HUD INFORMATION 

TECHNOLOGY

More Work Remains to 

Implement Necessary 

Management Controls

Statement of Valerie C. Melvin, Director 

Information Management and Technology 

Resources Issues

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Transportation, 

Housing and Urban Development, and Related 

Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, 

House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT

Thursday, March 29, 2012

GAO-12-580T

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-12-580T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Transportation, 

Housing and Urban Development, and 

Related Agencies, Committee on 

Appropriations, House of Representatives 

March 29, 2012

HUD INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 

More Work Remains to Implement Necessary 

Management Controls 

Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) performs a range 

of significant home ownership and 

community development missions that 

are integral to the U.S. economy. In 

doing so, HUD relies extensively on 

information technology (IT). However, 

HUD’s IT environment has not 

effectively supported its business 

operations, and as a result, the 

department has been working to 

modernize its IT infrastructure. To 

provide oversight and inform decisionmaking, Congress required that HUD 

develop and submit plans describing 

how it intends to use its expenditures 

to support its modernization efforts. In 

addition, Congress required GAO to 

review these expenditure plans to 

determine if they meet statutory 

conditions. 

GAO was asked to testify on HUD’s 

progress in implementing its prior 

recommendations on (1) modernizing 

its IT systems and (2) improving its 

expenditure plans. In preparing this 

statement, GAO relied on previous 

work at HUD. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making new 

recommendations. As noted, GAO has 

previously made recommendations 

aimed at assisting HUD in fully 

implementing key IT management 

controls. 

What GAO Found

HUD has made progress in implementing prior GAO recommendations on

modernizing its IT environment; however more actions are needed. In 2009, 

GAO reported that HUD lacked key IT management controls; which are essential 

to achieving successful outcomes. Specifically, 

• Although the department had established an IT strategic plan that outlined 

goals and performance measures, it had not assessed its performance 

against established goals. As a result, HUD did not know how well it was 

achieving its goals and where it needed to improve.

• While the department had established policies and procedures for developing 

a complete portfolio of its investments, it had not established policies and 

procedures for evaluating that portfolio. This meant that it was limited in its 

ability to control risks and achieve benefits associated with the mix of legacy 

systems and modernization investments it selected.

• HUD’s Office of the Chief Information Officer had not adequately assessed 

its IT workforce needs, inventoried existing staff knowledge and skills, and 

identified gaps between needs and existing capabilities. As a result, the 

department was not well positioned to acquire the skill sets it needed.

• The department had not fully developed its enterprise architecture (EA)—

which provides a blueprint for investing that connects strategic plans with 

individual programs and system solutions. This meant that HUD lacked a 

sufficient basis for guiding and directing its modernization projects.

GAO made a number of recommendations to HUD aimed at strengthening its

management capabilities, and while progress has been made in addressing 

them, work remains. For example, HUD issued a department-wide strategic plan 

with associated goals that aligned with new IT strategic goals. However, the 

department had not developed criteria for assessing the performance of its 

portfolios, finalized its plan to address its IT workforce needs, or established an 

approved policy for its enterprise architecture. 

HUD’s modernization expenditure plans, which are to describe how the agency 

plans to spend IT modernization funding, have improved in response to GAO’s 

recommendations. These plans are to meet statutory conditions that include 

identifying, for each modernization project, capabilities to be delivered, expected 

benefits, estimated costs, and key milestones; and showing that each project is 

supported by adequate staff, conforms to capital planning and investment control 

requirements, complies with the department’s EA, and is being managed in 

accordance with department lifecycle management policies. GAO found that 

HUD’s 2010 expenditure plan contained weaknesses and thus was limited as a 

congressional oversight and decision-making mechanism. Accordingly, GAO 

recommended, among other things, that the department ensure future plans 

satisfied each element of the statutory conditions. In response, subsequent 

expenditure plans submitted in 2011 and 2012 satisfied the conditions. As a 

result, these more recent plans have provided key information needed for 

continued oversight of the modernization projects.

View GAO-12-580T. For more information, 

contact Valerie C. Melvin at (202) 512-6304 or 

melvinv@gao.gov.
 

Page 1 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

Chairman Latham, Ranking Member Olver, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

I am pleased to participate in today’s hearing to discuss the Department 

of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) management challenges. 

