 4.2 million 

veterans during fiscal year 2001. Of VA’s 4,700 buildings, over 40 percent 

have operated for more than 50 years, including almost 200 built before 

1900. Over 1,600 buildings have historical significance that requires VA to 

comply with special procedures for maintenance and disposal. 

VA’s health care infrastructure was designed and built to reflect a concept 

of hospital-centered inpatient care, with long stays for diagnosis and 

 3

38 U.S.C. §8161 (2002) et seq. VA has authority to enter into partnerships to lease its 

properties to nongovernmental entities. In turn these entities develop, rehabilitate, or 

renovate the properties. 

Background 
Page 4 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

treatment. This concept is now outdated as new technology and treatment 

methods have shifted delivery from inpatient to outpatient services where 

possible and shortened lengths of stay when hospitalization is required. As 

a result, VA’s capital assets often do not align with current health care 

needs for optimal efficiency and access. 

To address this situation, CARES will assess veterans’ potential demand 

for health care over the next 20 years, identify potential service gaps and 

develop delivery options for meeting veterans’ needs, and guide the 

realignment of capital assets to support the preferred delivery options. VA 

conducted a pilot test in the Great Lakes network, which served about 

220,000 veterans in fiscal year 2001 with an annual budget of $891 million. 

This network includes three general market areas: northern Illinois 

(Chicago), Wisconsin, and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. In February 

2002, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs selected strategies for realignment 

of services. These strategies included (1) consolidation of services at 

existing locations, (2) opening of new outpatient clinics, and (3) closure of 

one inpatient location. 

Subsequently, VA identified 30 vacant buildings that were no longer 

needed to meet veterans’ health care needs. Of the 30 buildings, 11 are 

considered to be historic. Under the provisions of the National Historic 

Preservation Act,4

 federal agencies are required to take into account the 

effect of any federal undertaking on any historic property. Until a decision 

is made on demolition, agencies that own or control historic properties are 

required to preserve their historic character and minimize harm to them. 

The act also establishes federal agency responsibilities that must be met if 

historic properties are to be demolished. 

During fiscal year 2001, officials in VA’s Great Lakes network told us that 

an estimated $750,000 was spent to maintain vacant buildings, primarily 

for utilities. Network officials told us that this represents a relatively small 

portion of the total resources needed to adequately operate these 

buildings for the delivery of health care or other purposes. Actual 

expenses were lower because the buildings are no longer used for health 

care. 

 4

16 U.S.C. 470 et seq. The act establishes roles and responsibilities of the federal 

government to preserve and protect historic properties. 
Page 5 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

In general, the network considered three options when developing 

property disposal or other plans for vacant buildings: Enhanced-Use 

Leasing, demolition, or transferring the property to GSA, which has the 

authority to dispose of excess or surplus federal property under the 

Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (Property Act).5

Under Enhanced-Use Leasing, VA may lease property to others for up to 75 

years; it may transfer title to the lessee at some time during the life of the 

lease if such transfer is in the best interests of the federal government. 

Demolition is a viable option when the associated costs can be recovered 

within a reasonable period, primarily through the avoidance of 

maintenance costs. If VA reports the property to GSA as excess, GSA 

identifies potential users for the property by going through several levels 

of screenings that evaluate users in the following order of priority: federal 

users; organizations that will use the property for homeless programs 

under the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act;6

 nonprofit 

organizations that may want the property for public uses such as parks, 

museums, or educational facilities; and state or local governments. If none 

of these screening processes produce a user, the site is made available for 

public sale. 

Following the pilot test in the Great Lakes network, VA made significant 

modifications to its CARES procedures, including development of a more 

systematic process to guide decisions involving the management of vacant 

buildings. For example, networks will use a common format for estimating 

future maintenance costs, as well as potential demolition costs. However, 

the model does not include costs associated with the transfer of property 

to GSA nor the potential revenue that could be realized. 

