Public Relations Spending: Selected Agencies' Activities Supported by Contracts and Public Affairs Staff
Published: 2017-09-12T00:00:00

Fast Facts:
The federal government spends $1.5 billion a year for what is generally called "public relations." How is that money spent?
At the four agencies we reviewed—the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, FEMA, NASA, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services—most public relations spending focused on educating the public about their specific tools, resources, and programs.
For example, CFPB used contracts to raise awareness of its tools to educate and empower consumers to make better financial decisions, and FEMA's contracts and public affairs staff focused on promoting emergency preparedness.

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Agencies communicate with the public regarding their functions, policies, and activities. In September 2016, GAO reported that the federal government spends about $1.5 billion per year on public relations activities, carried out through advertising and public relations contracts and by public affairs employees.
GAO was asked to describe the purposes and reported benefits of federal agencies' public relations investments. This report reviews (1) the activities selected agencies conducted using advertising and public relations contracts and public affairs employees, and their purposes; (2) how the level of resources the agencies devote to these activities has changed over the past decade and factors officials identified as affecting these changes; and (3) how the agencies measure results of these activities.
GAO selected four case study agencies—CFPB, FEMA, NASA, and USCIS—based on factors including obligations for advertising and public relations contracts, numbers of public affairs employees, and agency missions and public interactions. GAO reviewed documentation for contracts valued at or over $150,000 from fiscal years 2012 through 2016; examined staff position descriptions, performance information, and employment data; and interviewed officials at these agencies.
CFPB and the Department of Homeland Security provided technical comments on this report, which were incorporated as appropriate. NASA did not have comments.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: At the agencies GAO examined—the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)—most of the advertising and public relations contracts GAO reviewed and public affairs staff responsibilities focused on informing and educating the public. These agencies' advertising and public relations contract obligations were concentrated in a small number of contracts that supported major agency initiatives and communications services. Specifically,
CFPB: The four largest contracts ($22.6 million out of $32.8 million) focused on increasing public awareness of CFPB's tools and resources related to its statutory responsibility to educate and empower consumers to make better financial decisions.
FEMA: The largest contract ($8.7 million out of $20.7 million) supported the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The agency's role in administering the program includes advertising to encourage people to buy flood insurance. Other high-value contracts promoted emergency preparedness, including the Ready campaign.
NASA: The two largest contracts ($7.6 million out of $17.1 million) supported NASA's Communications Support Services Center, which provides graphics and other services across the agency.
USCIS: The two largest contracts ($18.1 million out of $19.8 million) were for outreach for two immigration-related eligibility verification systems—E-Verify and Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements.
Over the past decade, changes in advertising and public relations contract obligations and public affairs employees varied at the selected agencies due to changes in agency activities and increased use of digital media. For example, contract obligations were relatively stable at NASA and USCIS. CFPB, on the other hand, saw an increase in obligations due to ramping up operations from 2011, when the agency began operations. Variances in FEMA's obligations stemmed primarily from fluctuations in NFIP contracts due to changing priorities. The number of public affairs employees generally increased at the selected agencies, but was relatively stable at NASA. These increases were due to changes in operations and staffing structure. For example, USCIS changed its staffing model to add more lower-level public affairs staff. Officials at three of the four agencies we reviewed noted an increased use of digital media for public outreach, though the effects on contract and staff resources have been mixed.
The agencies measured performance of their activities using web-based and other indicators, such as the number of website visits and length of time spent on a page, and reported using this information to inform decision making. However, agency officials identified challenges in measuring the performance of these activities, including a lack of qualitative data on whether and how information is being used. Selected agencies have taken some steps to address these challenges by, for example, administering surveys to obtain additional feedback.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: In September 2016, we reported that the federal government spends  about $1.5 billion per year on public relations activities, carried out both  through advertising and public relations contracts, and by federal public  affairs employees. Agencies may have legitimate interests in  communicating with the public regarding their functions, policies, and  activities. For example, agencies communicate with the public for  purposes ranging from publicizing health and safety bulletins to providing  information on federal entitlements and benefits.
You asked us to describe the primary purposes and reported benefits of  federal agencies’ public relations investments, including contracts and  employees support. In this report, we reviewed:  the activities selected agencies conduct using advertising and public  relations contracts and public affairs employees, and their purposes; how the level of resources these agencies devote to these activities  has changed over the past decade, and the factors that officials  identify as affecting these changes; and how these agencies measure the results of these activities.
To address these objectives, we selected four agencies to use as case  illustrations across all three objectives. We chose the agencies based on  several factors, including having high total obligations for advertising and  public relations contracts, or high total numbers of public affairs  employees and/or large changes in these numbers over the past decade  relative to other agencies with similar organizational structures (e.g.,  comparing component agencies). We also selected agencies with  differing missions and interactions with the public. The four agencies are:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB);
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); and within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS):
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); and
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
We previously reported that the Department of Defense (DOD) obligates  more funding to advertising and public relations contracts, and employs  more public affairs staff than any other agency. We did not include DOD  in this review because we have recent work that examined advertising at  that department.