HUD performs a range of significant home ownership and community 

development missions that are integral to our nation’s economic wellbeing, and it relies extensively on information technology (IT) to carry out 

these missions. Moreover, legislation enacted since 2008 to stimulate the 

economy, in part through strengthening the housing market, has 

continued to expand the department’s responsibilities and thus its need 

for IT support. For example, the department’s increased responsibilities 

under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 introduced 

greater processing requirements for Federal Housing Administration 

(FHA) mortgage insurance programs, which further increased its reliance 

on information systems and other IT services.1

Nevertheless, HUD has long experienced shortcomings in its IT 

capability. As we reported in 2009, the department’s IT environment did 

not effectively support its business operations.2

To provide oversight and inform decision-making, Congress established 

limitations on funding for HUD’s IT modernization efforts through 

appropriations acts in fiscal years 2010 and 2011.

The department’s 

operating plans and budget submissions indicated, for example, that its 

information systems were overlapping and duplicative, were not 

integrated, necessitated manual workloads, and employed antiquated 

technologies that were costly to maintain. Since our report, the 

department has been working to modernize its IT infrastructure.

3

 

1

Housing and Economic Recovery Act, 2008, Pub L. No. 110-289, § 2126, 122 Stat. 2654, 

2840-41 (July 30, 2008). 

In addition, these acts 

required us to review and provide an assessment of HUD’s IT 

modernization expenditure plans. To this end, we issued two reports—in 

2

GAO, Information Technology: HUD Needs to Strengthen Its Capacity to Manage and 

Modernize Its Environment, GAO-09-675 (Washington, D.C.: July 31, 2009). 

3

Department of Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2010, Pub. L. No. 

111-117, div. A, tit. II, 123 Stat. 3074, 3093-3094 (Dec. 16, 2009); and Department of 

Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, Pub. L. No. 112-10, § 2259, 

125 Stat. 38, 197-98 (April 15, 2011). 

 
 

Page 2 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

November 2010 and September 2011—that documented the results of 

our fiscal year 2010 expenditure plan review.4

At your request, my testimony today summarizes HUD’s progress in 

implementing our prior recommendations on (1) modernizing its IT 

systems and (2) improving its expenditure plans.

Further, earlier this week, 

we briefed the Committees’ staff on a just-completed third review which 

examined the department’s fiscal year 2011 expenditure plan.

The information in my testimony is based on our previous reports on 

HUD. All work on which this testimony is based was conducted in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

HUD’s mission to create strong, sustainable, and inclusive communities 

and quality and affordable homes for all has significantly evolved due to 

the current economic and housing crisis. Accordingly, the department has 

increased its reliance on IT. In particular, legislation enacted over the past 

several years has given the department new responsibilities for, among 

other things, strengthening the housing market. For example, the Housing 

and Economic Recovery Act of 20085 established a program intended to 

help families avoid home foreclosure by refinancing them into mortgages 

insured by FHA.6 As a result, the number of mortgage loans insured by 

FHA more than tripled between 2006 and 2010, from almost half a million 

loans to 1.7 million loans. This in turn resulted in the need for much 

greater system processing capabilities to accommodate the increased 

demand.7

IT plays a critical role in the department’s ability to carry out its growing 

mission by supporting data collection and dissemination throughout the 

 

4

GAO, Information Technology: HUD Needs to Better Define Commitments and Disclose 

Risks for Modernization Projects in Future Expenditure Plans, GAO-11-72 (Washington, 

D.C.: Nov. 23, 2010); and Information Technology: HUD’s Expenditure Plan Satisfies 

Statutory Conditions, and Implementation of Management Controls Is Under Way, 

GAO-11-762 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 7, 2011).

5

Pub. L. No. 110-289, § 2126. 

6

FHA provides mortgage insurance on loans made by approved lenders.

7

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

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

Background 
 

Page 3 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

department and to external parties. For instance, the department reports 

that its business areas rely on IT to process over 50,000 loan requests 

per week, over 12,000 service calls per month, and more than 7,000 

grant requests annually for each of its major grant programs.

Despite its growing mission, HUD’s IT environment has not effectively 

supported its business operations. In 2009, we reported that the 

department’s IT had consisted of:

• over 200 information systems, many of which performed the same 

functions and, thus, were duplicative;

• stove-piped, nonintegrated systems that could not share related data;

• manual processing for key business processes; and

• systems that were nearly 15 years old (on average), including several 

different operating systems and using 35 different programming 

languages.

A factor that had contributed to the state of HUD’s IT environment was 

the department’s focus, primarily, on the maintenance of its existing 

systems and infrastructure, rather than on the modernization needed to 

meet its expanding mission needs. For example, in fiscal year 2008, 

about 2 percent of the department’s IT obligations were for new 

development, whereas the remaining 98 percent were obligated for

operating and maintaining legacy systems.

