A Report by a Panel of the 

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

 for the U.S. Congress, Congressional Research Service, and the Government Printing Office

October 2011

January 2013

National Academy of 

Public Administration ®

REBOOTING THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:

Keeping America Informed in the Digital Age
 ABOUT THE ACADEMY

The National Academy of Public Administration is an independent, nonprofit, and non-partisan organization established in 1967 and chartered 

by Congress in 1984. It provides expert advice to government leaders in 

building more effective, efficient, accountable, and transparent organizations. To carry out this mission, the Academy draws on the knowledge 

and experience of its nearly 800 Fellows—including former cabinet officers, Members of Congress, governors, mayors, and state legislators, 

as well as prominent scholars, business executives, and public administrators. The Academy helps public institutions address their most critical 

governance and management challenges through in-depth studies and 

analyses, advisory services and technical assistance, Congressional testimony, forums and conferences, and online stakeholder engagement. 

Learn more about the Academy and its work at www.NAPAwash.org.
A Report by a Panel of the 

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF 

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 

For the U.S. Congress, Congressional Research Service, 

 and the Government Printing Office 

January 2013 

REBOOTING THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 

Keeping America Informed in the Digital Age 

PANEL

Marilu Goodyear, Ph.D.,*Chair 

Joel Aberbach, Ph.D.*

J. William Gadsby*

Molly O’Neill*

Sallyanne Payton, J.D.* 

* Academy Fellow 
ii

Officers of the Academy 

Diane M. Disney, Chair of the Board

Robert J. Shea, Vice Chair 

Dan G. Blair, President and Chief Executive Officer

B. J. Reed, Secretary

Sallyanne Harper, Treasurer 

Academy Panel 

Marilu Goodyear, Ph.D., *Chair 

Joel Aberbach, Ph.D.*

J. William Gadsby*

Molly O’Neill*

Sallyanne Payton, J.D.*

Study Team 

Joseph P. Mitchell, III, Ph.D., Director of Project Development 

and Project Director 

Maria Rapuano, Deputy Project Director 

Stephanie Bailenson, Senior Advisor 

Timothy Dirks, Senior Advisor 

Jonathan Tucker, Ph. D., Senior Research Analyst 

Chloe Yang, Senior Research Associate 

Danny Caravalho, Research Associate 

_______________________________________________________________________

The views expressed in this report are those of the Panel. They do not necessarily 

reflect the views of the Academy as an institution. 

National Academy of Public Administration 

900 7th Street, N.W. 

Suite 600 

Washington, DC 20001-3888 

www.napawash.org

January 2013 

Printed in the United States of America 

Academy Project Number: 2170 

* Academy Fellow 
iii

FOREWORD 

The Government Printing Office (GPO) opened its doors the day that Abraham 

Lincoln was inaugurated as the 16th President of the United States. For the past 152 

years, the GPO has played a critical role in keeping the nation informed—ensuring 

permanent public access to authentic government information, including such 

historic documents as the Emancipation Proclamation and official journals of 

government such as the Congressional Record and the Federal Register. Like the rest 

of the publishing industry, the GPO of the 21st Century has been forced to manage 

the decline of print and the transition to digital publishing. At the same time, GPO 

has faced the challenge of performing broader government responsibilities in an 

increasingly digital world. 

Recognizing this changing environment, Congress mandated that the National 

Academy of Public Administration (the Academy) conduct a broad operational 

review of GPO. The Academy formed a five-member Panel of Fellows to conduct a 

ten-month study of the agency’s current role, its operations, and its future 

direction. The Panel concluded that GPO’s core mission remains valid, but that the 

agency—and the rest of the federal government—will need to continue to “reboot” 

for the digital age. The Panel’s recommendations are intended to position the 

federal government for the digital age, strengthen GPO’s business model, and 

further GPO’s continuing transformation.

As a Congressionally chartered non-partisan and non-profit organization with 

nearly 800 distinguished Fellows, the Academy brings seasoned experts together to 

help public organizations address their most critical challenges. We are pleased to 

have had the opportunity to assist Congress and the GPO by conducting this review. 

I appreciate the leadership and stakeholders of GPO who provided important insight 

and context needed to inform the study. Also, I thank the members of the Academy 

Panel, who provided invaluable expertise and thoughtful analysis to this 

undertaking, and the professional study team that provided critical support to the 

Panel. 

Dan G. Blair 

President and CEO 

National Academy of Public Administration 
iv

This page intentionally left blank. 
v

ACRONYMS 

CFO 

CIO 

CM 

COOP 

CRS 

CTO 

DHS 

EPIC 

FADGI 

FAR 

FDLP 

FDsys

FY 

GAO 

GPO

GPRA

JCP 

LC 

NARA 

NASA 

NDIIP 

OFR 

OMB 

PIV 

PURL

S&E 

SAO 

SIC 

SID 

SuDoc

URL 

Chief Financial Officer

Chief Information Officer

Contribution Margin

Continuity of Operations

Congressional Research Service

Chief Technology Officer

Department of Homeland Security

Electronic Procurement Information Control

Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative

Federal Acquisitions Regulations

Federal Depository Library Program

Federal Digital System

Fiscal year

Government Accountability Office

Government Printing Office

Government Performance and Results Act

Joint Committee on Printing

Library of Congress

National Archives and Records Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Digital Information Infrastructure and 

Preservation Program

Office of the Federal Register

Office of Management and Budget

Personal Identity Verification

Persistent Uniform Resource Locator

Salaries & Expenses

Senior Agency Official

Strategic Investment Committee

Secure and Intelligent Documents

Superintendent of Documents

Uniform Resource Locator
vi

This page intentionally left blank. 
vii

Table of Contents 

FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................................................iii

ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................................................ v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER I: BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................. 7

Overview of the Government Printing Office ...................................................................................................... 9

GPO’s Transformation in the Digital Age..........................................................................................................14

Key Themes in This Report.....................................................................................................................................15

CHAPTER II: GOVERNMENT-WIDE STRATEGY ..........................................................................................17

Interagency Coordination of Electronic Government Information Management (Finding II-1): 18

GPO’s Potential Role in the Lifecycle Management of Electronic Government Information 

(Finding II-2):..............................................................................................................................................................22

CHAPTER III: IMPACT OF DIGITAL PUBLISHING ON GPO’S MISSION................................................29

Digital Publishing (Finding III-1):.......................................................................................................................29

Digital Authentication (Finding III-2): ..............................................................................................................31

Preservation of the Legacy (Tangible) Government Collection (Finding III-3):................................. 32

Preservation of the Digital Government Collection (Finding III-4):........................................................33

Government Information Dissemination and Access (Finding III-5):.....................................................35

Cataloging and Indexing Program (Finding III-6):.......................................................................................42

CHAPTER IV: GPO’S BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL OUTLOOK .......................................47

Improvement in GPO’s Financial Position (Finding IV-1):..........................................................................49

GPO’s Longer-Term Financial Outlook (Finding IV-2):................................................................................51

Financial Status of Plant Operations (Finding IV-3):...................................................................................52

Plant Operations’ Efforts to Reduce Costs (Finding IV-4):..........................................................................54

Impact of Declining Demand for Procured Printing on Customer Services (Finding IV-5)............55

Recovery of Government Printing Business (Finding IV-7):.......................................................................59

Financial Reliance on Passport Operation (Finding IV-8):.........................................................................60

Smart Card Business Offers an Opportunity to Diversify Revenue Stream (Finding IV-9): ............61

CHAPTER V: HUMAN CAPITAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT .........................................................65

GPO Workforce Reduction and Reshaping (Finding V-1):..........................................................................66

GPO Outreach and Communications Efforts (Finding V-2):.......................................................................70

GPO’s Future Workforce Challenges (Finding V-3):......................................................................................71
viii

GPO Human Capital Planning (Finding V-4):..................................................................................................73

CHAPTER VI: CONTINUING GPO’S ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION ....................................77

GPO’s Changing Products and Services (Finding VI-1):...............................................................................78

Change Management Practices (Finding VI-2)...............................................................................................80

Strategic Planning (Finding VI-3):......................................................................................................................85

GPO’s Recent Cost Reduction and Recovery Efforts (Finding VI-4):........................................................90

Future Cost Savings and Recovery (Finding VI-5):........................................................................................92

APPENDIX A: PANEL AND STAFF ................................................................................................................. 101

APPENDIX B: INDIVIDUALS CONTACTED ................................................................................................. 105

APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS GPO STUDIES ......................................................................... 111

APPENDIX D: KEY DATES IN GPO’S HISTORY ......................................................................................... 121

APPENDIX E: KEY THEMES FROM THE ACADEMY’S FDLP SURVEY................................................. 124

APPENDIX F: GPO OVERHEAD CHARGES TO OPERATING UNITS FY 2011 ................................... 135

APPENDIX G: SUMMARY GPO FINANCIAL DATA FY 2008 – FY 2012 .............................................. 137

APPENDIX H: GPO PROJECTION AND ASSUMPTIONS .......................................................................... 139

APPENDIX I: SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................. 146

APPENDIX J: GLOSSARY OF TERMS ............................................................................................................ 152
1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

We the People need access to government information in order to exercise our rights and 

responsibilities as democratic citizens. This has been the case throughout American 

history, from the founding of our country to the 21st Century, which is often described as 

the information age or the digital age. With the “flattening” of the world and the explosion 

of new technologies in recent years, citizens not only expect more governmental

transparency; they also want documents to be made widely available in electronic format 

on a variety of devices in a short time horizon. 

Over the past ten months, a five-member Panel of the National Academy of Public 

Administration (the Academy) has conducted an independent review of the Government 

Printing Office (GPO) at the direction of Congress. Established in 1861, the GPO has played 

a critical role in keeping America informed for over 150 years, and its core mission remains 

valid to this day. GPO performs a diverse set of functions. It provides print and digital 

editions of the Congressional Record, the Federal Register, and the Code of Federal 

Regulations. It manages the Federal Depository Library Program and provides digital 

access to federal information through the Federal Digital System. GPO also produces U.S. 

passports and other secure credentials. 

Over the past two decades, the shift from an industrial age to an information age has 

affected the way both public and private sector organizations operate. For GPO, the 

demand for federal print products has declined by half over the past twenty years, but the 

demand for information that government creates has only increased. While conducting 

this review, the Panel determined that GPO faces challenges in dealing with the movement 

to the digital age that are shared across the federal government. Critical issues for the 

federal government include publishing formats, metadata, authentication, cataloging, 

dissemination, preservation, public access, and disposition. 

Congress and federal agencies, including GPO, must work collaboratively to address these 

issues. The Panel believes that the federal government needs to establish a broad 

government-wide strategy to manage digital information through all stages of its lifecycle. 

The absence of such a strategy has resulted in a chaotic environment with significant 

implications for public access to government information—and, therefore, the democratic 

process—with some observers describing federal digital publishing as the “wild west.” 

Now that approximately 97 percent of all federal documents are “born digital,” many 

important documents are not being authenticated or preserved for the future, and the 

public cannot easily access them. GPO has a critical role to play along with other agencies 

in developing a government-wide strategy that streamlines processes, clearly defines 

agency responsibilities, avoids duplication and waste, and effectively provides information 

to current and future generations. 

GPO leaders have made progress in “rebooting” the agency for the digital age by moving 

from a print-centric to a content-centric focus. In order for the promise of this ongoing 

transformation to be fully realized, the Panel believes that GPO must continue to 
2

incorporate new ideas and mechanisms of delivering information consistent with its 

founding principles. GPO’s current landscape is heavily influenced by the following issues: 

 preference for digital documents by the public and federal agencies that has reduced 

the demand for print and altered how GPO carries out its mission and its ability to 

recover costs; 

 exponential growth of “fugitive” digital government documents, which has 

complicated GPO’s ability to authenticate and preserve valuable history; and 

 changing demands of federal agencies and the general public, requiring GPO to 

establish new services while continuing to carry out its mandated functions. 

Declining demand for print products has challenged GPO’s business model and its 

operating methods because only a small percentage of the agency’s funding is derived from 

direct appropriation from Congress. The bulk of the agency’s revenues come from agency 

payments for work performed by GPO or sales of publications to the public. This means 

that GPO—like businesses across the country—must carefully review its product lines to 

ensure that they respond to market demand and continually monitor its financial situation. 

To address the digital age’s challenges to GPO’s business model, agency leaders have 

expanded products and services for the digital age and made difficult decisions to align 

revenues with expenditures. To increase access to information, GPO has created the 

Federal Digital System, which contains authentic published government documents from 

all three branches of government. It has also been providing access in other formats, such 

as mobile apps and e-Books, and making these available through Google and Amazon. In 

fiscal year (FY) 2013, it released the President’s Budget as an award-winning app.1

To reduce costs, GPO has made significant reductions in employee staffing levels, 

administrative expenses, and the costs of plant production and distribution. In addition, 

GPO has instituted a variety of cost offset and recovery measures to help alleviate financial 

pressures. These have included improvements to its billing and debt collection processes, 

leasing of available building space to government and non-government organizations, and 

investments in more productive and efficient equipment and operating systems. 

GPO will need to continue to be aggressive in taking action given that its own analysis, 

based on a conservative set of assumptions, shows that it only has the cash necessary to 

offset operating losses and fund modest investment for another seven years. This provides 

the agency with a narrow window of opportunity to continue to expand business lines and 

maintain financial health into the next decade. To expand products and services, the Panel 

believes that GPO can make an important contribution to the lifecycle management of 

government information by doing more in the areas of content management, metadata 

creation, authentication, preservation, cataloging, and providing permanent public access. 

To further reduce costs, the Panel believes that GPO can reduce its facilities footprint 

through the lease of unneeded space and more consolidation of regional office locations, 

 

1 Government Printing Office, “GPO Honored for App Development” (Washington, D.C.: September 18, 2012). 

http://www.gpo.gov/pdfs/news-media/press/12news39.pdf. 
3

space, and staff. And, by implementing a new print procurement system, GPO can both 

reduce labor costs and improve the customer experience, which could lead to increased 

business. 

Based on its review, the Panel makes 15 recommendations. They are designed to position 

the federal government for the digital age, strengthen GPO’s business model, and continue 

to build the GPO of the future. 

Positioning the Federal Government for the Digital Age 

 Recommendation 1. To enable the federal government to carry out its role of 

providing information to its citizens, Congress should establish a collaborative 

interagency process, and designate a lead agency or interagency organization, to 

develop and implement a government-wide strategy for managing the lifecycle of 

digital government information. 

 Recommendation 2. To ensure GPO can carry out its mandate of providing 

permanent public access to government information, GPO should enhance its 

position and capabilities by offering an expanded set of services on a cost-recovery 

basis that contribute to the lifecycle management of government information. These 

services could include content management, metadata creation, authentication, 

preservation, and cataloging. GPO should develop strategies to encourage executive 

branch agencies to provide publications to GPO to enable permanent public access. 

 Recommendation 3. To safeguard the historical documents of our democracy for 

future generations, GPO should work with depository libraries and other library 

groups to develop a comprehensive plan for preserving the print collection of 

government documents. This plan should include cataloging, digitizing, and 

preserving tangible copies of government publications, a timeline for completion, 

and options for supporting the effort financially, as well as a process for ingesting 

digitized copies into the Federal Digital System. Congress should appropriate funds 

for the purpose of cataloging, digitizing, and preserving the government collection. 

 Recommendation 4. To ensure the long-term preservation and access of digital 

government publications, GPO and Congress should explore alternative funding 

models for the Federal Digital System in order to ensure a stable and sufficient 

funding source. 

 Recommendation 5. To preserve the relevance and viability of the Federal 

Depository Library Program, GPO should continue to collaborate with depository 

libraries and the broader library community to develop a national strategic plan for 

the program that gives libraries the flexibility and tools they need to provide 

permanent public access to government information in the digital age. 
4

Strengthening GPO’s Business Model

 Recommendation 6. To ensure the Publication and Information Sales Program 

continues to play a role in information dissemination and is able to recover costs, 

GPO should continue to aggressively research and expand into new markets. 

 Recommendation 7. To enable further cost reductions, Congress should consider 

changes in its demand for print. GPO should develop estimates of cost savings that 

could be realized through potential changes in the requirements for printing the 

Congressional Record. GPO should quantify the savings that could be realized 

through such options as printing fewer copies of the Congressional Record or ending 

the daily start-of-business print requirement while continuing to provide electronic 

access.

 Recommendation 8. To continue to realize government-wide benefits, GPO should 

continue to perform executive branch printing, while further reducing costs and 

improving customer service. 

 Recommendation 9. To generate additional revenue, GPO should continue to 

pursue smart card business. To assist GPO in growing this business and to leverage 

GPO’s smart card expertise for public benefit, Congress should consider whether to 

allow GPO to respond to state and local government requests for smart cards. 

Building the GPO of the Future 

 Recommendation 10. To effectively integrate and align the agency’s human 

resource policies, programs, and practices with its strategies for achieving mission 

success and desired programmatic results, GPO should develop and institutionalize 

a human capital planning capacity. GPO should make strategic human capital 

planning a high priority and use multiple strategies to ensure the recruitment, 

retention, development, and rewarding of a highly motivated and diverse workforce. 

 Recommendation 11. To ensure it is able to continue to plan for and respond to 

future changes, GPO should continue its transformation by enhancing its strategic 

planning capabilities, broadening its change management efforts, and continually 

reviewing customer product and service needs. 

 Recommendation 12. To achieve future organizational and operational cost 

savings in the Customer Services program, GPO should further consolidate regional 

office locations, space, and staff and continue to identify and implement best 

management practices (such as cross training, telework, work sharing 

arrangements, and increasing managerial spans of control) and available 

technologies to the greatest extent possible. 

 Recommendation 13. To realize significant potential savings and enhance 

revenues (as well as improve customer service), GPO should accelerate the 

development and deployment of a new automated print procurement system. 

 Recommendation 14. To reduce GPO’s facilities footprint while increasing the 

leasing of unused building space, GPO should continue pursuing incremental lease 

arrangements. 
5

 Recommendation 15. To address workforce skills imbalances, GPO should 

continue to pursue targeted, gradual staffing reductions in specific areas, as well as 

functional consolidations, when feasible and appropriate. 

The Panel is pleased to have had the opportunity to conduct this review. In the digital age, 

GPO’s core mission of authenticating, preserving, and distributing federal information 

remains critically important to American democracy. Moving forward, GPO will need to 

continue to transform both externally and internally. Externally, it should serve as a 

critical player in the collaborative development of a government-wide strategy and offer 

new products and services. Internally, it will have to build upon its recent change 

management efforts, including the further development of an agile organization with the 

capabilities to plan for and respond to potential changes; continue to adjust its business 

model; and take additional steps to achieve cost savings. By adopting this report’s 

recommendations and associated implementation actions, Congress, GPO, and other federal 

agencies will ensure that American citizens have the information needed to be full 

participants in the democratic process. 
6

This page intentionally left blank. 
7 

CHAPTER I: BACKGROUND 

Established in 1861, the Government Printing Office (GPO) is a federal legislative branch 

agency that performs an important role for American democracy. To achieve its mission of 

keeping America informed, GPO serves as a centralized resource to authenticate, produce, 

protect, preserve, and distribute official federal publications and information products.2 To 

this end, its responsibilities include: 

 providing print and digital editions of the Congressional Record;

3

 producing bills, hearings, reports, and other legislative branch documents; 

 printing the Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulations;

 providing centralized operations for the procurement of information products for 

the entire federal government; 

 managing the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP); 

 providing digital access to federal information through the Federal Digital System 

(FDsys); and 

 selling documents to the public. 

Through a long-standing relationship with the U.S. Department of State, GPO produces 

passports for Americans. Since 2008, the agency has expanded its offerings to include 

secure credentials, such as smartcards. 

In December 2011, Congress mandated that the National Academy of Public Administration 

(the Academy) conduct a review of the GPO to: 

 examine GPO’s business model for how the Government should operate its printing 

and information dissemination responsibilities; 

 review past studies evaluating GPO’s production, procurement, and information 

dissemination and operations, including the Federal Depository Library Program, in 

light of the recent growth in printing and digital technology;4

 examine the feasibility of GPO continuing to perform executive branch printing; and 

 explore various cost-saving operational alternatives.5

 

2 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee Driven 

(Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), 3. 

3 The Congressional Record captures the daily proceedings of Congress. It is printed overnight and delivered 

by the following morning. 

4 Appendix C provides a summary of past studies.

5

 The mandate was contained in the Conference Report to P.L. 112-74: “Over the past 10 years, the 

Government Printing Office has regularly contracted out approximately 75 percent of the dollar value of all 

work ordered annually (other than U.S. passports and secure credentials). The vast majority of the work that 

is contracted out is for the Executive Branch. Printing for the Congress, passports for State Department, 

secure credentials for Federal agencies and Congress, products for the Office of the Federal Register, and 

several important jobs of the Executive Branch, such as the President’s Annual Budget and printing for the 

White House, are conducted in-house, as are all of GPO’s digital information operations serving all three 

branches of the Federal Government. The conferees note that several studies evaluating GPO’s production, 

procurement, and information dissemination programs and operations, including the Federal Depository 

Library Program, have been conducted in the past. The conferees also note that past reviews have supported 
8 

The Academy formed a five-member expert Panel—drawn from the organization’s nearly 

800 elected Fellows—to direct and oversee the project. The Panel met numerous times 

over the course of this ten-month project to approve the work plan, define issues, review 

work progress, develop options and alternatives, and develop formal findings and 

recommendations and the final report. By bringing together experts with different views, 

experiences, and skills in a process that yields state-of-the-art, innovative thinking, 

Academy Panels have proven to be a very powerful management assessment tool. They 

also afford an opportunity for the government to interact with seasoned executives with 

significant experience dealing with similar challenges. The Panel received research and 

analytical support from a highly qualified professional study team. 

As part of this review, the Panel assessed GPO’s existing business model; examined its 

current mission and functions, as well as the desired future state of government printing 

and dissemination; and identified needed improvements at GPO and government-wide. 

The Academy Panel and study team conducted a wide range of primary and secondary 

research, including: 

 conducting background research, including relevant GPO documents and academic 

research; 

 reviewing prior studies of GPO; 

 interviewing GPO leaders, managers, union representatives, and employees; 

 interviewing other external stakeholders, such as Congressional staff, agency 

customers, and the library community; 

 surveying the Federal Depository Library community; 

 holding a focus group with private sector printing and publishing experts; 

 analyzing financial, workforce, and print procurement data; 

 analyzing results from the Panel’s survey of the Federal Depository Library Program 

community; and 

 visiting GPO field operations, including one regional office, both distribution 

facilities, and the backup passport production facility. 

The Academy used a mix of methods to obtain different but complementary qualitative and 

quantitative data on the key research topics. This methodology allowed the Academy to 

conduct a comprehensive assessment of GPO’s legal mandate, mission, functions, business 

 

the GPO’s business model as the most efficient way in which the government should operate its printing and 

information dissemination responsibilities. The conferees believe that the GPO and the Congress would 

benefit from an update of these reviews, particularly given the growth in printing and digital technology in 

recent years, including the feasibility of Executive Branch printing being continued to be performed by the 

GPO, and other cost saving operational alternatives that might be worthy of consideration. Within available 

funds under the heading, “Congressional Research Service,” the conferees direct the Congressional Research 

Service to award a grant or contract to the National Academy of Public Administration, an independent 

nonpartisan organization that was chartered by Congress to assist Federal, State, and Local governments in 

improving their effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability to conduct a study on updating a review of GPO 

operations and additional cost saving opportunities beyond what GPO has already instituted, if any, and 

report its findings to the Committee on Appropriations of the House and Senate no later than one year after 

enactment of this Act.”
9 

model, workforce capacity, budget and financial status, and performance information. At 

the end of September 2012, the Academy Panel presented a set of preliminary observations 

to GPO for review and comment, after which the Panel met to develop recommended 

strategic options for GPO moving forward. The Panel submitted a draft report for agency 

review and comment at the end of November 2012. GPO provided comments in December 

2012, and the Panel responded by making some modifications it deemed appropriate. 

OVERVIEW OF THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

In the nation’s early years, printing and distribution of government documents were 

handled in a “chaotic” manner that did not serve the American people well. Concerns were 

expressed that this critical function was performed in a sporadic and unprofessional 

manner, with “the original systems of government printing” being “costly and frequently 

subject to corruption and public scandal.”6

Early Congresses relied on private printers. In 1819, Congress passed legislation requiring 

the House and the Senate to elect firms to serve as their printers—a practice that continued 

for over forty years. In the 1840s, Congress passed a number of statutes “providing for 

competitive contract printing for various government departments and the Supreme Court, 

and then moved to implement this method for its own printing.”7 Concerns were 

expressed, however, that this method increased the cost of government printing. The 

government spent more on printing between 1846 and 1852, for example, than it had in 

the previous 35 years combined. Because Congress’s decision in 1852 to return to the 

practice of electing their own public printers failed to stem the problems arising under this 

system, the groundwork had been laid for the Government Printing Office—an agency to 

execute printing and binding for the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the 

federal government.8

In the more than 150 years since GPO’s creation, its mission of keeping America informed 

has not changed, but the manner in which it is carried out has changed—especially in the 

digital age. (See Appendix D for some of the key dates in GPO’s history.) Over the past 

several decades, our society and economy have shifted from an industrial age to an 

information age. Individuals have more access to information than ever before, and this 

access transcends national boundaries. The personal computer began to be widely used in 

the 1980s and 1990s. Internet use became widespread by the mid-1990s, and innovations 

such as mobile phones, tablets, and mobile apps continue the shift toward digitization. 

The digital age has resulted in far-reaching changes that have impacted public and private 

organizations, including GPO. The demand for federal print products has declined by half 

over the past twenty years, but the demand for information has only increased. Because 

 

6 Government Printing Office, Keeping America Informed, 150 Years of Service to the Nation (Washington, D.C.: 

2011), 4-7.

7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.
10

the demand for print has not gone away entirely, GPO faces the challenge of striking the 

right balance between different formats. Today, GPO has one of the world’s largest printing 

plants and digital factories, and it remains one of the biggest print buyers in the world. 

GPO purchased an estimated $331 million in print products in FY 2012 from private 

vendors across the nation, accounting for almost two-thirds of the print products ordered 

from GPO. Congressional documents, such as the Congressional Record, as well as products 

for the Office of Federal Register (including the Federal Register and Code of Federal 

Regulations) are produced by GPO in-house. GPO’s Strategic Plan notes that its print 

procurement program “provides great economic opportunity for the private sector.” The 

majority of the firms GPO deals with are small businesses of 20 employees or less. The 

total number of contractors registered to do business with GPO is approximately 16,000.9

Compared to most other federal agencies, GPO runs like a business: only a small percentage 

of its funding comes from direct appropriations, which cover the cost of administering the 

FDLP and FDsys.10 GPO depends primarily on revenue from agency payments for work 

performed by GPO and sales of publications to the public. The extent to which GPO’s 

operations are run on a cost-recovery basis distinguishes it from other federal agencies. 

Along with sales of publications in digital and print formats to the public, GPO supports 

openness and transparency by providing no-charge public access to government 

information through FDsys (www.fdsys.gov) and through partnerships with approximately 

1,200 libraries nationwide participating in the FDLP. GPO’s FDsys website provides access 

to nearly 700,000 documents online. GPO also provides for public sale of government 

publications through its traditional and online bookstores, offers e-Books through 

partnerships with multiple vendors, and has recently introduced a variety of mobile apps 

of key federal documents. 

This is why the “business model” concept is particularly apt as a conceptual framework for 

reviewing GPO.11 Although the term “business model” is typically associated with the 

private sector—identifying the customer value proposition, the profit formula, and key 

resources and processes—a broader definition can be usefully applied to public 

organizations such as GPO.12 As Saul Kaplan, the founder and chief catalyst of the Business 

Innovation Factory, notes: 

If an organization has a viable way to create, deliver, and capture value, it has 

a business model. It doesn't matter whether an organization is in the public 

 

9 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee Driven 

(Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), 3.

10 According to GPO’s Strategic Plan, only six percent of the agency’s funding comes from the direct 

appropriation. This includes the Superintendent of Documents Salaries and Expenses appropriation, and the 

Revolving Fund appropriation, which has funded the development of FDsys and other IT systems.

11 Congress’s study mandate made specific reference to this term in noting “past reviews have supported the 

GPO’s business model as the most efficient way in which the government should operate its printing and 

information dissemination responsibilities.” 

12 Mark W. Johnson, Clayton M. Christensen, and Henning Kagermann, “Reinventing Your Business Model,” in 

Rebuilding Your Business Model (Boston: Harvard University Press, 2011), 42. 
11

or private sector. It doesn't matter if it's a non-profit or a for-profit 

enterprise. All organizations have a business model. Non-profit corporations 

may not be providing a financial return to investors or owners, but they still 

capture value to finance activities with contributions, grants, and service 

revenue. Social enterprises may be mission-driven, focused on delivering 

social impact versus a financial return on investment, but they still need a 

sustainable model to scale. Government agencies are financed by taxes, fees, 

and service revenue, but are still accountable to deliver citizen value at scale. 

The idea that business models are just for business is just wrong. Any 

organization that wants to be relevant, to deliver value at scale, and to 

sustain itself must clearly articulate and evolve its business model. And if an 

organization doesn't have a sustainable business model, its days are 

numbered.13

In applying the business model concept, it is important to note the important differences 

between private and public sector enterprises. GPO has a way “to create, deliver, and 

capture value,” but it does not seek to make a profit to distribute to investors. Like any 

organization, it must determine how to create and deliver value for citizens and customers, 

as well as how to recover the cost of producing that value, including the cost of necessary 

investment. As discussed in this report, GPO is operating in a rapidly changing business 

environment, which has required it to reexamine what products and services are needed, 

how to deliver them to scale, and how to cover the associated costs (whether from 

customer revenues, appropriations, fees, or some other means).14

GPO’s operating units are supported using different funding models and funding sources. 

Most operating units run on a cost-recovery basis, but Library Services is funded directly 

through the Superintendent of Documents Salaries and Expenses (S&E) appropriation. 

GPO’s organizational units that operate on a cost-recovery basis recover funds from 

customer payments. However, Congressional printing, which operates on a cost-recovery 

basis, recovers funds from the Congressional Printing and Binding appropriation. FDsys 

operations and maintenance are funded through the Salaries and Expenses appropriation. 

Investment in FDsys and other information technology systems is funded through a 

separate appropriation to the Revolving Fund. The business model concept is particularly 

appropriate for units run on a cost-recovery basis. 

 

13 Saul Kaplan, “Business Models Aren’t Just For Business,” HBR Blog Network, April 19, 2011, 

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/04/business_models_arent_just_for.html.

14 Ibid. 
12

Organizational Structure 

Figure 1 shows the GPO’s current organizational structure.

Figure 1. GPO Organizational Chart15

Source: Government Printing Office 

Public Printer 

The Public Printer is the Chief Executive Officer of GPO. In this capacity, the Public Printer 

is responsible for leading and managing the organization, including overseeing all its 

mission and support functions and serving as the principal liaison with internal and 

external stakeholders. The current Public Printer is serving in this position in an acting 

capacity. 

 

15 The light blue boxes are subunits.
13

Assistant Public Printer for Operations 

The Assistant Public Printer for Operations oversees GPO’s revenue generating business 

units, which include Official Journals of Government, Plant Operations, Customer Services, 

three business units reporting to Business Products and Services,16 and Security and

Intelligent Documents. Official Journals of Government and Plant Operations are together 

responsible for the production of the Congressional Record and other congressional 

documents, and the Federal Register. Customer Services is responsible for providing 

procured printing services to government customers. Security and Intelligent Documents 

produces U.S. passports and secure federal credentials such as smart cards for the 

Department of Homeland Security’s Trusted Travelers Program. 

Superintendent of Documents 

The Superintendent of Documents is responsible for providing public access to government 

information published by the U.S. Congress, federal agencies, and the federal court.17 Major 

responsibilities of the Superintendent of Documents are to: 

 oversee the FDLP in cooperation with Congress and GPO’s library partners; 

 oversee the policy and strategy for GPO’s Library Services and Content Management 

unit, and Publication and Information Sales unit; 

 cataloging and indexing, by-law, and international exchange; and

 work with agencies to expand FDsys content and exercise oversight responsibilities 

for the collection. 

Chief of Staff 

The Chief of Staff is responsible for overseeing a number of critical mission support 

functions: 

 human capital; 

 equal employment opportunity; 

 acquisitions; 

 information technology and systems; 

 programs, strategy, and technology; and 

 security services. 

Chief Financial Officer 

The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) administers and guides policy and oversight of the 

agency’s financial strategies and administrative support systems, personnel, and 

operations. The CFO serves as GPO’s principal liaison with the Congressional 

Appropriations Committees. 

 

16 Three business units report to the Managing Director of Business Products and Services: (1) Publications 

and Information Sales, which handles sales to the public; (2) Creative and Digital Media Services; and (3) 

Distribution Services, which handles warehousing and distribution of publications for agency customers. 

17 Traditionally, GPO’s role with the courts has been limited; however, it recently completed a very successful 

pilot project with the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to include opinions of the U.S. appellate, 

bankruptcy, and district courts in FDsys. This project will be expanded upon and continued. 
14

General Counsel 

The General Counsel is the agency’s chief legal officer. In that capacity, he provides legal 

opinions and advice to the Public Printer, and represents GPO in all legal matters involving 

government and non-government organizations. In addition, the Office of the General 

Counsel represents GPO before all federal administrative forums, including the Merit 

Systems Protection Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the U.S. 

Government Accountability Office Board of Contract Appeals. 

Chief Communications Officer 

The Chief Communications Officer is the official point of contact with Congress, providing 

direct liaison on behalf of the Public Printer and the agency. The Chief Communications 

Officer also oversees the agency’s public relations and employee communications 

operations, and website content. 

Inspector General 

The Inspector General provides an independent and objective means of keeping the Public 

Printer and Congress informed about problems and deficiencies relating to the 

administration and operations of GPO. 

GPO’S TRANSFORMATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Over the course of this review, the Panel has found that GPO leaders have made 

considerable progress in transforming the agency into an efficient, future-oriented 

organization, but the agency will need to continue to work to address medium and longerterm challenges to its business model as it continues the transition from a print-centric to a 

content-centric focus. 

In a rapidly changing environment characterized by the need to meet diverse customer 

demands and make trade-offs, GPO leaders told the Academy that they have been facing a 

number of management and operational issues. In establishing its strategic direction, GPO 

has had to balance digital technology and traditional print, and it has struggled with legacy 

information technology infrastructure, which has required investments in modernization 

efforts to support digital technology initiatives. GPO has a multi-generational workforce 

that, as discussed in Chapter V, will require continual reshaping. Over the longer term, 

Congress and GPO will need to align funding to meet evolving needs and ensure that the 

budget is consistent with the shift to digital. 