To identify the activities selected agencies conduct using advertising and  public relations contracts and public affairs employees, and the purposes  of these activities, we reviewed information on these contracts and staff.  Specifically, we used the Federal Procurement Data System-Next  Generation (FPDS-NG) database to identify contracts at the selected  agencies with values of $150,000 or more that were classified as  advertising or public relations services over fiscal years 2012 through  2016. The four agencies we reviewed had a combined total of 68  contracts with these characteristics. These 68 contracts represented just  over a quarter (68 out of 253 contracts) and nearly 95 percent ($90.7  million of the $97.4 million) of all advertising and public relations contracts  and related obligations at these agencies over this time period.
To illustrate the types of general activities supported by agency contracts,  we analyzed statements of work and other documentation for the 68  contracts, and classified them according to five categories that we  identified in our earlier work: (1) public education and awareness; (2)  customer service; (3) general information; (4) recruitment; and (5)  compliance with laws and policies. We also shared this classification with  agency public affairs officials to ensure concurrence. As part of our  assessment of the reliability of the contract data, we also reviewed a  nongeneralizable sample of 18 contracts not coded as advertising or  public relations services, but that appeared to include some activities  related to these services. We identified these other contracts by  searching FPDS-NG for contracts with (1) vendors that had received  other contracts for advertising and public relations services, and (2)  contract descriptions that used the terms “advertising” or “public  relations.”
To identify activities supported by public affairs employees, we analyzed  position descriptions and other documentation showing how agencies use  public affairs employees. We also interviewed agency contracting and  public affairs officials about activities supported by both contracts and  employees.
To review how the level of contract and staff resources at selected  agencies has changed over the past decade, and factors affecting these  changes, we analyzed obligations data from the FPDS-NG database and  employment data provided by agencies. We also interviewed agency  public affairs officials about changes and trends over the past decade in  these activities. We assessed the reliability of FPDS-NG data by  considering known strengths and weaknesses of the data based on our  past work and comparing it to information in contracts provided by  agencies. We assessed the reliability of employment data provided by  agencies by comparing it to the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM)  Enterprise Human Resource Integration (EHRI) database—the primary  government-wide source for information on federal employees. We  determined that both the FPDS-NG contracting data and agency  employment data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.
To review how selected agencies measure the results of activities  supported by advertising and public relations contracts and public affairs  staff, we analyzed information on performance management included in  the contracts we reviewed. We also reviewed relevant agency  documentation, including agency performance reports and reports  describing performance of specific outreach initiatives. In addition, we  interviewed agency public affairs officials about the information used to  measure these activities. Additional details on our scope and  methodology are in appendix I.
We conducted this performance audit from August 2016 to September  2017 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Agencies communicate with the public for various reasons. In September  2016, we reported on categories of advertising and public relations  activities that agencies may engage in, including:
Public education and awareness – providing information on public  health and safety issues, informing the public of its rights and  entitlements, discouraging harmful or dangerous behavior;
Customer service – providing information to users of agency
General information – keeping the public informed of agency
Recruitment – the process of attracting qualified applicants to apply
Compliance with laws and policies – making information available  in order to comply with statutes, executive orders, policies, and  procedures.
There are no single, commonly-accepted definitions of the terms  “advertising,” “public relations,” or “public affairs.”
Advertising. Although federal guidance does not define “advertising”  for purposes of classifying contracts, the Office of Management and  Budget (OMB) defines the term in relation to determining costs for  grants and other federal awards. OMB Circular A-87 defines  “advertising costs” as “the costs of advertising media and corollary  administrative costs,” and “advertising media” as including magazines,  newspapers, radio and television, direct mail, exhibits, and electronic  or computer transmittals.
Public relations. OMB Circular A-87 defines “public relations” as  “community relations and those activities dedicated to maintaining the  image of the governmental unit or maintaining or promoting  understanding and favorable relations with the community or public at  large or any segment of the public.”
Public affairs. We have stated that “public affairs” involves “efforts to  develop and disseminate information to the public to explain the  activities of and the issues facing an organization.”
While agencies have flexibility to use a variety of approaches to  communicate with and reach out to the public, there are some  prohibitions on public relations activities. For example, appropriations acts  and other provisions of law prohibit the use of appropriated funds for  certain types of communications. Since 1951, appropriations acts have  included provisions prohibiting agencies from using appropriations for  unauthorized “publicity or propaganda.” While Congress has not defined  the meaning of such publicity or propaganda, we have recognized three  types of activities that violate these prohibitions: (1) self-aggrandizement,  (2) covert propaganda (defined as “communications such as editorials or  other articles prepared by an agency or its contractors at the behest of  the agency and circulated as the ostensible position of parties outside of  the agency”), and (3) materials that are purely partisan in nature.
Appropriations acts have also typically included provisions prohibiting the  use of federal funding for certain grassroots lobbying. Typical language  includes a prohibition against using appropriated funds for  communications designed to support or defeat legislation pending before  Congress, except in presentation to Congress itself. We have determined  that in order for a violation to occur, there must be evidence of a clear  appeal by the agency to the public to contact members of Congress in  support of, or in opposition to, pending legislation.