 5

Excess property means any property under the control of a federal executive agency that 

is not required for the agency’s needs or the discharge of its responsibility. (40 U.S.C. § 

102(3); 41 C.F.R. §101-47.901.) If GSA determines that excess real property is not required 

by any federal landholding agency, the property is deemed “surplus” and eligible for 

disposal. (40 U.S.C. § 102(10); 41 C.F.R. 101-47.901.) 

6

42 U.S.C. § 11411. 
Page 6 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

VA has negotiated Enhanced-Use Leases for 10 vacant buildings and is 

negotiating Enhanced-Use Leases for 3 buildings. Four buildings have 

been demolished, and 4 additional buildings will be demolished. VA 

currently has no disposal plans for the other 9 buildings. 

In April 2002, VA contracted with the Chicago Medical School for an 

Enhanced-Use Lease of 10 vacant buildings at VA’s North Chicago health 

care delivery location. The medical school will either renovate or demolish 

these buildings and in return will purchase utilities, including steam, 

electricity, and chilled water, from a VA-operated facility. In addition to 

generating revenue from the sale of utilities, the network will avoid annual 

maintenance costs of over $440,000. 

VA is negotiating an Enhanced-Use Lease with Catholic Charities of 

Chicago for 3 vacant buildings at the Hines VA hospital in Chicago. Two of 

the three were considered historic; VA network officials took steps to have 

the historic designation removed. VA expects Catholic Charities to 

renovate the buildings to make them suitable for transitional housing for 

the homeless. VA also expects to receive rental payments as well as 

reimbursement for utilities, grounds maintenance, and snow removal. In 

addition, VA is negotiating with Catholic Charities to use at least 50 

percent of the housing for veterans who need this service. Network 

officials told us that utilities were turned off and that no funds were spent 

on these buildings for other purposes during fiscal year 2001. 

Four buildings have been demolished, and 4 others will be demolished. At 

the Chicago Health Care System’s West Side Division, the Enhanced-Use 

Lease partner demolished 3 buildings in November 2002 to provide space 

for a new parking garage and a Veterans Benefits Administration regional 

office. The U. S. Navy demolished 1 building at North Chicago on land that 

VA transferred to it for future use. Four other buildings will be demolished 

because they present safety hazards or the land is needed to expand 

existing VA facilities, including cemeteries. These buildings are located at 

the Milwaukee health care facility and Hines VA hospital. Two of these 

buildings, located at Milwaukee, are historic. The other two buildings are 

at Hines. One of the two was considered historic. Network officials told us 

they were successful in having the historic designation removed. This 

building will be demolished in order to construct a surface parking lot for 

a new spinal cord injury/blind rehabilitation center. During fiscal year 

2001, VA spent about $17,000 to operate and maintain these 4 buildings. 

VA’s Management of 

30 Vacant Buildings in 

Its Great Lakes 

Network 
Page 7 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

Despite the efforts of network officials, the lack of interest in 9 of VA’s 

vacant buildings has been an obstacle to finding alternate uses for these 

buildings. Network officials believe that maintaining ownership of the 

vacant buildings is the least expensive course of action, given the 

relatively high demolition costs compared to annual maintenance costs 

and considerable uncertainties concerning VA’s potential costs to transfer 

the properties to GSA. 

Network officials told us that they have attempted to interest outside 

organizations in utilizing the 9 vacant buildings without success. For 

example, officials at the medical center in Tomah, Wisconsin, offered to 

transfer ownership of a 23,579-gross-square-foot building to a local Indian 

tribe for use as office space and an outpatient clinic. The building, which 

was constructed in 1929, has been vacant since 1983. According to VA, the 

offer was turned down because of the $2 million cost of renovations 

needed to make it suitable for this purpose. The medical center director 

told us that because Tomah is located in a rural area, it has been difficult 

to find other organizations interested in this building and its two other 

vacant buildings. 

Likewise, officials at the Milwaukee medical center told us that they have 

had discussions with other organizations concerning use of 6 vacant 

buildings. They have tried to generate interest in the buildings as elderly 

housing, as office space, and for a youth home. These officials suggested 

that two of the vacant buildings, a theater and a chapel, could, when 

renovated, be used for these purposes if interested parties could be found. 