GPO has been an agency in transition throughout its history. During the ink-on-paper era, 

GPO transitioned from handset to machine-set type, increased the speed of its presses, and 

moved from hand to automated bookbinding. In the digital era’s early stages, Congress 

passed the GPO Electronic Information Access Act in 1993 to provide GPO with a statutory 

mandate to ensure online access to the Congressional Record, Federal Register, and other 

federal documents. In June 1994, GPO launched GPO Access, which was the agency’s first 

online information service. This service met a critical public need as Internet use was 

becoming widespread for the first time. In 1995, GPO replaced the four letterpresses 
15

originally installed in 1953 and 1973 with three new 64-page web offset presses. In 1998, 

GPO introduced state-of-the-art computer-to-plate technology that generated significant 

cost savings. GPO had a critical role to play in preparing for Y2K.18 Now, in the second 

decade of the 21st Century, customers require a wide range of information platforms: 

paper; Internet; CDs; and apps. The print run for the Federal Register and the Congressional 

Record is now just 2,500 compared to 30,000 two decades ago. Over that time, government 

printing has declined by half.19

Over the past two decades, GPO has experienced a greater magnitude of transformational 

changes than in all of its previous history. In fact, the agency has changed so much that 

some have suggested that “Government Printing Office” no longer adequately describes the 

agency’s mission. Instead, the Acting Public Printer has said that it should be called the 

“Government Publishing Office.”20

While transforming the focus of the organization in response to changing technological 

capabilities and customer demands, GPO has had to alleviate continuing financial pressures 

and business model challenges. In FY 2011, GPO leadership believed the organization was 

at a crossroads that required tough decisions. These include the development of a multipronged strategy to “do more with less” by improving organizational and production 

technologies, as well as adopting a wide range of cost-cutting initiatives. 

KEY THEMES IN THIS REPORT 

The remainder of this report presents the Panel’s findings and recommendations in a 

number of critical areas: 

 need for government-wide strategy; 

 impact of digital publishing on GPO; 

 business operations and financial outlook for GPO; 

 human capital planning and management at GPO; and 

 organizational transformation at GPO. 

Key themes in the remaining chapters include the following: 

1) In the digital age, the federal government must continue to ensure that the public 

has permanent access to authentic government information. This will require 

coordination across the federal government in managing the lifecycle of digital 

government information. 

2) GPO has a critical role to play in providing permanent public access to authentic 

information. Like the rest of the printing industry, GPO faces challenges in the 

 

18 Government Printing Office, Keeping America Informed, 150 Years of Service to the Nation (Washington, D.C.: 

2011), 117 – 120.

19 Lisa Rein, “Government Printing Office Has New Strategy to Keep the Presses Rolling,” Washington Post, 

October 26, 2012, http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/government-printing-office-has-newstrategies-to-keep-presses-rolling/2012/10/26/d76dc0f4-1ef8-11e2-9746-908f727990d8_story.html.

20 Ibid.
16

transition to digital publishing, but its responsibilities are far broader than a private 

commercial vendor. 

3) GPO leaders have made significant progress in “rebooting” the agency from a printcentric to a content-centric focus. GPO has a narrow window of opportunity to 

make further business and operational changes. 

4) GPO has achieved important cost savings to date and has additional opportunities to 

make cost reductions. It is unclear, however, exactly how much can be saved in the 

future, and some portion of savings should be reinvested in new human and 

technological capabilities required to meet the demands of GPO’s digital operating 

environment. 

5) To continue rebooting in an environment that is changing rapidly, GPO must 

upgrade its planning capabilities. Enhanced strategic planning and human capital 

planning, as well as scenario planning, are necessary. 
17

CHAPTER II: GOVERNMENT-WIDE STRATEGY 

Providing permanent public access to authentic government 

information remains a critical government responsibility. As 

access to government information is the foundation of a 

democratic government, and it is the responsibility of the 

government to provide permanent public access to information, 

the federal government will need to take immediate measures to 

make authentic digital government information discoverable and 

prevent the continued and permanent loss of information. 

In carrying out its mandate to study the GPO, the Panel observed that the federal 

government does not have a government-wide strategy for managing digital 

information through all stages of its lifecycle. While Title 44 has specific standards 

for tangible documents, it provides limited guidance for digital publication to GPO 

and other federal agencies and does not address the full range of activities involved 

in digital publishing, such as 

authentication and preservation. 

The lack of a government-wide 

digital strategy has significant 

implications for the democratic 

process, as well as GPO’s ability to 

carry out its mission. For example, 

identifying born-digital documents 

published by executive branch 

agencies to include in FDsys and the 

FDLP is a continuing challenge for 

GPO; as a result, many of these 

documents are not being authenticated, and discoverability and preservation are 

uneven. 

This chapter assesses how the federal government is managing digital government 

information throughout its lifecycle and contains two findings in the following 

areas: 

1) interagency coordination of electronic government information management 

2) GPO’s potential role in the lifecycle management of electronic government 

information 

Each finding is discussed in more detail below. The chapter concludes with a Panel 

recommendation. 

A popular government, without popular 

information, or the means of acquiring it, is 

but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or, 

perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern

ignorance: and a people who mean to be 

their own governors must arm themselves 

with the power which knowledge gives.

-James Madison

August 4, 1822
18

Interagency Coordination of Electronic Government Information Management 

(Finding II-1): 

Although government agencies with various responsibilities for information 

management have been coordinating in specific areas, such as digitization and 

preservation, there is no government-wide strategy for managing the lifecycle 

of government information. 

A variety of federal government organizations—including GPO, National Archives 

and Records Administration (NARA), Library of Congress (LC), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and the Chief Information Officers Council—have 

responsibilities for different aspects of digital government information 

management. Although some overlap exists, duplication of effort has been largely 

avoided through coordination. For example, GPO and NARA have signed a 

Memorandum of Understanding to avoid duplication in digital preservation.21 There 

are also several interagency committees and working groups, such as the Library of 

Congress-led National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program 

(NDIIP). 22 GPO, along with other relevant federal agencies, participates in 

developing government-wide guidelines through these interagency bodies. 

While these efforts provide useful guidance to agencies and opportunities for 

collaboration, a broader coordination and planning effort is needed to develop 

common standards and guidelines for the lifecycle management of digital 

government documents, including publishing formats, metadata, authentication, 

cataloging, dissemination, preservation, public access, and disposition. Figure 2 

illustrates the different phases of a digital government document’s lifecycle.

 

21 Government Printing Office, and National Archives and Records Administration, Memorandum 

Between the Government Printing Office and the National Archives and Records Administration 

(Washington, D.C.: August 2003; Revised: October 2012). 

22 This program was established by Congress in 2000. 
19

Figure 2. Lifecycle of Digital Government Documents 

The importance of standardization across the federal government in these areas and 

current collaborative efforts are briefly described below: 

Create

Born-Digital and Digitized Publications

Capture

Include in FDsys and FDLP

Authenticate

Technical and Chain-of-Custody

Manage

Manage and Store Content

Discover

Catalog, Index, Persistent Uniform Resource Locators (PURLs)

Access

Metadata, Searchability

Preserve

Dark Archives, Active Preservation

Dispose

According to Plan and Criteria
20

Create 

Document creation issues that need to be addressed include publishing formats, 

metadata, and digitization. There is no one publishing format that works for all 

data; however, some standardization will improve preservation and 

interoperability.23

There are multiple digitization projects being carried out by GPO, LC, libraries, and 

executive branch agencies. GPO is planning to work with federal agencies to help 

them fulfill the President’s mandate to digitize documents.24Coordination of 

digitization projects would minimize costly duplication of effort. There are also 

quality control issues; certain standards should be met to ensure digitized 

documents are discoverable, searchable, and accurate. The Federal Agency 

Digitization Guidelines Initiative, a collaborative federal agency effort that GPO 

participates in, has developed guidelines for digitization. 

Extensive use of metadata is essential for preservation, searchability, and 

documenting chain of custody (part of the authentication process). The NDIIPP is 

working to develop guidelines on descriptive metadata to improve accessibility. 

Capture 

Large volumes of digital information are being created and disseminated at an 

amazingly rapid rate. But unless this information is captured for the purpose of 

providing permanent public access, through the FDLP and/or FDsys, its existence is 

likely to be fleeting. Processes are needed to facilitate GPO’s capture of government 

documents for permanent public access. 

GPO is currently carrying out a pilot project with select executive branch agencies to 

test technology solutions for automatic web harvesting. 

Authenticate 

GPO is the only federal agency that authenticates digital content for public 

consumption. However, guidelines on what should be authenticated would be 

useful to other agencies. With print documents, authentication was less necessary 

 

23 Richard Fyffe, Deborah Ludwid, and Beth Forrest Warner, “Digital Preservation in Action: Toward 

a Campus-Wide Program,” EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, Research Bulletins 2005, no. 19 

(September 13, 2005), 7; Government Printing Office, Report to the Congress: Study to Identify 

Measures Necessary for a Successful Transition to a More Electronic Federal Depository Library 

Program (Washington, D.C.: June 1996), 21. 

24 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee 

Driven (Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), 5. For more on the President’s Directive, see Office of 

Management and Budget, and National Archives and Records Administration, Memorandum for 

Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies and Independent Agencies: Managing Government 

Records Directive (Washington, D.C.: August 2012). 
21

because it was fairly safe to assume that any printed document with a federal 

agency logo had not been altered. It may be necessary to reevaluate which 

publications should be authenticated and set priorities now that the public often 

receives government information through emails or unofficial websites and has no 

way of knowing if the information is authentic. 

The RLG-NARA Task Force on Digital Repository Certification25 has developed 

Trustworthy Repositories Audit and Certification: Criteria and Checklist, which are 

digital authentication standards. LC, National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration, academic institutions, and international experts served on the task 

force and provided input on the development of these criteria. 

Manage 

Data needs to be managed, maintained, and stored. Cloud storage may provide an 

opportunity for originating agencies to standardize formats, and simply transfer 

control of the information to another agency (like NARA, LC, or GPO) at appropriate 

times in the information’s lifecycle.

Discover 

Cataloging and finding aids, including Persistent Uniform Resource Locators 

(PURLs), ensure that digital information is discoverable. GPO’s cataloging of 

electronic government information is available to the public through the Catalog of 

U.S. Government Publications. Cataloging records are shared with NARA, LC, 

national libraries, FDLP libraries, and the library community through cooperative 

cataloging partnerships, the Program for Cooperative Cataloging at the LC, and 

through shared networks of cataloging records. 

Access 

Agencies will of course continue to disseminate information directly to the public 

through their websites and other means. However, dissemination and access are not 

central to their missions. In addition, agencies disseminate only their own 

publications, even though there may be other federal publications related to similar 

topics. The importance of providing federal online information according to function 

and topic rather than agency boundaries was addressed by the E-Government Act of 

2002.26 Publications in the FDLP and FDsys can be searched by topic across agency 

boundaries. 

Preserve 

Digital preservation is an ongoing process that begins with document creation. File 

formats, storage location, and the creation of descriptive metadata contribute to the 

 

25 RLG (Research Libraries Group) was a nonprofit organization focused on supporting the needs of 

research repositories, including libraries, archives and museums. RLG has since been subsumed by 

OCLC Research, an international library cooperative. 

26 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
22

long-term accessibility of information.27 Permanent preservation entails migrating 

content to new formats on a regular basis while maintaining the original format. 

LC, through the NDIIPP, has taken the lead at the federal level on developing 

standards and guidelines on digital preservation. 

OMB and NARA recently issued a directive touching on various aspects of digital 

preservation, providing further opportunities for coordination. Agencies are 

directed to designate a senior agency official with the responsibility of ensuring 

compliance with records management laws and regulations, as well as NARA policy 

and the directive.28 This directive provides an opportunity for GPO to work with 

OMB and NARA to incorporate requirements for agencies to provide print 

publications to GPO for inclusion in the FDLP. 

Dispose 

One of the goals of digitization is the disposition of printed copies.29 In addition, not 

all government information needs to be permanently preserved. Federal agencies 

need guidance on what government information can be disposed of and under what 

circumstances. NARA already provides this service to agencies for government 

records. 

A government-wide strategy for digital information management should examine 

these issues in the context of an overarching framework to provide guidance to 

federal agencies on how to manage digital information at each stage of its lifecycle, 

from creation to disposition. Developing the government-wide strategy could also 

help establish the infrastructure necessary to update standards and guidelines as 

technology changes. 

GPO’s Potential Role in the Lifecycle Management of Electronic Government 

Information (Finding II-2): 

GPO’s statutory requirements, experience, and capabilities place the agency in a 

position to play a significant role in performing a variety of functions to support 

the lifecycle management of government information. 

One of the goals of the E-Government Act of 200230 is to provide government 

information to the public quickly, equitably, and in a format that maximizes the 

 

27 Richard Fyffe, Deborah Ludwid, and Beth Forrest Warner, “Digital Preservation: A Campus-Wide 

Perspective,” EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, Research Bulletins 2005, no. 18 (August 30, 

2005), 3-4.

28 Office of Management and Budget and National Archives and Records Administration 

Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies and Independent Agencies: Managing 

Government Records Directive (Washington, D.C.: August 2012), 4. 

29 While current digitization efforts by depository libraries are focused primarily on paper 

documents, digitization of microfiche is also getting some attention. 

30 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
23

utility of the information and the use of information technology. The Act specifically 

addresses issues of accessibility, organization, and preservation of online 

government information. NARA, LC, and GPO all have specific responsibilities in 

these areas. GPO is required by law to manage digital content, create directories, 

and manage a storage facility. GPO is also the national leader in government 

authentication, with a long and trusted history. GPO provides valuable services to 

the federal government and the public that no other agency performs: 

 GPO is the only federal agency that authenticates digital government 

documents for public dissemination. 

 GPO catalogs, indexes, and provides persistent URLs to digital government 

documents, which makes them discoverable. 

 GPO makes information immediately and permanently accessible to the 

public. 

As described above, LC has played a leadership role in developing standards for 

digitization, metadata creation, and preservation through the NDIIPP. LC has skills 

and experience in digitization that GPO does not have. LC also plays an important 

role in facilitating library networking activities. 

NARA plays an important role in the management and permanent preservation of 

government records of historical value. NARA has also conducted research in 

preservation and authentication. 

Table 1 delineates the roles and responsibilities of GPO, NARA, and LC in the 

lifecycle management of government information. 
24

Table1. Roles and Responsibilities of GPO, NARA, and LC

GPO NARA LC

Purpose of Content 

Managed

“Keeping America Informed” - current 

and future access to all Federal public 

documents.

Preserving essential evidence that 

documents the rights of American 

citizens, the actions of Federal officials, 

and the national experience. 

Acts as the U.S. national library, 

and supports the information 

needs of the Congress. 

Access “Free public access” to FDLP content 

required by law

Limited public access permitted if 

conditions are met

Limited public access permitted if 

conditions are met

Time to Availability Hours to Days Years (depends on records schedule) Days to Years

Cataloging/

Finding Aids

Cataloging and indexing required by law; 

done at the piece level

Finding aids generally at the collection 

level

Cataloging performed to manage 

very large collections; generally 

done at the piece level

Statutory View

(digital products)

Specific mandate to manage digital 

content, create “directories,” and manage 

a “storage facility” (44 USC 4101)

Digital content responsibility derived 

from definition of Federal records (44 

USC Chap 29; 3301)

Appropriations and legislative 

oversight for digital projects (e.g., 

NDIIPP)

Format(s) of Content 

Managed

(current state)

Tangible, including print, microfilm, CDs, 

and maps

Print, Digital, Image, Sound, and 

Manuscript

Print, Digital, Image, Sound, and 

Manuscript

Scope of Content 

Managed

Published information (i.e. public 

documents) of all three branches of the 

U.S. Federal Government.

Federal records31 and other historical 

materials relating to the US national 

experience. 

Collections are universal in scope, 

and include copyrighted material 

deposited by U.S. publishing 

firms. 

Life-Cycle stages of 

Content Managed

Assists agencies with content creation. 

Publishes final products, dissemination, 

cataloging, and preservation for 

permanent public access. 

Manages preliminary records and final 

products, creates finding aids, and 

preservation.

Manages final products and rare 

objects, cataloging, and 

preservation. 

Source: Government Printing Office 

 

31As defined in 44 USC 3301, “records” includes all books, papers, maps, photographs, machine readable materials, or other documentary materials, 

regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the U.S. Government under federal law or in connection with the 

transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, 

functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations or other activities of the government, or because of the informational value of data in them. 
25

Although NARA plays an important role in preservation, it should not be the only 

agency preserving government records for several reasons. First, digital 

preservation is one area where duplication is desirable. Having one digital 

repository can be likened to the Library of Alexandria, which is believed to have 

contained a copy (and in some cases the only copy) of every book in existence at the 

time it burned to the ground between 48 BC and 640 AD. Works of great thinkers 

spanning centuries (including Aristotle, Euripides, and Sophocles) were lost forever. 

A similar loss of information today could have a serious impact on education, 

government, and national security.32 Second, NARA archives only two to three 

percent of government records. Third, the determination of which documents are 

archived is made by the originating agency and is subjective.33

Most other federal agencies have little or no responsibility for many aspects of the 

lifecycle management of government information. Beyond posting information on 

their websites, most agencies do not view dissemination or preservation to be a 

central part of their mission. Over the course of three decades, agencies will transfer 

a very small percentage of their records to NARA for archiving. 

GPO is in a strong position to play the role of capturing and providing permanent 

public access to authentic information and has a proven track record in doing this 

with digital content.34 Through FDsys, GPO can provide a central public access 

portal, which would provide ease of use for the public and prevent the duplication of 

each agency having to develop, maintain, and continually upgrade its own system. 

Unlike information published on agency websites, once information is published on 

FDsys, it is permanently available, authenticated, versioned,35 searchable, and 

downloadable. Information cannot be withdrawn from FDsys without going through 

a lengthy and thorough process to ensure that documents are not withdrawn for 

improper (e.g., political) reasons.36

Including agency documents in FDsys makes it easier to find agency content, and it 

is marketed to the public by GPO and depository libraries. This should be an 

incentive for executive branch agencies to rely on GPO to provide permanent public 

access to their publications. 

 

32 “Lost in Cyberspace,” The Economist, Technology Quarterly Q3 (2012), 

http://www.economist.com/node/21560992, from the print edition. 

33 Ryan, Tom W. and Jeff Musto, The People’s Printer: Time for a Reawakening, Center for Study of 

Responsive Law (Washington, D.C.: August 2012), 17.

34 Durant, David, “The Federal Depository Library Program: Anachronism or Necessity?” in North 

Carolina Libraries, North Carolina Library Association (Spring 2003), 37.

35 The most current version and a detailed history of updates are made available. 

36 Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents Policy Statement, Withdrawal of Federal 

Information Products from GPO's Superintendent of Documents (SuDoc) Programs, (Washington, D.C.: 

September 26, 2006). 
26

GPO is likely to require additional resources to carry out its current or expanded 

digital information management responsibilities. For example, if GPO were to 

provide additional services to other federal agencies, such as a more robust FDsys 

with a significantly larger collection, more resources would be needed. While GPO’s 

costs would increase, the cost to government will be less than if each individual 

agency were to invest in similar content management and preservation systems. 

Also, it is impossible to predict the pace and magnitude of technological changes. 

The continual investments necessary to keep pace with technological advances may 

make digital publication more expensive than paper in the long run. But again, 

having each agency incur these recurring costs would be inefficient. 

Capturing more federal publications for FDLP and FDsys will increase GPO’s 

workload in terms of cataloging/indexing, creation of metadata, authentication, 

FDsys storage space, and preservation. However, GPO could also utilize newer, less 

costly solutions, such as automated indexing and/or working with new records 

management Senior Agency Officials to help them take on more responsibilities for 

their agencies’ documents, with GPO providing technical assistance and content 

management and preservation through FDsys. 

Based upon the two findings above, the Panel has one recommendation to 

help the federal government manage the lifecycle of government information. 

This recommendation is presented and discussed below. 

RECOMMENDATION 1 

To enable the federal government to carry out its role of providing 

information to its citizens, the underpinning of a representative democracy, 

the Panel recommends that Congress establish a collaborative interagency 

process and designate a lead agency or interagency organization to develop 

and implement a government-wide strategy for managing the lifecycle of 

digital government information. The goals of such an interagency effort are to 

streamline processes, clearly define agency responsibilities, avoid duplication 

and waste, and effectively provide information to current and future 

generations. 

To implement this recommendation, Congress should: 

 direct GPO, NARA, and LC to work together and with other government 

agencies to develop the government-wide strategy; and 

 make legislative changes and appropriate funding, as necessary, to provide 

agencies with necessary requirements, authorities, and resources to 

implement this strategy. 
27

To implement this recommendation, GPO should work with LC, NARA, OMB, and 

other agencies and gather input from libraries and the private sector to develop 

standards and guidelines for publication, metadata creation, digitization, 

preservation, and authentication. These standards and guidelines should be 

updated, as needed, as technologies change. Once the strategy is developed, GPO 

should do the following to implement it: 

 explore and maximally utilize cost-effective technologies to carry out 

functions for the government-wide strategy, such as automated metadata 

creation and web harvesting; 

 work with OMB and NARA to incorporate standards, guidelines, and 

processes of the government-wide strategy into records management 

training for senior agency officials and provide technical assistance to them 

to incorporate standards and guidelines into agency processes and 

procedures; 

 include GPO’s role in developing and implementing the government-wide 

strategy in the organization’s strategic planning process; and 

 determine what, if any, additional resources and staffing would be needed to 

carry out responsibilities in the government-wide strategy and develop a 

model, as needed, to include cost recovery and additional appropriations. 
28

This page intentionally left blank. 
29

CHAPTER III: IMPACT OF DIGITAL PUBLISHING ON GPO’S MISSION

GPO plays a vital role in our democracy by providing permanent public 

access to authentic government information, but its ability to do so in a 

digital publishing environment is significantly challenged. 

GPO fulfills the fundamental aspects of its mission—“keeping America informed”—through 

the Superintendent of Documents programs, which are funded through Salary and Expense 

appropriations. Centralizing these functions also avoids the redundancy of all government 

agencies having to invest in the infrastructure and skills necessary to authenticate, 

preserve, and provide access to digital government information. By performing these 

functions of government, GPO frees up other agencies to focus on their core missions. 

This chapter assesses how GPO is performing five functions critical to providing permanent 

public access to authentic government information as it continues to transform from a 

print-centric to a content-centric organization. Included in this chapter are six findings in 

the following areas: 

1) digital publishing; 

2) digital authentication; 

3) preservation of the legacy (tangible) government collection; 

4) preservation of the digital collection; 

5) cataloging and indexing program; and 

6) government information dissemination and access. 

Each finding is discussed in more detail below. The chapter concludes with Panel 

recommendations. 

Digital Publishing (Finding III-1): 

Digital publishing has dramatically changed how the federal government creates and 

disseminates information, posing new challenges for GPO. 

The amount and types of information being created by the federal government has 

exploded with the advent of digital publishing. In many ways, this has been a boon for the 

public: more government information is reaching more people, more quickly than ever 

before. However, the nature of digital publishing has ramifications for how government 

information is authenticated, preserved, cataloged, disseminated, and accessed by the 

public. 

As of 2011, GPO estimated that 97 percent of government documents are born digital and 

will never be printed.37 Most users prefer online access, driving down demand for printed 

 

37 Barbie E. Keiser, “Public Printer Goes to the Hill—GPO at a Crossroads,” Information Today, Inc., Posted on 

May 16, 2011, p.2. 
30

documents. At the same time federal agencies are under pressure to publish electronically 

whenever possible.38

GPO has specific responsibilities for publishing digital government documents. In addition 

to requiring GPO to produce digital copies of the Federal Register and Congressional Record, 

the Government Printing Office Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act of 1993 

(PL-103-40) gave GPO the authority to produce digital versions of other government 

documents. The law also requires GPO (as far as practicable) to produce and make 

available digital content requested by executive branch agencies.39 GPO publishes these 

digital products on FDsys. 

In addition to the challenge of declining revenue from reduced print demand, GPO faces the 

challenge of capturing and preserving information for permanent public access in an 

environment where federal agencies are creating and disseminating government 

information themselves. GPO is exploring ways to become involved in the digital 

publication process in a variety of ways, including offering new services, such as advice to 

agencies on e-Book conversion. GPO is also positioning the agency to move further 

upstream in the document creation process. GPO provides guidance to other agencies in 

digitization, content management, creating metadata, preservation, authentication, and 

search functions.40 In addition to contracting for publishing services, GPO has established a 

creative design unit that provides layout and design services to federal agency customers. 

Furthermore, as publications are becoming increasingly interactive, there may be 

additional opportunities for GPO to provide digital publishing services to agencies. 

Together, these efforts will help GPO capture more federal documents for preservation and 

dissemination. 

In general, GPO’s statutory authority to manage electronic government information has 

provided considerable flexibility to date. Although GPO’s statute is outdated and precedes 

current technology, GPO has been able to update operations and introduce new 

technologies, services, and products. As roles and functions continue to change, however, 

the statute might need to be updated to facilitate effective action. 

 

http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Public-%3Cb%3EPrinter%3C/b%3E-Goes-to-the-HillGPOat-a-Crossroads-75499.asp

38 President Barack Obama, Promoting Efficient Spending, Executive Order 13589, November 9, 2011. 

39 44 U.S.C. §4101.

40 Government Printing Office, Programs, Strategy and Technology Strategic Plan (Washington, D.C.), 4. 
31

Digital Authentication (Finding III-2): 

GPO follows best available practices for authenticating digital content, and GPO is a 

trusted source of authentic government information. 

The legitimacy of information is at least as important as its availability. Federal agency 

web content is not authenticated, and therefore can be altered by agency personnel or 

changed after it is downloaded without detection. 

GPO defines authentic content as “the complete and unaltered representation approved or 

published by the content originator or an authorized derivative with a trusted chain of 

custody to that representation.”41 GPO’s challenge is to ensure that digital content made 

available through FDsys is as authentic as print documents with GPO’s imprimatur.42

Technology and trust are two critical aspects of authentication. Digital authentication 

technology is under development; federal agencies, academics, and professional groups are 

engaging in projects to find technological solutions. GPO follows best available practices at 

this time for digital authentication, such as the Certification Project’s Trustworthy 

Repositories Audit and Certification: Criteria and Checklist.43 Content integrity is assured 

through digital GPO signatures on portable document format (PDF) files and cryptographic 

hash values. GPO also is exploring new technologies that will improve federal government 

authentication processes, such as applying hash tags or digital signatures to content before 

it is sent to GPO to ensure that GPO is receiving what the originating agency intended to 

send. 

Despite GPO’s best efforts, there is no solely technological solution to digital authentication 

because authentication technologies can be hacked and authentication can be forged. Also, 

for some digital formats, such as extensible markup language (XML), there is no effective 

technological method for authentication. Therefore, authentication technologies will work 

only if there is trust in the third party checking the document for authenticity (the third 

party is not the originator or the end user). According to library community stakeholders, 

GPO is a trusted source of government information and attempts to maintain that trust by 

ensuring that the information it provides is from a trusted repository and the history of the 

chain of custody is documented.44

Depository libraries are another trusted source of authentic information in our society, and 

those depository libraries willing to host a permanent digital collection can play the role of 

 

41 Government Printing Office, Authenticity of Electronic Federal Government Publications (Washington, D.C.: 

June 13, 2011), 4.

42 Ibid. 

43 Ibid., 5. The criteria and checklist were agreed upon by the preservation community and address the 

authenticity and integrity of content. 

44 Interviews with prominent leaders in the library community; James A. Jacobs, “Who Do you Trust? The 

Authentication Problem,” Free Government Information, Posted on November 2, 2005, 

http://freegovinfo.info/authenticity; and Government Printing Office, Authenticity of Electronic Federal 

Government Publications, 4.
32

a trusted third party.45 In addition, digital copies of government information held by 

multiple libraries helps ensure information integrity because it would be too difficult for all 

the digital copies in the depository library system to be tampered with or inadvertently 

compromised, and automated processes could be used to compare content in different 

repositories to identify anomalies in documents.46

Preservation of the Legacy (Tangible) Government Collection (Finding III-3): 

No comprehensive plan or program exists for preserving the legacy collection of 

government documents. While preservation of the legacy collection is not a GPO 

responsibility, this issue should be addressed as the FDLP becomes an increasingly 

digital program. 

Regional depository libraries are responsible for maintaining the tangible documents they 

receive through the FDLP. It is estimated that there are approximately 2.3 million items in 

the FDLP, but about one-third of the collection has never been cataloged. In addition, 

individual library collections vary due to a number of factors, including when they entered 

the program, loss or destruction of printed documents, acquisitions of government 

documents that were not distributed as part of the FDLP, and so forth. As a result, no 

definition of a full government collection or the location of specific items currently exists. 

Many depository libraries, faced with space constraints, are turning to digitization as one 

method of preserving the print collection. One goal of digitization is to provide flexibility 

for depository libraries to dispose of print copies of documents that have been digitized. 

Regional depository libraries may not substitute a digital surrogate for a tangible FDLP 

title, while selective libraries may substitute under certain conditions. However, many 

depository libraries have obtained government documents that were not distributed 

through the FDLP, and these items are not subject to the same rules as FDLP titles. 

Digitization contributes to preservation by providing online access while reducing handling 

of the print counterpart. However, digitization is not in itself a comprehensive 

preservation plan for the print collection because digital content is less stable and has a 

shorter lifespan than print, and there is not yet a consensus on its long-term preservation. 

In fact, the LC currently recognizes only print and microfilm as preservation standards. A 

comprehensive plan for preservation of the print collection will require supplementing 

digital documents with a yet-to-be-determined number of full print collections, in 

controlled environments and in geographically dispersed locations. There is a danger of 

permanent loss of information if a significant number of print documents are disposed of 

before a comprehensive preservation plan is developed. 

 

45 James A. Jacobs, “Who do you Trust? The Authentication Problem,” Free Government Information, Posted on 

November 2, 2005, http://freegovinfo.info/authenticity.

46 The LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) project, administered by Stanford University Library is an 

example of a network that performs this function for its members. 
33

How digitization is carried out and the digitized products are made accessible deserve 

careful planning. Digitization is more complicated and costly than simply scanning 

documents. The digitized content needs to be searchable, discoverable, and authenticated, 

and there are quality control issues. 

There are several digitization efforts that can be built upon and coordinated, including 

depository and other library networks, LC, and executive branch agencies. In addition, a 

new OMB/NARA directive instructs executive branch agencies to consider digitizing their 

collections.47

The ingestion of digitized collections into FDsys improves preservation and accessibility. 

FDsys has this capability and collections digitized by LC and executive branch agencies 

have been ingested by the system. GPO currently does not allow ingestion of documents 

digitized by depository libraries into FDsys due to strict standards regarding 

authentication. Instead, GPO publicizes and supports collaborative digitization projects and 

digitized collections through its online Registry of U.S. Government Publication Digitization 

Projects.48

Preservation of the Digital Government Collection (Finding III-4): 

There is a growing, but incomplete, consensus among stakeholders and experts on the 

long-term preservation of digital content. 

Many stakeholders—including depository libraries, LC, and NARA—have concerns about 

digital preservation because digital publications and data are less stable and have a shorter 

lifespan than print products. While printed copies of the proceedings from the First 

Congress are retrievable, it is unclear if some digital documents created in the last decade 

can be accessed due to outdated versions of software used in their creation,49 as well as 

outdated formats (including floppy disks and microfiche), and hardware incompatibility. 

Experts are researching and coordinating efforts to develop digital preservation guidelines, 

and progress is being made, but no consensus or track record currently exists for how best 

to ensure long-term preservation of digital content. Print or microfilm will need to be a part 

of the solution for the foreseeable future.50

GPO has an important role to play in preserving the digital government collection. In 

addition to the preservation aspects of FDsys (see below), GPO can help provide guidance 

to federal agencies on document creation issues related to preservation, including file 

formats and metadata. As discussed in Chapter II, NARA and LC also have roles to play in 

digital preservation. 

 

47 Office of Management and Budget, and National Archives and Records Administration, Memorandum for 

Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies and Independent Agencies: Managing Government Records 

Directive (Washington, D.C.: August 24, 2012).

48 Digitization Projects Registry, http://registry.fdlp.gov/. 

49 Congressional Research Service, Congressional Printing: Background and Issues for Congress (R40897; 

February 9, 2011), by R. Eric Petersen and Amber Hope Wilhelm, 17.

50 This conclusion is based on interviews with prominent leaders in the library community. 
34

Some depository libraries are also participating in collaborative digital preservation efforts 

and more libraries are likely to become involved in these efforts; 12 percent of participants 

in GPO’s Forecasting Study of depository libraries indicated that they are interested in 

preserving and hosting digital content.51 One such network is LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep 

Stuff Safe), which is run by the Stanford University Library.52 LOCKSS performs automatic 

web crawls of FDsys and the 36 members that maintain government document 

repositories53 (“LOCKSS boxes”) to capture documents for preservation and check for 

anomalies in the content. FDsys collections include a LOCKSS permission statement to 

allow the LOCKSS software to perform web crawls and collect content. Replicating FDsys 

content in multiple library repositories helps ensure that a failure of one repository, 

including FDsys, will not affect preservation and access. LOCKSS and digital preservation 

systems of a similar nature could be useful in augmenting the centralized government 

repository.54

Multiple digital collections also guard against documents being withdrawn from the 

collection without public notice, or being tampered with without detection.55 Some of the 

member libraries are depositing digital government documents in “dark archives” with 

limited access, conducting active preservation, and experimenting with different 

technologies. These efforts will help ensure that a failure of one technology/repository will 

not affect collections in other repositories. 

Another aspect of digital preservation is web harvesting and archiving. With federal 

agencies publishing directly to websites, there has been an explosion in fugitive 

documents.56 Web content is ephemeral: URLs change, with content being altered or 

 

51 Government Printing Office, Federal Depository Library Program Forecasting Study: Preservation Themes, 

(Washington, D.C.),

http://www.fdlp.gov/home/repository/cat_view/177-outreach/97-events/101-depository-library-councildlc-meetings/357-2012-meeting-proceedings.

52 Libraries participate in a variety of other preservation networks, such as the Digital Preservation Network 

and Portico, but those networks do not focus on government document collections. 

53 These 36 libraries are members of LOCKSS-USDOCS, a subset the LOCKSS network; other libraries in the 

network are working together to preserver other types of collections. 

54 In addition, FDsys has a full Continuity of Operations Instance, in a separate geographic location that 

ensures that the critical functions provided by FDsys will be available in the event of failure of FDsys. 

55 GPO withdraws digital publications from FDsys only at the request of the originating agency or a 

Congressional Committee/Office. With the exceptions of making corrections to the online Congressional 

Record as directed by Congress and GPO’s authority to remove Social Security numbers from congressional 

publications, GPO does not alter digital publications in FDsys. The concerns of depository libraries and public 

interest groups are not with GPO’s current policies, but with potential future government changes in policies, 

accidental removal or alterations of FDsys content, or hackers outside of the government withdrawing or 

changing content in FDsys or other digital archives.

56 Durant, David, “The Federal Depository Library Program: Anachronism or Necessity?” in North Carolina 

Libraries, North Carolina Library Association (Spring 2003), 30-36. Fugitive documents are documents 

published by federal agencies that are eligible for the Federal Depository Library Program, but are not 

included in the program. Print documents are typically fugitive as a result of an agency not going through GPO 

to procure printing. In the digital era, agencies publish the majority of the information they produce directly 

on their websites, bypassing GPO. 
35

disappearing altogether without notice. As a recent article in The Economist noted, “The 

rapid turnover of content on the web has made total loss the norm.”57 With changes in 

administrations, web content turnover is particularly high. There currently is no agreedupon process for systematically capturing and preserving content on agency websites. 

GPO is exploring solutions for identifying and capturing the ever-growing number of 

fugitive documents through pilot projects with a small number of agencies to test 

automated web harvesting of government documents. In addition, several depository 

libraries monitor specific agency websites to identify fugitive documents and report them 

to GPO. Coordinating these efforts could significantly improve preservation of government 

information. 

Government Information Dissemination and Access (Finding III-5): 

The transition to disseminating primarily digital content has changed the dynamic 

among GPO, depository libraries, executive branch agencies, and the public, as well as 

led to fundamental questions about the future of the Federal Depository Library 

Program and the Publication and Information Sales Program. 

GPO disseminates government information through FDsys, the FDLP, and the Publication 

and Information Sales program. The information disseminated by GPO is increasingly 

digital, which has had profound effects on how information is disseminated and accessed. 

First, the transition has required both GPO and depository libraries to take on new 

responsibilities and shift spending to new areas. Second, as federal agencies publish born 

digital publications, bypassing GPO altogether, GPO’s ability to identify and disseminate 

government information has been challenged. Third, while the public’s access to 

information has improved as a result of electronic dissemination, there have also been 

some new burdens placed on the public in terms of technological equipment and skills that 

have negatively affected access. 

FDsys 

FDsys replaced GPO Access on January 15, 2009. FDsys is considered a significant 

improvement over GPO Access, and was named one of the “10 Great Government Web 

Sites” by Government Computer News and received an American Business Award. In 

October 2011, there were over 60,000 FDsys visitors per week, a 300 percent increase over 

December 2010.58 By April 2012, the number of weekly visits to FDsys had increased to 

190,000.59 FDsys currently includes more than 40 collections, including the Economic 

Report of the President, U.S. Courts Opinions, and History of Bills. Six collections are 

available for bulk download, such as Commerce Business Daily and the annual edition of 

 

57 “Lost in Cyberspace,” The Economist, Technology Quarterly Q3 (2012), 

http://www.economist.com/node/21560992, from the print edition. 

58 Government Printing Office, Strategic Plan Fiscal Year 2011 Accomplishments (Washington, D.C.: October 

2011), 2. 

59 Government Printing Office, FY 2012 Mid-Year Strategic Plan Progress Report (Washington, D.C.: April, 

2012), 3.
36

the Code of Federal Regulations. FDsys also contains a number of other government 

publications that are not part of an existing collection, such as Supreme Court Nomination 

Hearings, Independent Counsel Investigations, and Legislative Calendars. 

The goal of FDsys is to provide a one-stop shop for authentic, published government 

documents from all three branches of government.60 FDsys consists of three systems: 

content management; preservation repository; and an advanced search engine. Content 

management ensures integrity and authenticity by securely controlling content throughout 

its lifecycle. The preservation repository, accessible by GPO personnel only, adheres to 

archival standards. The advanced search engine combines extensive metadata with modern 

search technology.61

While FDsys is considered an improvement over its predecessor, users would like more 

functions, improved search capability and navigation, and an expanded collection. The 

search and retrieval functions can be difficult to use, in part because of the large size of the 

database, and especially for less experienced users.62 As the collection continues to grow, 

functionalities and search capability may suffer further. 

GPO is working to address these issues by developing projects with interested agencies to 

add collections to FDsys. In addition to adding to the collection, FDsys will need to be 

updated on a regular basis to keep pace with new technologies. For example, the “next 

FDsys release” is already scheduled and will include new mobile apps and other 

functionalities. New functionalities include a “search engine refresh” (because the current 

search engine is no longer supported and there are less expensive options) and an 

automated preservation tool. 63 In addition, GPO partner agencies are increasingly 

producing multimedia documents and they will need to be preserved and managed. 

Therefore, GPO is making investments in FDsys that would allow for the submission, 

processing, and provision of public access to a combination of text, audio, still images, 

video, and/or interactive functions.64 GPO requested the authority to spend $3.89 million 

from the revolving fund for FY 2013 to expand the FDsys collection and system upgrades.65

These necessary upgrades are an example of the recurring costs of digital information 

management; the search engine is obsolete after just three years and there are new 

functionalities that customers and users want that GPO could not have foreseen three years 

ago. It is impossible to predict what upgrades will be needed in the future, but GPO needs 

to be prepared for the “next big thing.”

 

60 Government Printing Office, Authenticity of Electronic Federal Government Publications (Washington, D.C.: 

June 13, 2011), 5. 

61 Government Printing Office, Programs, Strategy and Technology Strategic Plan (Washington, D.C.: June 25, 

2012), 5. 

62 These observations are based on interviews with prominent leaders in the library community and 

responses to the Academy’s FDLP survey. (See Appendix E for list of contacts.) This is a small sampling of the 

30 million monthly users of FDsys. 

63 Government Printing Office, Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2013 (Washington, D.C.: January 2012), G4. 

64 Ibid., G5. 

65 Ibid., A10. 
37

FDsys, like all government IT programs, is dependent on sustained appropriations. 

(Currently, GPO is providing FDsys services to executive branch agencies and the public 

free of charge.) However, given the unique role of FDsys in providing permanent public 

access to authentic government information, it is imperative for GPO to secure long-term, 

consistent funding for FDsys through cost recovery and/or appropriation to ensure current 

and future access to government information. Another option would be to explore the 

funding model of the USAJOBS website, run by the Office of Personnel Management. The 

USAJOBS site is funded through automatic fees assessed to federal agencies based on the 

size of the agency. Such a model would not only fund FDsys, but encourage agencies to use 

this centralized service, given the fact that they have already paid to use it. A more 

sustained source of funding will ensure sufficient funds are available to maintain and 

upgrade the system as needed, as well as expand its collection. Also, as the collection 

expands, the system may need upgrades to incorporate state-of-the-art search and other 

functions. 

When GPO Access was launched, GPO charged users for access to digital content. The 

problem was that the administrative costs of collecting payments were higher than what 

GPO could charge. Also, there was resistance from public interest groups and other 

stakeholders. Free access of government information is an important tenet of a democracy. 

However, GPO has always charged for printed publications to recoup costs (see Publication 

and Information Sales, below). In addition, access to FDsys content could be provided free 

of charge through the depository libraries, similar to how the public can access print 

documents through the libraries free of charge. 

Now may be the time for GPO to revisit charging the public for access to FDsys content. The 

Academy convened a forum of experts on printing and publishing where this topic was 

discussed extensively. Participants noted that technologies for online payments have 

progressed to the point that they cost very little to administer. Also, the public is becoming 

accustomed to paying fees for government services that used to be free (such as admittance 

to National Parks). Rather than charge a publication price, GPO could explore charging a 

small user fee to recoup the cost of providing access to government information on FDsys, 

or allowing users to view documents for free, and charging for document downloads. 

Forum participants also discussed the possibility of GPO exploring opportunities for 

repackaging files and content in different ways and making them available for sale to the 

public. 

Clearly, FDsys has had a significant and positive impact on public access to government 

information. Posted information is available instantly; users and libraries no longer have 

to wait for shipments of documents to arrive. The public can access information directly, 

without having to go to a library or purchase them from GPO. More information is now 

available to the public, and content can be searched easily and quickly. FDsys can be 

accessed around the clock, freeing the public from having to adhere to library hours. 

However, FDsys cannot meet the needs of all users of government information. Twentytwo percent of American adults over the age of 18 do not use the Internet. The disabled, 
38

poor, and seniors are less likely to get online than other adults.66 Providing Internet access 

through libraries does not necessarily solve the problem. Due to large file sizes and slower 

Internet speeds, download times can be very slow, and libraries impose computer 

workstation time limits on their users. Also, with budget cuts, many libraries, especially in 

rural areas, have cut or eliminated weekend hours.67 Other access issues are lack of user 

computer skills, not enough computers to meet library patron demand, changing digital 

formats, and changing URLs.68 FDsys is one of the GPO training classes depository libraries 

are most interested in.69

Federal Depository Library Program 

There are approximately 1,200 depository libraries in the FDLP. The nearly 50 regional 

depository libraries are required to retain all FDLP documents permanently, in either print 

or microfiche. The remaining depository libraries are selective and can be choosier 

regarding which FDLP documents they receive, and are required to retain them for only 

five years. All depository libraries are required to provide free public access to government 

documents in their collections. 

GPO provides printed documents to depository libraries free of charge. GPO is responsible 

for the cost of printing and mailing the documents to the libraries. The regional depository 

libraries are responsible for maintaining the documents and are required to provide 

permanent public access to them. The costs to the libraries associated with the print 

collection include processing, maintaining, and storing the documents, as well as providing 

assistance to patrons. Ownership of the publications remains with GPO. 

The FDLP was transformed into a primarily electronic program at the direction of 

Congress.70 This transformation has dramatically changed the relationship between GPO 

and the depository libraries, shifted their responsibilities, and changed program 

implementation costs for both GPO and the libraries.71

Electronic documents provided online by GPO are not physically deposited with depository 

libraries like their tangible counterparts, although some depository libraries are 

 

66 Pew Internet & American Life Project, The Pew Research Center, 

http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences/Main-Report.aspx?view=all.

67 House Committee on House Administration, GPO—Issues and Challenges: How Will GPO Transition to the 

Future?, 122nd Cong., 1st sess., May 11, 2011, Testimony of Suzanne Sears, Assistant Dean for Public Services, 

University of North Texas, 109. 

68 Government Printing Office, Federal Depository Library Program Forecasting Study: Preservation Themes, 

(Washington, D.C.: October 17, 2012), http://www.fdlp.gov/home/repository/cat_view/177-outreach/97-

events/101-depository-library-council-dlc-meetings/357-2012-meeting-proceedings.

69 Government Printing Office, Federal Depository Library Program Forecasting Study: Summary Discussion & 

Future Roles, (Washington, D.C.: October 18, 2012). 

70 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1996 Public Law 104-53. 

71 For example, the year government documents were first made available online (FY 1995), the cost of 

printing and distributing documents to the FDLP was approximately $26 million in FY 2011 dollars. GPO’s 

request for these activities for FY 2013 was $8.5 million. Savings from these activities have been shifted to 

fund FDsys. (See GPO’s FY 2013 Budget Justification for more information.) 
39

voluntarily hosting digital content for preservation purposes. GPO is providing access 

through FDsys and the Catalog of Government Publications. Under this scenario, GPO is 

now responsible for the recurring costs of: 

 identifying, acquiring, and cataloging digital content; 

 providing permanent links to digital content controlled by other agencies; 

 converting digital content to current and accessible formats; and

 providing public access to digital government publications. 

Libraries are now primarily responsible for providing access to electronic collections on 

FDsys and other government databases (although GPO also distributes tangible copies of 

government documents to depository libraries, which regional libraries are responsible for 

maintaining). While this approach has eased pressure on space requirements, especially 

for selective libraries, libraries now have the additional burden of providing appropriate 

technology (hardware, software, and high-speed Internet connection), and patron 

assistance in locating and utilizing digital government publications. As discussed 

previously, because many libraries are wary of a system where storage and preservation 

are centralized with the federal government, they are voluntarily taking on additional 

responsibilities, such as downloading and preserving government documents. 

These changes give rise to questions regarding the continued relevance and viability of the 

FDLP. Now that all libraries have equal access to FDsys, and the public can access online 

government information free of charge, what role, if any, should the FDLP play in providing 

permanent public access to government information? What are the benefits to the 

depository libraries of staying in the program? 

Faced with these changes and questions, GPO and the depository libraries have embarked 

on a project together to develop a new vision for the FDLP. GPO’s forecasting study, which 

is in process, has systematically collected information from individual libraries and at the 

state level. The Forecasting Study is expected to culminate in a national plan for the FDLP. 

The results of the study are preliminary, but combined with interview data and results of 

the Academy’s own survey of depository libraries (see Appendix E), it is clear that most 

depository libraries want changes in the program even as they see value in continuing to 

participate. Libraries value the opportunities to collaborate with each other and GPO, as 

well as the support (such as training) that GPO provides. Major issues that depository 

libraries want to have addressed include program governance (depositories want more 

flexibility in the program),72 preservation, digitization, access, harvesting federal agency 

 

72 An example is the Centers of Excellence model being implemented by the Association of Southeastern 

Research Libraries (ASERL), in which libraries have agreed to take the lead in developing agency-specific 

collections (such as Department of Education). ASERL’s approach has resulted in increased coordination 

among libraries and visibility for underused collections. See Association of Southeastern Research Libraries, 

Southeast Region Guidelines for Management and Disposition of Federal Depository Library Collections, July 

2012, 5. 
40

web content, training and education, and cataloging and bibliographic control.73 Libraries 

are also generally positive regarding the job GPO is doing, considering its operating 

environment, but would like to see GPO have more authority and resources. 

Based on the needs and viewpoints of stakeholders expressed to date, as well as where the 

program is headed, it is likely that the “new” FDLP will provide more flexibility for 

depository libraries and have an increased focus on the provision of services. Depository 

libraries will be the trusted sources of authentic government information and expert 

assistance on locating and utilizing online government information. In addition, depository 

libraries will continue to enter into mutually-beneficial partnerships with GPO and/or 

other libraries to work collaboratively on issues such as digital preservation, cataloging 

and digitizing the print collection, developing a comprehensive plan for preserving the 

print collection, and identifying fugitive documents. Some of these changes will be costly to 

implement and may require libraries to shift resources from current FDLP activities. 

The increased reliance on digital publication across the federal government has also 

significantly impacted GPO’s ability to capture government documents for dissemination 

through the FDLP. By law, any federal agency print publications not ordered from GPO 

must be provided to GPO for distribution to depository libraries. The only exceptions are 

documents determined by the originating agency to be for official use only, strictly 

administrative or operational in nature (and thus having no public interest or educational 

value), “cooperative publications” (publications which must be sold to be self-sustaining), 

and classified documents.74 When the majority of federal government publications were 

printed, there was a fairly seamless process for GPO to use print orders to identify 

documents for the FDLP program. 

Now, agencies completely bypass GPO by publishing digital documents on their own and 

posting them on websites. Agencies do not have a legal requirement to provide digital 

publications to GPO for inclusion in the FDLP. Fugitive documents have always been a 

problem, even in the era of print, but the problem has grown exponentially as a result of 

digital publication, with long-term implications for public access. 

Publication and Information Sales 

GPO also provides access to government publications through sales of various products. It 

has both a physical storefront at headquarters and an online store. The Publication and 

Information Sales program used to be under the jurisdiction of the Superintendent of 

Documents, but now it is under Business Products and Services. Unlike Superintendent of 

Documents programs, the Publication and Information Sales program is revenuegenerating and is not funded by appropriations. However, there is a dotted-line report on 

 

73 Government Printing Office, Federal Depository Library Program Forecasting Study: Summary Discussion & 

Future Roles (Washington, D.C.: October 18, 2012), http://www.fdlp.gov/home/repository/cat_view/177-

outreach/97-events/101-depository-library-council-dlc-meetings/357-2012-meeting-proceedings.

74 44 U.S.C §1902. 
41

the organizational chart to the Superintendent of Documents reflecting the role of the sales 

program in information dissemination. 

The Superintendent of Documents can order reprinting of documents with the permission 

of the head of the originating agency, using the revolving fund to cover the cost. The 

revolving fund is then reimbursed for printing costs with sales revenues. With most 

government information available to the public for free online, there has been a steep 

decline in publication sales and revenues. GPO responded to reduced sales by adopting a 

print-on-demand model and researching and actively pursuing new markets. 

In 2004, GPO held a meeting to gather input from representatives of other federal agencies, 

the FDLP, and the information/publishing industry on the future of the program. GPO’s 

assumption at the time was that “there is both a genuine need and a real opportunity for a 

healthy Sales Program that recognizes the interests of the library community and those of 

the information industry and can assist publishing agencies in the proactive dissemination 

of their information to the public.”75 Meeting participants agreed that Publication and

Information Sales has an important role to play in government information dissemination. 

The Publication and Information Sales program is actively pursuing new services to 

improve its revenues and continue its support of public access to information. For 

example, the program has entered into agreements with Barnes and Noble, Amazon.com, 

and Google books to offer e-Books to the public on a profit-sharing basis. In addition, the 

program worked with the Veterans Health Administration to produce a federal e-Magazine, 

The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development. This first effort at e-Magazine 

publication was a success and may lay the groundwork for future opportunities in this area. 

GPO has made a policy decision not to sell mobile apps that have been developed and 

released to date. 

Publication and Information Sales also runs the storage and distribution operations located 

in Pueblo, Colorado and Laurel, Maryland. These facilities perform several functions, 

including taking and distributing orders for executive branch clients and the Publication 

and Information Sales program. GPO also recently moved its FDLP distribution operations 

to Laurel, which incurred some initial costs, but will free up space at headquarters for 

leasing. 

The Laurel and Pueblo facilities have excess capacity (in Laurel, the warehouse is filled at 

85% capacity, but more storage space could be realized by reconfiguring inventory). GPO is 

actively marketing its storage and distribution capabilities, seeking additional executive 

branch agency customers that are under budget cutbacks and financial strains and would 

entertain optional arrangements for storing documents, fulfilling orders, and distributing 

documents. 

 

75 Government Printing Office, Summary of Meeting on the Future of the GPO Sales Program, (Washington, D.C.: 

March 16, 2004), 4. 
42

Despite efforts to streamline operations, cut costs, and pursue new markets, the 

Publication and Information Sales program is unable to consistently cover costs and GPO 

recognizes that there is a need for continued identification and development of new 

services and products for agencies and the public. 

Cataloging and Indexing Program (Finding III-6): 

GPO cataloging and indexing insures federal government information is discoverable. 

Significant cataloging and indexing of government documents are needed for ease of access 

and inventory management. In 1996, GPO estimated that approximately 50 percent of 

government documents were not cataloged, indexed, or distributed to depository 

libraries.76 With the vast majority of government documents now born digital and posted 

on agency websites, the current percentage of government publications that are fugitive is 

unknown, but can be assumed to be higher than GPO’s 1996 estimate. Unfortunately, 

posting information on a website does not mean citizens can find it. Given the federal 

government’s enormous web presence and the tendency for URLs to change, finding 

government documents on agency websites can be very challenging, even for Internetsavvy users. Cataloging and indexing makes government publications discoverable. 

Cataloging the legacy collection is also the first step in preserving that collection; there is a 

need to define the collection in order to identify what needs to be preserved. Cataloging the 

full collection will need to be a collaborative effort because library collections vary 

depending on when they entered the program and other factors. 

GPO’s goal is to expand the online Catalog of Government Publications to make it more 

comprehensive, including historical and electronic documents. Activities to expand the 

Catalog include increased harvesting of born-digital federal documents and expanding 

cataloging record services to depository libraries.77

Based upon the six findings above, the Panel has five recommendations to help GPO 

continue to overcome the challenges of digital publication to its mission of keeping 

America informed. These recommendations are presented and discussed below. 

 

76 General Accounting Office, Information Management: Electronic Dissemination of Government Publications, 

GAO-01-428 (Washington, D.C.: March 2001), 5. 

77 Government Printing Office, Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2013 (Washington, D.C.: January 2012), F3. 
43

RECOMMENDATION 2 

To ensure GPO can carry out its mandate of providing permanent public access to 

government information, the Panel recommends that GPO enhance its position and 

capabilities by offering an expanded set of services to executive branch agencies on a 

cost recovery basis. Such services could include content management, metadata 

creation, authentication, preservation, and cataloging—all of which contribute to the 

lifecycle management of government information. In addition, the Panel 

recommends that GPO develop strategies to encourage executive branch agencies to 

provide publications to GPO to enable permanent public access. 

To implement this recommendation, GPO should: 

 collect data on the demand for GPO performing these services for the federal 

government and share them with Congress, OMB, and other executive branch 

agencies; 

 fast-track the development of services that could be marketed to executive branch 

agencies; 

 build on collaborative efforts with other federal agencies to encourage demand for 

these services; 

 work with OMB and NARA to ensure that the new senior agency officials responsible 

for records management in each executive branch agency understand their legal 

obligation to provide print government publications to GPO for distribution to the 

FDLP; 

 conduct outreach to new records management senior agency officials on GPO’s 

unique capabilities and to demonstrate the benefits of providing digital publications 

to GPO for inclusion in FDLP and/or FDsys; 

 develop incentives for agencies to provide digital publications eligible for inclusion 

in the FDLP collection to GPO; and 

 continue and expand the web harvesting pilot project if the initial phase proves 

successful. 

RECOMMENDATION 3 

To safeguard the historical documents of our democracy for future generations, the 

Panel recommends that GPO work with depository libraries and other library groups 

to develop a comprehensive plan for preserving the print collection of government 

documents. The Panel recommends that the plan include cataloging, digitizing, and 

preserving tangible copies of government publications, a timeline for completion, 

and options for supporting the effort financially, as well as a process for ingesting 
44

digitized copies into FDsys. Congress should appropriate funds for the purpose of 

cataloging, digitizing, and preserving the government collection.

To implement this recommendation, GPO should: 

 develop a budget strategy for cataloging, digitizing, and preserving the government 

collection and provide that strategy to Congress;

 help create and support collaborative library networks for the purpose of cataloging 

the print collection; 

 build on existing collaborative digitization projects and coordinate with other 

federal agencies to avoid duplication of effort; 

 provide standards and training in digitization to depository libraries; and 

 develop and adopt a policy that recognizes the authenticity of digitized content 

submitted by federal depository libraries that have entered into a formal agreement 

with GPO, and ingest this content into FDsys. 

RECOMMENDATION 4 

To ensure the long-term preservation and access of digital government publications, 

the Panel recommends that GPO and Congress explore alternative funding models 

for FDsys that ensure a stable and sufficient funding source. 

To implement this recommendation, GPO should: 

 build on its successful partnerships with legislative, executive, and judicial branch 

agencies that have resulted in an expanded FDsys collection to market FDsys 

services to additional agencies; and 

 consider options such as reimbursement for services; fees for end users; dedicated 

appropriations; and/or an automatic charge to agencies, depending on size, to 

encourage agencies to take advantage of GPO’s existing infrastructure and cover the 

cost of the services being provided by GPO (similar to the fee-based structure of 

USAJOBS). 
45

RECOMMENDATION 5 

To preserve the relevance and viability of the FDLP, the Panel recommends that GPO 

continue to collaborate with depository libraries and the library community to 

develop a national strategic plan for the program that gives libraries the flexibility 

and tools they need to provide permanent public access to government information 

in the digital age. Once GPO and the depository libraries have developed a vision for 

the future direction of the FDLP, it would be appropriate to conduct an analysis of 

the advantages and disadvantages of maintaining the geographic structure of the 

depository library system in an era where access is not tied to state and 

congressional district boundaries. 

RECOMMENDATION 6 

To ensure the Publication and Information Sales program continues to play a role in 

information dissemination and is able to recover costs, the Panel recommends that 

GPO continue to aggressively research and expand into new markets. 

To implement this recommendation, GPO should: 

 explore opportunities to recover the costs of developing mobile apps and other 

derivative products from federal agencies; 

 continue market research to determine agency and customer needs and services 

GPO could provide, such as e-Books and e-Magazines; and 

 continue intensive marketing of storage and distribution operations to fully utilize 

available space and maximize revenues. 
46

This page intentionally left blank. 
47

CHAPTER IV: GPO’S BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL OUTLOOK 

GPO has improved its current and short-term financial outlook, but will 

continue to face challenges given declining print demand. GPO has 

worked to diversify its revenue streams by expanding its provision of 

secure federal credentials. GPO has a narrow window of opportunity to 

pursue strategic revenue-generation and cost-saving initiatives. 

This chapter focuses on GPO’s major business operations—its two print operations and 

Security and Intelligent Documents. Together, these business operations accounted for 94 

percent of total contribution margin in FY 2012.78 GPO performs its printing function 

through a mix of in-house production managed by Plant Operations and procurement 

managed by Customer Services. Most GPO printing is procured from the private sector—

accounting for almost two-thirds of all printing in FY 2012. Most printing for the executive 

branch is procured by GPO. GPO performs almost all congressional printing (99 percent) 

in-house. In addition to printing for Congress, GPO performs printing required under Title 

44 for three other groups: the Office of the Federal Register (OFR), the Federal Depository 

Library Program, and the Publication and Information Sales program. Printing for all four 

groups accounted for 87.5 percent of total printing performed in-house between FY 2009 

and FY 2012. 

Additional printing requested by the executive branch (not including the OFR), as well as 

congressional agencies and the judicial branch, is performed in-house to help use capacity 

and recover the costs of the equipment and labor needed to meet congressional printing 

demands. Customer Services, in consultation with Plant Operations, makes the final 

decision on whether the printing is done in-house. That decision is driven by GPO’s inhouse capacity, since GPO plant always needs to be available to respond to congressional 

printing needs. 

The Security and Intelligent Documents (SID) business unit is responsible for designing, 

manufacturing, and distributing secure government credentials for federal agencies. In FY 

2012, SID’s revenue was $179.5 million, which represented approximately 25.7 percent of 

GPO’s total revenue. SID’s operations are organized around U.S. passports for the State 

Department and smart cards,79 for a range of federal agency customers. The original and 

largest customer is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS): GPO produces Trusted 

 

78 “Contribution margin” is a term specific to GPO. Contribution margin equals business unit revenues minus 

business unit expenses (direct and indirect). Contribution margin is the margin available to contribute to GPO 

overhead costs. 

79 The term “smart card” generally refers to a plastic card with an embedded integrated circuit capable of 

storing and processing information. See Government Accountability Office, Personal ID Verification: Agencies 

Should Set a Higher Priority on Using the Capabilities of Standardized Identification Cards, GAO-11-751

(Washington, D.C.: September 2011).
48

Traveler and Global Entry80 cards for Customs and Border Patrol and Personal Identity 

Verification (PIV) cards81 for seven DHS agencies to comply with Homeland Security 

Presidential Directive-12. Other customers include the Department of State (family of 

secure diplomatic credentials) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (credentials for 

special events). 

This chapter assesses the financial impact of declining print demand on GPO’s print 

operations, GPO’s efforts to adjust, the government-wide benefits of GPO performing 

printing for the executive branch, the importance of SID to the financial health of GPO, and 

GPO’s efforts to diversify its revenue streams.

82 It contains nine findings in the following 

areas: 

1) improvement in GPO’s financial position

2) GPO’s longer-term financial outlook 

3) financial status of Plant Operations 

4) Plant Operations’ efforts to reduce costs 

5) impact of declining demand for procured printing on Customer Services 

6) government-wide benefits of executive branch printing 

7) recovery of government printing business 

8) financial reliance on the U.S. passport business 

9) opportunity offered by smart card business to diversity revenue stream 

Each finding is discussed in more detail below. The chapter concludes with four Panel 

recommendations. 

 

80 The Trusted Traveler Program is a joint Canada-U.S. program designed to let pre-approved, low-risk 

travelers cross the Canada–U.S. border quickly. The Global Entry program is a pilot program that allows preapproved, low-risk air travelers to receive expedited clearance upon arrival into the United States.

81 Personal Identity Verification cards are a specific subset of smart cards. PIV refers to smart cards that 

comply with National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Federal Information Processing Standards, 

which have been adopted as a requirement for federal agency credential programs directed by Homeland 

Security Presidential Directive-12 issued in 2004. PIV cards are intended for use by agency employees and 

contractors to control access to government facilities and systems. (See Government Accountability Office, 

Personal ID Verification.)

82 Given the Panel’s view that the Government Printing Office performs a critical governmental function, as 

well as the uncertainty associated with the federal government’s long-term strategy for managing digital 

information, it was neither feasible nor necessary to do a detailed analysis of the future costs and revenues 

that might be associated with different ways of organizing the federal government’s printing and 

dissemination functions. This review did conduct a detailed examination of the financial challenges facing 

GPO and its efforts to adjust, and it identified major opportunities for expanding product lines that may 

increase revenue (discussed in this chapter) and achieving further operational cost savings (discussed in 

Chapter VI). 
49

Improvement in GPO’s Financial Position (Finding IV-1):

The employee buyout and other cost-reduction measures have greatly improved GPO’s 

financial position, but GPO faces ongoing financial challenges. 

Going into FY 2011, GPO was burdened with high business unit personnel costs and rising 

agency-wide overhead costs. High business unit personnel costs reflected in part a 

workforce sized to support larger and less automated operations. 

GPO’s high overhead cost is due in large part to the cost of operating and maintaining old, 

obsolete facilities sized for much larger World War II era operations. Facilities cost is the 

largest component of GPO overhead (30 percent in FY 2011). The facilities component of 

GPO overhead has been a particular burden on Plant Operations, which was charged for 

two-thirds of the total based on the proportion of space it occupies plus a proportional 

share of unoccupied space. GPO overhead also includes the cost of mandated programs—

the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) 

office—that is paid out of appropriations in other agencies. (See Appendix F for summary 

data on GPO overhead components and allocation across business units in FY 2011.) In 

addition to high overhead costs, GPO must bear the cost of the long-term liability for 

workers’ compensation.83

GPO overhead includes the cost of the following: 

 executive offices; 

 quality assurance; 

 mandated programs; 

 national account managers; 

 finance; 

 acquisitions; 

 information technology and systems; 

 human capital; 

 security services; and 

 facilities.84

From FY 2008 to FY 2010, GPO overhead rose by 11 percent from $117.2 million to $130.1 

million. The burden of GPO’s high cost structure was magnified by relatively steep declines 

in print revenue. GPO has experienced relatively steep declines in print demand in recent 

years resulting from a number of factors including tightening agency budgets and 

 

83 GPO bears the cost of the long term liability for the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act Program, for 

which other agencies receive appropriations. In his most recent Semiannual Report to Congress, the GPO 

Inspector General has identified the imposition of these unfunded costs--accrued long-term workers’ 

compensation benefits--as putting GPO’s financial management at risk from unexpected increases in 

Department of Labor estimates of FECA liability. See GPO, Office of Inspector General, Semiannual Report to 

Congress April 1, 2012 through September 30 (Washington, D.C.: November 2012), 7-8.

84 In FY 2011, the composition of facilities costs were as follows: personnel—63 percent; utilities—26 

percent; materials, depreciation, and contracts—11 percent. 
50

Executive Order 13589 in November 2011 directing agencies to cut print expenses.85 These 

declines have put financial pressure on both Plant Operations (in-house production) and 

Customer Services (print procurement), but have impacted Customer Services most 

severely due to its model for cost recovery. 

GPO has relied heavily on SID’s contribution margin86 to help cover GPO overhead. This is 

a function of the relative financial performance of SID. With the exception of the facilities 

costs discussed earlier, the allocation of overhead costs across business units is driven by 

net revenue.87

GPO estimates that the employee buyout in FY 2011 will allow it to reduce agency-wide 

overhead to $120 million, close to its FY 2008 level. The buyout enabled even larger 

savings in business unit personnel costs, with savings concentrated in Plant Operations and 

Customer Services. Savings from the buyout are realized in FY 2012 and FY 2013--with the 

larger part still to be realized in FY 2013. (See Table 2 below.) This has improved GPO’s 

financial situation by lowering its cost structure going forward and raising its net operating 

income.88 (See Appendix G for summary financial data, including net income, at the 

business unit level from FY 2008 through FY 2012.) 

 

85 Barack Obama, Promoting Efficient Spending, Executive Order 13589 (November 9, 2011). This Executive 

Order calls upon agencies to reduce the amount of printed material in favor of electronic publishing. 

86 The contribution margin reported for SID includes the capital that State Department provides for 

investment in the passport operation over and above the price it pays for passports (which includes profit 

margin). However, State Department capital can only be used for investment in passport operations. It is kept 

separate from the general pool of money in the revolving fund that may be used to fund GPO overhead and 

investment in other operations. 

87 Net revenue equals business unit revenue (excluding pass through costs) divided by the sum of GPO 

business units’ revenue. Pass through costs include revenue from commercially procured printing, direct mill 

shipments, blank paper sales from inventory, and postage charged to products. These items are completed 

goods upon receipt by GPO or GPO’s customer agency. No value is added by GPO employees from an 

accounting standpoint. 

88 Net operating income for GPO is the difference between total contribution margin and total GPO overhead 

cost. Positive net operating income adds to the cash available to GPO to make investments and to offset 

operating losses if necessary. As noted earlier, this excludes State Department capital set aside specifically for 

investment in passport production. 
51

Table 2. Projected Buyout Savings by Business Unit ($ thousands) 

*Includes savings projected in the Agency Distributions business units 

** Library Services operations are funded directly by the Salaries & Expenses appropriation.

Source: Chief Financial Officer, GPO 

While the employee buyout has enabled substantial savings, GPO still faces ongoing 

financial challenges. Overhead is still high and continued decline in print demand will put 

downward pressure on contribution margin available to cover that overhead. In its 

financial projections, discussed below, GPO assumes that revenue will decline by 4 to 5 

percent for Customer Services and 2 percent for Plant Operations through FY 2019.89

Consequently, GPO will continue to be heavily reliant on SID’s contribution margin to cover 

agency-wide overhead costs for the foreseeable future. 

GPO’s Longer-Term Financial Outlook (Finding IV-2): 

GPO has a limited period of time in which to address ongoing financial challenges 

through a mix of strategic initiatives to further reduce costs and generate additional 

revenue. 

GPO is aware of the ongoing financial challenges posed by declining demand for print. GPO 

has done a projection to estimate the financial implications of these declines and the 

timeframe within which actions must be taken to ensure continued financial health. Based 

on this projection, GPO concludes that it has seven years until it will run out of cash in FY 

2020. In the meantime, the agency would have cash available to offset operating losses and 

to fund investment at current levels from the revolving fund through FY 2019.90

 

89 GPO’s model does not allow for projecting net operating income for individual business units, such as Plant 

Operations and Customer Services. However, it does project business unit revenues, expenses (direct and 

indirect), and contribution margin (revenues minus expenses). The revenue declines projected even against 

shares of total GPO overhead reduced to FY 2008 levels will drive increasing operating losses by GPO print 

businesses, with Customer Services (procured printing) experiencing the largest losses given a greater rate of 

revenue decline (4-5 percent versus 2 percent for Plant Operations). 

90 GPO projection includes an annual investment of $15 million through FY 2019. GPO typically invests $10-

15 million in a given year. GPO has requested congressional authorization to spend $15.5 million from the 

revolving fund in FY 2013. This does not include investment in the passport business, which the State 

Department funds as a separate line item each year. 

Business Unit

FY 12 FY 13

Bus. Unit 

Expenses

(Direct +

Indirect)

GPO 

Overhead

Bus. Unit 

Expenses

(Direct +

Indirect)

GPO Overhead

Plant Operations $6,852 $2,833 $9,137 $3,777

Official Journals of Government 241 102 322 136

Security and Intelligent Docs 639 2,061 931 2,747

Digital Media/Creative Services 0 0 0 0

Customer Services 2,347 468 3,130 625

Publications/Information Sales* 1,123 190 1,498 254

Library Services and Content Mgt** 555 447 740 596

Total $11,818 $6,101 $15,758 $8,135
52

GPO has based its projection on what it contends are conservative assumptions. (Appendix 

H describes GPO’s projection and assumptions.) Examples include: 

 A 4-5 percent decline each year in Customer Services revenues. (This is 

comparable in effect to the 4.8 percent average rate of decline since FY 2007, a 

period of relatively steep decline.) 

 The projected rate of growth in SID does not include additional revenues that are 

expected from the higher price charged for the Next Generation Passport due to 

launch in FY 2015 or FY 2016. Also, revenue from smart cards is assumed to 

remain constant during the projection period. 

 No appropriations to the revolving fund ($3.9 million in FY 12), which has been 

funding GPO’s investments in FDsys and IT systems. 

 No increase in lease revenue. 

 Except for savings from improved balance sheet management (continued 

reduction in charge-back balance), the projection assumes no cost-savings 

beyond those to be realized from the employee buyout. 

Through the employee buyout and other cost-saving measures, the GPO has bought needed 

time to pursue strategic opportunities to grow revenue and further reduce costs and 

thereby ensure its continued financial health and its ability to perform important 

government responsibilities effectively into the future. These opportunities, such as the 

development of a new print procurement ordering and management system and growing 

the smart card business, are discussed later in this chapter and in Chapter VI. 

GPO’s financial projection is an important step in the agency’s strategic planning efforts. 

However, GPO could benefit from scenario planning in this area. For instance, what are the 

implications of more severe declines in print revenue?91 Even if GPO believes this is 

unlikely, it is not impossible. Chapter VI addresses the importance of scenario planning 

more broadly. 

Financial Status of Plant Operations (Finding IV-3): 

Plant Operations’ financial position is much improved, but continued declines in print 

demand will require further cost reduction measures, including possible changes to 

congressional print requirements. 

Plant Operations has been faced with high personnel costs and a large share of GPO 

overhead due primarily to the high cost of operating and maintaining legacy facilities as 

noted earlier. Plant Operations experienced a 23 percent decrease in billing from printing 

for the executive branch (not including OFR) in FY 2011. According to GPO, this decrease is 

due mostly to a reduction in blank paper sales and the completion of the U.S. Census project 

that occurs every ten years. Also, agency demand for printed copies of the Federal Register

 

91 GPO has considered the possibility of more severe declines in print revenue, but has not developed 

alternate projections. 
53

dropped by over half (53 percent) in FY 2012 following Executive Order 13589 in 

November 2011, but total billings for OFR printing went up by almost 10 percent in FY 

2012.92 (See Table 3 below.) 

Table 3. Plant Operations Billings by Customer Group 

($ thousands) 

Customer Group FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012

(est.)

Congress $83,334,993 $92,231,894 $79,401,289 $89,298,766 

Office of the Federal 

Register

53,963,028 52,217,410 51,804,241 61,076,236

Depository Library 

Program

5,620,702 5,131,458 5,228,266 6,380,055 

Publication and Info. 

Sales

2,060,096 1,584,680 952,572 1,123,011 

Other Executive 

Branch

22,288,486 22,069,449 16,945,165 16,553,082 

TOTAL $167,267,305 $173,234,891 $154,331,533 $174,431,151 

Source: Plant Operations, GPO 

In FY 2011, Plant Operations covered both its direct and indirect expenses, and generated a 

$44.3 million contribution margin, but ran an overall operating deficit of $7.6 million after 

accounting for its GPO overhead charge. The employee buyout significantly reduced Plant 

Operations’ personnel costs as well as its GPO overhead burden. Plant Operations’ 

operating deficit was reduced by more than a third to $5 million. The unit’s financial 

situation will benefit further from the buyout when the larger remaining portion of savings 

is realized in FY 2013. 

Plant Operations’ primary customer is Congress, but its business model depends on 

printing and publishing for OFR and other executive branch customers to spread the cost of 

capital and labor needed to meet congressional printing demands.93 However, the impact of 

declining executive branch demand for print on Plant Operation’s contribution margin is 

limited for two reasons. First, cost recovery for in-house printing, including printing for the 

OFR and other executive branch agencies is not tied primarily to the size of the print job as 

in the case of procured printing.94 Second, executive branch printing (not including OFR) 

accounts for only a small percentage of total in-house printing revenues (12 percent on 

average between FY 2009 and FY 2012). 

 

 

92 GPO attributes the majority of the increase in billings to OFR in FY 2012 to the collection of unpaid bills 

from prior years. 

93 The daily printing of the Congressional Record and the Federal Register run on the same presses. Additional 

executive branch printing helps utilize labor when not needed to meet congressional print demands. 

94 Customer Services levies a 7 percent surcharge on the cost of procured commercial print jobs up to 

$20,000 in total surcharge and 0.5 percent thereafter. 
54

While its financial impact is limited, declining executive branch demand for printing will 

place downward pressure on Plant Operations’ contribution margin, which GPO projects 

will decrease by 2 percent annually through FY 2019. 

Plant Operations’ Efforts to Reduce Costs (Finding IV-4): 

GPO continues to consider ways to reduce cost by increasing the efficiency and 

flexibility of its in-house print operations, but eventually further cost-savings may 

require adjustment by congressional users. 

GPO has been proactive in taking steps to increase the efficiency of Plant Operations, while 

improving the quality and sustainability of printing products and processes. These steps 

include: 

 consolidating operations to free up space for leasing;95

 using the employee buyout to streamline the management structure and to establish 

an engineering group to help improve efficiency and flexibility; 

 planning for investment in new, more efficient equipment (such as presses) and 

production systems (such as information systems); 

 securing and maintaining best-in-class certifications;96 and

 cross-training employees to enable more flexible allocation across jobs. 

Further cost reduction may be realized through a continued shift from paper to electronic 

delivery of congressional documents. To place the potential for cost savings in context, 

however, pre-press processes (actions that must be taken before a document can be 

printed or even be made available digitally) constitute approximately two-thirds of total 

production cost of the Congressional Record. This limits the application of cost saving 

measures to just one-third of total cost. 

Plant Operations already has reduced costs by obtaining voluntary reductions in demand 

by congressional stakeholders for printed copies of the Congressional Record. While further 

reductions in demand for printed copies of the Congressional Record would enable 

additional cost savings, these savings will be more limited due to the large reductions in 

demand already achieved. Greater cost savings could be achieved by ending the 

requirement that print copies of the Congressional Record be available at the start of 

business each day. Ending this requirement would reduce overtime production costs and 

enable savings from more efficient utilization of labor across print jobs produced in-house. 

In coming years, ongoing advances in printing technology may offer an opportunity to 

realize this option,97 if congressional stakeholders are willing to rely on electronic copies. 

 

95 Plant Operations stands to be the chief beneficiary of consolidation and leasing given its space footprint and 

allocation of GPO facilities costs. 

96 Certifications include IDEAlliance G7 Master Printer, ISO 3664:2009, ANSI/NISO/LBI Library Binding 

Standard Z39.78-2000, and Sustainable Green Printer. 

97 Current printing technology alternatives have not been determined to enable printing to archival standards 

required to support long-term preservation of print copies. The GPO is already moving forward with 

investment in new off-set presses based on current requirements. However, the return on this investment is 
55

Electronic copies of the Congressional Record would continue to be available at the start of 

business on a daily basis. Also, there are opportunities to develop alternative ways to 

provide convenient access such as mobile applications. For instance, GPO has already 

developed a Congressional Record iPad app for the Library of Congress. 

Impact of Declining Demand for Procured Printing on Customer Services (Finding IV-5)

Declining demand for print has had a greater financial impact on Customer Services 

than Plant Operations. After meeting customer resistance to raising the surcharge on 

print jobs, GPO took important steps to reduce operational costs of Customer Services 

and to improve service to customers. 

Customer Services has faced relatively steep declines in print revenue, which fell by 23.9 

percent from FY 2007 to FY 2012. This decline severely impacted Customer Services due to 

a high cost structure, including a workforce sized to support a larger and less automated 

business, and a cost recovery model tied directly to the size of print jobs. 

In FY 2011, Customer Services covered both its direct and indirect costs, and generated a 

$1.3 million contribution margin, but ran an overall operating deficit of $8.8 million after 

accounting for its GPO overhead charge. Savings from the employee buyout allowed 

Customer Services to reduce this deficit by 48 percent in FY 2012. Even larger savings from 

the buyout will be realized in FY 2013. However, Customer Services will continue to face 

financial challenges from continued declines in print demand. While the nature and extent 

of future declines are uncertain, stakeholders and experts agree that demand for print will 

continue to decline. As noted earlier, GPO’s financial projection assumes that Customer 

Services’ revenue will decline by 4 percent in FY 2014 and 5 percent annually through FY 

2019. 

The recent pattern of decline in demand for procured printing also presents challenges for 

workforce adjustment. Customer Services’ revenue fell by 23.9 percent between FY 200798

and FY 2012, while the number of print jobs dropped by only 16.1 percent during this 

period. If this pattern of decline continues, Customer Services’ ability to adjust through 

personnel reductions will be limited because a similar number of print jobs must be 

processed. This suggests the need for changes in process and technology. 

 

five years. During this time, printing technology alternatives that are both more efficient and capable of 

printing to archival quality standards may become available. 

98 FY 2007 was chosen as the base year for this comparison because it is closer to the average of past 

procured print revenues. 
56

Table 4. Percentage Changes in Procured Print: Revenue versus Jobs 

FY Total 

Revenue

% 

Change 

Yr to Yr

# of Print Jobs % 

Change 

Yr to Yr

2001 $431,901,856 155,148

2002 $436,728,349 1.1% 147,783 -4.7%

2003 $409,725,016 -6.2% 142,921 -3.3%

2004 $413,186,501 0.8% 132,085 -7.6%

2005 $429,733,843 4.0% 127,920 -3.2%

2006 $416,172,739 -3.2% *124,299 -2.8%

2007 $436,166,469 4.8% *115,654 -7.0%

2008 $524,755,069 20.3% *115,383 -0.2%

**2009 $505,080,490 -3.7% *116,761 1.2%

**2010 $449,177,361 -11.1% *116,231 -0.5%

2011 $397,116,053 -11.6% *114,110 -1.8%

2012 

(Est.)

$331,789,966 -16.5% *96,823 -15.1%

*Number of print jobs includes GPO Express orders. 

**Adjusted for cyclical decennial census work. 

Source: Customer Services, GPO

In 2009, GPO sought to address the decline in print procurement revenues in part by 

raising the surcharge on procured print jobs, which has not been raised since 1999. 

However, agency customers were resistant to increasing the surcharge for print jobs. GPO 

proposed a rate increase (from 7 to 8.5%) to the Interagency Procured Printing Services 

Council (Council), which represents agency print customers and advises GPO on policies 

relating to procured printing. The Council declined to endorse the proposal, citing two 

primary reasons in its written response to GPO: (1) budget pressures on print programs at 

customer agencies; and (2) the need for GPO to clearly define and support proposed fee 

increases. In its response, the Council also indicated that GPO should better communicate 

the workflow process by which jobs are handled at each stage from acceptance to 

completion. In our interview with the Council, members made similar points with regard to 

future proposals, noting that budget pressures remain and print spending was singled out 

for reduction in Executive Order 13589 in November 2011. Council members also 

reiterated the importance of improving the transparency of the workflow process as an 

important improvement for GPO to make before proposing a rate increase. 

If the recent pattern of decline in print demand continues, adjustments to the surcharge 

rate may only provide part of the answer to improving cost recovery for procured 

printing.99 It may make sense to consider cost recovery models more like those used for inhouse print jobs, which are not tied primarily to the size of the job. 

 

99 In addition to increasing the surcharge, GPO also proposed an initiation fee that it hoped would incentivize 

agency customers to use the Small Purchase Agreements program for smaller procurements. Under this 

program, agencies undertake the procurement themselves within GPO guidelines. This program is intended 
57

Given customer resistance to increasing the surcharge, GPO has focused on efforts to 

reduce operational costs of Customer Services and to improve the services it provides 

customers. Customer Services has been cross-training procurement personnel performing 

business processes. The chargeback team, initially focused on recouping agency payments, 

is now focused on proactively working with agencies to identify billing problems and 

develop solutions to reduce the occurrence of chargebacks and thereby improve cash flow 

and customer relationships. 

Also, GPO leadership has made it a priority to develop or acquire a new print procurement 

ordering and management system and is now planning for investment.100 The system 

envisioned by GPO has the potential to dramatically increase process efficiency and enable 

future personnel reductions (an increasingly pressing issue in light of projected declines in 

print demand and the recent pattern of decline), improve accuracy (enabling savings from 

the reduction in billing/payment issues), and improve transparency of procurement and 

related business processes to customers. This last would address a significant outstanding 

complaint by customers addressed most recently in the Council’s response to GPO’s last 

proposal to increase the surcharge on procured printing orders. 

Government-Wide Benefits of Executive Branch Printing (Finding IV-6):

While Customer Services faces financial challenges, GPO’s current role as a centralized 

source of print services to the executive branch provides important government-wide 

benefits. 

The study mandate directed the Academy to examine the feasibility of GPO continuing to 

perform executive branch printing. In addressing this question, the Panel focused on the 

GPO print procurement operation through which most executive branch printing is done. 

The Panel takes a broad view in addressing the question of feasibility, looking at a range of 

factors including but not limited to cost-recovery. Even if GPO is unable to fully recover the 

costs of the operation, the Panel believes three important considerations justify GPO 

continuing to perform this function: 

(1) customer satisfaction; 

(2) open competition for government print work; and

(3) capture of federal agency documents for inclusion in the FDLP and FDsys. 

The most recent customer satisfaction survey conducted by GPO in August 2011 showed 

that 92 percent of respondents were satisfied with their primary customer service team at 

GPO. This is a very high satisfaction rate. Members of the Council interviewed generally 

 

to reduce GPO processing costs by shifting processing of smaller procurements to agency customers. The 

program offers an offsetting benefit of flexibility to agency customers. The Council also refused to endorse 

this fee increase taking the position that it would impose undue costs on agency customers and possibly lead 

to a shift from printing to web publishing. 

100 GPO has issued a Request for Information to learn more about industry capabilities and options for 

achieving desired goals for system. A make/buy decision is expected during the first quarter of FY 2013. 
58

indicated that they were very satisfied with GPO’s procured printing services, emphasizing

GPO’s proactive response to addressing problems with the billing process, which was the 

chief concern expressed by customers in the 2011 survey. These problems appear to have 

been resolved for the most part. 

Another important factor to consider in assessing the feasibility of GPO continuing to 

perform executive branch printing is the relative cost to the government of providing print 

services. Unfortunately, there are no current comparative cost analyses available; the most 

recent was conducted over 20 years ago.101 However, Council members interviewed 

expressed the view that it is more cost-effective for GPO to procure printing than it would 

be for agencies to do it themselves. They emphasized that even if agencies were not 

required by statute to obtain print services through GPO, it would not make sense in most 

cases for agencies to do otherwise given the distinctive features of GPO and the expense of 

replicating similar procurement capacity in other agencies.

Industry stakeholders emphasized a different, but closely related benefit. The centralized 

print procurement system administered by GPO ensures open competition. In addition to 

reducing cost to the government, they emphasize that open competition for agency printing 

work supports a level playing field for vendors, many of which are small businesses. Small 

businesses would not have the resources to effectively compete for print work if it were 

procured by individual agencies. 

These benefits are underpinned by key features of GPO. First, GPO is a legislative branch 

agency and is therefore not bound by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) that governs 

executive branch procurement. The Printing Procurement Regulation that applies to GPO 

allows much greater flexibility. Second, the Printing Procurement Regulation provides for 

competing smaller jobs that agencies would not need to compete under the FAR. This is 

especially important given the small size of most executive branch print jobs. Third, GPO 

maintains a large database of print vendors that includes information about capabilities 

and past performance. This database—together with a staff with expertise in printing as 

well as contracting—helps ensure cost competition, reliability, and quality. It has been 

argued by industry experts that this last feature allows GPO effectively to exploit the price 

advantages of renting underutilized capacity in the printing industry. 

As noted in Chapter III, the trend among agencies to publish documents directly to the web 

instead of printing them has reduced the importance of GPO’s government printing 

function as a means of capturing government documents for preservation and access. 

However, many important government documents are still printed, if in smaller quantities. 

 

101 Past studies include: Office of Technology Assessment, Informing the Nation: Federal Information 

Dissemination in an Electronic Age (Washington D.C.: October 1988); Joint Committee on Printing, Oversight 

Hearing on Consolidation of Department of Defense Printing Services, 102nd Cong., 2nd sess. (August 4, 1992); 

Joint Committee on Printing, Review of the Defense Printing Service, 103rd Cong., 1st sess. ( July 15, 1993); and 

General Accounting Office, Report to the Chairman, Joint Committee on Printing of the United States: Agency 

Printing Plants—Choosing the Least Costly Option, PLRD-81-31 (Washington D.C.: June 19, 1981). 
59

Print services relationships with agencies still help to ensure that GPO captures some of the 

documents published by these agencies. 

Recovery of Government Printing Business (Finding IV-7): 

An ongoing Government Accountability Office review of federal agency printing plants 

may suggest opportunities for GPO to recover significant volumes of government print 

business currently done outside of GPO. 

The possible recovery of government print business is an important longer-term option for 

GPO to improve the cost-effectiveness of its government printing function and strengthen 

its ability to perform its core mission of providing permanent public access to government 

documents. However, to realize this option, a number of issues would need to be 

addressed. First, what portion of federal government printing and reproduction done 

independently of GPO should be channeled to GPO? While the President’s budget clearly 

indicates that a large amount of printing and publication does not go through GPO,102 it is 

not known what portion of that business is allowed by waivers of Title 44 requirements 

issued by the Joint Committee on Printing.103 There is no current record of waivers issued. 

Second, once the non-exempt portion of federal government printing and reproduction is 

identified, more would need to be learned about its composition (e.g., in-house versus 

procured; printing versus duplication) to support an assessment of the financial 

implications for GPO (contribution to margin) and for the federal government (costeffectiveness) of channeling that work to GPO. The GAO began a study of federal agency 

printing plants in September 2012 that will help to address both issues and provide some 

foundation for a future assessment of what printing might be targeted for recovery by 

GPO.104

The feasibility of recovering the printing and duplication work is also an issue. Since the 

Chadha decision in 1984,105 there have been repeated challenges to GPO’s authority to 

perform executive branch printing.106 The most recent was the OMB guidance memo in 

 

102 The President’s FY 2013 Budget shows the estimated FY 2012 federal budget for printing and 

reproduction at $2 billion, including the legislative branch. GPO billed only an estimated $507 million total for 

printing and reproduction services in FY 2012. 

103 The Joint Committee on Printing, created by an act of Congress on August 3, 1846 (9 Stat. 114; 44 U.S.C. 

101), is composed of five representatives and five senators. It oversees the operation of GPO, whose support 

is essential to the legislative process of the Congress. The GPO also serves by law as the principal printing 

organization for federal agencies, and so the Joint Committee generally oversees compliance by federal 

agencies with laws, rules, and regulations designed to minimize printing costs to the American people. 

104 On April 24, 2012, the Joint Committee on Printing requested that GAO audit the total number of internal 

printing plants, the total amount of in-plant work produced, and the print procurement practices for all 

federal departments and agencies. See Gregg Harper, Chairman, Joint Committee on Printing, Letter to the 

Comptroller General of the United States (Washington D.C.: April 24, 2012). 

105 The Supreme Court’s 1983 opinion in INS v. Chadha related to separation of powers and opened the door 

to subsequent challenges by the executive branch to legislative authority over government printing. 

106 In 1984, the Department of Justice issued a legal memorandum advising the Department of Defense (DoD) 

that it could establish its own printing facilities without prior approval of the JCP as required under Title 44. 

In 1987, the FAR Council—composed of the General Services Administration, DoD, and NASA—proposed to 

amend the FAR to allow the agencies to procure their own printing directly instead of using GPO as required 
60

2002 telling executive branch agencies that they were not bound by Title 44 and could 

procure printing as they saw fit.107 While all these challenges were eventually dropped, the 

prospect of further challenges has discouraged any efforts to enforce Title 44. 

Financial Reliance on Passport Operation (Finding IV-8): 

GPO, which has produced U.S. passports since the 1920s and electronic passports since 

2005, is now starting to develop a next-generation electronic passport in partnership 

with the Department of State. GPO is heavily reliant on contribution margin from its 

passport business to help cover agency-wide overhead costs. 

U.S. passports are SID’s premier product line, accounting for 94.2 percent of SID’s total 

revenues in FY 2012. GPO has been in the passport business since the 1920s, but the 

character and importance of this business changed dramatically with the shift to electronic 

passports, beginning in 2005. This shift translated into a six-fold increase in revenues 

between FY 2006 and FY 2007 ($49 million to $223 million). Revenues and contribution 

margin are expected to increase with the introduction of the next generation of electronic 

passports due to the higher price State Department will pay per passport for additional 

functionality.108

GPO’s passport business unit accounted for 24.2 percent of total GPO revenues, but 

generated 49.9 percent of total contribution margin in FY 2012.109 The passport operation 

bore 35.5 percent of total GPO overhead cost in FY 2012. Based on GPO projections, SID 

will bear a greater proportion of GPO overhead as the contributing margin generated by 

the agency’s print operations declines. 

While such heavy reliance on a single customer would ordinarily be seen as posing a risk, it 

is important to emphasize that GPO’s passport business is anchored by long-term 

commitments by the State Department to working with GPO as a partner in design and 

production of the next generation of electronic passports. GPO is an official member of the 

Next Generation Passport Committee formed in 2011 to design and build the new 

enhanced passport that is set for launch to the public in the 2015-2016 timeframe. This 

 

by Title 44. Congress responded to this decision in a series of appropriations bills blocking the 

implementation of this amendment to the FAR. The proposal was later withdrawn. 

107 In May 2002, OMB issued Memorandum M-02-07, “Printing and Duplicating through the Government 

Printing Office,” instructing agencies that they were not bound by the Title 44 requirement to obtain printing 

services through GPO and could select printing and duplicating services—based upon the best quality, cost, 

and time of delivery—available through GPO, the private sector, or other avenues. Public Printer Bruce James, 

appointed at the end of 2002, proposed an arrangement that would provide agencies with more choice and 

potentially reduce costs. GPO and OMB reached an agreement in June of 2003 and the OMB directive was 

withdrawn. 

108 A 30 percent margin is built into the price paid for each passport. The price per passport in FY 2012 was 

$16. The price per passport is expected to increase to cover the cost of additional functionality that will be 

required in the next generation passport. 

109 The percentage of passport business revenues and contribution margin was calculated using GPO’s 

reported “revenue group contribution margin” figures. The percentage of total contribution margin was 

calculated after excluding State Department capital provided for investment in passport production. 
61

product has at least a ten-year life cycle. Also, over the past two years, the State 

Department has provided GPO with $34 million in capital for investment to purchase and 

install upgraded equipment to support production of existing and future passports. In 

October 2012, GPO received an action memo from the State Department approving and 

directing the agency’s work on the next generation passport. GPO is planning to invest 

$21.7 million in upgraded equipment pending approval from the JCP. In November, the 

State Department issued another action memo approving an additional $2 million for 

research and development supporting the next generation passport. 

The cost-recovery model for passports reduces the annual and short-term risks to GPO due 

to variability in the demand for passports. Under the memorandum of understanding 

between GPO and the State Department, the price per passport is negotiated each year 

based on the known and estimated costs driven by volumes ordered by State. The 

memorandum provides for automatic adjustments within a certain range of variability. 

Therefore, when State orders fewer passports due to unexpectedly low demand then the 

price per passport paid to GPO is increased to ensure that GPO’s costs are covered.

Smart Card Business Offers an Opportunity to Diversify Revenue Stream (Finding IV-9): 

The smart card business offers an opportunity for GPO to diversify its revenue stream 

and generate contribution margin needed to help cover the cost of agency-wide 

overhead. 

GPO’s work with the State Department on developing the electronic passport provided the 

basis for its move into the smart card business. GPO learned that the State Department was 

thinking about using plastic card technology for passports in the future. GPO decided that it 

should enter the smart card business in order to build the necessary internal capability to 

position itself to remain the provider of passports if the State Department decided to adopt 

plastic card technology in the next generation of electronic passports. As it turned out, GPO 

was able to secure the next generation passport business, but has also found itself 

positioned to pursue a growing market for smart cards. 

GPO’s smart card business is small (5.8 percent of total SID revenues in FY 2012), but 

growing rapidly. Smart card revenues grew from ($7.3 million) in FY 2011 to ($10.5 

million) in FY 2012. Revenues are expected to double in FY 2013 due to the planned 

expansion of DHS’ PreCheck and Global Entry Card pilot program to airports nationwide 

and a new Department of State smart card program for frequent Mexican travelers crossing 

the U.S.-Mexico border. 

Unlike in the case of passports, GPO is not the sole provider of smart cards. Agencies may 

obtain smart cards from private sector vendors as well.110 However, interviewees cite a 

number of benefits of using GPO that suggest a solid basis for expanding its smart card 

business with federal agency customers. These benefits include: 

 

110 GPO is prohibited from bidding against private companies for work competed by federal agencies. 

However, it is authorized to perform work at the request of federal agencies. 
62

 GPO is better able to focus on meeting customer needs without the distraction of 

pressure to generate profits. 

 It is easier to do business with another government agency because it avoids the 

cost of going through the federal procurement process and memorandum of 

understanding arrangements offer greater operational flexibility than standard 

federal contracting arrangements. 

 Agencies have a higher comfort level with the security afforded by production being 

undertaken within a secure government facility and staffed by cleared federal 

employees.111 In addition, GPO is building a back-up production site for smart cards, 

co-located with the back-up production site for passport, at its facility in Stennis, 

Mississippi. 

The two segments of the federal government smart card business—PIV and non-PIV 

cards—offer different opportunities for growth. The potential for growth in the market for 

PIV cards is limited; the market is confined to agency employees and contractors. Also, the 

market for PIV cards is difficult to enter given the installed base of proprietary systems 

(e.g., card readers) incompatible with PIV cards offered by other vendors. The market for 

non-PIV smart cards, which encompasses agency customers/citizens, is larger and offers 

much greater potential for growth. Also, markets for non-PIV smart cards are easier to 

enter given the lack of established vendors and proprietary systems. Examples of current 

non-PIV card programs include the Trusted Traveler and Global Entry card programs for 

frequent travelers. 

SID serves both the PIV and non-PIV smart card markets. However, it is focused on the 

larger, more open federal government market for non-PIV cards. Possible future 

opportunities might include using smart cards for Social Security, Medicare, and other large 

federal benefits programs. 

Another large potential market for non-PIV smart cards is state and local governments. 

GPO reports being approached by state and local governments to provide smart card 

credentials, such as drivers’ licenses. However, it is currently unable to respond to these 

requests under Title 44, which limits GPO to providing services to the federal government. 

Based upon the nine findings above, the Panel has three recommendations to help 

GPO improve its printing operations and more fully recover costs. These 

recommendations are presented and discussed below. 

 

111 GPO elaborated on these security benefits identified by customers interviewed, emphasizing that the 

smart card operation can leverage security arrangements already in place for passport operation, including 

the Vendor Secure Supply Chain Program.
63

RECOMMENDATION 7 

To enable further cost reductions, the Panel recommends that Congress consider 

changes in its demand for print. To assist Congress in this process, GPO should 

develop estimates of cost savings that could be realized through potential changes in 

the requirements for printing the Congressional Record. GPO should quantify the 

savings that could be realized through such options as printing fewer copies of the 

Congressional Record or ending the daily start-of-business print requirement while 

continuing to provide electronic access. 

RECOMMENDATION 8 

To continue to realize the government-wide benefits identified in its analysis, the 

Panel recommends that GPO continue to perform executive branch printing, while 

further reducing costs and improving customer service through initiatives such as 

developing and implementing a new electronic print procurement ordering and 

management system. 

RECOMMENDATION 9 

To generate additional revenue, the Panel recommends that GPO continue to pursue 

smart card business as one option to help cover agency-wide overhead costs while it 

continues to right-size and transform from a print-centric to a content-centric 

organization. To assist GPO in growing this business and to leverage GPO’s smart 

card expertise for public benefit, Congress should consider whether to allow GPO to 

respond to state and local government requests for smart cards. 
64

This page intentionally left blank. 
65

CHAPTER V: HUMAN CAPITAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 

Although GPO has made considerable recent progress in rightsizing and 

reshaping itself, the agency will continue to face formidable workforce 

challenges. GPO will need to develop an ongoing human capital 

planning process and capabilities to enable continued reshaping of its 

workforce.

The current composition of GPO’s workforce reflects the evolving nature of its mission and 

the means it uses to provide products and services to its customers. Over the years, the 

agency has faced substantial challenges in effectively managing its workforce during times 

of increasing fiscal austerity, lean operating budgets, changing technology, and evolving 

customer needs and expectations. As printing and information dissemination technology 

becomes progressively more electronic, GPO has increasingly provided digital-based 

products and services to the Congress, federal agencies, and other customers. At the same 

time, GPO has attempted to maintain an appropriate balance between traditional printingrelated skills and emerging electronic publishing and dissemination capabilities. 

In recent years, GPO’s workforce has evolved to reflect the increasing needs for business 

management, marketing, information technology, customer service, and other non-printing 

related skills as it seeks to become more efficient and competitive in producing, procuring, 

cataloging, indexing, authenticating, disseminating, and preserving the official information 

products of the federal government in digital and print formats. Today, GPO’s workforce 

reflects a diverse set of skills, ranging from electricians, machinists, and offset printers to 

procurement, information technology, and design specialists—a combination of traditional 

printing production and plant operations jobs coupled with a growing cadre of business, 

professional and technology-related positions. Although production jobs in GPO’s plant 

have declined over the years, the agency is still heavily unionized with an almost even split 

between blue collar and white collar occupations.112

 

112 Government Printing Office, Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2013 (Washington, D.C.: January 2012), B3. 
66

Figure 3. GPO Blue versus White Collar Workforce Breakdown 

Source: GPO FY 2013 Budget Justification

This chapter assesses the current and future state of GPO’s workforce, including the extent 

to which its human capital programs and planning are aligned with and supportive of the 

agency’s strategic plan and contributing to mission success. This chapter contains five 

findings in the following areas: 

1. workforce reduction and reshaping; 

2. outreach and communications; 

3. future workforce challenges; and 

4. human capital planning. 

Each finding is discussed in more detail below. The chapter concludes with a Panel 

recommendation. 

GPO Workforce Reduction and Reshaping (Finding V-1): 

GPO has made significant progress in reducing and reshaping its workforce over the 

past 30 years to improve efficiency and meet organizational needs. The recent buyout 

program, coupled with sizable reductions in the number of management and 

supervisory positions contributed significantly to agency staff and cost reductions. 

Due to declining revenues and appropriations as well as changes in technology and 

employee productivity levels, the GPO workforce has been significantly reduced in the past 

30 years. During this period, public printers and other GPO leaders have employed a 

variety of workforce management strategies to downsize and restructure the workforce 

Plant/Other Blue Collar (48%)

Customer Services (9%)

Security & Intelligent Docs

(8%)

Finance & Administration (6%)

Business Products/Serv (5%)

Information Technology (5%)

Library Serv/Content Mgt (5%)

Official Journals of Govt (5%)

Admin/Other White Collar

(9%)
67

through attrition, incentivized voluntary separation programs (i.e., buyouts), retirements, 

and other voluntary employee separations and redeployments. In 1980, as GPO was 

completing its conversion to electronic photocomposition, employment stood at 

approximately 6,450 federal employees. By 1998, the workforce had fallen to 

approximately 3,400 employees. Today, GPO has approximately 1,920 employees onboard, representing a reduction of approximately 70 percent from its 1980 level. This is 

the lowest GPO employment level of any time in the past century.113

Figure 4. GPO Employment Trend, 1980-2012 

Source: GPO FY 2013 Budget Justification 

During 2011 and early 2012, GPO embarked on a major workforce downsizing and 

delayering of management positions in response to serious financial strains. These efforts, 

although extremely challenging, were successful in reducing the workforce to an affordable 

level, eliminating unnecessary management and supervisory positions, and consolidating 

some functions into more efficient organizational groupings. To accomplish these goals, 

GPO leaders developed a high-level workforce assessment and planning process during 

2011. The process required each GPO business unit to submit a plan reflecting their current 

organizational structure and to develop a new organizational structure with 15 percent 

fewer employees (or about 330 positions) and 25 percent fewer supervisors while 

ensuring that critical agency functions were not allowed to be depleted of essential staff 

strength.114

 

113 Ibid. 

114 Ibid., A5. 

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2012

Headcount

GPO Employment Trend, 1980-2012*
68

The directors of each business unit then had to present their plan to their peers. In 

addition to the workforce reduction and structural changes, these presentations had to do 

the following: 

 list and discuss significant products and services and anticipated demand for the 12-

24 months post-reorganization period; 

 identify similar/identical functions performed elsewhere in GPO; 

 identify opportunities to consolidate shifts, locations, and functions; and 

 provide a narrative describing the efficiencies associated with a new leaner 

organization. 

These meetings resulted in the creation of individual business unit workforce plans and an 

agency overall workforce plan consistent with the goals of the downsizing. 

To support the downsizing called for in its workforce planning process, GPO conducted a 

voluntary separation incentive program (commonly referred to as the “buyout” program) 

in late 2011 to reduce staffing levels and personnel costs. The program was conducted 

pursuant to the authorization provided by the House Committee on House Administration 

and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration in accordance with section 210 of 

Title III, Division G, of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2005 (P.L. 108-447). 

On June 1, 2011, GPO’s workforce numbered 2,232. A total of 321 employees applied for 

buyouts under the program. GPO did not allow 25 of these applicants to participate 

because they were in positions deemed to be essential to GPO operations. Subsequently, 49 

applicants withdrew from the program, leaving a total of 247 employees who separated 

from GPO under the buyout by the closing date of December 31, 2011. Between June 2011, 

when the buyout was first announced, and the end of 2011, GPO experienced a total of 65 

other separations from the agency. These included 27 other non-buyout retirements and 

38 separations for other reasons. Accordingly, the total number of persons leaving GPO 

between June 2011 and the end of December 2011 was 312, or nearly 95 percent of the 

workforce reduction goal for that year. At the end of 2011, GPO’s federal workforce stood 

at 1,920.115 In addition to the almost 15 percent reduction in staffing levels achieved 

through GPO’s buyout and attrition management efforts, the agency achieved personnel 

cost savings by reducing the number of higher level managerial and supervisory positions 

by almost 25 percent. This resulted in a leaner and more efficient agency. 

The 247 employees who separated from GPO under the buyout spanned a broad range of 

occupations (see Table 5) and were paid a total of just over $6 million in separation 

payments. 

 

115 Ibid. 
69

Table 5. Employee Buyouts by Occupation 

General Occupational Categories # of Buyouts Granted

Print Related

Printing Management 30

Printing and Reproduction 26

Bindery Operations 14

Offset Press Operations 19

Platemaking/Composition 10

Administrative 

General Administrative 11

Clerical and Assistant 10

Financial 11

Information Technology 13

Contracting/Procurement 8

Supply 6

Trades

Warehouse Worker 9

Motor Vehicle Operator 7

Fork Lift Operator 6

Elevator Mechanic 5

Machining 5

ALL OTHERS 57

TOTAL BUYOUTS GRANTED 247

Source: GPO Office of Human Capital 

The payments were made out of available funds in GPO’s revolving fund. Projected savings 

for FY 2012 resulting from the buyout, based on the remaining three quarters of the year 

following December 31, were almost $18 million. In FY 2013, GPO expects to realize a full 

year of savings from the buyout totaling almost $24 million. In addition to the buyout 

savings, GPO will save another $6 million in FY 2013 based on not backfilling most of the 

vacancies of other employees who separated from June through December of 2011. Most 

of the savings will be realized in GPO’s revolving fund operations, although some will also 

be realized in GPO’s Congressional Printing and Binding and Salaries and Expenses 

Appropriations.116

In addition to the savings realized through buyouts and delayering of supervisory 

positions, GPO management has taken other steps to reduce personnel costs. One major 

action has been the suspension of annual cash performance bonuses paid to employees 

based on the results of their performance reviews. In lieu of cash bonuses, GPO is granting 

deserving employees time-off awards and small, achievement-driven “on the spot” cash 

awards. Also, GPO has taken steps to reduce overtime pay and workplace injury costs. 

Further, the Chief Human Capital Officer works closely with GPO business units and the 

 

116 Ibid. 
70

Acting Public Printer to prioritize hiring requests, which has kept staff augmentation to a 

minimum. 

GPO Outreach and Communications Efforts (Finding V-2):

GPO engaged in active and effective outreach, communications, and transparency 

efforts throughout the downsizing and reshaping process. 

Throughout this period of significant workforce transition, the Acting Public Printer and 

the agency’s senior managers engaged in active outreach and communications with the 

GPO workforce. Recognizing the potential for fear among employees about job security and 

the future of GPO, agency leaders took proactive steps to minimize uncertainty and 

reassure workers that the agency would continue to perform its vital functions and that no 

involuntary separations would result from the downsizing and reshaping initiatives. 

Further, GPO’s workforce is highly unionized (with about three quarters of all jobs in union 

bargaining units) due to GPO’s large percentage of blue collar jobs and a traditional labor 

culture. Consequently, it has been vitally important for the agency to engage in earnest 

efforts to keep GPO’s twelve different unions informed of workforce downsizing and 

reshaping changes, including listening to labor-management concerns and providing timely 

information about planned actions and outcomes. 

Communications on GPO’s workforce restructuring efforts began in early 2011 and have 

continued to the present. Several different mediums and forums have been used to keep 

employees informed. For example, the Acting Public Printer held “Town Hall” meetings 

with GPO organizations, initiated a “What’s on Your Mind” two-way employee 

communications forum, and restored periodic meetings with union leaders as means of 

addressing employee concerns and keeping them informed. In addition, GPO has included 

articles in its periodic newsletter and special information flyers about a variety of 

workforce and human resources issues. By engaging with employees and their union 

representatives in a timely and transparent fashion, GPO leadership gained the trust of 

workers and minimized disruptions to agency operations during a difficult period. 

To gauge morale and aid in identifying and responding to worker concerns, the Acting 

Public Printer has restored the annual employee climate survey. In addition, GPO has 

established as a major goal in its most recent agency Strategic Plan to make GPO “An 

Employer of Choice,” including promoting, “Work Life programs to meet the changing 

needs of today’s and tomorrow’s employees.”117

 

117 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee Driven, 

(Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), 9. 
71

GPO’s Future Workforce Challenges (Finding V-3):

Despite recent progress, GPO faces major future workforce challenges due to a 

continually changing technological and business environment, as well as shifting skill 

mix requirements. 

Although the recent downsizing was successful in achieving GPO’s overall workforce 

reduction goals, it did not resolve all of GPO’s skills imbalances and occupational surpluses. 

This is evidenced by the differences between the positions GPO targeted for buyouts 

relative to employees who volunteered to separate under the incentive program. Moving 

forward, GPO will need to continue to reshape its workforce size, composition, skills mix, 

and cost in what will likely be a highly resources constrained environment. As discussed in 

other sections of this report, GPO will face future challenges in revenue generation and 

business development as it continues its transition from a print-centric to content-centric 

business model. In addition, the agency will experience changing demands for its products 

and services, rapidly evolving work technologies, and deployment of sophisticated business 

and engineering software and highly modern production equipment. These changes will 

necessitate the redesign of a wide range of jobs and retooling of employee skill sets as 

workers and the agency attempt to adapt to the changing workplace environment. 

In addition, GPO’s future challenges include dealing with a workforce that is 

multigenerational and older than the government-wide average (with a high percentage of 

retirement eligible employees), highly unionized, and 

featuring a distinct blend of white and blue collar 

occupations reflecting significantly different 

employment cultures. As more senior employees 

retire, GPO will need human capital strategies for 

replacing their skills, leadership roles, and 

institutional knowledge. Transferring responsibility 

and knowledge to other workers and acquiring new 

talent to fill skill gaps will likely occur during 

restrictive fiscal times—making the retooling even 

more challenging. 

GPO’s Changing Business and Technology Environments Add Complexity to its 

Workforce Challenges 

Some business units, such as the print procurement program and GPO’s publication sales 

program, have continued to experience significant declines in volume in the face of 

reductions in federal agency printing demand, Presidential Executive Order 13589, and 

changing patterns in how the public acquires and consumes information. These 

circumstances, which will require new business systems and marketing efforts, may 

necessitate further downsizing and retraining of current workers as well as hiring of 

employees with new skill sets to enhance future success. Similarly, other programs, such 

as GPO’s secure credentials unit, find that the technology underlying their products and 

“The workforce is in transition 

because of changing 

demographics and required 

skill sets. Therefore, 

succession planning initiatives 

will be required to enable GPO 

to become an Employer of 

Choice.”

GPO Strategic Plan FY 2012-

2016
72

services is changing so rapidly that they will need to constantly reengineer work processes 

and employee job requirements. Taken together, these and other challenges require 

ongoing workforce analysis and responsive human capital programs that address emerging 

skills gaps in a timely and dynamic manner. 

GPO’s Current Compensation System Is Complex and in Need of Reassessment 

As GPO competes in the marketplace for talent it must ensure that its compensation system 

provides cost-effective incentives and rewards that support acquiring, retaining, and 

motivating a highly skilled workforce. In this regard, GPO’s current compensation system 

is very complicated, especially for blue-collar workers in production, trades, and craft 

positions. Part of the complexity stems from the Kiess Act of 1924.118 This legislation 

grants broad pay setting authority to GPO and, unlike legislation governing pay setting for 

most government agency workers, requires the public printer to negotiate pay with its 

unions for positions in their bargaining units (approximately three-quarters of GPO’s 

workforce reside within union bargaining units). In addition to having to negotiate on 

wages for most workers, many union collective bargaining agreements contain longstanding, highly specialized provisions affecting pay (for example, “derivative pay 

schedules” and “uprates,” setting pay for “premium positions,” etc.). Adding to the 

complexity, GPO has eight different pay plans and over 20 different wage tables covering its 

1,900 employee workforce. 

Given the rapidly changing nature of work in the printing industry it has become 

increasingly difficult for GPO to make job to job comparisons upon which to base wage 

negotiations for press persons, book binders, typesetters and other related printing crafts. 

Further, GPO unions claim that their work is so unique that it is unfair to compare their 

jobs for pay purposes to non-unionized workers in the private sector or to other blue collar 

trades and crafts workers in the federal government. Indeed, it appears, for example, that 

GPO pays on a different (and somewhat higher) scale for electricians, carpenters, plumbers 

and some other blue collar building trades personnel than other federal agencies in the 

Washington, DC area who set their rates based on locality pay surveys conducted under the 

Federal Wage System. 

The net result seems to be a pay system that is complicated, labor intensive, somewhat 

outmoded, and not fully calibrated to labor market conditions. Given GPO’s ongoing 

financial challenges and personnel cost sensitivities as well as its current and future need 

to recruit and retain top flight talent, an assessment and potential revisions to its current 

compensation system would be useful. GPO appears to have recognized this need. Its FY 

2012-2016 Strategic Plan, under the goal of becoming an Employer of Choice, lists as one of 

the supportive efforts to be undertaken in 2012: “Compensation and Performance 

Management—review and update processes as needed.” Although this effort is not 

highlighted in GPO’s current FY 2013-2017 Strategic Plan, the Panel believes this initiative 

should continue to be given priority. 

 

118 44 U.S.C. § 305. 
73

GPO Human Capital Planning (Finding V-4):

GPO needs to engage in comprehensive, strategic, and ongoing human capital planning 

to effectively address its current and future workforce challenges.

Although GPO has taken many positive steps in recent years to reshape and reduce its 

workforce, it will need to do more moving forward to ensure that its workforce possesses 

the skills, tools, and motivation necessary to ensure mission success. Looming skills gaps 

and a highly dynamic and challenging business environment call for systematic, agencywide human capital planning which includes ongoing workforce analyses; training needs 

assessments; and employee recruitment, deployment, retention, and development 

strategies that address changing work demands, technology, and job design requirements. 

The current GPO-wide strategic plan contains some overall workforce improvement goals 

and highlights selected human resources-related focus areas for action in FY 2013 (i.e., 

training, telework, hiring process, diversity, and communication with unions).119 While 

focusing on these areas will undoubtedly enhance GPO’s near term human resources 

program, the Panel is concerned that the agency does not have a comprehensive, longer 

term human capital planning process that is closely linked to the GPO mission and strategic 

plan and which addresses its formidable and evolving workforce challenges. 

A central pillar in the strategic management of human capital is the alignment of human 

resources policies and practices with the organization’s mission, goals, and major operating 

objectives through rigorous workforce analysis, planning, and investments. Successful 

human capital planning is a key factor in building and maintaining a highly effective 

organization by recruiting, motivating, retaining, and rewarding a high performing, top 

quality workforce.120 In short, ongoing human capital planning focuses on developing midto longer-term strategies for meeting the organization’s future needs of having the right 

people with the right skills in the right places at the right time.121 According to research 

conducted by the GAO looking across successful public and private organizations, certain 

critical elements recur as part of effective workforce and human capital planning processes 

as reflected in Figure 5, below:122

 

119 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee Driven,

(Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), 9.

120 Office of Personnel Management, Key Components of a Strategic Human Capital Plan (Washington, D.C.: 

September 2005), 1. 

121 General Accounting Office, Government Printing Office: Advancing GPO’s Transformation Effort through 

Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-04-85 (Washington, D.C.: October 2003), 19. 

122 Ibid., 20.
74

Figure 5. Effective Workforce and Human Capital Planning Processes

Source: Government Accountability Office 

In addition to guidelines published by the Government Accountability Office, most federal 

agencies have developed human capital plans to support their workforce planning and 

management programs. For example, NARA’s Strategic Human Capital Plan 2009-2014 and 

the U.S. Geological Survey of the Department Interior’s, Workforce Planning Desk Guide 

provides detailed human capital planning guidelines. In addition, the U.S. Office of 

Personnel Management has issued government-wide guidelines on human capital 

planning: Key Components of a Strategic Human Capital Plan, September 2005. 

Based upon the four findings above, the Panel has a recommendation to ensure that 

GPO has the workforce planning processes and capabilities to continue to adapt to 

changing technological and business needs as well as shifting skill mix requirements. 

This recommendation is presented and discussed below.
75

RECOMMENDATION 10 

To effectively integrate and align the agency’s human resources policies, programs, 

and practices with its strategies for achieving mission success and desired 

programmatic results, the Panel recommends that GPO develop and institutionalize 

a human capital planning capacity. GPO should make strategic human capital 

planning a high priority and use multiple strategies to ensure the recruitment, 

retention, development, and rewarding of a highly motivated and diverse workforce. 

To implement this recommendation, GPO should initiate and/or continue to: 

 perform rigorous workforce analysis and planning that identifies current skills 

surpluses, emerging shortages and gaps and sets strategies for addressing these 

imbalances in specific occupational and organizational areas in the near and 

longer term;

 carry out periodic, agency-wide training needs assessment, including employee 

development approaches that address changing work demands, technology, and 

job design—including cross training of workers in related organizational 

entities;

 conduct targeted recruitment and outreach strategies that identify new and 

expanded talent sources and enhance talent acquisition in mission critical 

functions and professions;

 implement structured management succession planning that focuses on the 

risks associated with an aging, multigenerational workforce through active 

knowledge transfer and formal development of the next generation of GPO 

leaders;

 develop reasoned and creative compensation reform that involves reexamining 

current GPO policies and takes into account best practices from the public and 

private sectors (for example, gain-sharing, skills-based pay), relevant labor 

market conditions, and pertinent collective bargaining agreement provisions 

dealing with wages, hours, overtime, and other forms of employee 

compensation;

 identify effective practices and effective models from around the government 

and in the private sector to assist in its human capital planning efforts; and

 work closely and collaboratively with unions and other internal and external 

stakeholder groups, including, as appropriate, agency partners and customers in 

the federal government community. 
76

This page intentionally left blank.
77

CHAPTER VI: CONTINUING GPO’S ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION 

GPO leaders have made good progress in transforming the 

agency into an efficient, future-oriented organization with a 

content-centric focus. One aspect of this transformation has 

been aggressive and successful cost savings and recovery efforts, 

which have contributed substantially to GPO’s current financial 

soundness. Despite significant progress, it is clear that GPO will 

continue to face financial challenges into the future and will need 

to simultaneously look to achieve additional cost savings while 

expanding services to the public. To continue rebooting in an 

external environment that is changing rapidly, GPO will need to 

upgrade its strategic planning capabilities and begin to utilize 

scenario planning. 

As discussed in Chapter II, it is necessary to develop a government-wide strategy for 

managing the lifecycle of federal information in the digital age. This strategy would 

address such issues as publishing formats, metadata creation, authentication, 

cataloging and finding aids, dissemination and public access, and digitization. GPO 

has a critical role to play in developing, coordinating, and implementing this 

government-wide strategy. 

With increasing amounts of federal information being created, disseminated, and 

stored electronically, GPO’s recently released strategic plan for the next five years 

acknowledges that it is operating in a different environment: 

As the information needs of Congress, Federal agencies, and the public 

have changed, GPO has embraced technological innovations to meet 

those needs as efficiently and economically as possible. We will 

continue to adapt to and overcome these challenges as we transform 

ourselves into the Official, Digital Information Platform for the Federal 

Government and Provider of Secure Credentials. The public trusts that 

information published by GPO is the official word of the Government. 

GPO uses the latest technologies to make information available in 

digital formats. Federal agencies seek GPO’s expertise and services for 

their secure credential needs.123

GPO estimates that approximately 97 percent of all the federal government’s 

documents are “born digital.”124 In this new environment, the “content received 

from Congress and federal agencies needs to be managed through a lifecycle process 

that supports the primary requirement to make the digital version of publications 

permanently available online, and to print only when required or otherwise 

 

123 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee 

Driven (Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), i. 

124 Ibid., 4. 
78

necessary.”125

As mentioned at various points throughout this report, GPO has undertaken 

significant cost reduction and cost recovery measures while transforming as an 

organization. Moving forward, GPO will need to continue to transform both 

externally and internally. Externally, it will need to serve as a critical player in the 

collaborative development of a government-wide strategy, and it may need to 

assume some new responsibilities. Internally, it will have to build upon its recent 

change management efforts, including the further development of an agile 

organization with the capabilities to plan for and respond to potential changes; 

continue to adjust its business model; and take additional steps to achieve cost 

savings. 

This chapter contains findings in the following areas: 

1) GPO’s changing products and services

2) change management practices 

3) strategic planning 

4) recent cost reduction and recovery efforts 

5) future cost savings and recovery 

The chapter concludes with five Panel recommendations. 

GPO’s Changing Products and Services (Finding VI-1): 

GPO has made progress in transforming itself from a print-centric to a contentcentric organization by expanding services and products for the digital age. 

To meet the information needs of Americans in the digital age, GPO has been shifting 

from a print-centric to a content-centric focus. Although the business that GPO is in 

has always required it to change, the changes of the past two decades are more 

dramatic and significant than those that have come before. This has required the 

agency to transform to ensure that its mission, business model, structure, and 

operations are aligned with changes in its external environment. It is “focusing on 

managing content for customer and public use today and tomorrow. GPO uses its 

extensive experience and expertise with digital systems to provide both permanent 

public access to government information in a variety of formats and the most 

efficient and effective means for printing when required, all within a secure setting 

that is responsive to its customers’ needs.”126GPO has been increasing its efforts on 

preserving and managing digital content to ensure it is permanently accessible. 

At the same time, GPO retains responsibilities to produce and disseminate 

government documents in print and must work to strike the right balance between 

 

125 Ibid., 4. 

126 Ibid. 
79

different formats and will need to continue to do so. GPO still faces demands for 

printed products, in part due to concerns about the instability of digital formats 

because technologies change so rapidly. Critics note that the demise of previous 

technological innovations such as eight-track tapes, cassettes, etc. Even as these 

technologies have come and gone, paper products have endured and will continue 

to exist in the future regardless of technological changes. 

Former Public Printer Michael DiMario’s testimony to Congress in the 1990s 

remains valid today: “Ink on paper today is still the most egalitarian of information 

formats. It is accessible, transportable, and economical.”127 Also, the shift to digital 

is unlikely to save the amount of money that many would instinctively expect 

because up to 70 percent of the publishing cost is due to pre-press work (electronic 

files are prepared for both digital access and printed documents).128 For these 

reasons, GPO believes that it is important to supplement the traditional print format, 

not replace it entirely. GPO has worked with federal depository librarians to 

identify 60 key federal documents (including the Economic Report of the President) 

that will be printed indefinitely. Another issue is that the LC continues to recognize 

only print and microfilm formats for archival records.129

Key new services include FDsys, which is a key component of GPO’s transition to a 

content-centric approach. Operating FDsys costs little more than GPO Access, yet it 

provides much more functionality.130 GPO has been providing access in other 

formats, such as mobile apps and e-Books, and making these available through 

Google and Amazon. GPO’s digital media and creative services are informing and 

supporting agency publishing and dissemination strategies. In February 2012, GPO 

released the President’s Budget as a mobile app for the first time. The app provides 

free access to the text and images of the FY 2013 Budget and links to FDsys for 

summary tables, analytical perspectives, appendices, and historical tables. This app 

received an award from the Center for Digital Government for its FY 2013 budget 

app.131 GPO developed the Mobile Member Guide app, released in November 2011, 

 

127 Government Printing Office, Keeping America Informed, 150 Years of Service to the Nation

(Washington, D.C.: 2011), vii and 122. 

128 This statistic is only documented for the Congressional Record. GPO interviews indicate that other 

publications require less pre-press work and vary in the proportion of total cost accounted for by 

pre-press activities. See Congressional Research Service, Congressional Printing: Background and 

Issues for Congress (R40897; February 9, 2011), by R. Eric Petersen and Amber Hope Wilhelm. 

129 Lisa Rein, “Government Printing Office Has New Strategy to Keep the Presses Rolling,” Washington 

Post (October 26, 2012), http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/government-printingoffice-has-new-strategies-to-keep-presses-rolling/2012/10/26/d76dc0f4-1ef8-11e2-9746-

908f727990d8_story.html.

130 Initial investment was needed to stand up the system and complete data migration. The current 

yearly development funds have stabilized at $3.9 million, which GPO intends to adjust, if needed, 

based on stakeholder requirements. Consistent investment will be necessary to support FDsys to 

ensure adaptive development, maintenance and support, and hardware and technology 

improvements. GPO recognizes that significant changes to identified needs or funding cuts will have 

an adverse effect on its ability to further enhance and support FDsys. 

131 Government Printing Office, “GPO Honored for App Development” (Washington, D.C.: September 

18, 2012), http://www.gpo.gov/pdfs/news-media/press/12news39.pdf.
80

which provides information about members of Congress. It also provided support 

to the Library of Congress for the iPad Congressional Record app. In September 

2012, GPO announced that it was adopting a new system for managing and 

publishing congressional bills and other publications entirely in a pared down and 

machine-readable XML format. This will save time and labor because staff will not 

have to convert documents to the proprietary system used previously by GPO.132

Change Management Practices (Finding VI-2)

Internally, GPO has successfully implemented change management practices 

that have played a crucial role during a period of significant change and 

uncertainty, but more work is needed in the areas of training and 

implementation planning. 

As discussed in Chapter I, GPO has successfully implemented many aspects of a 

change management strategy that has enabled it to undergo a significant 

transformation while maintaining good labor-management relations and continuing 

to meet customer needs. Over the next five years, GPO anticipates maintaining a 

lean organization, with continuing efforts to realign as necessary. 

GPO’s change management efforts are intended to produce a cultural change inside 

the organization that will ensure the organization has the strategic direction, 

funding, skills, information technology, and practices that will meet the demands of 

the digital age. 

GPO has established a Strategic Investment Committee to identify capital 

investment initiatives and revenue opportunities to support the agency’s 

transformation efforts. Its main task is to prioritize the agency’s investment needs 

and develop an overall short-to-long term capital investment plan for the Public 

Printer’s endorsement. Another task is to ensure that the investment plan is tied 

back to GPO’s overall strategic plan and maintain the right balance between the 

agency’s future sustainability and its short-term focuses. The Committee, chaired by 

the CFO, is composed of seven members, including the Superintendent of 

Documents, Chief Information Officer, Chief Technology Officer, and the leaders of 

key business units (Plant Operations, Security and Intelligent Documents, Customer 

Services, and Business Products and Services). 

GPO has been budgeting about $1 million per year for training, which is admirable 

in a time of resource shortages. It does appear, however, that GPO has only done 

limited systematic training needs analysis across functional/organizational lines in 

the past; instead, GPO has primarily provided funding directly to business units with 

 

132 Government Printing Office, “Government Printing Office Adopts Internal XML System,” 

September 2012, 

http://www.nextgov.com/mobile/2012/09/government-printing-office-adopts-internal-xmlsystem/58065/.
81

an expectation that they train employees in those functions. With so much new 

technology and many new business systems on the horizon (and limited human and 

financial resources), GPO will need to focus on cross training, multi-functional 

training, and other employee development that helps current staff adapt within and 

outside organizational lines. GPO's Strategic Plan for FY 2013 – FY 2017 lists under 

its "Employer of Choice" goal: "Human Capital will provide leadership and support 

to the Business Units for the successful identification of training needs and 

accomplishment of training plans which include training on leadership, new 

technology, 5S,133 and customer services.” This is a step in the right direction. 

A June 2004 GAO report assessed GPO’s progress relative to key practices associated 

with successful transformations. The practices identified by GAO are similar to 

those listed above and are similar to those identified by the Academy in previous 

studies. Because one aspect of the Academy’s mandate is to update past studies, 

Table 6 summarizes GPO’s status as assessed by GAO in 2004 and as assessed by the 

Academy Panel in November 2012.

 

133 “5S” is the name of a workplace organization method that describes how to organize a work space 

for efficiency and effectiveness. The five S’s refer to (1) sorting; (2) setting in order; (3) systematic 

cleaning; (4), standardizing; and (5) sustaining the practice. 
82

Table 6. Assessment of GPO’s Change Management Practices Relative to GAO’s 2004 Baseline

GAO Practice GPO’s Status (June 2004) GPO’s Status (November 2012)

Ensure top leadership drives the 

transformation.

GPO has fully implemented this practice through 

the Public Printer’s actions to make a clear and 

compelling case for transforming GPO. He has 

also established an organizational structure to 

help balance transformation with the delivery of 

services.

Leadership commitment has been strong, and 

senior leaders have communicated openly with 

employees. 

Establish a coherent mission and 

integrated strategic goals to drive the 

transformation.

GPO has not established a mission and strategic 

goals; however, GPO has set goals for its 

individual operating units, which help to create 

a more results-oriented culture.

GPO has developed its mission statement, 

vision statement, and strategic goals to guide 

the agency’s transformation efforts. The 

agency’s overall strategic plan could be 

strengthened as discussed in Finding VI-3.

Focus on a key set of principles and 

priorities at the outset of the 

transformation.

GPO has not adopted a set of agency-wide 

principles or core values; however, a GPO unit 

has benefited from establishing core values.

GPO has identified a set of agency-wide core 

values in its strategic plan to anchor the 

agency’s transformation. GPO’s senior 

leadership has recognized the value of creating 

an organizational culture that embraces 

changes. Employees were made aware of the 

agency’s core values/principles.

Set implementation goals and a 

timeline to build momentum and 

show progress from day one.

GPO has not established specific time frames 

and goals for its transformation; however, it has 

planned some initial steps to show progress.

GPO has identified key near-term activities in 

its strategic plan. GPO has not established a 

comprehensive transformation plan that lays 

out specific implementation goals, tasks, 

responsibilities, and timelines to ensure that 

the agency’s transformation is on track. GPO 

has taken some steps to show progress (for 

example, the Strategic Plan Progress Report for 

FY 2012 Mid-Year).
83

GAO Practice GPO’s Status (June 2004) GPO’s Status (November 2012)

Dedicate an implementation team to 

manage the transformation process.

GPO’s management council focuses on 

transformational issues, but attention to the 

daily activities of the transformation could be 

strengthened.

GPO has not established a defined 

transformation team to focus on the day-to-day 

management of GPO’s transformation efforts, 

but has created some groups to plan and 

implements strategic initiatives in specific 

areas. Examples are:

 GPO’s Strategic Investment Committee 

formulates/executes agency-level 

investment strategies. 

 Improving customer service and 

recouping funds owed to the agency 

through the creation of a charge-back 

taskforce. This team, led by the CFO’s 

office, is responsible for implementing 

strategic initiatives to resolve major 

billing/revenue problem for the 

agency’s print procurement business. 

Use the performance management 

system to define the responsibility and 

assure accountability for change.

GPO is developing a new performance 

management system for its executives, but 

needs to complete its strategic plan before it can 

align performance expectations with 

organizational goals.

Although GPO has made progress in developing 

performance metrics at the unit level and the 

individual level, the development of 

performance metrics varies widely across 

business units. Performance plans for 

individual employees are tied to GPO’s 

organizational goals and key efforts. A more 

comprehensive employee compensation and 

rewards strategy would help GPO effectively 

recruit and retain the highly skilled workers 

needed to further support its transformation.
84

GAO Practice GPO’s Status (June 2004) GPO’s Status (November 2012)

Establish a communication strategy 

to create shared expectations and 

report related progress.

GPO leadership has communicated early and 

often, ensured consistency of message, and 

encouraged two-way communication. However, 

employees want additional information to meet 

their specific needs.

GPO has ensured effective communications 

between the senior leadership and employees 

during a period of significant change and 

uncertainty. The Acting Public Printer’s “Town 

Hall” meetings and “What’s On Your Mind” 

initiative have been effective at driving change 

and seeking employee input.

Involve employees to obtain their 

ideas and gain ownership for 

transformation

GPO has informed employees of changes, but 

has the opportunity to more fully involve them 

in the transformation.

GPO leadership has undertaken an array of 

efforts to communicate plans for change to 

unions and employees. GPO leadership has 

recognized the importance of getting employee 

buy-in on the agency’s transformation effort. 

However, the concerns that employees are not 

sufficiently involved in the planning process 

still exist. Employees’ input should be given 

more value before decisions are made. For 

example, as discussed in the human capital 

chapter, unions had limited involvement in 

planning for the buyout or in strategic 

planning. 

Build a world-class organization. GPO has taken steps to apply best practices in 

human capital, information technology, and 

financial management, but significant challenges 

remain.

GPO has made progress in strengthening its 

human capital management, IT infrastructure 

development, and financial management. These 

areas remain major operational focuses of GPO.
85

Strategic Planning (Finding VI-3): 

GPO has made progress in strategic planning, but current efforts do not include 

scenario planning and fall short of the dynamic ongoing agency-wide planning 

processes required in a time of significant and ongoing change. 

Past studies conducted by GAO and other organizations identified weak or non-existent 

strategic planning capacity at GPO as one of the major factors hindering the agency’s 

effective management. In its 2004 report, GAO recommended that GPO adopt leading 

practices for results-oriented strategic planning and reporting. GAO maintained that it is 

essential for GPO to develop its mission and strategic goals and establish a strategic 

planning process to support its transformation effort. According to GAO’s review of 

recommendation status in 2008, GPO had implemented all recommendations related to 

strategic planning with one exception. 

Both OMB and GAO have produced guidance for the development and content of strategic 

plans.134 In its Executive Guide, GAO cites the six practices in the textbox to the right as key 

to successful strategic planning. 

The Government Performance and 

Results Act has identified several key 

elements of agency strategic plans, 

including mission statement, long-term 

goals and objectives, approaches or 

strategies to achieve goals and 

objectives, a description of the 

relationship between long-term and 

annual goals, key external factors, and 

program evaluations.135 Although GPO 

is not required to follow the 

Government Performance and Results 

Act, its strategic planning guidance 

provides a relevant framework for 

improving its planning effort. 

In the newly released Strategic Plan FY 

2013 to 2017, GPO updated its mission 

statement and vision statements, 

identified strategic goals in four major 

initiatives, and included a situational 

analysis that discussed a series of key 

 

134 See OMB Circular No. A-11, Part 2 and GAO, Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government 

Performance and Results Act, GAO/GGD-96-119, June 1996. 

135 General Accounting Office. Results-Oriented Government: GPRA Has Established a Solid Foundation for 

Achieving Greater Results. GAO-04-38 (Washington, D.C.: March 2004), 132. 

Successful Strategic Planning Practices

 Present a comprehensive mission 

statement.

 Establish long-term goals for all major 

functions and operations.

 Identify approaches and strategies to 

achieve the goals and objectives and 

obtain the various resources needed.

 Document the relationship between longterm goals/objectives and annual 

performance goals.

 Identify key factors external to the agency 

and beyond its control that could 

significantly affect achievement of the 

strategic goals.

 Describe how program evaluations have 

been used to establish or revise strategic 

goals, and a schedule of future program 

evaluations.

Source: Government Accountability Office
86

external factors and how these factors affect the agency’s strategies to achieve its mission. 

In addition, GPO’s strategic plan contains strategies for achieving the goals articulated, but 

the description of these strategies was very general. Table 7 compares the GPO strategic 

plan with GAO standards. 

Table 7. Assessment of GPO’s FY 2013 – FY 2017 Strategic Plan 

GAO Guide Required 

Component Content of GPO Plan 

Mission Statement GPO has a clear mission statement: Keeping America informed by 

producing, protecting, preserving, and distributing the official 

publications and information products of the federal government. 

Long-Term Goals and 

Objectives

GPO’s Strategic Plan establishes four goals136 and a total of ten 

objectives.

137

Approaches to Achieve 

Goals and Objectives

GPO identifies efforts in 2013 that will be used to accomplish each of 

the objectives. It does not, however, discuss approaches beyond the 

FY 2013 time period except in the area of secure federal credentials. 

Relationship between 

Long-Term Goals and 

Objectives and Annual 

Performance Goals

GPO has not established specific performance measures that can be 

used to assess progress toward its long-term goals and objectives. 

Key External Factors that 

Could Affect Goal 

Achievement

GPO’s strategic plan has a section devoted to a “situational analysis,” 

but a connection between these key external factors and goal 

achievement is not clearly articulated. 

Use of Program 

Evaluations to Establish 

or Revise Strategic Goals; 

Future Evaluation Plans

GPO’s strategic plan includes references to the use of multiple 

customer surveys, but does not identify a process for using program 

evaluations to establish or revise strategic goals.

In addition, the agency’s internal planning processes are not as dynamic and robust as are 

needed in a rapidly evolving environment. For example, individual business units have 

 

136 GPO’s plan identifies four goals: “Satisfying Our Stakeholders; Strengthening Our Organizational 

Foundation; Offering Products and Services; Engaging Our Workforce.”

137 Objectives: (1) develop internal processes and procedures that develop an internal organizational culture 

in which exceptional service, delivery and customer satisfaction are encouraged and rewarded; (2) build on 

GPO’s ongoing commitment to an open transparent government; (3) enhance strategic partnerships to gain 

flexibility, build effective networks, and manage processes to meet customer demands and expectations; (4) 

anticipate, plan and equip GPO to provide products and services to customers; (5) utilize a cost effective and 

collaborative approach in managing GPO’s business processes to help the Agency achieve its strategic 

initiatives and ensure continued financial stability; (6) continue to integrate the application of environmental 

values into GPO processes and support environmental stewardship through effective implementation of 

“green initiatives”; (7) develop appropriate plans to provide for the continuation of GPO’s essential functions 

and operations during a wide range of all-hazards emergencies; (8) the mission of GPO is rooted in legislation 

codified in Title 44 U.S.C., and GPO e will continue to use technology and best practices to ensure the most 

efficient and effective provision of mission-critical products and services for Congress, Federal agencies, and 

the public; (9) position GPO as the provider of choice for secure federal credentials; (10) transform GPO into 

an employer of choice through proactive workforce planning that focuses on diversity and fostering Work 

Life programs to meet the changing needs of today’s and tomorrow’s employees.
87

developed plans, but their quality varies greatly. There is no standard approach in GPO for 

business units to take to develop their plans. 

In addition to strengthening strategic planning by following GPO’s effective practices, GPO 

could benefit from incorporating scenario planning into its planning processes. Scenario 

planning allows an organization to prepare itself for different types of futures that 

represent a range of fundamental possibilities. Scenario planning can increase an 

organization’s awareness, stimulate creativity in thinking through opportunities, help 

challenge assumptions, and improve decision-making. This can help organizations develop 

and alter strategies based on critical changes in the environment, as well as provide an 

effective mechanism for organizations to tackle complex management challenges in a more 

proactive way, especially during times of uncertainty and risk. These scenarios could 

factor in potential future changes, such as a future Congress deciding that the Congressional 

Record only be available electronically, or that a bare minimum number of copies be 

printed, or that the executive branch makes similar decisions about the Federal Register

and/or Code of Federal Regulations. 

The central idea of scenario planning is “learning about the future by understanding the 

nature and impact of the most uncertain and important driving forces affecting our 

future.”138 “Scenarios” describe different future environments that organizations may face, 

and the key of scenario planning is to identify possible futures and drivers for change and 

their implications, as well as to develop appropriate strategies to address the challenges. 

These drivers can be monitored carefully over time to determine which scenario the 

agency is moving toward. 

As shown in Figure 6, one way of depicting scenario planning graphically is to develop a 

quadrant that maps out the implications of two key “drivers” portrayed on the X and Y axes. 

This results in four unique scenarios that are plausible versions of the future. Plans are 

developed that are relevant to each scenario. Organizations can monitor and determine 

which scenario they are moving into by identifying indicators for each scenario. This tool 

would help GPO address medium and longer-term challenges to its business model as it 

continues the transition from a print-centric to a content-centric focus. 

 

138Martin Borjesson, a university lecturer at Sweden’s Göteborg University and a consultant on scenario 

planning.
88

Figure 6. Scenario Planning Quadrant Graphic 

Another way of depicting scenarios is shown in Figure 7. The resulting scenarios can take 

account of any number of drivers and trends. 
89

Figure 7. Scenario Planning Line Graphic

Some federal agencies have incorporated scenario planning into their planning processes. 

For example, in its report on human capital across the federal government (2003), GAO 

observed that “scenario planning is an approach that agencies have used to manage risk of 

planning for future human capital needs in a changing environment.”139 In 2005, GAO 

released a report on NASA’s Space Shuttle program that urged the program to “begin 

identifying its future workforce needs based upon various future scenarios the program 

could face.”140 The Coast Guard reexamined five long-term scenarios after the 9/11 

terrorist attacks to describe different environments that might exist in 2020. The Coast 

Guard established two new scenarios to guide short-term planning and created new longterm scenarios to guide planning beyond 2005. Similarly, the Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation incorporated scenario planning into its 2002 strategic workforce plan process. 

They conducted scenario analysis to determine how the scope and volume of the agency’s 

activities might change in the future. 

 

139 General Accounting Office Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, GAO04-39 (Washington, D.C.: December 2003). 

140 Government Accountability Office, Space Shuttle: Actions Needed to Better Position NASA to Sustain Its 

Workforce through Retirement, GAO-05-230 (Washington, D.C.: March 2005).
90

GPO’s Recent Cost Reduction and Recovery Efforts (Finding VI-4):

GPO has achieved substantial cost savings and cost recovery in recent years. 

Substantial savings have been achieved through staffing reductions, spending controls, 

and reducing GPO’s facilities footprint. Revenue enhancements have occurred through 

reductions in late receivables and customer “chargebacks” and the leasing of unused 

space. 

Given the technological and consumer demand changes that are ever present in its 

business, GPO has often had to make adjustments to organizational structure, workforce, 

and practices to maintain a financially sound business model. When an increasing amount 

of materials first began to migrate to the Internet in the 1990s, GPO faced an abrupt and 

significant decline in print demand, with revenues from publication sales falling by more 

than one-third during the decade. In response, Public Printer DiMario obtained wage 

concessions affecting work hours and night-work pay, moved operations to owned space, 

and utilized retirement incentives and attrition to reduce the workforce through 

retirement incentives and attrition to a decade-long total of more than 35 percent. Despite 

these changes, GPO had sustained over $30 million in operating losses over the course of 

the 1990s. To address these financial challenges, GPO closed bookstores across the country 

and closed its regional printing plants in Chicago; New York; San Francisco; and 

Washington, DC’s Navy Yard. 

Like many organizations in the business of serving customers, GPO has had to adapt over 

the years to changing financial conditions, including changing government customer 

spending levels. As described earlier in this report, GPO operates primarily on a costrecovery basis, much like a business. According to GPO’s FY 2013 – 2017 Strategic Plan, 

only a small portion of GPO’s funding comes from appropriations to cover the cost of the 

FDLP and FDsys. All other GPO revenues come from agencies for work performed or sales 

of publications to the public.141

While transforming the focus of the organization due to changing technological capabilities 

and customer demands, GPO has embarked on a variety of significant cost cutting and 

recovery measures in response to falling agency revenues and congressional 

appropriations. These actions have included major reductions in employee staffing levels, 

administrative expenses, and the costs of plant production and distribution. In addition, 

GPO has instituted a variety of cost offsets and recovery measures to help alleviate financial 

pressures. These have included improvements to its billing and debt collection processes, 

leasing of available building space to government and non-government organizations, and 

investments in more productive and efficient equipment and operating systems. 

As revenue and appropriation levels have drifted lower, GPO has taken aggressive 

measures to lower and recover its costs, improve productivity, and look for new and more 

 

141 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee Driven,

(Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), 3.
91

efficient ways of doing business. Some of GPO’s recent and highly successful efforts to 

reduce and recover costs are as follows: 

 Planned staff reductions. As the discussion in Chapter Vindicates, GPO has 

reduced its staffing levels substantially in recent years. In addition to the 2011 

buyout, GPO has since carefully managed staffing levels and attrition to ensure that 

savings from recent staff reductions are maintained into the future. As a result of 

the staff reductions and expense controls, GPO estimates that it will reduce its base 

level of expenses by at least $30 million starting in FY 2013, when the savings from 

the buyout are fully realized. 

 Customer chargebacks and late receivables. In 2011 GPO established an 

intradepartmental chargeback team under the purview of the CFO to focus on 

recovering uncollected customer billings that had been charged back to GPO due to 

invoicing irregularities. The beginning chargeback balance was over $28 million. 

As a result of diligent efforts by individuals on GPO’s team (consisting mostly of 

employees from GPO’s financial and customer services units), the chargeback 

balance was decreased to approximately $17.5 million by the end of FY 2011. Since 

that time the chargeback balance has been further reduced to approximately $10 

million—an overall reduction of 64 percent—contributing substantially to GPO’s 

cost recovery initiative. In addition, GPO undertook successful efforts to reduce its 

non-chargeback late receivables by almost $1 million in FY 2011, another solid 

contribution to cost recovery. 

 Spending controls. GPO has taken several steps in recent years to reduce its 

overhead and administrative expenses. In this regard, it reduced its overhead “run 

rate” by approximately $20 million to $120 million (about the same rate as in FY 

2008) by the end of FY 2012 through a variety of targeted reduction measures. In 

addition, Plant Operations reduced or eliminated second shift work in several 

production/operational support areas and significantly reduced overtime costs, 

including savings of $1.5 million in overtime and materials costs in FY 2011. Further, 

GPO has saved tens of thousands of dollars through recent cuts in office, 

administrative, equipment, and distribution costs, including sizable reductions in 

spending on general supplies as well as the purchase of non-capitalized computer 

equipment. For example, GPO recently achieved year-over-year spending cuts of 

more than 40 percent in the consumption of general supplies in support of its 

business units, as well as a reduction of over 45 percent in the purchase and use of 

non-capitalized computer equipment. 

 Energy, building maintenance, and operation savings. GPO has taken forceful 

steps to reduce the cost of maintaining its buildings complex, including associated 

utilities and maintenance expenses. For example, between FY 2002 and 2012 the 

level of personnel assigned to maintain and repair its facilities (e.g., carpenters, 

plumbers, mechanics, etc.) was reduced by 35 percent even though GPO’s facilities 

footprint was basically unchanged during this period. In addition, GPO has managed 

utilities usage aggressively and implemented new energy saving devices (for 

example, replacing defective steam trap and installing efficient energy metering and 

lighting systems) that have resulted in major reductions in energy usage: steam

consumption by 31 percent, electricity by 7 percent, natural gas by 16 percent, and 
92

water usage by 21 percent since FY 2003. In addition, GPO has been able to reduce 

materials and supplies needed to maintain its buildings by over $1 million since FY 

2010. 

 Leasing of unneeded space and improved utilization. GPO has instituted an 

aggressive program to make better use of its buildings and facilities by reducing the 

size of its operational footprint while leasing space to other agencies. These efforts 

are aimed at offsetting some of the costs that are required to operate the GPO 

complex. Actions GPO has taken include surveying their four-building complex in 

Washington, DC, inventorying the use of space by organization, and producing a set 

of detailed drawings of space allocation. In addition, GPO has benchmarked other 

government agencies to determine the efficiency of their space utilization and 

identified steps to vacate unneeded office space that can be leased. Early results 

have been impressive, as GPO has reduced its footprint of usable building space by 

approximately 12 percent in recent years and leased out over 90,000 square feet to 

other organizations. The GPO lease program generated approximately $1.5 million 

in FY 2012 and is expected to grow to an estimated $1.8 million in FY 2013. Further, 

as a means of improving efficiency, freeing up space in the GPO Washington, DC 

complex, and providing better service to FDLP libraries, GPO’s Depository 

Distribution operation relocated to GPO’s Laurel, MD warehouse in early 2012. This 

move has decreased overhead costs for the FDLP and takes advantage of facilities 

better suited for distribution. GPO also rents available shelf space in its Laurel, MD 

and Pueblo, CO warehouse facilities to other agencies seeking secure storage of bulk 

quantities of important government documents. 

In anticipation of future financial challenges, GPO will need to continue to focus on cost 

savings and recovery measures moving forward. 

Future Cost Savings and Recovery (Finding VI-5): 

To address future financial challenges and make key investments in technology and 

equipment, GPO will need to continue to focus on cost savings initiatives moving 

forward. Further opportunities for GPO cost savings and recovery appear possible 

moving forward, though they are likely to be more difficult to achieve. 

The trends GPO is facing in terms of declining revenues from traditional printing and 

related services have been addressed in Chapter IV. Although GPO is aggressively seeking 

to expand its product lines and suites of services in areas related to digital publishing, 

preservation, and authentication, it will likely continue to face revenue pressures as it 

makes the transition. 

In addition to future revenue pressures, GPO will continue to bear the costs associated with 

its overhead expenses, in particular the cost of facilities. As noted in Chapter IV, GPO 

facilities are old, outsized, and expensive to operate and maintain. Also, GPO overhead costs 

include substantial expenses, such as GPO’s IG and EEO offices. In addition to these 

overhead costs, GPO must bear the cost of the long-term liability for workers’ 
93

compensation as noted in Chapter IV. Other agencies receive appropriations to cover the 

cost of these programs. 

Notwithstanding financial challenges associated with declining print revenues and 

overhead expenses, GPO is rightly moving forward to replace and migrate old and 

inefficient legacy applications to new, more modern and efficient platforms that provide 

system-wide solutions for GPO and its customers. The GPO Strategic Plan for FY 2013-

2017 specifies that this modernization effort includes, but is not limited to, GPO’s 

Automated Procurement System, Depository Selections Information Management System, 

Acquisitions Classification and Shipment Information Systems, and various sales systems. 

In addition, GPO’s Plant Operations will pursue the implementation of a state-of-the-art 

composition tool to replace its current MicroComp, a 30-year-old system that does not 

support today’s Extended Mark-Up Language data standard.142 Taken together, these and 

other applications and systems replacements and upgrades being pursued by GPO will 

require significant investments of capital over an extended period. 

To put itself in a position to help deal with the above future financial and investment 

challenges, GPO will need to continue to pursue a wide variety of cost savings and recovery 

efforts in the years ahead. Based on its prior, exemplary efforts, it is reasonable to expect 

that GPO will continue to pursue cost saving and recovery opportunities as they arise. 

Based on current information and data, it appears that the following areas might offer 

further opportunities for considerable cost savings moving forward: 

 customer services’ nationwide delivery model; 

 print procurement ordering and management system; 

 facilities footprint; and 

 staffing reductions. 

GPO’s Customer Services’ Nationwide Delivery Model

GPO’s Customer Services program offers opportunities for further cost savings. The 

program, which procures printing for federal customers from over 2,000 private sector 

vendors and GPO’s in-house printing plant, employs approximately 170 employees across 

the nation in 15 different regional offices and at GPO headquarters. GPO indicates that 72 

employees work in regional offices and the remainder in the GPO central office. Outside of 

Washington, DC, Customer Services regional offices lease or co-occupy space with other 

federal agencies in conducting their business. Many regional offices are very small in terms 

of dollar value of procured printing as well as the number of GPO staff assigned (including 

several one- or two-person offices such as Boston, Charleston, New York, Oklahoma City, 

San Diego, and San Antonio). In addition, some of these small offices are in fairly close 

proximity to larger, more highly staffed GPO offices (e.g., Boston and New York are in close 

proximity to Philadelphia, San Diego is in close proximity to San Francisco, Charleston is in 

close proximity to Hampton Roads). GPO has indicated that it is good for the program to 

 

142 Government Printing Office, GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and Employee Driven

(Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012), 7. 
94

have a local presence and that some regional agency customers have long-standing and 

trusting relationships built up over the years with regional GPO staff. In addition, GPO 

contends that these customers benefit from GPO’s knowledge of their operations and 

needs, as well as being able to meet face-to-face on occasion to discuss more complex job 

orders. 

GPO’s 2011 Customer Satisfaction Survey, however, reports that only 31.5 percent of print 

procurement customers responding to the survey indicated proximity to a GPO office is 

influential in their choice of who to send their work to. Further, the same survey found that 

about 43 percent of customers indicated they send work requests to more than one GPO 

Customer Service office/team.143 These findings are consistent with study team interviews 

of customers who, by and large, expressed flexibility with regard to what offices they are 

willing to seek GPO support from, including sometimes “shopping around” to find the best 

prices for their orders. Current technology increasingly allows virtual interactions with 

customers and organizational counterparts, which reduces the need for in-person contact. 

GPO itself commented on these types of possibilities in its observations to findings in the 

aforementioned survey. In commentary related to the finding that only 31.5 percent of 

customers are influenced by proximity to a GPO office or team, GPO indicated, “There are 

likely ways to recognize savings using telework and remote access while maintaining GPO 

presence in numerous locations near our customers outside of Washington, DC.”144 In 

commenting on another area of survey findings dealing with GPO opportunities to provide 

new or enhanced services, GPO agreed they should, “develop new on-line tools to 

communicate with customers. “145

GPO’s Print Procurement Ordering and Management System 

In another area, the Panel notes that GPO’s current print procurement systems have been 

developed as needed to support a wide range of business unit needs. These systems 

unfortunately are often stove-piped, provide redundant functionality, lack desired 

capabilities, are highly labor intensive and are operating on outdated infrastructure. In 

order to meet GPO’s program goals, a new system is needed to provide better transparency 

and print procurement services to GPO customers and provide standardized processes 

which allow GPO employees to successfully perform operations. As mentioned earlier in 

Chapter IV, GPO is placing high priority on the replacement of its current procurement 

systems with a modern, automated and unified print procurement system—a system it 

refers to as “EPIC” (Electronic Procurement Information Control). 

GPO anticipates that EPIC will streamline the Print Procurement process and allow for 

greater transparency for both GPO staff and customers. It will consolidate print 

procurement operations within a single, modular system, improve work processes, and 

automate specific functions. GPO foresees cost savings over time once the system is 

 

143 Government Printing Office, 2011 Customer Satisfaction Survey: Results and Analysis (Washington, D.C.: 

January 2012), 9-11.

144 Ibid., 11. 

145 Ibid., 8.
95

implemented. These savings are based on being able to streamline processes, thus reducing 

the need for additional staff. The new automated, interactive system should also provide a 

better structure for increased telework and workload sharing across multiple GPO work 

locations. 

GPO estimates that time and effort saved by the efficiencies of EPIC could result in up to a 

30 percent reduction in number of full-time equivalent positions (i.e., approximately 50) in 

Customer Services over a period of time—resulting in major cost savings. Although GPO 

indicates it is difficult to have an accurate estimate of the timing and magnitude of the 

savings at this time, their projections might actually increase depending on the resulting 

system. According to GPO, cost savings would apply equally in the regions as well as for the 

Washington, D.C. office teams due to the standardized processes and efficiencies and 

reductions in staff. As a potential added benefit, GPO further estimates that the new system 

could help facilitate an increase in revenue between 5 and 10 percent (all other things 

being equal) by setting business rules to apply surcharges to all applicable orders and by 

capturing accurate data to eliminate unbilled jobs and lost revenue. The system would also 

impact other GPO business units with improved efficiencies that could result in a reduction 

in full-time employees, thus increasing cost savings for other parts of the agency over a 

period of time. 

GPO’s Facilities Footprint

Further reductions in GPO’s facilities footprint and increased leasing of unused building 

space should be possible to achieve. The GPO complex in Washington, DC is comprised of 

four buildings, including three interconnected buildings on the west side of North Capitol 

Street and one building across the street on the east side. They are the only GPO-owned 

buildings in Washington, DC. GPO has leased warehouses in Laurel, Maryland and Pueblo, 

Colorado, a passport production backup facility in Stennis, Mississippi, and printing 

procurement offices around the country. The gross area of the four Washington, DC GPO 

buildings is about 1.5 million square feet. However, about one-third of that space houses 

light courts and support functions such as shafts, elevators, stairs, bathrooms, etc., leaving 

about 1 million square feet that are useable. Building 4, on the east side of North Capitol 

Street, is a warehouse that houses passport production functions and paper storage. Only 

parts of it are air-conditioned, and the power supply there is limited. The gross area of 

Building 4 is about 170,000 square feet. Buildings 1-3 house GPO’s production operations 

supporting Congress and agencies, as well as GPO’s printing procurement and information 

dissemination operations, plus administrative support functions (executive offices, finance, 

personnel, IT, security, acquisitions, etc.).

As discussed earlier in this chapter, GPO has already launched a highly promising program 

aimed at reducing its facilities footprint coupled with increased leasing of unused building 

space as a means of reducing and recovering costs of operation. In this respect, the gross 

area of Buildings 1-3 is about 1.25 million square feet, but total usable space is about 

825,000 square feet (of which about 91,000 is the unfinished basement, used for 

storage). Of the remaining 733,000 usable square feet, about 90,000 (or 12 percent) are 

currently assigned to space leasing agreements with federal agencies. As GPO continues to 
96

modernize plant operations, introduce more compact and efficient equipment, and 

downsize production space requirements, additional facilities savings and leasing appear 

to be possible. To this end, GPO estimates that it can free up an additional 50,000 to 

100,000 square feet of leasable space within the next two to three years. It also reports 

that current discussions are being held with potential tenants that could result in an 

additional 30,000 to 50,000 square feet of space being leased within two years with an 

associated increase in lease revenue of up to $2 million. 

Workforce Reductions 

Despite major recent workforce downsizing and reshaping, future staffing reductions and 

organizational restructuring at GPO may be possible. As noted earlier in this chapter, 

substantial workforce downsizing undertaken by GPO over several decades is part of a 

trend driven by advancements in publishing technology and production capacity within 

GPO, reduced demand by GPO customers for print products and related services, and 

improvements in management practices and systems that support GPO’s mission. It is 

reasonable to expect that these and other trends that allow gradual reduction in GPO 

staffing levels will continue in the foreseeable future. For example, the substantial 

potential impact that deployment of a new automated print procurement system might 

have on human resources requirements in GPO’s Customer Services function. Also, as GPO 

upgrades or replaces other old legacy applications with new, modern systems, additional 

personnel savings should be able to be achieved. The same notion applies to opportunities 

to replace labor-intensive processes with technology-intensive processes as new 

equipment and technology improve productivity levels in GPO’s Plant Operations. 

In addition to these areas of potential savings it was noted in Chapter V that although GPO 

reached its overall staff reduction goal during its 2011 workforce restructuring and buyout 

initiative, there were some areas where buyout targets fell short in terms of the number of 

employees who took the voluntary incentive relative to target levels established for their 

business units. In those instances skills imbalances and surpluses may still exist that, over 

time, can be reduced through careful staffing and attrition management, retraining and 

redeployment efforts on the part of GPO management–with the net result being further 

targeted personnel cost savings and improved employee skills utilization. A sample of 

some areas where buy-out targets fell substantially short of the goal is included in Table 8. 

Table 8. Buyout Targets Compared to Actual (Sample Units) 

GPO Business Unit Target # of Buyouts # Who Took Buyouts

Library Services and Content 

Management

17 7

Official Journals of Government 15 4

Security and Intelligent 

Documents

25 13

GPO Security 9 4

Source: GPO Office of Human Capital 
97

Beyond targeted personnel reductions in specific operational units , additional staffing 

reductions can likely be made to administrative overhead functions as the level of support 

needed by a shrinking GPO workforce decreases. In addition, GPO has demonstrated a 

willingness to realign functions and consolidate work units in an attempt to improve 

business operations, cut costs, and more effectively serve its customers. As the agency 

continues to evolve towards its envisioned digital information platform, the Panel expects 

there will be more opportunities for such realignments and consolidations. Some portion 

of savings realized from workforce reductions will need to be reinvested in hiring and 

training new and existing personnel to meet the evolving skill requirements of GPO’s digital 

operating environment. 

Based upon the five findings above, the Panel has five recommendations to help GPO 

continue to transform to meet changing needs, including the identification of 

potential future cost savings. These recommendations are presented and discussed 

below. 
98

RECOMMENDATION 11 

To ensure it is able to continue to plan for and respond to future changes, the Panel 

recommends that GPO continue its transformation by enhancing its strategic 

planning capabilities, broadening its change management efforts, and continually 

reviewing customer product and service needs. 

To implement this recommendation, GPO should: 

 begin to incorporate scenario planning into strategic planning processes; 

 develop an implementation plan for strategic planning and its broader change 

management strategy; 

 expand training opportunities based on a review of needs across functional and 

organizational lines; and 

 expand opportunities for employees to provide input and feedback on strategic 

planning, scenario planning, and other transformation issues. 

RECOMMENDATION 12 

To achieve future organizational and operational cost savings in the Customer 

Services program, the Panel recommends that GPO further consolidate regional 

office locations, space, and staff and continue to identify and implement best 

management practices (such as cross training, telework, work sharing 

arrangements, and increasing managerial spans of control) and available 

technologies to the greatest extent possible. 

RECOMMENDATION 13 

To realize significant potential savings and enhance revenues (as well improve 

customer service), the Panel recommends that GPO accelerate the development and 

deployment of a new automated print procurement system. 

To implement this recommendation, GPO should work closely with internal and external 

stakeholders and customers to obtain funding and support for the rapid development and 

implementation of this system. 
99

RECOMMENDATION 14 

To reduce GPO’s facilities footprint while increasing the leasing of unused building 

space, the Panel recommends that GPO continue pursuing incremental lease 

arrangements. 

To implement this recommendation, GPO should: 

 recover the full cost (including all attendant overhead costs) of administering, 

operating (including modifications), and maintaining leased space; 

 ensure that GPO’s space consolidation and leasing plans are closely aligned with its 

agency-wide strategic plan, including its evolving workflow and production 

processes and transition to a digital information factory; 

 explore an even broader approach to consolidation and reconfiguration that could 

result, over a period of time, in greater cost recovery by freeing up an entire 

building (and perhaps adjoining unimproved acreage) for lease (or explore the 

possibility of the disposition of property through sale, turning the property over to 

the management of another government entity, or other means that would release 

GPO from covering the cost of operating and maintaining it); 

 consider retaining the services of a space architect, industrial facilities design expert, 

and/or professional property management firm to assist it in strategic space 

planning and leasing activities going forward; and 

 consider establishing a standing cross-functional intra-agency team (or expand the 

charter of its Strategic Investment Committee) to aid in its ongoing space and lease 

planning initiative. 

RECOMMENDATION 15 

To address remaining workforce skills imbalances, the Panel recommends that GPO 

continue to pursue targeted, gradual staffing reductions in specific areas and 

functional consolidations when feasible and appropriate. 
100

This page intentionally left blank. 
101

APPENDIX A: PANEL AND STAFF 

PANEL 

Marilu Goodyear, Ph.D., Chair*—Chair, Department of Public Administration, University 

of Kansas, Lawrence. Former Vice Provost for Information Services and Chief Information 

Officer, Department of Public Administration, University of Kansas, Lawrence; Associate 

Dean, University of Kansas Libraries; Senior Associate Director, Associate Professor, 

Interim Director of Libraries, and Assistant Director for Collection Interpretation, Texas 

A&M University; Assistant Director for Public Services, University Library, Iowa State 

University; Assistant Director for Instruction and Research Services, University of Colorado 

at Denver.

Joel D. Aberbach, Ph.D.*—Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Public Policy, 

and Director of the Center for American Politics and Public Policy, University of California, 

Los Angeles. Former John G. Winant Professor, Department of Politics and International 

Relations, University of Oxford. Former Professor, Department of Political Science and 

Research Scientist, Institute of Public Policy Studies, University of Michigan. Former Senior 

Fellow, Governmental Studies Program, Brookings Institution. 

J. William Gadsby*—Senior Advisor. Former Vice President for Academy Studies, National 

Academy of Public Administration; Director, Management Studies Program, National 

Academy of Public Administration. Former positions with U.S. Government Accountability 

Office: Senior Executive Service; Director, Government Business Operations Issues; 

Director, Federal Management Issues; Director, Intergovernmental and Management 

Issues. Former Assistant Director, Financial Management Branch, U.S. Office of 

Management and Budget.

Molly A. O'Neill*—Vice President, CGIt. Former Assistant Administrator and Chief 

Information Officer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; State Director, National 

Environmental Information Exchange Network, Environmental Council of the States; 

Principal, Environmental Systems Group, American Management Systems, Inc.; Director, 

State Environmental Group, TechLaw, Inc.; Director, State Environmental Group, A.T. 

Kearney, Inc., 1989- 1997; Environmental Biologist/Analyst, PEER Consultants, PC.

Sallyanne Payton, J.D.*—William W. Cook Professor of Law, University of Michigan School 

of Law. Former Associate Professor, University of Michigan School of Law; Chief Counsel, 

Urban Mass Transportation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation; Staff 

Assistant to the President of the United States, Domestic Council, The White House; 

Attorney, Covington & Burling.

* Academy Fellow
102

STAFF STUDY TEAM 

 

Joseph Mitchell, Ph.D., Director of Project Development and Project Director —Manages the 

Academy’s studies program and previously served as Project Director for past Academy 

studies for USAID/Management Systems International, the National Park Service’s Natural 

Resource Stewardship and Science Directorate, and the USDA Natural Resources 

Conservation Service. Served on the study team for past Academy studies for the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, Office of National Drug Control Policy, Centers for Disease 

Control, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, National Marine Fisheries Service, Patent and Trademark Office, National 

Institutes of Health, Department of the Interior, and Forest Service. Former Adjunct 

Professor at the Center for Public Administration and Public Policy, Virginia Polytechnic 

Institute and State University. Holds a Ph.D. from the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and 

State University, a Master of Public Administration from the University of North Carolina at 

Charlotte, and a BA in History from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. 

Pursuing a Master of International Public Policy with a concentration in American Foreign 

Policy at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. 

Maria Rapuano, Deputy Project Director—Previously served on the study team for past 

Academy studies for the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology 

Directorate and the Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel System. Board Member, Trust 

for Lead Poisoning Prevention. Former Project Director, Alliance for Healthy Homes. Holds 

an MA in International Affairs from The American University and a BA in Government from 

the College of William and Mary. 

Stephanie Bailenson, Senior Advisor—Previously served as Project Director for past 

Academy studies for the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National 

Coalition to End Childhood Lead Poisoning. Served on the study team for past Academy 

studies for the Office of Management and Budget, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Former Director, Office of Coastal 

and Aquatic Managed Areas, Florida Department of Environmental Protection; Senior 

Policy Advisor, NOAA; Professional Staff Member, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation, Research Assistant, University of Hawaii, Department of 

Zoology; and Teaching Fellow, Harvard University, Department of Government. Holds a 

Master of Public Administration from Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of 

Government and a B.A. in Biology/Political Science (with Distinction) from Duke 

University. 

Timothy Dirks, Senior Advisor—Previously served on the study team for past Academy 

studies for the Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel System and the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development. Instructor in Catholic University’s Masters in Human 

Resources Program. Former Consultant, Partnership for Public Service; President and CEO, 

GRA, Inc.; Director of Human Resources Management, U.S. Department of Energy; Assistant 

Director of Human Resources for Personnel Policy, Smithsonian Institution; Chief of the U.S. 

Office of Personnel Management Policy Coordination Appellate Policies, Employee 
103

Relations, and Performance Management organizations. Holds an MA in Transpersonal 

Studies from the Atlantic University and an MBA and B.A in Economics from The George 

Washington University. 

Jonathan Tucker, Ph.D., Senior Analyst—Previously served as Project Director for two 

past Academy studies for the Department of Defense. Served on the study team for past 

Academy studies for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United States 

Coast Guard, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of 

Homeland Security, the National Institutes of Health, the United States Army Corps of 

Engineers, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Former analyst with Battelle Memorial 

Institute. Holds a Ph.D. in Public Policy from George Mason University, an MS in Science and 

Technology from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and a BA in Public Policy from New 

College of the University of South Florida.

Chloe Yang, Senior Research Associate—Previously served on the study team for past 

Academy studies for the Office of Management and Budget, Amtrak Office of Inspector 

General, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and Government 

Accountability Office. Former research intern, the Foundation for Environmental Security 

and Sustainability; intern, Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars; and research assistant, 

George Mason University. Holds an MPA from George Mason University and a Bachelor of 

Management in Financial Management from the Renmin University of China. 

Danny Caravalho, Research Associate—Former intern, Office of Senator Dianne Feinstein. 

Holds a BS in Business Administration from California State University, Monterey Bay. 
104

This page intentionally left blank. 
105

APPENDIX B: INDIVIDUALS CONTACTED 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

Baish, Mary Alice—Superintendent of Documents 

Barnes, Michael—Manager, San Francisco Regional Office 

Boesch, William—Comptroller 

Bradley, Jim—Assistant Public Printer (Operations) 

Brooks, Thomas—FDLP Coordinator, Laurel Distribution Center 

Carey, Dennis—Chief Engineering Officer, Plant Operations 

Clark, Gordon—National Account Manager, Sales and Marketing 

Crawford, John W.—Production Manager, Plant Operations 

Cyrwus, Donna—National Account Manager, Sales and Marketing 

Davis, Richard G.—Chief Technology Officer 

Divanni, Kathy—Congressional Relations and Communications Staff 

Ehrenfeld, Terry—Employee Communications Specialist 

Fine, Neal—Director, Labor Relations 

Flores, Juanita—Acting Director, Equal Employment Opportunity 

Frazier, Michael T.—Senior Labor Relations Specialist 

Girod, Olivier A.—Managing Director, Plant Operations 

Green, Lyle—Managing Director, Official Journals of Government 

Hannan, John—Director, Information Technology Security, Information Technology and 

Systems

Harris, William—Special Assistant to Chief Human Capital Officer 

Hasenfus, Julie—Director, Agency Strategic Teams, Customer Services 

Horbinski, Jeffrey—Assistant Manager, Chicago Regional Office 
106

Keeney, Ronald—Assistant Director, Creative and Digital Media Services, Business Products 

and Services 

Knoll, Kirk—Director, Development and Program Support, Customer Services 

Knoll, Selene—FDsys Program Manager, Program, Strategy and Technology 

Jackson, Jr., Herbert H.—Managing Director, Business Products and Services 

LaPlant, Lisa—Lead Program Planner, Programs, Strategy and Technology 

LeBlanc, Stephen G.—Managing Director, Secure and Intelligent Documents 

MacAfee, Jeffrey—Assistant Director, Office of Federal Register Publishing Services, Official 

Journals of Government 

MacAfee, Sandra—Acting Managing Director, Customer Services 

Mitchell, Robert—Operations Director, Laurel Distribution Center 

Miller, Kerry—Deputy General Counsel 

Mixon, Clint—Manager, Chicago Regional Office 

Mooney, Michael—Manager, Quality Control and Technical Department, Plant Operations 

Priebe, Ted—Director, Print Support Operations, Customer Services 

Raponi, Michael A.—Inspector General 

Riddle, Chuck—Chief Information Officer 

Rosa, Renee—Headquarters COOP Coordinator 

Rozdzielski, Debra—Manager, Philadelphia Regional Office 

Sánchez, Jane—Director, Library Services and Content Management 

Seger, Bruce—Director, Sales and Marketing 

Shedd, Steven T.—Chief Financial Officer 

Sherman, Andrew M.—Chief Communications Officer 

Somerset, Gary G.—Director, Public Relations 
107

Spalding, Drew—General Counsel 

Subt, Sylivia S. Y.—Technical Manager, Strategic Planning and Analysis, Plant Operations 

Sullivan, Tom—Managing Director, Customer Services 

Thomas, Ginger T.—Chief Human Capital Officer 

Thompson, Marcia—Congressional Record Index Office, Official Journals of Government 

Turner, Jeffrey—Director, Sales Planning and Development, Business Products and Services 

Vance-Cooks, Davita—Acting Public Printer 

Vernon, Lamont—Director, Security Services 

Williams, Lisa—Director of Marketing and Outreach, Distribution Services 

Wu, Deng—Director, Technology Development and Management/Chief FDsys Architect, 

Programs, Strategy and Technology 

Young, Sheree—Director, Acquisition Operations 

GPO UNION REPRESENTATIVES 

Ayers, Kevin—Chief Steward, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 

Bennett, Jessie—President, Local 713 

Cullen, Michael T.—Vice President, Local 101-12

Gordan, Norman—Building Chairman, Fraternal Order of Police 

Lord, George—Chairperson, Joint Council of Unions 

Melcher, Joyce—President, Association of Federal Government Employees 

Pratt, Melvin—Building Representative, Local 1-C 

CONGRESSIONAL STAKEHOLDERS 

Dawson, Elizabeth—Staff Director, House Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative 

Branch 
108

Helms, Lila—Clerk, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch 

Johnson, Bud—Assistant to the Director of Printing and Document Services, Office of 

Secretary of the Senate 

McGowan, Matthew P.—Professional Staff Member, Senate Committee on Rules and 

Administration 

Moore, Karen—Director, Printing and Document Services, Office of the Secretary of the 

Senate 

Schroeder, Rachelle—Professional Staff Member, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on 

the Legislative Branch 

Schweickhardt, Reynold—Director of Technology Policy, Committee on House 

Administration 

Sterkx, Craig—Professional Staff Member, House Office of Legislative Council 

Storelli, Dominic—Professional Staff Member, Committee on House Administration 

Turner III, Chester Lee—Professional Staff Member, House Appropriations Subcommittee 

on the Legislative Branch 

Young, Shalanda—Professional Staff Member, House Appropriations Subcommittee on the 

Legislative Branch 

AGENCY CUSTOMERS 

Bennett, Dwight—National Archives and Records Administration; member, Board of 

Directors of the Interagency Council on Printing and Publication Services 

Conway, Barry J.—Managing Director for Support Operations, Passport Services, Bureau of 

Consular Affairs, State Department 

Dunlap, Ben—Census Bureau; member, Board of Directors of the Interagency Council on 

Printing and Publication Services 

Godwin, Bev—Director, Federal Citizen Information Center, Office of Citizen Services and 

Innovative Technologies, General Services Administration 

Hemphill, James—Special Assistant to the Director of the Office of the Federal Register, 

Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration 
109

Lee, Keith—Department of Homeland Security; member, Board of Directors of the 

Interagency Council on Printing and Publication Services 

Padget, Paula— Department of Justice; member, Board of Directors of the Interagency 

Council on Printing and Publication Services 

Piscopo, Daniel—Assistant Division Director, United States Customs and Border Protection 

Sherman, Stephen T.—Director, Defense Logistics Agency Document Services, DoD 

Simon, Burt—U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior; Chair, Board of Directors 

of the Interagency Council on Printing and Publication Services 

Spire, Michelle—Defense Logistics Agency Document Services, DoD; member, Board of 

Directors of the Interagency Council on Printing and Publication Services 

Steele, Wendy—DLA Document Services, DoD; member, Board of Directors of the 

Interagency Council on Printing and Publication Services 

Wash, Michael—Chief Information Officer, National Archives and Records Administration 

Yake, Jeff—Library of Congress; member, Board of Directors of the Interagency Council on 

Printing and Publication Services 

LIBRARY COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS 

Adler, Prudence—Director, Association of Research Libraries 

Feltren, Emily—Director of Government Relations, American Association of Law Libraries 

Holterhoff, Sarah—Government Information/Reference Librarian, Associate Professor of 

Law Librarianship, Valparaiso University Law School 

Jacobs, James—Government Documents Librarian, Stanford University; Former Chair, 

Federal Depository Library Program 

Keller, Michael A.—University Librarian, Director of Academic Information Resources, 

Publisher of HighWire Press, and Publisher of the Stanford University Press Green 

Library, Stanford University 

LaChance, Janice—CEO, Special Libraries Association 

Laster, Shari—Government Documents Librarian, University of Akron; Chair, Depository 

Library Council 
110

Lowry, Charles—Executive Director, Association of Research Libraries 

Mao, David—Law Librarian, Library of Congress 

McGilvray, Jessica—Assistant Director, American Library Association

Shaffer, Roberta—Associate Librarian for Library Services, Library of Congress 

FORUM OF EXPERTS 

Cosimini, Gary—Principal, Things InDesign LLC 

Forbes, Jim—Regional Sales Manager, RR Donnelley 

Gindlesperger, William—President and CEO, e-LYNXX 

Kannan, P. K.—Ralph J. Tyser Professor of Marketing Science and Chair, Department of 

Marketing, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland 

Pope, Barbara Kline—Executive Director, National Academies Press 

Slisz, Susan—Vice President, Print Products, LexisNexis 

OTHER EXPERTS/STAKEHOLDERS 

Boarman, William—former Public Printer 

Burman, Allan V.—President, Jefferson Solutions; Fellow, National Academy of Public 

Administration 

Cooper, Benjamin Y.—former Vice President of Government Affairs, Printing Industries of 

America 

DiMario, Michael F.—former Public Printer 

James, Bruce—former Public Printer 

Lynch, Clifford A.—Executive Director, Coalition for Networked Information 

Petersen, R. Eric—Analyst, Congressional Research Service 

Tapella, Robert—former Public Printer 
111

APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS GPO STUDIES 

The Conference Report that mandated this study calls for an update of past studies 

evaluating GPO’s production, procurement, information dissemination, and operations, 

including the Federal Depository Library program (FDLP). The Panel’s review included 

major external reviews of GPO mandated by Congress and related testimony, as well as 

smaller, more focused studies of individual GPO programs and activities. The major studies 

include: 

 Office of Technology Assessment, Informing the Nation: Federal Information 

Dissemination in an Electronic Age (1988) 

 GAO, Monopoly-Like Status Contributes to Inefficiency and Ineffectiveness (1990) 

 Booz-Allen &Hamilton, Management Audit of the Government Printing Office (1998) 

 GAO study of GPO during 2003-2004 that produced the following two reports: 

o GAO, GPO: Advancing GPO’s Transformation Effort through Strategic Human 

Capital Management (2003) 

o GAO, GPO: Actions to Strengthen and Sustain GPO’s Transformation (2004) 

Studies focused on the FDLP include two congressionally-directed studies and a study 

conducted for GPO by a contractor: 

 GAO, Information Management: Electronic Dissemination of Government Publication 

(2001) 

 Ithaka S+R, Modeling a Sustainable Future for the Federal Depository Library 

Program (2011) 

 Congressional Research Service (CRS), Federal Depository Library Program: Issues 

for Congress (2012) 

Two other studies considered focused on congressional printing and facilities planning: 

 GAO, Issues Faced in Obtaining New Facilities (2009); and 

 CRS, Congressional Printing: Background and Issues for Congress (2011). 

These reports and testimony are summarized briefly in the table below. 
112

Study Focus and Findings Recommendations

Office of Technology Assessment, 

Informing the Nation: Federal 

Information Dissemination in an 

Electronic Age (1988)

The OTA study was focused broadly on the challenges 

facing federal information dissemination and included 

assessments of GPO as well as other agencies with 

government-wide dissemination responsibilities, such 

as the National Technical Information Service (NTIS).

OTA made three major findings related to GPO:

1. The growth in agency desktop and electronic 

publishing systems is making production and 

distribution more cost-effective at low levels of 

demand. This development challenges the centralized 

approach of GPO and NTIS built around traditional 

ink-on-paper printing that tends to be more costeffective with high levels of demand.

2. The existing legal and regulatory framework is 

limiting the ability of GPO to function effectively as a 

government-wide disseminator in the context of 

increased electronic publishing by agencies. GPO's 

FDLP is limited by law to distributing federal 

information only in paper or microfiche format.

3. Electronic publishing has raised issues about the 

role of the federal government in producing "valueadded" information. Current federal policy does not 

specify the conditions under which information 

products may be considered governmental in nature.

OTA recommended that the 

government should: 

1. Undertake a comprehensive 

planning process for exploring the 

long-term future

2. Provide short-term direction to 

existing agencies and institutions 

with respect to electronic 

information dissemination.

GAO Testimony - GPO's Future 

Direction (1989)

Based on two surveys conducted in support of the 

1988 OTA study and its past assessments of various 

GPO programs, GAO identified four issues that must 

be resolved to establish a clear-cut role for GPO going 

forward:

1. The role of GPO, the private sector, and 

departments and agencies in ink-on-paper printing. 

GAO recommended changing the 

job requirements of the Public 

Printer and Deputy Public Printer 

to allow people with a broader 

background in all aspects of 

information management and 

publishing to be considered as 

candidates.
113

2. The role GPO will have in distributing government 

information in non-paper formats, more specifically 

its role vis-à-vis the private sector in “adding value” to 

data, such as creating indexes and other aids to make 

information more accessible. 

3. GPO's role in procuring nontraditional information 

dissemination mediums, such as its participation in 

"on demand" printing systems for the Army and Air 

Force. 

4. GPO's role in working with other organizations to 

anticipate and assess technological change and 

develop standards.

GAO, Monopoly-Like Status 

Contributes to Inefficiency and 

Ineffectiveness (1990)

This review focused on challenges facing GPO’s inhouse and procured printing operations. GAO made 

five findings:

1. Internal printing was costly due to inefficient 

production scheduling, high level of paper waste and 

spoilage, and old equipment.

2. Internal systems were inadequate to ensure 

efficiency and quality.

3. GPO was using poorly-performing contractors 

because it was not validating critical data showing 

whether contractors delivered work on time,

important quality of performance information 

necessary to operate a sound contracting system was 

not readily available, and no guidance existed for how 

best to use it.

4. Customer service was hindered by poor 

communication and a poor system for tracking and 

resolving customer complaints.

5. Accountability was hindered by weaknesses in the 

GPO’s performance management system and 

Executive Information System.

In addition to these specific findings, GAO concluded 

In addition to making 

recommendations addressing these 

five specific findings, GAO 

recommended that the Joint 

Committee on Printing should take 

the lead in convening a group, 

including the Public Printer, 

Congress, federal agencies, and 

GPO unions, to decide on the future 

direction of the agency.
114

that uncertainty about its future role and mission 

would hinder GPO’s ability to move forward 

effectively. Secondarily, GAO also noted GPO’s lack of 

strategic planning processes. 

Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 

Management Audit of the 

Government Printing Office 

(1998)

The management audit encompassed six broad areas: 

(1) Superintendent of Documents; (2) printing 

procurement program; (3) in-plant production; (4) 

personnel; (5) budgeting, accounting, and financial 

reporting systems; and (6) financial and other 

management-related observations and 

recommendations made in the audit of GPO’s FY 1995 

financial statement

BAH made three overall findings:

1. There is little support among GPO's customers for 

eliminating GPO.

2. GPO has no established strategic planning process 

and no current strategic plan. 

3. GPO is overly centralized with little communication 

across functional organizations.

BAH made three overall 

recommendations.

1. GPO should focus on creating a 

future-oriented organizational 

structure and on developing and 

adopting new plans and business 

processes that focus more on 

where GPO and its customers want 

it to be and less on where it has 

been.

2. GPO should institutionalize the 

strategic planning process and link 

annual budgets to a published 

strategic plan.

3. GPO should adopt an 

organization model that reduces 

the number of senior executives 

reporting directly to the Public 

Printer, empowers senior 

managers to make decisions, and 

provides easy and effective 

communication across functional 

areas.
115

GAO, Information Management: 

Electronic Dissemination of 

Government Publication (2001)

GAO was asked to address two major issues: (1) the 

impact of providing documents to the public solely in 

electronic format; and (2) the feasibility of 

transferring the Federal Depository Library Program 

to the Library of Congress.

GAO’s findings with respect to each issue are as 

follows: 

1. Several challenges would have to be overcome 

before a shift could be made to disseminating 

documents solely in electronic format. These include 

ensuring that these documents are authentic, 

permanently maintained, and equally accessible to all 

individuals. Also, certain cost issues would need to be 

addressed, in particular the effect of shifting printing 

costs to depository libraries and end users.

2. There are advantages and disadvantages of 

transferring FDLP to the Library of Congress (LC). 

Regarding advantages, GAO cites LC studies 

conducted in 1993 and 1994, concluding that the 

FDLP is not inconsistent with the mission and 

functions of LC and that it might be appropriate for LC 

to have responsibility for it. Further, GAO suggests 

that a transfer could facilitate the development of 

government-wide solutions to issues surrounding the 

acquisition, management, and dissemination of 

electronic documents. It cites the new money and 

mandate for national strategic planning received by 

LC as part of the National Information Infrastructure 

and Preservation Program.

Regarding disadvantages, GAO notes that GPO does 

not consider LC an appropriate home for FDLP 

because LC’s mission and operations are inconsistent 

with a large-scale information dissemination 

If it was decided to transfer the 

depository library program, GAO 

recommended forming a joint 

GPO/Library transition team—

which would be led by the 

Librarian or his designee and 

include representatives of the 

depository libraries—to develop 

appropriate strategies.
116

program. In addition, the Library studies, as well as 

organizations representing librarians, cite 

disadvantages including potential negative effects on 

public access to information and the availability of

funds to maintain the current program. Finally, 

unions representing GPO employees raised concerns 

about the effect on employee rights.

GAO, GPO: Advancing GPO's 

Transformation Effort through 

Strategic Human Capital 

Management (2003)

This report covers the first part of the 2003-2004 

study of GPO--a review of human capital management. 

GAO’s overall finding was that the Public Printer had 

taken steps to strengthen GPO's human capital 

management--by filling the position of Chief Human 

Capital Officer, shifting the focus of training, and 

enhancing recruitment strategies--but that additional 

action was needed.

GAO recommended that GPO build 

on these initial steps by taking four 

additional actions:

1. Enhance communication with 

senior managers.

2. Build a strategic human 

resources office to help drive the 

transformation.

3. Develop strategic workforce 

plans.

4. Implement an individual 

performance management system 

that aligns organizational goals 

with day-to-day operations and 

creates a line of sight between 

individual and organizational 

performance.

GAO, GPO: Actions to Strengthen 

and Sustain GPO's 

Transformation (2004)

This report covers the second part of the 2003-2004 

GAO study, which included an examination of the 

current state of printing and information 

dissemination, the development of strategic options, 

and a review of GPO’s financial management, 

information management, strategic planning, 

organizational operations, as well as the use of 

technology in printing and information dissemination.

GAO made three findings about changes in 

A Panel of experts assembled by 

GAO to assess the current state and 

develop strategic options for GPO 

made the following four 

recommendations:

1. Develop a business plan to focus 

its mission on information 

dissemination as its primary goal, 

rather than printing.
117

government printing and information dissemination 

forcing GPO to transform itself:

1. GPO’s revenues from printing for agency customers 

and document sales to the public have declined as 

federal agencies publish more documents directly to 

the web and do more of their own printing and 

dissemination of information without using GPO 

services, and the public increasingly obtains

documents available for free on the internet.

2. These changes in federal printing and 

dissemination are also creating challenges for GPO’s 

long-standing structure for centralized printing and

dissemination.

3. The ongoing agency shift toward electronic 

publishing is also creating challenges for GPO’s 

existing relationships with its executive branch 

customers.

GAO also found that GPO had taken steps to address 

these challenges and adopted some practices 

associated with successful transformation, but still 

lacked a strategic plan to guide continued 

transformation.

GAO emphasized the need for improvement in GPO’s 

information technology management to enable the 

development or acquisition of the technologies 

needed to realize its transformation.

2. Demonstrate to its customers the 

value it can provide.

3. Improve and extend 

partnerships with agencies to help 

establish itself as an information 

disseminator

4. Ensure that its internal 

operations are adequate for 

efficient and effective management 

of core business functions and for 

service to its customers.

As part of its management review, 

GAO made recommendations for 

GPO to build on its progress in 

adopting practices associated with 

successful transformation efforts. 

To fully implement these practices, 

GAO recommended that GPO 

establish its mission and strategic 

goals and implementation plan. 

GAO recommended GPO take 

actions in a number of IT 

management areas, including the 

development of an information 

technology investment 

management process to choose, 

monitor, and evaluate investments 

needed to support transformation.

GAO, Issues Faced in Obtaining 

New Facilities (2009)

GAO assessed GPO's analysis of options to obtain a 

new facility and issues that might impede GPO's 

efforts to obtain a new facility.

GAO made two findings:

No recommendations made.
118

1. GPO had not considered the full range of options, 

including the option of reconfiguring existing 

facilities.

2. GPO may have overestimated cost savings to be 

gained from leasing a new facility.

CRS, Congressional Printing: 

Background and Issues for 

Congress (2011)

This study focused on two issues: (1) whether further 

cost savings could be achieved by eliminating paper 

versions of some congressional documents and 

relying instead on electronic versions; and (2) the 

trade-offs that a shift to electronic versions would 

entail and what might need to be done before making 

such a shift.

The CRS report made the following observations:

1. Further reduction in print runs for Congressional 

Record and other congressional documents may result 

in only modest reductions in cost due to the cost of 

pre-press processes (actions that must be taken 

before copies can be printed), which constitute 

approximately two-thirds of the total printing cost of 

the Congressional Record. (The report noted that prepress costs vary and are not documented for other 

congressional documents.)

2. Any cost savings achieved as a result of reduced 

print runs might come at the expense of users who 

prefer to use paper copies or who do not have access 

to electronic versions. 

3. With regard to reliance solely on electronic 

versions of documents, the report cited concerns 

about (1) the ability to reliably access electronic 

versions as technologies evolve and systems become 

obsolete; and (2) the long-term cost of ensuring that 

documents stored using old systems are converted.

4. A shift to relying on electronic versions would likely 

need to provide for verification and authentication 

No recommendations made.
119

procedures that ensure the provenance and accuracy 

of any official record of congressional activity.

Ithaka S+R, Modeling a 

Sustainable Future for the 

Federal Depository Library 

Program (2011)

The study identified three challenges/opportunities 

that should inform decisions about the future of FDLP:

1. Many libraries are moving away from the 

maintenance of “tangible” document collections due 

to growing user preference for digital collections and 

the increasing availability of FDLP documents on the 

internet. This development potentially threatens 

certain types of public access needs.

2. There are indications that services available to 

support the effective use of government documents 

available on the internet are inadequate. A focus on 

support services provides opportunities for existing 

network libraries and other libraries to add value.

3. The management and preservation of digital 

collections could be performed more effectively and 

efficiently by networks of libraries and could help 

relieve the growing burden on regional libraries. 

However, FDLP’s current structure severely limits 

networked approaches.

Ithaka S+R developed a range of 

options or “models.” The models 

are described as increasingly 

complete implementations of an 

overall approach intended to 

address the mission, goals, and 

principles of the FDLP. They entail 

more or less cost and complexity, 

including changes to the existing 

authorizing statute.

CRS, Federal Depository Library 

Program: Issues for Congress 

(2012)

The report discusses the following issues related to 

the digital transition: (1) maintenance and 

availability of the FDLP tangible collection—retention 

and digitization; (2) retention and preservation of 

born digital information; (3) access to digital 

government information; and (4) cost of the FDLP and 

other government information distribution initiatives.

The report concludes that a number of concerns must 

be more systematically addressed before a new policy 

on FDLP can be developed. These include:

1. Development of methods, materials, and 

technologies to ensure the long-term preservation of 

No recommendations made.
120

digitized and born digital information;

2. A more inclusive definition of materials to be 

included in FDLP collections to ensure consistency in 

the type of materials that get into FDLP collections;

3. The extent to which there is a need to expand the 

current institutional model of FDLP beyond regional 

and selective libraries; and

4. The costs of the program to the federal government 

and depository institutions, and how long-standing 

funding models might affect the program in the digital 

era.
121

APPENDIX D: KEY DATES IN GPO’S HISTORY 

1860 – Joint Resolution 25 (36th Congress, 2d Session) is enacted, establishing GPO. The 

resolution is signed by President James Buchanan. 

March 4, 1861 – The new Government Printing Office opens its doors on the same day 

Abraham Lincoln is inaugurated as the 16th President. The GPO is housed in a building at 

the corner of North Capitol and H Streets, NW, purchased by Congress from Cornelius 

Wendell. President Lincoln subsequently appoints John D. Defrees Superintendent of Public 

Printer, the first head of the GPO. 

1861 – GPO employees set the type and print President Lincoln’s war message to Congress 

of July 4. 

1862 – GPO employees set the type and print the document known as the Preliminary 

Emancipation Proclamation, issued by President Lincoln as General Order No. 139 in the 

days following the battle of Antietam. 

1873 – GPO begins production of the Congressional Record, the official record of the 

proceedings of Congress. Previously, the proceedings of Congress were published by a 

variety of private printers. 

1876 – Congress changes to the title of the head of GPO to Public Printer. In August, Almon 

M. Clapp becomes the first appointee to hold this title. 

1894 – GPO issues its first Manual of Style, a guide to printers, which becomes the widely 

observed standard in the style of congressional and federal agency documents. 

1895 – The General Printing Act of 1895 is passed. The Act transferred the position of 

Superintendent of Documents to GPO, brought all other federal printing plants under GPO’s 

control, provided rules and standards concerning compensation, purchasing supplies, 

setting prices, and outlined GPO’s organization. These changes would form the basis for the 

public printing and documents statutes contained in Title 44 of the United States Code 

today. 

1903 – GPO’s Building 1 opens, located at the corner of North Capitol and G Streets, NW, 

adjacent to the original Wendell building. 

1904 – GPO turns to machine typesetting with the introduction of Linotype and Monotype 

machines into its operations. 
122

1918 – GPO’s workload swelled with World War I production demands. War work includes 

the regular production of the Official U.S. Bulletin, a compendium of regulatory and related 

information that was the precursor of the Federal Register. Hundreds of GPO employees 

served in the war, which afterwards was marked by the funeral of Corporal Charles Jacobs 

on what has become GPO’s Veterans Memorial in Building 1. 

1921 – GPO’s first public bookstore was opened. 

1924 – Passage of the Keiss Act authorized the Public Printer to establish rates of pay based 

on collective bargaining with employees. 

1925 – With 120 Monotype and 147 Linotype key boards in use, GPO boasts the largest 

number of both machines in the world. 

1926 – GPO begins producing U.S. passports for the State Department. 

1929 – GPO’s Building 2 opens, located west of and connected to Building 1. 

1936 – GPO begins daily production of the Federal Register. 

1938 –GPO's Building 4 opens as a paper warehouse, on the east side of North Capitol 

Street. The building features a rail connection to Union Station for the delivery of paper by 

train. 

1940 – GPO’s Building 3 opens, located on the site of the Wendell building that originally 

housed the agency. 

1941 – Under special war time authority, GPO begins contracting with commercial printers 

to add desperately needed capacity. This authority continued after the war, eventually 

resulting in a mix of 75% procured work/25% in-plant work by the end of the century. At 

the end of the war, emergency war time printing plants are turned over to the GPO, which 

operates them as regional printing plants until the 1990s. 

1945 – GPO’s World War II-era work included procurement of a wide range of posters 

seeking recruits, advertising war bonds, and related matters; production of the leather 

covers for the surrender documents signed by the Japanese forces at the end of the war; 

and the documents used in the establishment of the United Nations. More than 2,500 GPO 

employees served in the conflict. 

August 1953 – Senator Joseph McCarthy’s investigations subcommittee targets alleged 

communists at the GPO. No criminal breaches of security are found and no prosecutions 

follow. 

1961 – GPO observes its centennial with the publication of 100 GPO Years. 
123

1962 – The Depository Library Act of 1962 is passed. This act created the system of 

regional and selective depository libraries. 

1962 – The Joint Committee on Printing directs GPO to begin the development of a 

computerized system for setting type. 

1967 – The Linotron, a computerized phototypesetting machine, goes into operation at 

GPO. 

1967 - GPO begins opening bookstores around the nation, reaching a high of 25 stores in 

the 1970s. They were closed between 2001 and 2003, with only the bookstore in GPO’s 

Building 1 remaining in operation today. In their place, GPO operates a secure online 

bookstore. 

1971 – The Pueblo, CO, warehouse is established. Three years later, the Laurel, MD, 

warehouse begins operations. 

1975 – GPO begins the transition from hot metal typesetting to electronic 

photocomposition for publications produced in-plant, including congressional and Federal 

Register documents. The Congressional Record begins production via photocomposition in 

1982. 

1985 – Hot metal typesetting is fully phased out, ending 80 years of service to GPO. 

1993 – The GPO Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act passes (Pub. L. 103-40), 

directing GPO to provide online access to the Congressional Record, Federal Register, and 

other publications from all three branches of government. This act leads to the creation of 

GPO Access. GPO Access begins service a year later. 

1994 – GPO Access begins service. 

2007 – GPO establishes the ability to create secure federal credentials, otherwise known as 

smartcards. 

2008 – A second passport production facility opens in Stennis, MS. 

2009 – Release 1 of FDsys goes live, beginning the replacement of GPO Access. 

2011 -- GPO releases its first mobile app, a Guide to Members of Congress. 

2012 -- GPO provides access to the federal budget for the first time as a mobile app; GPO 

Access officially shut down. 
124

APPENDIX E: KEY THEMES FROM THE ACADEMY’S FDLP SURVEY

Purpose and Value of the Survey 

As part of the broader GPO review, information on how the Federal Depository Library 

(FDLP) community views the future of the program was needed. The survey provided a 

unique opportunity to simultaneously gather viewpoints from a large number of 

representatives of selective and regional depository libraries and library associations on 

several key topics. 

The results of the survey are one data source within the larger context of many primary 

and secondary sources to be considered in the overall review. The survey filled a critical 

data gap by targeting the broad FDLP stakeholder group in a compressed time. 

Survey Design and Audience 

The survey was created using Survey Monkey and was disseminated on August 22, 2012 to 

more than 2,400 individuals representing approximately 1,200 libraries and five library 

associations. The list of recipients was provided by GPO. GPO sent a follow-up email to the 

recipients explaining the purpose of the survey and urging participation. The Academy resent the survey to all recipients on August 29, 2012 with a reminder of the survey closing 

date. The survey was initially closed on September 5, 2012, but reopened for a few more 

days as a result of several requests from people who had started to fill out the survey but 

hadn’t had a chance to finish. The survey was permanently closed on September 14, 2012. 

The survey asked four identifying questions to determine if the respondents represented a 

library or association, the type of library, and the respondent’s title. The remainder of the 

survey consisted of five open-ended questions designed to solicit perspectives on the 

future direction of the program. 

Quantitative Survey Results

This section presents quantitative analysis of survey questions 1-4. Of the more than 2,400 

individuals who received the survey, 745 (31%) answered at least some of the survey 

questions. A total of 501 (21%) of survey recipients answered every survey question. 
125

Q1. Please identify the type of organization with which you are associated.

Answer Options Response 

Percent Response Count

a. Library association 3.7% 27

b. FDLP library 97.4% 720

answered question 739

skipped question 6

3.7%

97.4%

Please identify the type of organization with which you are 

associated.

a. Library association

b. FDLP library
126

Q2. If you are associated with an FDLP library, please identify the category of 

library.

Answer Options Response 

Percent Response Count

a. Regional 9.1% 67

b. Selective 88.3% 650

c. N/A 2.9% 21

answered question 736

skipped question 9

9.1%

88.3%

2.9%

If you are associated with an FDLP library, please identify the 

category of library.

a. Regional

b. Selective

c. N/A
127

Q3: If you are associated with an FDLP library, what specific type of library is it?

Answer 

Options Response Percent Response Count

a. State library 6.1% 45

b. Public 

institution 

academic 

library

45.2% 333

c. Private 

institution 

academic 

library

18.9% 139

d. Public library 13.9% 102

e. Federal 

library 3.7% 27

f. Law library 13.6% 100

g. N/A 1.5% 11

answered question 736

skipped question 9

6.1%

45.2%

18.9%

13.9%

3.7%

13.6%

1.5%

If you are associated with an FDLP library, what specific type of 

library is it?

a. State library

b. Public institution academic

library

c. Private institution academic

library

d. Public library

e. Federal library

f. Law library

g. N/A
128

Q4: What is your title?

Answer Options Response Count Response Percent

a. Librarian 362 49.9%

b. Dean or 

Director 189 26.0%

c. Head/Manager 90 12.4%

d. Coordinator 37 5.1%

e. Other 48 6.6%

answered question 726

skipped question 19

Note:

Dean or Director includes: Directors, Associate Directors, Assistant Director, Dean, 

Assistant Dean, CEO, Provost, and Commissioner.

Head/Manager includes: Heads, Managers, Research Chief, and Team Leader.

Other includes: assistant, consultant, specialist, supervisor, technician, faculty, liaison, 

cataloguer, associate, and archivist. 

49.9%

26.0%

12.4%

6.6%

5.1%

What's your position title?

Librarian

Director

Head/Manager

Others

Coordinator
129

Qualitative Survey Results—Key Themes

The study team researched and considered automated analysis tools for the analysis of the 

open-ended questions, but determined that these tools would not be helpful in the analysis 

of the data that were collected for a variety of reasons, including different usages of the 

same terms and the number of ideas in each response. For example, when using the term 

“preservation” some respondents were referring to the tangible collection and others to 

digital preservation. When using the term “flexible, some respondents were referring to 

collections management and others were referring to governance issues, such as multistate regionals. In addition, most responses contained multiple ideas (some contained up to 

six or more).

Due to the volume and length of survey responses, the analysis approach and summary of 

results focus on the data in aggregate. The data represent a segment of the attitudes and 

experiences existent within the overall population of FDLP stakeholders. The results 

summarize the higher-level “ideas” that were provided by the respondents. For the present 

purposes, analysis of the ideas is the appropriate level of analysis for understanding the 

main themes in the data and comparing these findings with the other forms of data 

gathered during this review. 

All ideas were sorted in descending order by the number of times the idea is offered and 

supporting comments offered (how many individuals were compelled to offer further 

elaboration on the idea). These two indices provided a general indication of the relative 

importance of these ideas across the survey results. 

Whereas in a survey consisting of close-ended questions quantitative analysis is the key 

output, this is not the case for a survey including open-ended questions. Thus, for this data 

set, ideas will be summarized in terms of the relative strength or prominence of underlying 

themes, based on the number of respondents providing similar ideas. The analysis will 

attempt to identify and compile the top themes by looking across the most “active” ideas 

(defined as appearing in at least 20 survey responses). 

Review of the survey results indicated that some of the ideas presented were nonresponsive to the survey questions; reflected idiosyncratic comments or complaints that 

could not be associated with a research question or theme; or had few supporting 

responses (e.g., mentioned fewer than 20 times). These ideas were not useful for the 

present analysis and no action was taken to include them in this survey results. Their 

exclusion from this summary will neither add to nor detracts from the findings. 

There are some overarching themes that emerged that did not specifically pertain to the 

questions that were asked in the survey. Libraries want realistic goals and streamlined 

processes for collections maintenance and disposition. Another overarching theme is that 

the libraries strongly value collaboration. They want more opportunities to collaborate 

with each other and they want GPO to collaborate more with other federal agencies and 

existing library networks and projects. 
130

Several respondents went out of their way to praise GPO for the job they are doing under 

what the library community considers difficult circumstances—inadequate resources and 

authority. In contrast, there were only a very few negative comments about GPO and the 

program. This is surprising given the fact that FDLP is a program in transition. In survey 

research, it is assumed that those with the strongest feelings about the issue are the most 

motivated to share their concerns, and those who are satisfied, neutral, or only mildly 

negative don’t feel compelled to engage.

The key themes pertaining to each question are discussed below. 

Q5. What are the three most important actions GPO needs to take to ensure that the 

Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) fully meets the government’s 

information access and dissemination needs?

Respondents focused much more on the access than the dissemination aspect of this 

question. By an overwhelming number, respondents favored increasing public awareness 

of the FDLP and available government information as a way to increase access. A comment 

that was also very common was that the information should remain free and permanent. 

These were the most commonly mentioned ideas across all categories of respondents 

except for federal depository libraries (with expanding and improving FDsys as the most 

commonly expressed idea) and library associations (which stressed the need for GPO to 

collaborate more at the federal level). 

Much less common, but very consistently mentioned topics across all categories of 

respondents included the desire for more in-person and online training (particularly in the 

use of FDsys and for new government documents librarians), cataloging and digitizing the 

tangible collection, and improvements to FDsys. 

Comments on FDsys focused on expanding the collection (including ingesting content from 

depository libraries and encouraging federal agencies to provide digital publications) and 

making it more user friendly, particularly by improving searchability. Libraries and users 

also want a one-stop shop for government information rather than having to search 

multiple sites (e.g., Census, EPA, Smithsonian, etc.). 

Less frequently mentioned topics in response to this question, but still mentioned multiple 

times in all categories of respondents were digital preservation, authentication, 

cataloging/indexing, fugitive documents, funding (for both the FDLP and FDsys), and 

enforcing and/or updating Title 44. 

Some quotes supporting the key themes include: 

 “Make the FDLP less of a secret. Better inform the public that it can receive 

assistance with government questions from FDLP libraries.” 

 “Clearly communicate with the public from time to time what federal government 

information is available at no additional cost, in what format, and the method of 

access.”
131

 “GPO needs to ensure that there is permanent no-fee access to government 

information.”

 “Provide more FDsys training through webinars or have trainers do more hands-on 

demos outside of the DC area. I personally find FDsys very difficult to use, even 

when I have very precise search criteria.”

 “Continue to develop strategies to expand the range of government published 

information that is available in authenticated digital format, in FDsys.”

 “Catalog all pre-1976 FDLP materials, including links to stable, public domain 

digitized copies wherever they may be housed.” 

 “Digitize the retrospective materials published and distributed by the GPO and 

make them freely available to libraries and the public.”

Q6. What actions does GPO need to take to properly balance the dissemination of 

print and electronic content in the FDLP?

There is absolutely no consensus on this issue, even among stakeholders within the same 

category of library. Some respondents want a balanced approach, with GPO continuing to 

work with the depository libraries to determine the correct balance of print and digital. 

Others expressed concern about the decreased access to print. Those who want access to 

print continue to point out that some users are not comfortable with computers or the 

Internet, and not all libraries have the infrastructure to go totally digital. In addition, some 

documents (e.g., long legal documents, maps, etc.) don’t lend themselves well to digital 

formats. Still other respondents believe print should be minimized or even eliminated. 

These respondents cite staff and space constraints for dealing with print documents, and 

also that their users demand digital formats. Clearly, there is a need for libraries to 

continue to have flexibility to meet their needs as well as those of their user communities. 

Respondents also raised the issue of wanting streamlined processes and more flexibility in 

collection maintenance, including item selection and weeding. 

Some comments illustrating different opinions on print versus digital include: 

 “[GPO] must continue to ensure that all essential titles on the Item Selection List 

are available in both print and electronic format and such titles should be available 

at Depositories.”

 “GPO and the Federal Depository Program need to assess what their 

responsibilities are to the taxpayer that does not have personal computer access or 

the ability to access government information in an electronic format.”

 “Some material, such as graphical and/or large pdf format, is appreciably more 

accessible in print.”

 “GPO is dedicated to primary providing (around 98%) electronic format for 2 

reasons: cost and accessibility.”

 “Allow those libraries to make local retention decisions based on potential 

usefulness of each individual item in their state.”
132

 “Make everything available electronically with URL's that don't keep changing or 

are dead and authenticate federal legal documents so they can be relied on instead 

of print.” 

 “We believe that the proper balance between print and electronic is 100% 

electronic, and that GPO should phase out print dissemination entirely.”

Q7. What needs to be done to strengthen GPO’s digital preservation efforts?

The most common response to this question was more collaboration. Libraries want GPO 

to increase coordination with NARA, LC, and originating agencies at the federal level; with 

non-governmental organizations, like the HathiTrust; and with existing networks, like the 

Digital Preservation Network, and the National Digital Stewardship Alliance. Libraries also 

want GPO to work with depository libraries to develop a cooperative digital preservation 

plan. 

The second most common comment related to funding for a variety of activities: more 

funding from Congress to support GPO’s digital preservation efforts; funding for depository 

libraries to play a more active role in digital preservation; more funding for FDsys; and 

more funding to harvest, catalog, and preserve federal agency web content. Most 

respondents believe that additional funding should come from Congress, but some thought 

that GPO and depository library resources should be shifted from traditional activities to 

digital preservation. 

The third most common comment was regarding FDsys. Libraries want a robust FDsys, 

with an expanded collection and sustainable funding. 

The next most common comment was related to web harvesting and archiving. Libraries 

suggest requiring executive branch agencies to submit digital content to GPO, or 

alternatively, that GPO should work with originating agencies to establish a process for 

submitting digital content to GPO. Respondents also want GPO to increase automated 

harvesting of agency websites, and supplement these efforts with manual harvesting. 

Quotes from respondents illustrating these ideas include: 

 “There is a need to continue the cooperation with NARA, document producing 

agencies and non-governmental groups like Internet Archive, HathiTrust, 

universities and others to find and digitally preserve documents.”

 “Congress needs to understand that without adequate resources to ensure digital 

preservation, the U.S. will suffer catastrophic losses of government information in 

the future.”

 “A strengthened FDsys could improve the effectiveness of digital preservation 

almost immediately and would help to organize national efforts to preserve 

multiple instances of digital reproductions.”

 “FDsys is a good beginning, but as with all technical infrastructure, constant 

planning and updating/improving is required to grow/scale, to provide good 

access, to meet the expectations of the public.” 
133

 “GPO needs to decide on a method of systematic capture, migration, and 

permanently preservation of all products of government (including, but not limited 

to, websites).”

 “Agencies should be required to notify GPO when new information is published to 

the web.” 

Q8. How can GPO work to strengthen the relationship between the agency and the 

FDLP libraries?

The overwhelming majority of responses to this question focused on continued and more 

communication and collaboration between GPO and the depository libraries. Libraries 

want more two-way communication. Libraries want more e-newsletters and online 

discussion forums that address changes in FDLP policy, and would like more input on 

policy changes. 

Depository libraries also want more in-person and on-line training and more opportunities 

to participate in meetings and conferences remotely. Libraries also would like GPO to 

collaborate with other agencies to deliver training on utilizing federal databases. 

Libraries also raised a number of governance and program issues that are causing tension 

between GPO and the depository libraries, including lack of flexibility in interpretation of 

Title 44, the regional structure, and Needs and Offers policies and procedures. Libraries 

also want flexibility in building and maintaining collections and want to explore new 

models for the program. Examples of ideas for new models included multi-state regionals 

and new relationships between the regionals and selectives. Libraries who are struggling 

to stay in the program want more support from GPO. 

Some quotes illustrating the ideas expressed by respondents include: 

 “Offer training opportunities - the archived chats and webinars are great. Look for 

partners to also host electronic documents so GPO is not seen as the "only" 

provider or source. Give advance notice and promote "buy-in" for changes in FDLP 

tools, like the item selection process.”

 “GPO needs to listen to the needs of FDLP libraries in light of current staffing and 

budget restrictions. The current model is based on a library model that no longer 

exists for most libraries.”

 “More respect from Congress and higher visibility from public (that would come 

from more thorough digital access).”

 “GPO has no way of forcing a library to follow the mandates of Title 44. The only 

avenue for GPO is to expel a library from the program (and with the number of 

libraries that have already left and the large amount of government information 

available through the Web, that is not a terrifying prospect for a library). GPO 

cannot make a library give up the federal property it states the materials it 

disseminates are, and neither Title 44 or GPO recognize the fact that a library 

commits itself to a costly endeavor of receiving and maintaining this federal 
134

property. (The closest Title 44 comes to this is that a selective library must keep 

materials it receives for a minimum of five years).”

Q9. What other options should be considered by Congress to meet the legislative 

goal of providing the American public access to authentic government information?

The issue of funding was the most common response to this question. Libraries want GPO 

to have sufficient funding to continue to provide free and permanent public access to 

government information. Specifically, libraries indicated support for additional funding for 

FDsys and the FDLP. 

Libraries would also like congressional funding of depository libraries, particularly 

regionals, to support staffing; space; and provision of necessary software and hardware, 

including high-speed Internet access. 

Another popular comment was the Congress should update Title 44 to respond to changing 

technologies and user needs. A smaller number of respondents expressed the opinion that 

revisions to Title 44 are not necessary; the law provides flexibility and GPO should take 

advantage of that flexibility in implementation. 

Some quotes to illustrate these points include: 

 “Congress needs to understand, honor, and devote resources to meeting the core 

Constitutional commitment of providing the citizens of our democracy with free 

and unfettered access to government information.”

 “Revise Title 44 so that the FDLP structure becomes a flexible one. For example, 

regional libraries should have the ability to share responsibilities with other 

regional libraries across state lines. Because more government documents are born 

digitally, FDLP libraries should not be restricted to geographic boundaries.”

 “The most important action by Congress is to fund the operation. If that is done, 

everything else will follow.”

 “Help GPO offer assistance with electronic equipment for FDLP libraries. Many 

libraries are looking to de-clutter their collections and reducing paper copies is a 

big way to do just that. Digitization is the way to go for online government 

information.”
135

APPENDIX F: GPO OVERHEAD CHARGES TO OPERATING UNITS FY 2011($thousands) 

Components of GPO 

Overhead

Plant 

Ops

Official 

Journals 

of Gov’t SID

Digital 

Media/Creative 

Services

Customer 

Services

Pubs & 

Info 

Sales

Agency 

Distr.

Services

Library 

and 

Content

Mgt

Svcs

Other 

Ops Total

Executive Offices

 

2,010 162 

 

3,225 126 

 

595 

 

190 

 

106 

 

405 

 

101 

 

6,920 

Quality Assurance

 

172 14 

 

276 11 

 

51 

 

16 

 

9 

 

35 

 

9 

 

593 

Mandated Programs

 

1,470 118 

 

2,361 92 

 

436 

 

139 

 

77 

 

296 

 

74 

 

5,063 

National Account 

Managers and Program 

Analysis

 

658 53 

 

1,056 41 

 

195 

 

62 

 

35 

 

133 

 

33 

 

2,266 

Finance and 

Administration

 

4,471 360 

 

7,178 279 

 

1,323 

 

424 

 

238 

 

901 

 

224 

 

15,398 

Acquisitions

 

723 58 

 

1,161 45 

 

214 

 

69 

 

38 

 

146 

 

36 

 

2,490 

Info Tech and Systems

 

10,817 871 

 

17,369 675 

 

3,201 

 

1,025 

 

570 

 

2,181 

 

541 

 

37,250 

Human Capital

 

2,693 217 

 

4,324 168 

 

797 

 

255 

 

142 

 

543 

 

135 

 

9,274 

Security Services

 

3,454 278 

 

5,547 216 

 

1,022 

 

327 

 

182 

 

696 

 

173 

 

11,895 

Facilities

 

25,748 166 

 

6,533 738 

 

2,281 

 

782 

 

2,884 

 

344 

 

39,476 

Other (313) (28) (506) (20) (93) (30) (17) (64) (16) (1,087)

Total GPO Overhead

 

51,903 2,269 

 

48,524 2,371 

 

10,022 

 

3,259 

 

1,380 

 

8,156 

 

1,654 

 

129,538 
136

This page intentionally left blank. 
137

APPENDIX G: SUMMARY GPO FINANCIAL DATA FY 2008 – FY 2012 

($thousands) 

Business Unit FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11

FY12 

Annualized*

Plant Operations

Revenue 159,034 156,886 158,549 151,117 140,613

Expenses 106,365 109,683 107,482 106,788 86,483

Contribution Margin 52,669 47,203 51,067 44,329 45,966

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 34,627 54,842 55,022 51,902 50,958

Net Income 18,042 (7,639) (3,955) (7,573) (4,992)

Official Journals of Gov't In Plant**

Revenue 9,990 9,997 11,469 10,786

Expenses 9,221 9,753 9,632 7,242

Contribution Margin 769 244 1,211 1,554

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 2,540 1,963 2,328 2,269

Net Income (1,771) (1,719) (1,058) (928)

Customer Services

Revenue 532,585 545,081 500,177 397,116 331,789

Expenses 524,968 535,690 492,138 395,856 327,845

Contribution Margin 7,617 9,391 8,039 1,260 3,944

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 12,764 13,944 10,885 10,021 8,475

Net Income (5,147) (4,553) (2,846) (8,761) (4,531)

SID

Revenue 300,566 173,552 202,529 209,366 179,534

Expenses 209,677 109,044 131,274 131,860 109,318

Contribution Margin 90,889 64,508 71,255 77,506 70,216

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 56,155 37,983 46,386 48,526 45,001

Net Income 34,734 26,525 24,869 28,980 25,215

Publications and Info Sales

Revenue 15,866 14,101 13,245 11,366 9,397

Expenses 14,975 13,642 12,449 12,677 10,119

Contribution Margin 891 459 796 (1,311) (722)

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 3,128 4,313 2,830 3,260 2,554

Net Income (2,237) (3,854) (2,034) (4,571) (3,276)

Creative/Digital Media Svcs

Revenue 4,216 5,606 3,804 3,623 2,689

Expenses 3,705 4,465 4,472 3,511 2,965

Contribution Margin 511 1,141 (668) (490) (275)

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 1,042 2,978 2,262 2,372 1,947

Net Income (531) (1,837) (2,930) (2,862) (2,222)
138

Business Unit FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11

FY12 

Annualized*

Agency Distributions

Revenue 5,819 5,918 6,169 6,144 5,499

Expenses 5,911 6,039 6,367 6,188 5,067

Contribution Margin (93) (121) (198) (44) 432

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 1,534 1,659 1,337 1,378 1,184

Net Income (1,627) (1,780) (1,535) (1,422) (752)

Library Services

Revenue 31,732 31,859 34,144 37,627 32,853

Expenses 25,371 24,736 26,445 29,470 26,398

Contribution Margin 6,361 7,123 1,699 8,157 6,455

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 6,361 7,123 7,699 8,157 6,455

Net Income 0 0 0 0 0

Other Operations

Revenue 10,613 6,845 14,301 8,339 4,118

Expenses 5,652 7,676 13,398 6,523 4,951

Contribution Margin 4,961 (831) 903 1,816 (833)

Actual GPO Overhead Charge 1,596 3,026 1,757 1,650 1,387

Net Income 3,365 (3,857) (854) 166 (2,220)

Eliminations*** (18,001) (15,781) (14,578) (15,058) (14,678)

Total Revenue 1,042,430 934,057 928,337 821,109 702,600

Total Expenses 896,624 820,196 803,778 703,131 580,387

Total Contribution Margin 163,806 129,642 139,137 132,434 126,737

Total GPO Overhead 117,207 128,408 130,141 129,535 120,443

Total Operating Net Income 46,599 1,234 8,996 2,899 6,294

*Annualization is based on actual data available through August 2012. 

**Official Journals of Government operations were part of the Plant Operations business unit. 

***Eliminations are required to adjust revenue and expenses for sales between GPO business units. The most 

frequent transactions that generate eliminations relate to the manufacturing/printing of publications (Plant 

Operations) or purchasing of publications (Customer Service) for: (1) inventory for the Publication and 

Information Sales program for subsequent sale to the public; (2) Salaries and Expenses program copies for 

distribution primarily to depository libraries; and (3) publications for internal GPO use. 
139

APPENDIX H: GPO PROJECTION AND ASSUMPTIONS 

As noted under Finding IV-2, the GPO has performed a projection to estimate the financial 

implications of continued declines in print demand and the timeframe within which actions 

must be taken to ensure the continued financial health of the agency. Based on this 

projection, GPO concludes that it has seven years until it will run out of cash in FY 2020. In 

the meantime, the agency would have cash available to offset operating losses and to fund 

investment at current levels from the revolving fund through FY 2019. (Note: GPO provided 

data only through FY 2018.) 

To inform the interpretation of GPO’s projection, important aspects of the projection model 

are reviewed and the projection assumptions are presented. The projection data table is 

provided at the end of this appendix. 

Projection Model 

Important aspects of the GPO projection model are reviewed to facilitate review of the 

projection data table provided at the end of this appendix. 

Base Year 

GPO bases its projections on revenue estimates in FY 2012 budget instead of FY 2012 

annualized revenue figures, except in the case of Customer Services. With the exception of 

Customer Services, the FY 2012 budget revenue estimates are lower than annualized FY 

2012 revenues. Customer Services (procured printing) revenues were greatly overestimated in the FY 2012 budget. Therefore, a modified (lower) estimate of FY 2012 

Customer Services revenues is used as the base year figure for projection. 

Projections at the Business Unit Level 

GPO projects business unit revenues, expenses (direct and indirect), and contribution 

margin (revenues minus expenses). GPO’s model does not allow for projecting the 

operating net income for individual business units. When the model was last updated 

(early in FY 2012) it was not known how the savings from the buyout would be distributed 

across overhead components and business units. Without this information, neither an 

overhead charge nor net income (contribution margin minus overhead charge) could be 

projected for individual business units. Once FY 2012 is closed and the model is updated 

for FY 2013, expenses and savings from the buyout can be built into business unit and 

overhead component numbers allowing for a projection of net income at the business unit 

level. 

Projecting GPO’s Net Operating Income

For the reasons noted above, projected increases in expenses (salaries and operating 

expenses) and the savings from the buyout are added and subtracted, respectively, from 

the total expense base to obtain total net operating income for GPO. The projection 

employs the estimated minimum cost-savings from the buyout ($30 million) included in 

the FY 2012 budget before the full savings and their distribution were known. 
140

Projecting GPO’s Cash Flow 

Cash flow, which contributes to the total cash that GPO will have available to offset losses 

and fund investments, is calculated as follows: 

 Remove State Department capital—the State Department provides capital for 

investment in passport production in addition to the price it pays per passport. This 

investment capital may only be used to fund investment in passport production 

capabilities and is kept separate from funds in the revolving fund that are available 

to fund other business operations. 

 Add depreciation of investments—as a matter of accounting practice, the calculation 

of cash flow includes scheduled depreciation of past investments. 

 Add savings from improved balance sheet management—recoupment of 

chargebacks from prior year business is counted as increases in cash flow. 

While total net operating income turns negative in FY 2015, cash flow remains positive 

through FY 2017. Even as cash flow declines, cash remains available to offset operating 

losses and make investments through FY 2019. 

Projection Assumptions 

For ease of review, projection assumptions are grouped into three categories: business unit 

revenues; other revenue sources; and expenses. These assumptions are presented below. 

Business Unit Revenues 

Plant Operations—Revenues drop by 2 percent each year through FY 2018, while fixed 

costs are held constant. 

Customer Services—Revenues drop by 4 percent in FY 2014 and 5 percent each year 

through FY 2018. 

Security and Intelligent Documents (SID)—SID revenues increase by 5 percent in FY 2014, 

10 percent in FY 2016 and FY 2017, and remain the same in FY 2018. The increases in FY 

2016 and FY 2017 reflect the expected renewal of passports issued during the surge in 

demand in FY 2006 and FY 2007. (Note: this projection does not include additional 

revenues that are expected from the higher price charged for the next generation passport 

due to launch in FY 2015 or FY 2016.) Revenue from smart cards is assumed to remain 

constant during the projection period. 

Official Journals of Government—Revenues drop by 5 percent in FY 2013, 2 percent each 

year for FY 2014 and FY 2015, and then remain constant through FY 2018. 

Publication and Information Sales—Revenues drop by 10 percent each year through FY 

2017 and then remain constant in FY 2018. 

All other operations—assumed to remain constant. 
141

Other Revenue Sources 

Appropriations to revolving fund—assumed that GPO will not receive appropriations to the 

revolving fund. (Note: this appropriation ($3.9 million in FY 12) has been funding GPO’s 

investments in FDsys and IT systems.) 

Lease revenue—no increase in lease revenue 

Return on investments—no return on investment. 

Expenses 

Salaries—increase by 1 percent in FY 2013 and then 3 percent each year through FY 2018. 

Utilities—increase 3 percent each year through FY 2018. 

All other costs—increase 1 percent each year through FY 2018. 

Cost-reduction measures—Except for savings from improved balance sheet management 

(continued reduction in chargeback balance) noted earlier, the projection assumes no costsavings beyond those to be realized from the employee buyout. 

Headcount—held constant at 1,925. (Note: headcount was 1,879 as of 10/10/12.) 
142

Projection Data Table ($ thousands)

Business Unit FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011

FY2012 

Annualized*

FY2012 

Budget

FY2013 

Budget

FY2014 

Projected

FY2015 

Projected

FY2016 

Projected

FY2017 

Projected

FY2018 

Projected

Plant Operations

Revenue 159,034 156,886 158,550 151,117 140,613 147,759 141,809 139,012 136,231 133,507 130,837 128,220

Expenses 106,365 109,690 107,482 106,781 94,832 102,029 93,410 94,448 94,031 93,622 93,222 92,830

Contribution Margin 52,669 47,196 51,068 44,336 45,781 45,730 48,399 44,564 42,201 39,884 37,614 35,390

Official Journals In Plant**

Revenue 9,989 9,998 11,468 10,786 11,222 10,727 9,915 9,915 9,915 9,915 9,915

Expenses 9,220 9,759 10,258 9,254 9,736 9,932 8,602 8,602 8,602 8,602 8,602

Contribution Margin 769 239 1,210 1,532 1,486 795 1,313 1,313 1,313 1,313 1,313

Customer Services

Revenue 532,585 545,081 500,176 397,114 331,789 304,135 318,518 302,592 287,462 273,089 259,435

Expenses 524,968 535,690 492,136 395,854 327,845 301,193 314,732 298,995 284,045 269,843 256,351

Contribution Margin 7,617 9,391 8,040 1,260 3,944 2,942 3,786 3,597 3,417 3,246 3,084

SID

Revenue 300,566 173,552 202,529 209,365 179,534 169,380 224,467 177,849 177,849 195,634 215,197 215,197

Expenses 209,677 109,038 131,272 131,863 109,378 111,709 141,836 117,294 117,294 129,024 141,926 141,926

Contribution Margin 90,889 64,514 71,257 77,502 70,156 57,671 82,631 60,555 60,555 66,610 73,271 73,271

Pubs and Info Sales

Revenue 15,866 14,101 13,244 11,366 9,397 11,830 8,930 9,582 8,624 7,762 7,762 7,762

Expenses 14,975 13,642 12,450 12,679 10,119 12,430 10,034 10,068 9,061 8,155 8,155 8,155

Contribution Margin 891 459 794 (1,313) (722) (600) (1,104) (486) (437) (394) (394) (394)

Creative and Digital 

Media Services

Revenue 4,216 5,606 3,804 3,621 2,689 3,898 2,772 3,898 3,898 3,898 3,898 3,898

Expenses 3,705 4,465 4,476 4,116 2,973 4,176 2,136 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176 4,176

Contribution Margin 511 1,141 (672) (495) (284) (278) 636 (278) (278) (278) (278) (278)
143

Business Unit FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011

FY2012 

Annualized*

FY2012 

Budget

FY2013 

Budget

FY2014 

Projected

FY2015 

Projected

FY2016 

Projected

FY2017 

Projected

FY2018 

Projected

Agency Distributions

Revenue 5,819 5,917 6,170 6,143 5,499 6,700 5,925 5,499 5,499 5,499 5,499 5,499

Expenses 5,906 6,047 6,375 6,186 5,057 7,166 5,892 5,067 5,067 5,067 5,067 5,067

Contribution Margin -87 -130 -205 -43 432 -466 33 432 432 432 432 432

Library Services

Revenue 31,732 31,860 34,141 37,631 32,853 36,108 34,728 36,108 36,108 36,108 36,108 36,108

Expenses 25,374 24,737 26,443 29,474 26,398 27,612 29,981 27,612 27,612 27,612 27,612 27,612

Contribution Margin 6,358 7,123 7,698 8,157 6,455 8,496 4,747 8,496 8,496 8,496 8,496 8,496

Eliminations*** (18,001) (15,781) (14,578) (15,058) (14,678) 0 0 (16,146) (16,146) (16,146) (16,146) (16,146)

Revenue Group 

Contribution Margin

Revenue 1,031,817 927,211 914,034 812,767 698,482 733,493 684,234 664,570 663,638 666,158 649,887

Expenses 872,969 796,748 775,815 682,153 571,188 594,414 565,853 548,693 544,158 542,458 528,573

Contribution Margin 158,848 130,463 138,219 130,614 127,294 139,079 118,381 115,877 119,480 123,701 121,314

Total GPO Overhead

117,207 128,396 130,132 129,536 120,448 135,319 123,447 135,319 135,319 135,319 135,319 135,319

Profit/(Loss) from 

Operations

41,641 2,067 8,087 1,078 6,845 15,632 (16,938) (19,442) (15,839) (11,618) (14,005)

Other Operations

Revenue 10,613 6,845 14,302 8,338 4,118 3,984 4,678 3,984 3,984 3,984 3,984 3,984

Direct Expenses 5,652 7,675 13,396 6,521 6,696 10,049 309 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000

Contribution Margin 4,961 (830) 906 1,817 (2,578) 6,065 4,369 (1,016) (1,016) (1,016) (1,016) (1,016)

Agency Profit/(Loss) 46,602 1,237 8,993 2,895 4,268 20,001 (17,954) (20,458) (16,855) (12,634) (15,021)

Expense Increases 8,899 15,317 21,928 28,737 35,750

Buyout reduction from 

base

(30,000) (30,000) (30,000) (30,000) (30,000)

Net Operating 

Income

20,001 3,148 (5,775) (8,782) (11,371) (20,771)
144

Business Unit FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011

FY2012 

Annualized*

FY2012 

Budget

FY2013 

Budget

FY2014 

Projected

FY2015 

Projected

FY2016 

Projected

FY2017 

Projected

FY2018 

Projected

Adjustment for Cash

Remove State Dept. 

Capital (20,700) (4,180) (4,180) (4,180) (4,180) (4,180)

Add Depreciation 22,343 22,383 22,383 22,383 22,383 22,383

Balance Sheet Mgt 3,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000

Net Adjustment for 

Cash 4,643 20,203 19,203 19,203 19,203 19,203

Total Cash Flow 24,644 23,351 13,428 10,421 7,832 (1,568)

Cash Available for 

Investment 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000

*Annualization is based on actual data available through August 2012. 

**Official Journals of Government operations were part of the Plant Operations business unit. 

***Eliminations are required to adjust revenue and expenses for sales between GPO business units. The most frequent transactions that generate 

eliminations relate to the manufacturing/printing of publications (Plant Operations) or purchasing of publications (Customer Service) for: (1) inventory 

for the Publication and Information Sales program for subsequent sale to the public; (2) Salaries and Expenses program copies for distribution 

primarily to depository libraries; and (3) publications for internal GPO use. 
145

This page intentionally left blank. 
146

APPENDIX I: SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 

ARTICLES 

Dartmouth College Records Management. “The Document Life Cycle: Definitions, 

Supporting Technologies, and Applications.” 

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~library/recmgmt/forms/DocLifeCycle.pdf

Durant, David, “The Federal Depository Library Program: Anachronism or Necessity?” in 

North Carolina Libraries. North Carolina Library Association. Spring 2003. 

Fernandez, Sergio, and Hal G. Rainey. “Managing Successful Organizational Change in the 

Public Sector: An Agenda for Research and Practice.” Public Administration Review 66

(March/April 2006).

Fyffe, Richard, Deborah Ludwid, and Beth Forrest Warner. “Digital Preservation: A 

Campus-Wide Perspective.” EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, Research Bulletins

2005, no. 18 (August 30, 2005). 

Fyffe, Richard, Deborah Ludwid, and Beth Forrest Warner. “Digital Preservation in Action: 

Toward a Campus-Wide Program.” EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, Research 

Bulletins 2005, no. 19 (September 13, 2005). 

Jacobs, James A., and Melody Kelly. “The Future of the FDLP: From Conversation to 

Confrontation: Backtalk." Library Journal. (December 13, 2011). 

http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/home/893063264/the_future_of_the_fdlp.html.csp

Jacobs, James A. “Who Do You Trust? The Authentication Problem.” Free Government 

Information. Posted on November 2, 2005. http://freegovinfo.info/authenticity

Johnson, Mark W., Clayton M. Christensen, and Henning Kagermann. “Reinventing Your 

Business Model.” In Rebuilding Your Business Model. Boston: Harvard University Press, 

2011. 

Kaplan, Saul. “Business Models Aren’t Just For Business.” HBR Blog Network, April 19, 2011. 

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/04/business_models_arent_just_for.html

Keiser, Barbie E. “Public Printer Goes to the Hill—GPO at a Crossroads.” Information Today, 

Inc. Posted on May 16, 2011. http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Public-

%3Cb%3EPrinter%3C/b%3E-Goes-to-the-HillGPO-at-a-Crossroads-75499.asp

“Lost in Cyberspace.” The Economist, Technology Quarterly Q3 (2012) 

http://www.economist.com/node/21560992, 
147

Rein, Lisa. “Government Printing Office Has New Strategy to Keep the Presses Rolling.” 

Washington Post. October 26, 2012. 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/government-printing-office-has-newstrategies-to-keep-presses-rolling/2012/10/26/d76dc0f4-1ef8-11e2-9746-

908f727990d8_story.html

EXECUTIVE BRANCH DIRECTIVES 

Obama, Barack. Promoting Efficient Spending. Executive Order 13589. November 9, 2011. 

Office of Management and Budget. Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments And 

Agencies: Procurement of Printing and Duplicating through the Government Printing 

Office. Washington, D.C.: May 3, 2002. 

Office of Management and Budget, and National Archives and Records Administration. 

Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies and Independent 

Agencies: Managing Government Records Directive. Washington, D.C.: August 2012. 

EXTERNAL STUDIES 

Association of Research Libraries, White Paper: Strategic Directions for the Federal 

Depository Library Program. Washington, D.C.: April 2009. 

Booz-Allan & Hamilton. Management Audit of the Government Printing Office. Washington, 

D.C.: May 21, 1998. 

Congressional Research Service, Public Printing Reform: Issues and Actions (98-687; June 

17, 2003), by Harold C. Relyea. 

Congressional Research Service, American Law Division. Memorandum to House Committee 

on Administration on GPO Authority over Regional Depository Libraries. November 6, 

2007. 

Congressional Research Service. Congressional Printing: Background and Issues for Congress 

(R40897; February 9, 2011), by R. Eric Petersen and Amber Hope Wilhelm. 

Congressional Research Service. Federal Depository Library Program: Issues for Congress 

(R42457; March 29, 2012), by Petersen, R. Eric, Jennifer E. Manning, and Christina M. 

Bailey. 

Housewright, Ross, and Roger C. Schonfeld. Modeling a Sustainable Future for the United 

States Federal Depository Library Program’s Network of Libraries in the 21st Century: 

Final Report of Ithaka S+R to the Government Printing Office. Ithaka S+R. Washington, 

D.C.: May 2011. 
148

Ithaka S+R. Documents for a Digital Democracy: A Model for the Federal Depository Library 

Program in the 21st Century Interim Summary. Washington, D.C.: Ithaka S+R, October 

2009. 

National Archives and Records Administration. Strategic Human Capital Plan 2009-2014. 

Washington, D.C.: 2009. 

Pew Internet and American Life Project. The Pew Research Center 

http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences/MainReport.aspx?view=all

Office of Technology Assessment. Informing the Nation: Federal Information Dissemination 

in an Electronic Age. Washington, D.C.: October 1988 

U.S. Congress. Joint Committee on Printing. Oversight Hearing on Consolidation of 

Department of Defense Printing Services. 102nd Cong., 2nd sess., August 4, 1992. 

U.S. Congress. Joint Committee on Printing. Review of the Defense Printing Service. 103rd

Cong., 1st sess., July 15, 1993. 

U.S. Geological Survey. United States Geological Survey Workforce Planning Desk Guide. 

Washington, D.C.: April 2012. 

U.S. House of Representatives. House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight. GPO—

Issues and Challenges: How Will GPO Transition to the Future? 122th Cong., 1st sess., May 

11, 2011. 

General Accounting Office. Report to the Chairman, Joint Committee on Printing of the United 

States. Agency Printing Plants—Choosing the Least Costly Option. PLRD-81-31. 

Washington, D.C.: June 19, 1981. 

General Accounting Office. The Government Printing Office’s Future Direction. Testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Procurement and Printing Committee on House 

Administration, House of Representatives, U.S. Congress. GAO/T-GGD-89-25. 

Washington, D.C.: May 23, 1989. 

General Accounting Office. Government Printing Office: General Management Review. 

Testimony before the Joint Committee on Printing. GAO/T-GGD-90-57. Washington, 

D.C.: July 19, 1990. 

General Accounting Office. Monopoly-Like Status Contributes to Inefficiency and 

Ineffectiveness. GGD-90-107. Washington, D.C.: September 1990. 

General Accounting Office. Defense Management: Printing Operations at the Department of 

Defense. Testimony before the Joint Committee on Printing, U.S. Congress. GAO/TNSIAD-93-19. Washington, D.C.: July 15, 1993. 
149

General Accounting Office. Legal and Regulatory Framework Is Outdated for New 

Technological Environment. GAO/NSIAD-94-157. Washington, D.C.: April 1994. 

General Accounting Office. Information Management: Electronic Dissemination of 

Government Publications. GAO-01-428. Washington, D.C.: March 2001. 

General Accounting Office. Review of Potential Merger of the Library of Congress Police 

and/or the Government Printing Office Police with the U.S. Capitol Police. GAO-02-792R. 

Washington, D.C.: July 5, 2002. 

General Accounting Office. Decision on Bureau of Land Management: Payment of Pocatello 

Field Office Photocopying Costs. B-290901. Washington, D.C.: December 16, 2002. 

General Accounting Office. Government Printing Office: Advancing GPO’s Transformation 

Effort through Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-04-85. Washington, D.C.: 

October 2003. 

General Accounting Office. Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce 

Planning. GAO-04-39. Washington, D.C.: December 2003. 

General Accounting Office. Results-Oriented Government: GPRA Has Established a Solid 

Foundation for Achieving Greater Results. GAO-04-38.Washington, D.C.: March 2004. 

General Accounting Office. Government Printing Office: Technological Changes Create 

Transformation Opportunities. Testimony before the Committee on Administration, 

House of Representatives. GAO-04-729T. Washington, D.C.: April 28, 2004. 

General Accounting Office. Government Printing Office: Actions to Strengthen and Sustain 

GPO’s Transformation. GAO-04-830. Washington, D.C.: June 2004. 

Government Accountability Office. Space Shuttle: Actions Needed to Better Position NASA to 

Sustain Its Workforce through Retirement. GAO-05-230. Washington, D.C.: March 2005. 

Government Accountability Office. Government Printing Office: Issues Faced in Obtaining a 

New Facility. GAO-09-392R. Washington, D.C.: February 20, 2009. 

Government Accountability Office. Personal ID Verification: Agencies Should Set a Higher 

Priority on Using the Capabilities of Standardized Identification Cards. GAO-11-751. 

Washington, D.C.: September 2011. 

Office of Personnel Management. Key Components of a Strategic Human Capital Plan. 

Washington, D.C.: September 2005.
150

GPO Documents 

Government Printing Office. Pay Systems in the Government Printing Office. Government 

Printing Office Instruction 640.6A. Washington, D.C.: March 30, 1979. 

Government Printing Office. Report to the Congress: Study to Identify Measures Necessary 

for a Successful Transition to a More Electronic Federal Depository Library Program. 

Washington, D.C.: June 1996. 

Government Printing Office. GPO and OMB Announce a New Compact for Government 

Printing. Washington, D.C.: June 6, 2003. 

Government Printing Office, and National Archives and Records Administration. 

Memorandum between the Government Printing Office and the National Archives and 

Records Administration. Washington, D.C.: August 2003; Revised: October 2012. 

Government Printing Office. Summary of Meeting on the Future of the GPO Sales Program. 

Washington, D.C.: March 16, 2004. 

Government Printing Office. Superintendent of Documents Policy Statement, Withdrawal of 

Federal Information Products from GPO's Superintendent of Documents (SuDoc) 

Programs. Washington, D.C.: September 26, 2006. 

Government Printing Office. Regional Depository Libraries in the 21st Century: A Preliminary 

Assessment. Final Report to the Joint Committee on Printing. Washington, D.C.: 

December 2008. 

Government Printing Office. Federal Depository Library Program Strategic Plan, 2009-2014. 

Washington, D.C.: April 17, 2009. 

Government Printing Office. Memorandum on Reinventing Our Operational Strategy in Doc.-

Size Production. Washington, D.C.: April 5, 2010. 

Government Printing Office. Keeping America Informed: 150 Years of Service to the Nation.

Washington, D.C.: 2011. 

Government Printing Office. Memorandum on Manufacturing Technologies to Address 

Shifting Black and White Demand. Washington, D.C.: May 9, 2011. 

Government Printing Office. Authenticity of Electronic Federal Government Publications. 

Washington, D.C.: June 13, 2011. 

Government Printing Office. Strategic Plan Fiscal Year 2011 Accomplishments. Washington, 

D.C.: October 2011. 
151

Government Printing Office, Office of Inspector General. Semiannual Report to 

Congress: April 1, 2011 through September 30, 2011. Washington D.C.: November 2011. 

Government Printing Office. GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2012 – 2016, Customer Centric and 

Employee Driven. Washington, D.C.: November 3, 2011. 

Government Printing Office. Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2013. Washington, D.C.: January 

2012. 

Government Printing Office. 2011 Customer Satisfaction Survey: Results and Analysis. 

Washington, D.C.: January 2012. 

Government Printing Office. Federal Digital System, FDsys Business Case Plan, Version 

Number: 1.0. Washington, D.C.: February 23, 2012. 

Government Printing Office. FY 2012 Mid-Year Strategic Plan Progress Report. Washington, 

D.C.: April, 2012. 

Government Printing Office. Programs, Strategy and Technology Strategic Plan. Washington, 

D.C.: June 25, 2012. 

Government Printing Office. GPO’s Strategic Plan FY 2013 – 2017, Customer Centric and 

Employee Driven. Washington, D.C.: October 3, 2012. 

Government Printing Office. Federal Depository Library Program Forecasting Study: 

Preservation Themes. Washington, D.C.: October 17, 2012. 

Government Printing Office, Office of Inspector General. Semiannual Report to 

Congress: April 1, 2012 through September 30, 2012. Washington D.C.: November 2012. 

Prepared Remarks from Robert C. Tapella. GPO's Federal Digital System (FDsys): Open and 

Transparent Government. 102nd American Association of Law Libraries Annual Meeting 

and Conference. Washington, D.C.: July 27, 2009. 

OTHER REPORTS

Interagency Council on Printing and Publications Services. Letter responding to GPO 

proposal for surcharge and fee increases. September 15, 2009. 

Ryan, Tom W. and Jeff Musto. The People’s Printer: Time for a Reawakening. Center for 

Study of Responsive Law. Washington, D.C.: August 2012. 

Harper, Gregg, Chairman, Joint Committee on Printing, U.S. Congress. Letter to the 

Comptroller General of the United States. Washington, D.C.: April 24, 2012. 
152

APPENDIX J: GLOSSARY OF TERMS 

Buyout – The act of an employer making a single prepayment to an employee to induce the 

employee’s voluntary separation from the organization. 

Chargeback - The reversal of a prior outbound transfer of funds from a consumer's bank 

account, line of credit, or credit card. 

Cloud Storage - A service model in which data is maintained, managed, and backed up 

remotely by a third party and made available to users over a network (typically the 

Internet). 

Congressional Record - The official record of the proceedings of the United States 

Congress. 

Contribution Margin- A financial term specific to GPO. Contribution margin equals 

business unit revenues minus business unit expenses (direct and indirect). Contribution 

margin is the margin available to contribute to GPO overhead costs. 

Cryptographic Hash Value - An algorithm that takes an arbitrary block of data and 

returns a fixed-size bit string, the (cryptographic) hash value, such that an (accidental or 

intentional) change to the data will (with very high probability) change the hash value.

Dark Archive - A collection of historical records accessible by only those individuals with a 

pre-determined security clearance. 

Depository Library - A library designated to receive United States government 

documents. 

Federal Acquisition Regulation - The body of laws that govern the U.S. Federal 

Government's procurement process. It is published as Chapter 1 of Title 48 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations. 

Federal Register - The official daily journal of the federal government of the United States 

that makes available to the public the rules, regulations, and documents generated by the 

executive branch of the government. 

Fugitive Document- Documents published by federal agencies that are eligible for the 

Federal Depository Library Program, but are not included in the program.

Gain Sharing - Various incentive plans introduced by organizations that provide direct or 

indirect payments to employees that depend on the quantity, quality, accuracy, timeliness, 

or other desired organizational or individual outcome. Gain sharing incentives are in 

addition to employees' regular salary and bonuses. 
153

Global Entry Program - A pilot program that allows pre-approved, low-risk air travelers 

to receive expedited clearance upon arrival into the United States. 

Metadata - Metadata is data that describes other data, which can make finding and 

working with particular instances of data easier. “Meta” is a prefix that in most information 

technology usages means "an underlying definition or description." 

Net Operating Income - The difference between contribution margin and GPO overhead 

charge. Positive net operating income adds to the cash available to GPO to make 

investments and to offset operating losses if necessary. 

Procured Printing Regulation - The Printing Procurement Regulation is issued by the 

Public Printer, pursuant to the authority vested in the Public Printer by Title 44, United 

States Code. It (i) prescribes uniform policies and procedures for the procurement of 

printing, binding, related supplies, and related services; and, (ii) provides guidance to 

Agency Publishing Services personnel in applying those policies and procedures. 

Persistent Uniform Resource Locators (PURL) - A URL that points to another URL. 

PURLs are used when document pages are expected to be moved to different locations 

from time to time. The PURL is maintained as the official URL for that resource, and when 

that PURL is requested, a PURL server redirects the browser to the actual current URL. 

Regional Depository Library – There are two types of depository libraries: regional and 

selective. All publications authorized for distribution through the FDLP are to be sent to 

regionals and must be retained unless superseded. Regional libraries provide interlibrary 

loan, reference, and other services to the selective depository libraries it serves. Regional 

libraries must also assist selective libraries in disposing of unwanted items. Each state may 

have no more than two regional libraries; most have only one. 

Revolving Fund - A fund or account that remains available to finance an organization's 

continuing operations without any fiscal year limitation because the organization 

replenishes the fund by repaying money used from the account. 

Selective Depository Library- There are two types of depository libraries: regional and 

selective. A selective library can choose to receive certain classes of documents from the 

government and must retain them for five years. There may be no more than two selective 

libraries per congressional district. 

Smart Card - plastic cards with an embedded integrated circuit capable of storing and 

processing information. 

Title 44 - Outlines the role of public printing and documents in the United States Code. 

Trusted Traveler Program- A joint Canada-U.S. program designed to let pre-approved, 

low-risk travelers cross the Canada–U.S. border quickly. 
154

Voluntary Separation Incentive Program - Allows agencies that are downsizing or 

restructuring to offer employees lump-sum payments up to $25,000 as an incentive to 

voluntarily separate. In the federal government such incentives are commonly referred to 

as “buyouts.”

XML - XML (Extensible Markup Language) is a flexible way to create common information 

formats and share both the format and the data on the World Wide Web, intranets, and 

elsewhere. XML is “extensible” because the markup symbols are unlimited and selfdefining. 
Top row, left to right:

Copies of the Congressional Record: Government Printing Office

Tablet computer with GPO website on screen: Government Printing Office

Bottom row, left to right:

United States passports: Government Printing Office

GPO headquarters, Building 1: Government Printing Office

 COVER IMAGES CREDITS
 

900 7th Street, N.W.

Suite 600

Washington, D.C. 20001

Phone: (202) 347-3190

Fax: (202) 393-0993

Website: www.napawash.org

National Academy of 

Public Administration ®