The four agencies we reviewed were selected, in part, for their different  missions and interaction with the public. Table 1 summarizes each  agency’s mission.
We previously reported that government-wide annual obligations for  advertising and public relations contracts averaged close to $1 billion over  fiscal years 2006 through 2015, with the Department of Defense  responsible for about 60 percent of obligations for these contracts over  the 10-year period. The four selected agencies obligated on average a  combined amount of $19 million annually over the past 10 years for  advertising and public relations contracts, though annual obligations  amounts vary substantially from year to year. As shown in table 2, these  agencies obligated annual amounts ranging from -$0.3 million (reflecting  deobligations) to nearly $18 million.
The four agencies employed from 7 to 114 public affairs employees as of  the end of fiscal year 2016, as shown in table 3. We previously reported  that the government-wide number of full-time permanent public affairs  employees was about 5,000 in fiscal year 2014, with about 42 percent of  these employees at the Department of Defense.
section_title: Selected Agencies Used Advertising and Public Relations Contracts and Public Affairs Employees Primarily to Inform and Educate the Public
subsections: section_title: Most Agency Spending Was Concentrated in a Few Contracts Supporting Major Agency Initiatives and Communication Support
paragraphs: At each of the agencies we reviewed, obligations were concentrated in a  small number of advertising and public relations contracts. The activities  supported by these contracts ranged from promoting agency initiatives to  providing communications support services. Appendix II provides details  on each agency’s largest advertising and public relations contracts (in  terms of obligations) over fiscal years 2012 through 2016.
CFPB. CFPB’s four largest advertising and public relations contracts  represented nearly 70 percent of obligations for these contracts over  fiscal years 2012 through 2016 ($22.6 million out of $32.8 million).  These four contracts all focused on increasing general awareness of the  tools and resources CFPB offers to the public to promote better financial  decision making. Contract documentation linked the need for increasing  general awareness of CFPB’s tools and resources to CFPB’s statutory  responsibility to develop and implement initiatives intended to educate  and empower consumers to make better financial decisions. According to  CFPB officials, promoting awareness of CFPB’s tools and the services it  provides is intended to increase their use. In particular, research  conducted by a CFPB contractor in 2015 showed that before CFPB’s  campaign to increase awareness of its tools and resources, awareness  and use of these tools and resources had remained level over the prior two and a half years. Figure 1 shows an example of CFPB outreach  promoting its tools and resources.
FEMA. The largest of FEMA’s advertising and public relations contracts  represented just over 40 percent of all obligations for these contracts over  fiscal years 2012 through 2016 ($8.7 million out of $20.7 million). This  contract, and several others, supported the National Flood Insurance  Program (NFIP). According to FEMA officials, part of its role in  administering the NFIP involves public communications and advertising to  encourage people to buy flood insurance to better prepare themselves for  disaster. FEMA’s other high-value contracts included ones for services  promoting emergency preparedness, including those supporting the  Ready campaign. The Ready campaign promotes preparedness for many  types of emergencies, including hurricanes, extreme heat, and tornadoes.  Figure 2 illustrates Ready campaign outreach related to extreme weather  alerts.
NASA. NASA’s two largest advertising and public relations contracts  represented just under half of all obligations for these contracts over fiscal  years 2012 through 2016 ($7.6 million of $17.1 million). These two  contracts, and other lesser-value ones, supported NASA’s  Communications Support Services Center. This center provides support  services across the agency, such as developing products that support the  agency’s education and public outreach programs. According to NASA  officials, the contracts are for services that are less efficient for NASA  staff to perform or for which staff do not have the needed expertise.  Figure 3 shows an example of NASA outreach illustrating a program to  grow plants in space.
USCIS. USCIS’ two largest advertising and public relations contracts  represented just over 90 percent of obligations for these services over  fiscal years 2012 through 2016 ($18.1 million out of $19.8 million).These  two contracts supported planning and developing media and educational  messaging tools for the E-Verify and Systematic Alien Verification for  Entitlements (SAVE) programs. E-Verify is an Internet-based system that  allows businesses to confirm the eligibility of their employees to work in  the United States. SAVE is a verification service for benefit-granting  agencies to verify applicants’ immigration or citizenship status. According  to contract documentation, outreach on these programs aims to, among  other things, increase understanding and use of these services. Figure 4  shows an example of USCIS outreach promoting a virtual assistant,  which is one of the ways the agency interacts with those using or  interested in its services.
section_title: Overall Focus of Selected Agencies’ Contracts and Public Affairs Staff Is Providing Education and General Information
paragraphs: More broadly, most of the 68 contracts we reviewed focused on public  education and awareness, general information, or both. Table 4 shows  the frequency of the types of general activities supported by the contracts  we reviewed at each agency.
The contracts we reviewed also involved different types of tasks,  including analysis, content creation, monitoring, distribution, planning, or  technical or operational support. For example, planning activities include  creating a media strategy with new or existing resources or conducting  market research. Appendix II provides a description of these tasks and  the frequencies with which they were included in contracts.
Our review of position descriptions for public affairs employees across the  selected agencies showed that these employees’ duties also primarily  supported educating and providing information to the public. Officials at  the agencies we reviewed supported this by most commonly citing public  education and awareness, followed by general information, as public  affairs staff’s primary activities. Of the 13 position descriptions we  reviewed at various levels of responsibility, duties included: writing, editing, and analysis;  communication planning and evaluation; disseminating information through various channels, including news  media (wire services, radio, television, newspapers, and magazines),  agency websites, and social media accounts; engaging with stakeholders, including those within and outside of managing relationships with media entities.
In some cases, public affairs staff are involved in activities also supported  by contracted services to provide information to the public. For example,  FEMA’s Ready campaign involved contributions from both public affairs  staff and a contractor’s staff. According to FEMA officials, public affairs  staff responsibilities for the campaign included developing messages,  responding to questions from the public, representing the campaign at  outreach events, and tracking campaign efforts. The contractor’s staff, on  the other hand, provided coding for the website, developed public service  announcements, and created social media graphics and videos.
Officials told us that the decision to contract a service instead of using  public affairs staff, or the level of involvement of public affairs staff,  depends on the type of work and who is able to provide the service more  efficiently. For example, a USCIS public affairs official told us that the  agency contracts for services related to outreach in situations where  contractual services will save time and money or result in higher quality,  such as providing a daily delivery of news clippings and media references  to the agency, and maintaining a media contact database that agency  staff use for outreach. Additionally, a NASA public affairs official told us  that the agency contracts for services that employees do not have the  expertise to do. For example, NASA headquarters has a photo office that  is staffed by contractors, and contractors operate the cameras for NASA’s  television station. In both cases, NASA officials told us they monitor the  contractors.
section_title: Selected Agencies Carry Out Public Communications Activities in Addition to Those Reflected in Contract and Public Affairs Employee Data
paragraphs: Advertising and public relations contracts do not necessarily capture all of  the advertising and public relations activities carried out by the four case  study agencies. As we reported previously, there are other product  service codes aside from those related to advertising and public relations  services that can encompass such activities. We did not focus on them  because they may also include activities that are not related to public  relations. Additionally, there is an element of subjectivity involved in  selecting the appropriate product service code for a contract that may  lead different people to appropriately select different codes for similar  services. For example, three of the four agencies we reviewed had  contracts for services to monitor media for references to them or their  activities. Agencies coded these contracts as either advertising or public  relations services. Alternatively, USCIS coded a contract for a digital  broadcast monitoring service as “IT and Telecom - Other IT and  Telecommunications.” USCIS officials said that this coding was because  the monitoring related to digital broadcasting.
Similarly, staff aside from those classified under the public affairs  occupational series may also be involved in public affairs activities. For  example, the agencies we reviewed used other staff to support public  affairs activities by performing tasks such as translating material into  other languages, editing materials to ensure that they meet standards for  readability, and developing and maintaining information technologies that  support outreach. Additionally, officials at both FEMA and NASA told us  that public engagement is an integral part of their agencies’ activities, and  that one could consider all of their employees to be involved in public  affairs to some extent.
section_title: Resources for Contracts and Public Affairs Employees Varied over Past Decade Due to Changes in Agency Activities and Increased Use of Digital Media
subsections: section_title: Obligations for Advertising and Public Relations Contracts Relatively Stable at NASA and USCIS, and Varied at CFPB and FEMA
paragraphs: The amounts the agencies we reviewed obligated to contracts coded as  advertising or public relations services varied from year to year, though  some agencies’ obligations were more stable. As shown in figure 5,  CFPB and FEMA had the most significant changes over the last 10 years.
According to CFPB officials, the increase in CFPB obligations over time is  due to standing up its operations. Officials told us that during fiscal years  2013 through 2015, they piloted campaigns and conducted research on  outreach. The results of these pilot campaigns and research informed  later outreach activities. Increases in fiscal years 2015 and 2016 were  due primarily to two contracts that focused on increasing awareness of  CFPB and the tools it offers consumers. CFPB officials told us that fiscal  year 2016 obligations reflect full operations, and they expect future years’  obligations to be more consistent.
The changes in FEMA obligations over the past decade are due in large  part to changes in three contracts related to supporting outreach and  customer support services for the agency’s National Flood Insurance  Program (NFIP). For example, in fiscal year 2010, most of the agency’s  obligations for advertising and public relations services (about $12.5  million out of a total of $16.2 million) were for an integrated marketing,  advertising, and public relations services contract for the NFIP. In fiscal  year 2011, the amount obligated to that contract dropped to about $1  million. In fiscal year 2016, FEMA obligated about $8.7 million for another  contract supporting the NFIP, which drove the sharp increase in  obligations in that year. Officials said that the amounts obligated for  outreach for the NFIP depend on the program’s other priorities, such as  flood hazard mapping, which FEMA does to assess flood risks and uses  to inform the development of NFIP regulations and flood insurance  requirements.
At NASA and USCIS, obligations were relatively stable over the past  decade. NASA officials said they expected obligations to remain  consistent or even decline in the future, in anticipation of declining  resources. USCIS officials also said they expect obligations to remain  relatively level in the future, though they may increase marketing activities  if E-Verify is mandated nationwide.
section_title: Public Affairs Employment Was Relatively Stable at NASA, but Increased at Other Agencies Largely Due to Operational Changes
paragraphs: Employment of public affairs employees at the agencies we reviewed  increased over the past decade, but was relatively stable at NASA. Table  5 shows the changes in public affairs employees at these agencies from  2007 through 2016.
CFPB, FEMA, and USCIS officials identified several factors that caused  the increase in the number of public affairs staff they use, including  changes in operations and staffing structure.
CFPB officials told us that the increase from five to seven public  affairs employees between fiscal years 2011 and 2016 was due to  standing up operations from fiscal year 2011. According to officials,  the number of public affairs staff in fiscal year 2016 represents the  steady state of operations for these employees at CFPB.
FEMA officials cited organizational and structural changes, the rise of  digital media, increasing stakeholder engagement, and an increase in  work volume and duties as the reasons for its increase in public affairs  employment. For example, in fiscal year 2007, the Protection and  National Preparedness Directorate, which included public affairs staff,  moved to FEMA.
A USCIS public affairs official attributed the increase in the number of  public affairs staff to a focus on having a greater number of lower- level public affairs staff versus a smaller number of higher level staff.  They said they have found this staffing model to be effective.
A NASA public affairs official said that the stability in the agency’s number  of public affairs staff was due to the end of the space shuttle program in  2011, which reduced the public affairs workload, balanced by an  increased focus on commercial cargo and crew flight, which in turn has  increased the public affairs workload. The official told us he expects  staffing to either remain stable or decline in future years as the agency  manages resource constraints.
section_title: Use of Digital Media Changed Communications Methods and Increased Opportunities for Public Engagement, with Mixed Effects on Resources
paragraphs: Officials at three of the four agencies we reviewed identified increased  use of digital media as a significant change over the past decade, and at  all four agencies said that these platforms are their primary methods of  outreach. While the increased popularity of these media represented a  change for FEMA, NASA, and USCIS, officials at CFPB, which began  operations in 2011, said that they have used digital media platforms since  its beginning. All four agencies had websites and presences on multiple  social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter.
According to officials at the agencies we reviewed, the use of digital  media has increased the reach of agency communications and changed  the nature of these agencies’ interactions with the public. FEMA officials  emphasized the usefulness of these media in obtaining information from  the public by gaining awareness of conditions during disasters. For  example, FEMA guidance described how during Hurricane Sandy public  affairs employees were able to use social media to obtain information  about power outages, volunteering and donations, and concerns about  the response efforts. A USCIS public affairs official also said that digital  media have improved and changed the agency’s reach. For example,  USCIS has been working to provide customer service online by doing  things like holding “office hours” on Twitter, during which Twitter users  can post questions, which are answered by USCIS staff (see figure 6).
The increased use of digital media has had mixed effects on resources at  the agencies we reviewed. FEMA officials told us that they increased the  number of public affairs staff in response to the increase and evolution of  digital media and the public’s reliance on it during major disasters. For  example, officials said during the Louisiana Floods in 2016, monthly  engagement (shares, reactions, and comments) on the agency’s  Facebook account increased to 49,000, compared to an average of 7,000  (see figure 7). NASA and USCIS officials said they have generally been  able to adjust to the increased use of digital media using existing  resources. For example, NASA officials told us that they focused on hiring  new public affairs staff with expertise in these areas when hiring to fill  open public affairs positions. They also trained public affairs staff in digital  media skills and modified contracts to include more digital media tasks in  place of more traditional ones.
Although the agencies we reviewed used digital media to a large extent,  they all continue to use more traditional media such as newspapers and  radio. FEMA officials told us that some populations they are trying to  reach do not have access to digital media, so they use a mix of media.  For example, they have found that radio is an effective medium for  reaching out to members of tribal nations. Officials also made the point  that other media channels are important because, during a disaster,  people may not be able to access digital media due to power loss or other  connection failures.
section_title: Selected Agencies Used Web-Based and Other Tools to Assess Activities Supported by Contracts and Public Affairs Employees
subsections: section_title: Selected Agencies Used Web-Based and Other Tools as Indicators of Performance
paragraphs: All of the agencies we reviewed identified performance indicators they  use to assess the performance of outreach activities, including those  supported by advertising and public relations contracts and public affairs  staff. However, the type and extent of assessment depends on the types  of outreach conducted. For example, all four agencies use web-based  indicators when assessing digital outreach, including use of agency  websites and social media accounts. Officials told us that digital media  are well suited to performance measurement and offer richer analytical  possibilities than more traditional media. Outreach types and related  indicators are described below.
Digital media: Agencies use web-based indicators when assessing  digital outreach, including indicators of the number of people reached,  such as number of visits to a website and click-through rates (a ratio  showing how often people who see a digital advertisement end up  clicking on it). Agencies also use indicators related to how engaged  users are with the outreach materials, including bounce rates (the  percentage of visitors to a particular website who navigate away from  the site after viewing only one page), the length of time a user spends  on a web page or watching a video, and the number of people who  respond to or share a social media post. When assessing digital  outreach, agency officials told us that they also consider data on the  proportion of users who access websites from mobile versus desktop  computers and the geographic location of users.
Traditional media: Agencies use other indicators to evaluate the  performance of outreach conducted through traditional media such as  newspapers, radio, and television. For newspapers, these indicators  included circulation and number of readers per copy. For radio and  television, they included the number of listeners or viewers.
Other types of outreach: In some cases, agencies designed  indicators specific to more targeted outreach efforts. For example,  CFPB has a program that involves working with libraries to provide  websites, worksheets, guides, and other information to help with  consumers’ financial decisions. CFPB directed a contractor supporting  this program to assess this outreach through pilot testing of a  guidebook and job aids with partner libraries, and to capture and  document libraries’ feedback and consolidate recommendations to  CFPB. CFPB also used focus groups, field input from stakeholders,  and surveys to inform outreach efforts. Officials told us that obtaining  qualitative information through such efforts requires more resources,  but this information is extremely useful in assessing performance of  CFPB outreach activities.
section_title: All Selected Agencies Reported Using Performance Information in Decision Making, but Identified Some Challenges
paragraphs: In many cases, the agencies we reviewed identified quantitative and  qualitative goals for their contract and employee activities. For example,  one CFPB contract we reviewed included a goal of reaching 20 percent of  the target audience (defined as adults ages 30–44 with household  incomes between $35,000 and $125,000) at a frequency of five times per  month. In another case, FEMA set a qualitative goal for a contract  supporting the Ready campaign. The objectives of the contract included  encouraging state and local governments to create localized efforts to  encourage emergency preparedness.
The agencies we reviewed all used performance information to assess  services provided through advertising and public relations services  contracts. The majority of the contracts we reviewed (43 out of 68)  explicitly included an analysis component, which involved such actions as  developing indicators, collecting quantitative data, or analyzing and  reporting the effectiveness of outreach efforts. With the exception of  NASA, each agency used contracts and public affairs staff to support a  major outreach initiative. These agencies also assigned to contractors  responsibility for supporting performance assessment of those initiatives.  For example, USCIS contracts supporting education and outreach  initiatives for the E-Verify and SAVE programs directed the contractors to  develop performance indicators to analyze and assess the results of  outreach efforts. Appendix II provides examples of how the agencies we  reviewed assessed the performance of selected major initiatives.
Agencies also assign responsibility to public affairs employees to assess  the outreach activities they support. Position descriptions for public affairs  staff at all four of the agencies we reviewed specifically included  assessment of agency outreach activities. For example, a NASA public  affairs official told us that public affairs staff are involved in reviewing data  on how many people read certain features and analyzing the effects of  releasing new information, such as photos taken from spacecraft. The  agency’s Internet manager, who is classified under the public affairs  occupational series, supervises the review of analytic information.
Officials at the agencies we reviewed told us that they use performance  information to inform decisions about outreach activities. For example:
FEMA officials told us that they use the results of emergency  preparedness surveys to inform the focus of future advertising for the  Ready campaign. In response to people reporting lack of time as a  barrier to discussing emergency preparedness with family members,  FEMA developed messages for its Ready initiative focused on  working towards emergency preparedness while doing other daily  tasks, such as driving to school or eating dinner.
USCIS used a report summarizing lessons learned from fiscal year  2016 outreach about the E-Verify program to inform fiscal year 2017  outreach efforts. The report included an assessment of which efforts  in fiscal year 2016 most successfully supported objectives such as  building awareness of the program. It included performance  indicators, such as the number of times an online advertisement is  shown on a search result page or other site (impressions), and the  number of times a person clicks on an on-line advertisement (clicks).  The summary report recommended approaches for fiscal year 2017  based on lessons learned from fiscal year 2016 performance.
Despite the usefulness of web-based indicators and other tools used to  measure outreach activities, officials at the agencies we reviewed  acknowledged some challenges in using them. The following are  examples of challenges officials at our case study agencies identified:
Lack of qualitative feedback: Officials at USCIS and CFPB told us  that while they have access to several indicators related to  performance of outreach (for example, number of visitors to a site or  downloads of materials), these indicators are not the same as  understanding whether and how information is being used. A USCIS  public affairs official said that the agency has this challenge with  outreach through both digital and traditional media. For example,  USCIS staff have information on the circulation of a newspaper in  which they have placed an advertisement, but without additional  assessment, it is difficult for staff to know how or if someone used  information in the advertisement or had a favorable impression of it.
Difficulty measuring long-term effects: NASA officials told us that  digital media offers the ability to get virtually immediate feedback on  indicators such as the number of people reached, and that such  information helps inform decisions and ensure they make sound  investments. However, officials noted that it is more difficult to  determine the long-term effects of outreach activities. For example, it  would be difficult for NASA to determine whether its outreach aimed at  schoolchildren led them to eventually pursue careers in science,  technology, engineering, and math fields.
Difficulty identifying factors that influence performance: FEMA  officials told us that there are many variables that affect performance  of digital media outreach, including the time of day or week, the  specific content of the message, and other news topics or marketing  campaigns occurring at the same time. They said they use the data to  make decisions, but in some instances it is difficult to determine why  outreach did not perform well. In our prior work on advertising at the  Department of Defense, we reported similar challenges in measuring  the impact of advertising on recruitment. We stated that determining  the precise impact of advertising on outcomes in this case is  inherently challenging, in part due to concurrent effects of external  factors, such as the influence of family support and the availability of  other career or educational activities.
Difficulty performing in-depth assessments: Tools that allow for  more in-depth assessments of outreach activities may require more  resources than collecting web-based or other indicators does. For  example, under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), agencies must  receive approval from OMB for surveys or other efforts that involve  collecting data from the public. CFPB officials told us the approval  process for collecting information from the public can be challenging  because the outreach initiative that is the subject of the information  collection often changes or may evolve in the time it takes to receive  approval, which can take up to a year. In our 2010 report on  opportunities to strengthen agencies’ customer service efforts, we  reported that in certain circumstances the PRA clearance process  made obtaining customer input difficult because of the time it takes to  obtain approval for surveys to collect customer input. In our 2014  report on customer service at selected agencies, we reported that use  of the Fast Track process designed to speed OMB survey approval  had varied among the agencies we reviewed and not led to significant  improvements.
Selected agencies have taken steps to address these challenges. For  example, FEMA and CFPB have used focus groups or surveys to obtain  richer information on whether and how people are using their outreach  material. FEMA works with a contractor to administer surveys that provide  data on how the public may be responding to the agency’s outreach, such  as the extent to which people have taken action to prepare for  emergencies. Both agencies have worked with OMB to obtain approval  for their information collections, despite the resources involved. CFPB  officials told us the information obtained through these collections makes  it worth the time and resources involved in the approval process.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to CFPB, DHS, and NASA for comment.  CFPB and DHS provided technical comments, which we incorporated as  appropriate. NASA did not have comments.
As agreed with your staff, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the  report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Director  of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Acting Secretary of  Homeland Security, Acting Administrator of the National Aeronautics and  Space Administration, and interested congressional committees. In  addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at  http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-6806 or krauseh@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: Our objectives were to review (1) the activities that selected agencies  conducted using advertising and public relations contracts and agency  public affairs employees, and their purposes; (2) how the level of  resources selected agencies devoted to these activities changed over the  past decade and the factors that officials identified as affecting these  changes; and (3) how selected agencies measured the results of these  activities.
To address our objectives, we selected four agencies for case study  based on several factors. First, we focused on agencies with high total  obligations for advertising and public relations contracts or high total  numbers of public affairs employees relative to other agencies with similar  characteristics, and/ or large changes in these numbers in recent years  relative to other agencies with similar organizational structures (e.g.  comparing component agencies). Of those agencies, we selected ones  with differing missions and types of interactions with the public. We also  considered input on the suitability of agencies for case illustration  purposes from our staff with expertise in agencies’ operations. The four  selected agencies were the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,  Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Aeronautics and  Space Administration, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
We previously reported that the Department of Defense (DOD) obligates  more funding to advertising and public relations contracts, and employs  more public affairs staff than any other agency. We did not include DOD  in this review because we have recent work that examined advertising at  that department.
To identify the activities selected agencies conduct using advertising and  public relations contracts and the purposes of these activities, we  reviewed information on these contracts. Specifically, we used the  Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation (FPDS-NG)  database to identify contracts at the selected agencies with values of  $150,000 or more that were classified as advertising or public relations  services over fiscal years 2012 through 2016. The FPDS-NG database  captures information on the federal government’s contract awards and  obligations. It includes data for most federal contracts that have an  estimated value of $3,000 or more. The four agencies we reviewed had a  combined total of 68 contracts with these characteristics. These 68  contracts represented just over a quarter (68 out of 253) and almost 95  percent ($90.7 million of the $97.4 million) of all advertising and public  relations contracts and related obligations at these agencies over this  time period.
To illustrate the types of general activities the 68 contracts supported, we  analyzed statements of work and other documentation using a data  collection instrument (DCI).We used the DCI to categorize key  characteristics of the services described in the contract documentation,  such as the purpose of the activities, media channels for each of the  activities, the intended audiences of the outreach, and any references to  agency statutes or missions. We also interviewed agency contracting and  public affairs officials about activities supported by contracts.
We also classified the contracts according to five categories that we  identified in our earlier work: (1) public education and awareness; (2)  customer service; (3) general information; (4) recruitment; and (5)  compliance with laws and policies. To conduct our analysis, one analyst  used the DCI to review and code each contract. Another analyst verified  the coding. Finally, we shared our classification according to the five  categories with agency public affairs officials to ensure concurrence.
We assessed the reliability of FPDS-NG data by considering known  strengths and weaknesses of the data based on our past work that used  the database, and by comparing FPDS-NG data to information in  contracts provided by agencies. We also reviewed a nongeneralizable  sample of 18 contracts not coded as advertising or public relations  services, but that appeared to include some activities related to these  services. We identified these other contracts by searching FPDS-NG for  contracts with (1) vendors that had received other contracts for  advertising and public relations services, and (2) contract descriptions  that used the terms “advertising” or “public relations.” We determined that  these data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.
To identify activities supported by public affairs staff, and their purposes,  we analyzed employment data provided by agencies on employees  classified under the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) public  affairs occupational series. We also reviewed position descriptions and  other documents provided by agencies and interviewed agency public  affairs officials who manage public relations activities to describe the  organization and role of public affairs employees in public relations and  advertising activities, and the purposes of those activities. We assessed  the reliability of agency employment data by comparing it to OPM’s  Enterprise Human Resource Integration database—the primary  government-wide source for information on federal employees—and  determined that they were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.
To review how the level of contract and staff resources at selected  agencies has changed over the past decade and factors affecting these  changes, we reviewed FPDS-NG data, including the total obligations of  public relations and advertising contracts from fiscal years 2007 to 2016.  We also analyzed employment data provided by agencies on the  numbers of full-time permanent public affairs staff over fiscal years 2007  through 2016. We interviewed agency public affairs officials to discuss  reasons for any changes, as well as descriptions of changes in the types  of work performed.
To review how selected agencies measure the results of activities  supported by advertising and public relations contracts and public affairs  staff, we reviewed agency performance information, including agency  performance reports and reports describing specific outreach activities  and campaigns. We also examined whether and how the contracts we  reviewed involved performance measurement. We reviewed this  information and interviewed agency public affairs officials to identify  methods that agencies use to measure the effects of activities supported  by these contracts and staff, any challenges that the agencies have with  measuring their effects, and ways that agencies incorporate performance  information into decision making.
We conducted this performance audit from August 2016 to September  2017 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
section_title: Appendix II: Tasks and Major Outreach Initiatives Supported by Selected Agencies’ Advertising and Public Relations Services Contracts
subsections: section_title: Largest Advertising and Public Relations Contracts at Selected Agencies
paragraphs: At the agencies we reviewed, a relatively small number of advertising and  public relations contracts represented a large portion of total obligations  to these contracts. The following figures and notes illustrate and describe  each agency’s largest contracts over fiscal years 2012 through 2016.
Figure 8 shows Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)  obligations to its five largest and all other advertising and public relations  contracts (“calls” or “task orders”) over fiscal years 2012 through 2016.  CFPB had a total of 44 advertising and public relations contracts (“calls”  or “task orders”) with combined obligations of $32.8 million over this time  period. There may be multiple calls or task orders for a single contract.
Figure 9 shows Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)  obligations to its five largest and all other advertising and public relations  contracts over fiscal years 2012 through 2016. FEMA had a total of 148 of  these contracts with a combined value of $20.7 million over this time  period.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration  Figure 10 shows National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)  obligations to its five largest and all other advertising and public relations  contracts over fiscal years 2012 through 2016. NASA had a total of 55 of  these contracts with a combined value of $17.1 million over this time  period.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services  Figure 11 shows U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)  obligations to the four advertising and public relations contracts we  reviewed. The agency had two other of these contracts over fiscal years  2012 through 2016, with a value of about $27,000 and -$100,000.  Because the net value of these contracts is negative, we did not  represent them in the figure.
section_title: Tasks Included in Advertising and Public Relations Contracts
paragraphs: The contracts we reviewed involved different types of tasks. Table 6 lists  and describes these tasks and provides examples from the agencies.  Note that some contracts fell into two or more categories, as contracts  may involve multiple types of services.
Five of the six tasks (all except monitoring) were included in a majority of  the contracts, and the three most frequent tasks were the three most  closely related to distributing information (planning, content creation, and  distribution). Planning activities often included conducting market  research (of the 46 contracts that included planning, 31 included market  research). Agencies asked contractors to create content for a variety of  mediums. Of the 50 contracts that involved content creation, the most  common tasks included were related to writing/editorial (37), graphic  design (30), and video production (29), and the most common media  were web/digital (38), and print (30). Agencies tasked contractors with  distributing the information or buying media on a variety of platforms, but  more often than not, did not include a specific medium in the contract. Of  the 46 contracts that involved distribution, the most frequent method  specified is through digital advertising (17).
section_title: Performance Measurement of Major Outreach Activities Supported by Contracts
paragraphs: Table 7 shows examples of each agency’s major outreach initiatives, as  indicated by the advertising and public relations services contracts with  the highest obligations, along with related performance measurement  activities. High-value contracts at CFPB, FEMA, and USCIS focused on a  particular outreach initiative or initiatives, while NASA’s highest value  contracts were for services that more generally supported outreach and  other agency activities.
section_title: Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: Other GAO staff who made contributions to this report include Carol Henn  (Assistant Director); Shari Brewster; Jenny Chanley; Cale Jones; Julia  Kennon; Joshua Miller; Meredith Moles; Kathleen Padulchick; and Elise  Vaughan Winfrey.