HUD’s Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is responsible for 

supporting the department’s programs, services, and management 

processes by providing IT solutions and services. Additionally, the OCIO 

is responsible for developing, modernizing, and enhancing the IT 

environment. To this end, in 2010, the OCIO established four 

management goals, which aligned with the department’s 2010-2015 

Strategic Plan: (1) enhance the quality, availability, and delivery of HUD 

information to citizens, business partners, and government; (2) promote 

an enterprise approach to IT that will foster innovation and collaboration; 

(3) achieve excellence in IT management practice; and (4) transform the

OCIO to a culture of operational excellence that can achieve current and 

future departmental goals.8

 

8

HUD Strategic Plan Fiscal Year 2010-2015 (May 2010). 

HUD’s IT Environment
 

Page 4 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

To assist HUD in its modernization efforts, Congress has authorized and 

appropriated funding for the department in multiple statutes. For example, 

in recognizing the need to modernize the department’s IT environment, 

the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 authorized $25 million 

for each fiscal year, from 2009 through 2013, for improvements to FHA’s 

IT, among other things. In addition, according to department officials, 

HUD used approximately $1.5 million of the funding provided in the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for improving IT 

capabilities across a range of programs. More recently, the appropriations 

acts for fiscal years 2010 and 20119 made available to HUD for 

expenditure $180 million and $71 million, respectively, for IT 

modernization to support its Transformation Initiative.10

While HUD has been working to modernize its IT systems, we reported in 

2009 that the department lacked sound management controls that are 

essential to achieving successful outcomes. These controls included IT 

strategic planning, investment management, enterprise architecture, and 

human capital planning. We recommended that the department make 

improvements in these areas, and while it has taken a number of 

important steps, additional actions are still needed by the department to 

respond to remaining concerns.11

• Strategic planning and performance management: Effective IT 

strategic planning and performance management are intended to 

ensure that an organization’s IT strategic goals are aligned with its 

overall mission goals and outcomes and that these goals are 

supported by clearly defined (1) activities aimed at accomplishing the 

goals and (2) measures for determining performance in accomplishing 

the activities and goals. 

In 2009, we found that although HUD had established an IT strategic 

plan that outlined goals and performance measures, it had not 

assessed its IT performance against established goals since fiscal 

 

9

Pub. L. No. 111-117 and Pub. L. No. 112-10. 

10HUD’s Transformation Initiative consists of four components: (1) research, evaluation, 

and program metrics; (2) program demonstrations; (3) technical assistance and capacity 

building; and (4) information technology.

11GAO-09-675 and GAO-11-762. 

Progress Has Been 

Made in Implementing 

Recommendations on 

HUD’s IT 

Modernization, but 

More Work Remains 
 

Page 5 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

year 2007. By not regularly assessing and reporting progress against 

its strategic IT performance measures and activities, HUD did not 

know how well it was achieving its strategic goals and where it 

needed to improve. We recommended that HUD establish a plan for 

developing and implementing the department’s performance 

management framework, including an implementation schedule of key 

activities and related resource needs, and ensure that this plan 

provides for annually reporting progress in achieving IT strategic 

goals.

In September 2011, we reported that HUD had fully implemented this 

recommendation by issuing a new department-wide strategic plan 

with associated goals that aligned with new IT strategic goals that the 

OCIO developed.

• IT investment management: Investment management is aimed at 

selecting, controlling, and evaluating IT investments in a manner that 

better ensures that they produce business value, reduce investmentrelated risks, and increase accountability and transparency in the 

investment decision-making process. As we have previously reported, 

moving away from project-centric investment management and 

toward a portfolio-based approach, is considered a best practice. By 

managing investments as a portfolio, an organization can consider 

new investment proposals, along with previously funded investments, 

and identify the appropriate mix and synergies of these investments to 

best meet mission needs, technology needs, and priorities for 

improvement.

In 2009, we reported that while HUD had established a range of 

policies and procedures for developing a complete investment 

portfolio, it had not established policies and procedures for evaluating 

the portfolio.12

 

12

Without having defined and implemented practices for 

evaluating the performance of its portfolios, HUD was limited in its 

ability to control the risks and achieve the benefits associated with the 

mix of legacy system and modernization investments selected. 

Accordingly, we recommended that HUD develop a plan for instituting 

policies and procedures for reviewing, evaluating, and improving the 

performance of the department’s portfolio of investments; developing 

criteria for assessing portfolio performance and reviewing and 

GAO-09-675. 
 

Page 6 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

modifying them at regular intervals; defining and collecting IT portfolio 

performance measurement data consistent with the portfolio 

performance criteria; and executing adjustments to the IT investment 

portfolio in reaction to actual portfolio performance.

In September 2011, we reported that, in response to our 

recommendations, the department had begun establishing a new 

investment management governance structure and had applied it to 

its portfolio for IT modernization projects. However, HUD had not yet 

developed criteria for assessing portfolio performance, or defined and 

collected data consistent with the criteria. In the absence of taking 

these key steps, the department has continued to be challenged in 

implementing proper investment management practices.

• Human capital: As we have previously reported, IT human capital 

management is intended to ensure that an organization has the 

employees with the appropriate knowledge and skills to effectively 

execute critical IT functions. Human capital management involves 

assessing IT workforce needs, inventorying existing staff’s knowledge 

and skills and identifying any gaps between needs and existing 

capabilities, and developing strategies and plans to fill any gaps.

In 2009, we reported that HUD’s OCIO had not adequately performed 

most of these activities. For example, while the office had analyzed 

skill gaps in its IT workforce and had developed a strategy for closing 

those skills gaps, OCIO officials did not know when implementation of 

this strategy would begin or be completed. Additionally, the gap 

analysis was based on an incomplete and outdated inventory of 

human capital skill levels, thus rendering its strategy unreliable. We 

noted that without effective human capital management, HUD’s ability 

to have the right people to effectively operate and maintain existing 

systems was impaired. Therefore, we recommended that HUD 

establish and execute IT human capital gap closure strategies that are 

based on a complete and current inventory of its existing IT workforce 

skills.

In September 2011, we reported that HUD had made progress in this 

area. Specifically, HUD began working to establish a human capital 

plan that included tasks such as identifying challenges, developing 

performance metrics and strategies, and addressing the identified IT 

skill gaps. HUD anticipated finalizing this plan by December 2011; 

however, as of this month, the plan has not yet been completed. Until 

HUD finalizes its IT human capital management plan, implementation 

of this management control will continue to be a challenge.
 

Page 7 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

• Enterprise architecture: EA development and use is aimed at 

establishing a corporate blueprint for investing that connects strategic 

plans with individual programs and system solutions. As such, this 

blueprint provides the information needed to guide and constrain 

investments in a consistent, coordinated, and integrated fashion—

thereby improving interoperability, reducing duplicative efforts, and 

optimizing mission operations. Developing an enterprise architecture 

with associated system solutions for portions, or segments (referred to 

as segment architectures), is an important aspect of this activity.

In 2009 we reported that, while HUD had established an enterprise 

architecture program that met key aspects of related best practices, 

its efforts to develop segment architectures were not sufficient. For 

example, HUD had identified and prioritized segments to be 

modernized; however, it did not adhere to these priorities, the 

segments developed did not reflect important elements of federal 

guidance, and most were out of date. We found that HUD had 

developed eight segment architectures; however, these segments 

were not the department’s eight highest priorities. As a result, HUD’s 

segment architectures did not provide a sufficient basis for guiding 

and directing segment projects in a manner to ensure that both, 

system enhancements and new development efforts were properly 

sequenced, well integrated, and not duplicative. We recommended 

that HUD develop a plan for reexamining segment priorities and 

updating and developing segment architectures in accordance with 

these priorities and relevant guidance.

We subsequently reported in September 2011, that the department 

had made progress toward implementing our recommendation, by, for 

example, creating a conceptual enterprise architecture. However, it 

had not yet established a policy to guide the development, 

maintenance, and use of this architecture. Thus, we further 

recommended that HUD establish and approve a policy to govern the 

EA prior to further developing its segment architectures. In response, 

HUD officials did not explicitly agree or disagree with our 

recommendation, but noted that the department was working to draft 

an enterprise architecture policy. As of this month, the department 

had not yet finalized its EA policy. To this end, establishing a 

commitment to its new EA direction remains a challenge for the 

department.
 

Page 8 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

Out of concern about HUD’s capacity to manage its IT modernization 

efforts, Congress established limitations on the funding provided to the 

department for this purpose. Specifically, the appropriations acts stated 

that the department could not obligate more than 25 percent of fiscal year 

2010 funds and 35 percent of fiscal year 2011 funds until the Secretary of 

HUD submitted to the appropriations committees in each year an 

expenditure plan that satisfied two sets of statutory conditions and had 

been reviewed by GAO. To address the first set of statutory conditions, 

for each modernization project, HUD was required to identify in the plan 

(1) functional and performance capabilities to be delivered, (2) expected 

mission benefits, (3) estimated lifecycle costs, and (4) planned key 

milestones. To address the second set of statutory conditions, the plan 

had to demonstrate that each project (1) was supported by an adequately 

staffed project office, (2) conformed to capital planning and investment 

control requirements, (3) complied with the department’s enterprise 

architecture, and (4) was being managed in accordance with applicable 

lifecycle management policies and guidance.13

Our assessment found that the department’s first expenditure plan, 

submitted in April 2010, did not adequately satisfy the two sets of 

statutory conditions.14

In response, HUD submitted a revised 2010 expenditure plan in February 

2011, which we found satisfied both sets of statutory conditions. For 

example, the plan identified key milestones by project phase and 

deliverable timeframes for the development of requirements and software 

In particular, we found that the plan did not 

describe specific and measureable mission benefits for all of HUD’s IT 

modernization projects. In addition, the plan did not include information 

that demonstrated compliance with regard to the department’s enterprise 

architecture and capital planning for IT investments. For example, the 

modernization projects could not show how they aligned to the 

department’s EA because the existing EA was no longer operative. In the 

absence of this information, the plan was limited as a congressional 

oversight and decision-making mechanism. As a result, we recommended 

that HUD ensure that future expenditure plans satisfied each element of 

both sets of statutory conditions and describe the status of HUD’s efforts 

to establish and implement modernization management controls.

 

13Pub. L. No. 111-117 and Pub. L. No. 112-10. 

14GAO-11-72. 

HUD’s 

Implementation of 

Recommendations to 

Improve Expenditure 

Plans Enables More 

Oversight 
 

Page 9 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

releases. The plan also described how each of seven identified 

modernization projects complied with the department’s evolving 

enterprise architecture. Additionally, the plan clearly described the status 

of the department’s efforts to implement the management controls.

Further, in January 2012, HUD submitted its 2011 expenditure plan for 

our review, which also satisfied both sets of statutory conditions. For 

example, the plan described specific and measureable mission benefits 

for each of the identified IT modernization projects. In addition, it 

described costs associated with the lifecycle of each project, providing 

details on funds needed for major work activities and deliverables. 

Further, the plan categorized each project relative to HUD’s evolving 

architecture.

As a result of the measures that HUD has taken to respond to our 

recommendations and improve the content of each subsequent 

expenditure plan, it has rendered these plans more useful. In turn, the 

plans should facilitate continued and more effective oversight of the 

department’s IT modernization projects.

Going forward, the fiscal year 2012 appropriations act has directed us to 

evaluate HUD’s 2012 expenditure plan.15 Additionally, the 2012 

conference report directed us to evaluate implementation of project 

management practices, including contractor oversight and cost estimation 

for selected IT modernization projects.16 We have also been directed to 

assess the department’s institutionalization of IT governance. We 

anticipate initiating aspects of this work in spring 2012.

In summary, HUD has made progress in addressing certain weaknesses 

that we identified in its IT management capabilities. However, it is 

important to note that more actions are still needed. In particular, fully 

addressing the recommendations that we have made is vital to helping 

 

15Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-55, 125 

Stat. 552, 691-92 (Nov. 18, 2011). 

16This direction is contained in the Senate Appropriations Committee report, S. Rep. No. 

112-83, at 141-42 (2011), as approved by the conference committee in the Explanatory 

Statement, H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 112-284, at 286 (2001), accompanying the Consolidated 

and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-55, 125 Stat. 552, 691-

92 (Nov. 18, 2011). 
 

Page 10 GAO-12-580T HUD Information Technology

the department implement sound management controls and, ultimately, to 

overcome the challenges it has faced in improving its IT management 

capabilities. HUD has demonstrated progress in improving the content of 

its IT expenditure plans. As a result, these plans should be more useful 

as an oversight tool and thus should better help to demonstrate the extent 

to which the department takes the important steps that are essential to 

strengthening its capacity to manage and modernize its IT environment.

Chairman Latham, Ranking Member Olver, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this concludes my statement today. I would be pleased to 

respond to any questions that you may have.

If you have any questions concerning this statement, please contact 

Valerie C. Melvin, Director, Information Management and Technology 

Resources Issues, at (202) 512-6304 or melvinv@gao.gov. Other 

individuals who made key contributions include Shannin G. O’Neill, 

Assistant Director; Kami J. Corbett; Lee A. McCracken; and Teresa M. 

Neven.

Contact and 

Acknowledgments 

310988
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.
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 (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 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: 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.