They told us they have held discussions with other government agencies, 

school organizations, a labor union, and charitable organizations without 

success. 

Network officials cited a second obstacle, namely that the cost to 

demolish the 9 vacant buildings could not be recovered through avoidance 

of maintenance costs, such as utilities, within a reasonable period. For 

example, the network determined that the cost to demolish 3 of these 

9 vacant buildings would be about $500,000, while maintenance costs for 

the 3 buildings were about $26,000 during fiscal year 2001. 

The shortest recovery period was about 11 years for 1 of the 4 buildings. 

This 33,910-square-foot building, located in Tomah, Wisconsin, has been 

vacant since 1998. According to VA, the cost to demolish this building 

would be $212,000. During fiscal year 2001, the medical center spent about 

$18,600 for utilities for this building. By contrast, demolition costs for 

1 building would likely take over 40 years to recover. This 23,579-grossObstacles to Alternate 

Use or Disposal of 9 

Vacant Buildings 
Page 8 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

square-foot building has been vacant at the Tomah medical center since 

1983. During fiscal year 2001, the medical center spent about $7,000 to 

maintain this building. According to VA, the cost to demolish this building 

would be $308,000. 

In addition, network officials cited the uncertainty of potential costs as the 

third obstacle in declaring the 9 buildings excess property under the 

provisions of the Property Act. First there is no assurance that VA could 

save money given that property-holding agencies, such as VA, incur costs 

in disposing of excess property with GSA. Property-holding agencies are 

generally responsible for mothballing and stabilizing7

 property in order to 

prevent its further deterioration pending transfer to another federal 

agency or its disposal. According to GSA, the landholding agency is also 

responsible for studies to detect the presence of hazardous wastes as well 

as archeological sites. 

GSA officials also told us that they are committed to maintaining the best 

and highest use for the property and that historic property will be 

transferred only under covenants that protect its historic designation; all 9 

buildings are considered historic. According to a network official, the 

Great Lakes network has not determined whether the cost of transferring 

these excess buildings to GSA exceeds the cost of continuing to own and 

maintain them. 

Second, VA does not consider the transfer of vacant buildings to GSA (by 

declaring them excess) to be an attractive option. This is because 

proceeds that are received from the sale of real property must be 

deposited into the VA Nursing Home Revolving Fund, which is only to be 

used for the construction of nursing homes. VA would prefer to use these 

proceeds for the delivery of inpatient and outpatient services for veterans 

as well as long-term care. VA officials told us that they had proposed 

legislation that would allow VA to use sales proceeds to support veterans’ 

health care delivery, but it was not enacted. As a result, VA would prefer to 

pursue Enhanced-Use Leases, which will allow VA to use revenue to meet 

the overall health care needs of veterans. 

 7

Mothballing includes securing the buildings, providing adequate ventilation, and 

disconnecting and sealing off all utilities. Stabilizing includes structurally stabilizing the 

buildings, controlling pests, and protecting the exterior and interior from moisture. 
Page 9 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

Officials in VA’s Great Lakes network have made progress dealing with 

vacant buildings that are no longer needed in the delivery of health care to 

veterans. When there is no Enhanced-Use Lease potential, however, these 

officials have encountered several obstacles, including potentially high 

demolition costs or uncertain site preparation costs associated with 

reporting buildings to GSA as excess to VA’s needs. Understandably, they 

are reluctant to commit potentially large amounts of health care resources 

for the demolition or site preparation without sufficient assurance that 

most or all costs will be recovered. The Great Lakes network has retained 

ownership of 9 vacant buildings and thus continues to spend medical care 

resources to maintain them. As the CARES process is completed in the 20 

remaining networks, costs associated with an increasing number of 

unneeded buildings that will be identified will grow. Therefore, it is critical 

that VA take the steps needed to systematically evaluate all relevant cost 

information. VA’s recent changes to the CARES process provide a 

framework for making effective decisions, although since the changes 

have not been tested, it remains unclear whether they will function as an 

effective model that includes complete cost information concerning 

options to dispose of or find alternate uses for vacant buildings. 

To ensure that the newly developed CARES model for managing excess 

buildings will provide an effective decision-making tool that could be used 

in the other networks, we recommend that the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs conduct a pilot test of the model in the Great Lakes network and 

make modifications, if needed. 

In commenting on a draft of this report, VA agreed with our findings and 

conclusions and concurred with our recommendation. VA’s letter is 

reprinted in appendix II. 

We modified the report to use the term “Enhanced Use Leasing,” as VA 

suggested. We also incorporated VA’s technical comments as appropriate. 

VA also emphasized that it had proposed legislation that would allow VA 

to use sales proceeds to support veterans’ health care delivery, but it has 

not been enacted. Also, VA expressed concern that the process for 

removing buildings from historic preservation status is a significant 

obstacle when it attempts to find alternate use for or dispose of all 

remaining buildings. We agree that this process complicates VA’s ability to 

manage vacant buildings, but as we stated in our report, VA has been 

successful in removing the historic designation of buildings in the Great 

Lakes network in order to facilitate demolition or alternate use. Factors 

Conclusions 

Recommendation for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 
Page 10 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

such as the constraints on the ability to retain proceeds from the sale of 

real property and the need to address historical building issues are shared 

by many real property-holding agencies. We discuss the factors associated 

with excess property in the federal government as a whole in a soon-to-bereleased report on longstanding problems in the federal real property 

arena. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

and other interested parties. We will also make copies available to others 

upon request. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO 

Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

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

call me at (202) 512-7101. Key contributors to this report were Paul 

Reynolds, Behn Miller, and John Borrelli. 

Sincerely yours, 

Cynthia A. Bascetta 

Director, Health Care—Veterans’ 

 Health and Benefits Issues 
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Page 11 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

To assess the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) efforts to manage 

unneeded, vacant buildings, we obtained information from the Great Lakes 

network on the number of such buildings, the cost to maintain the 

buildings, and its efforts to find alternate uses for the buildings. We asked 

for information such as the age of the buildings, the year in which they 

became vacant, the cost of utilities and other operating costs, as well as 

the cost of any needed repairs. We also asked about the network’s plans to 

manage these buildings through such actions as demolition or EnhancedUse Lease. 

After we received this information we visited the network and interviewed 

the Director and other network staff members about their efforts to deal 

with unneeded, vacant buildings. We discussed with these officials their 

plans for implementing Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services 

(CARES) options selected by the Secretary. We visited the Hines, 

Milwaukee, and North Chicago hospitals. During our visits we met with 

hospital directors, associate directors, and their staffs. We discussed with 

these officials their actions to find alternate uses for the buildings and 

problems they have encountered in doing so. By telephone, we discussed 

with the Director of the Tomah hospital and members of his staff 

information on the hospital’s vacant buildings. At the Milwaukee and 

North Chicago hospitals, we visually inspected vacant buildings. We did 

not tour vacant buildings at Hines because of building safety concerns. 

At VA headquarters, we met with officials to discuss the CARES process 

and VA’s plans for managing vacant buildings. We reviewed CARES 

planning documents, including information supporting the network’s 

August 2002 realignment decisions. We also met with VA’s Historic 

Preservation Officer to discuss the impact of historic significance on VA’s 

ability to take actions on unneeded vacant buildings. 

We met with General Services Administration officials to discuss the 

process for disposing of excess property as well as proposed legislation 

aimed at improving federal agencies’ ability to manage federal property. 

We also discussed management of historic properties with officials at the 

National Trust for Historic Preservation. 

We performed our review from January 2002 through January 2003 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 12 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Veterans Affairs 

Page 13 GAO-03-326 VA's Management of Excess Real Property (290113) 
The General Accounting Office, the 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 the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail 

this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily 

E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading. 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A 

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. 

GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a 

single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs