Solar Energy: Federal Initiatives Overlap but Take Measures to Avoid Duplication
Published: 2012-08-30T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The United States has abundant solar energy resources and solar, along with wind, offers the greatest energy and power potential among all currently available domestic renewable resources. In February 2012, GAO reported that 23 federal agencies had implemented nearly 700 renewable energy initiatives in fiscal year 2010-- including initiatives that supported solar energy technologies (GAO-12-260). The existence of such initiatives at multiple agencies raised questions about the potential for duplication, which can occur when multiple initiatives support the same technology advancement activities and technologies, direct funding to the same recipients, and have the same goals.
GAO was asked to identify (1) solar- related initiatives supported by federal agencies in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 and key characteristics of those initiatives and (2) the extent of fragmentation, overlap, and duplication, if any, of federal solar- related initiatives, as well as the extent of any coordination among these initiatives. GAO reviewed its previous work and interviewed officials at each of the agencies identified as having federal solar initiatives active in fiscal years 2010 and 2011. GAO developed a questionnaire and administered it to officials involved in each initiative to collect information on: initiative goals, technology advancement activities, funding obligations, number of projects, and coordination activities.
This report contains no recommendations. In response to the draft report, USDA generally agreed with the findings, while the other agencies had no comments.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Sixty-five solar-related initiatives with a variety of key characteristics were supported by six federal agencies. Over half of these 65 initiatives supported solar projects exclusively; the remaining initiatives supported solar and other renewable energy technologies. The 65 initiatives exhibited a variety of key characteristics, including multiple technology advancement activities ranging from basic research to commercialization by providing funding to various types of recipients including universities, industry, and federal laboratories and researchers, primarily through grants and contracts. Agency officials reported that they obligated about $2.6 billion for the solar projects in these initiatives in fiscal years 2010 and 2011, an amount higher than in previous years, in part, because of additional funding from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
The 65 solar-related initiatives are fragmented across six agencies and overlap to some degree in their key characteristics, but most agency officials reported coordination efforts to avoid duplication. The initiatives are fragmented in that they are implemented by various offices across the six agencies and address the same broad areas of national need. However, the agencies tailor their initiatives to meet their specific missions, such as DOD's energy security mission and NASA's space exploration mission. Many of the initiatives overlapped with at least one other initiative in the technology advancement activity, technology type, funding recipient, or goal. However, GAO found no clear instances of duplicative initiatives. Furthermore, officials at 57 of the 65 initiatives (88 percent) indicated that they coordinated in some way with other solar-related initiatives, including both within their own agencies and with other agencies. Such coordination may reduce the risk of duplication. Moreover, 59 of the 65 initiatives (91 percent) require applicants to disclose other federal sources of funding on their applications to help ensure that they do not receive duplicative funding.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: The United States has abundant solar energy resources and solar, along  with wind, offers the greatest energy and power potential among all  commercial domestic renewable resources currently available, according  to the National Academies of Science. While helping meet the nation’s  energy needs, solar sources of electricity could also offer substantial  environmental benefits, such as a reduction in greenhouse gas  emissions, over conventional electricity generation. However, solar and  wind energy as sources of electricity at the utility scale also face  numerous challenges related to their intermittent availability and higher  costs compared with traditional energy sources. The Department of  Energy’s (DOE) Energy Information Administration, an independent  statistical and analytical agency, reports that although solar energy  accounted for only 1 percent of all renewable energy electricity consumed  in the United States in 2010, solar energy use increased by about 60  percent from 2006 to 2010. DOE has also embarked on a comprehensive  effort to reduce the cost of generating electricity using solar power.
Beyond supplying electricity to the existing infrastructure or grid (i.e., the  electricity networks that carry electricity from the plants where it is  generated to consumers, including wires, substations, and transformers),  solar energy technologies have extensive defense and space  applications. For example, the Department of Defense (DOD) has  undertaken efforts to develop technologies that allow it to use solar  energy in operational environments, such as the conflicts in Iraq and  Afghanistan, to help reduce its reliance on conventional fuel, which is very  difficult and costly to deliver and store. In addition, the National  Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is working to develop  high-power solar electric propulsion systems to provide low-cost  abundant power for deep-space missions. As the availability and  utilization of solar energy technologies have increased, so too has federal  support to some of the agencies addressing challenges associated with  further expansion of solar energy as an electricity source and to meet  other mission-specific goals.
In February 2012, we reported that 23 federal agencies had implemented  nearly 700 renewable energy initiatives in fiscal year 2010—and a number  of these initiatives supported solar energy technologies. The existence of  such initiatives at multiple agencies has raised questions about the  potential for duplication that, in this context, occurs when multiple initiatives  support the same technology advancement activities and technologies,  direct funding to the same recipients, and have the same goals. As we  have previously reported, unnecessary duplication can potentially result  from fragmentation and overlap among government programs.  Fragmentation occurs when more than one federal agency, or more than  one organization within an agency, is involved in the same broad area of  national need. For the purposes of this report, overlap occurs when multiple  initiatives support similar technology advancement activities, similar  technologies, similar funding recipients, or have similar goals.
In this context, you asked us to review federal initiatives that supported  solar energy technology—which we termed “solar-related initiatives.” Our  objectives were to identify (1) solar-related initiatives supported by federal  agencies in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 and key characteristics of those  initiatives and (2) the extent of fragmentation, overlap, and duplication, if  any, among federal solar-related initiatives, as well as the extent of  coordination among these initiatives.
To address these objectives, we collected and analyzed information from  our previous work and conducted new work. More specifically, to identify  federal solar-related initiatives and to assess the extent of fragmentation,  overlap, and duplication among these initiatives, we relied on data from  our February 2012 report on renewable energy, which identified and  collected information from solar-related initiatives active in fiscal year  2010, as well as other renewable energy initiatives. For the purposes of  this report, we defined an initiative as a program or group of agency  activities serving a similar purpose or function that involved solar energy  technologies through a specific emphasis or focus, even if solar energy  was only one part of a broader effort. We restricted our analysis to those  initiatives that supported research and development (R&D) on, or  commercialization of, innovative solar energy technologies.
Because initiatives often supported more than one type of technology  advancement activity, some of the initiatives included in this report may  also support deployment activities. We eliminated initiatives that focused  solely on the deployment of readily available solar energy technologies.  Although not covered in this report, a range of federal, state, and other  initiatives support such deployment activities. These federal deployment  activities facilitate or achieve widespread use of technologies—for  example, by federal agencies’ procurement of solar energy technologies  or by federal tax or other incentives that encourage households and  businesses to adopt these technologies. We have ongoing work that  looks at some of these deployment activities, including DOE’s Loan  Guarantee and Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan  Programs, and a review of wind energy technology initiatives, including  those that support deployment activities. We also recently issued reports  on tax incentives for residential energy efficiency and on renewable  energy deployment activities.
After using our February 2012 report to identify solar-related initiatives  that supported R&D and commercialization, we developed a  questionnaire and surveyed cognizant officials at each of the six agencies  that had such initiatives to collect additional information on the initiatives’  scope and key characteristics—DOD, DOE, the Environmental Protection  Agency (EPA), NASA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the  U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Specifically, we asked questions  to ascertain the number of projects, funds obligated, type of technology  advancement activities supported, recipients funded, funding  mechanisms, initiative goals, and efforts to coordinate across other solar- related initiatives. To determine the extent to which agencies coordinated  their initiatives, we used survey responses and interviews to identify  coordination activities within and among the six agencies. We also asked  the agencies to provide us with any additional relevant initiatives that  were implemented in fiscal year 2011 that were not on our initial list, and  we sent a copy of the questionnaire to officials representing those  initiatives as well. (For further information on our questionnaire, see app.  I. For a copy of our questionnaire, see app. III.) We then analyzed the  information collected for the February 2012 report and from our  questionnaire for this report to determine the extent to which we could  identify fragmentation, overlap, and duplication of solar-related initiatives.  In addition, we interviewed agency officials responsible for solar-related  initiatives for follow-up information as needed.
We conducted this performance audit from September 2011 to August  2012 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: Solar energy can be used to heat, cool, and power homes and  businesses with a variety of technologies that convert sunlight into usable  energy. Examples of solar energy technologies include photovoltaics,  concentrated solar power, and solar hot water. Solar cells, also known as  photovoltaic cells, convert sunlight directly into electricity. Photovoltaic  technologies are used in a variety of applications. They can be found on  residential and commercial rooftops to power homes and businesses;  utility companies use them for large power stations, and they power  space satellites, calculators, and watches. Concentrated solar power  uses mirrors or lenses to concentrate sunlight and produce intense heat,  which is used to generate electricity via a thermal energy conversion  process; for example, by using concentrated sunlight to heat a fluid, boil  water with the heated fluid, and channel the resulting steam through a  turbine to produce electricity. Most concentrated solar power technologies  are designed for utility-scale operations and are connected to the  electricity-transmission system. Solar hot water technologies use a  collector to absorb and transfer heat from the sun to water, which is  stored in a tank until needed. Solar hot water systems can be found in  residential and industrial buildings.
Innovation in solar energy technology takes place across a spectrum of  activities, which we refer to as technology advancement activities, and  which include basic research, applied research, demonstration, and  commercialization. For purposes of this report, we defined basic  research to include efforts to explore and define scientific or engineering  concepts or is conducted to investigate the nature of a subject without  targeting any specific technology; applied research includes efforts to  develop new scientific or engineering knowledge to create new and  improved technologies; demonstration activities include efforts to operate  new or improved technologies to collect information on their performance  and assess readiness for widespread use; and commercialization efforts  transition technologies to commercial applications by bridging the gap  between research and demonstration activities and venture capital  funding and marketing activities.
Congressional Budget Office, Federal Financial Support for the Development and  Production of Fuels and Energy Technologies (Washington, D.C.: March 2012). as a whole but not necessarily for the firms that invested in the activities.  For example, basic research can create general scientific knowledge that  is not itself subject to commercialization but that can lead to multiple  applications that private companies can produce and sell. As activities get  closer to the commercialization stage, the private sector may increase its  support because its return on investment increases.
section_title: Six Agencies Supported Sixty-Five Solar-Related Initiatives with a Variety of Key Characteristics
paragraphs: We identified 65 solar-related initiatives with a variety of key  characteristics at six federal agencies. Over half of the 65 initiatives  supported solar projects exclusively; the remaining initiatives supported  solar energy technologies in addition to other renewable energy  technologies. The initiatives demonstrated a variety of key characteristics,  including focusing on different types of solar technologies and supporting  a range of technology advancement activities from basic research to  commercialization, with an emphasis on applied research and  demonstration activities. Additionally, the initiatives supported several  types of funding recipients including universities, industry, nonprofit  organizations, and federal labs and researchers, primarily through grants  and contracts. Agency officials reported that they obligated around $2.6  billion for the solar projects in these initiatives in fiscal years 2010 and  2011.
subsections: section_title: Over Half of the Agencies’ Initiatives Exclusively Supported Solar Energy Technology
paragraphs: In fiscal years 2010 and 2011, six federal agencies—DOD, DOE, EPA,  NASA, NSF, and USDA—undertook 65 initiatives that supported solar  energy technology, at least in part. (See app. II for a full list of the  initiatives). Of these initiatives, 35 of 65 (54 percent) supported solar  projects exclusively and 30 (46 percent) also supported projects that were  not solar. For example, in fiscal years 2010 and 2011, DOE’s Solar Energy  Technologies Program—Photovoltaic Research and Development initiative,  had 263 projects, all of which focused on solar energy. In contrast, in fiscal  years 2010 and 2011, DOE’s Hydrogen and Fuel Research and  Development initiative—which supports wind and other renewable  sources that could be used to produce hydrogen—had 209 projects, 26 of  which were solar projects. Although initiatives support solar energy  technologies, in a given year, they might not support any solar projects. For  example, NSF officials noted that the agency funds research across all  fields and disciplines of science and engineering and that individual  initiatives invite proposals for projects across a broad field of research,  which includes solar-related research in addition to other renewable energy  research. However, in any given year, NSF may not fund proposals that  address solar energy because either no solar proposals were submitted or  the submitted solar-related proposals were not deemed meritorious for  funding based upon competitive, merit-based reviews.
Although more than half of the agencies’ initiatives supported solar  energy projects exclusively, the majority of projects supported by all 65  initiatives were not focused on solar. As shown in table 1, of the 4,996  total projects active in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 under the 65 initiatives,  1,506 (30 percent) were solar projects, and 3,490 (70 percent) were not  solar projects.
Agencies’ solar-related initiatives supported different types of solar  energy technologies. According to agency officials responding to our  questionnaire, 47 of the 65 initiatives supported photovoltaic  technologies, and 18 supported concentrated solar power; some  initiatives supported both of these technologies or other solar  technologies. For example, NSF’s CHE-DMR-DMS Solar Energy  Initiative (SOLAR) supports both photovoltaic and concentrated solar  power technologies, including a project that is developing hybrid  organic/inorganic materials to create ultra-low-cost photovoltaic devices  and to advance solar concentrating technologies.
These initiatives supported solar energy technologies through multiple  technology advancement activities, ranging from basic research to  commercialization. As shown in figure 1, five of the six agencies  supported at least three of the four technology advancement activities we  examined, and four of the six supported all four.
Our analysis showed that of the 65 initiatives, 20 initiatives (31 percent)  supported a single type of technology advancement activity; 45 of the  initiatives (69 percent) supported more than one type of technology  advancement activity; and 4 of those 45 initiatives (6 percent) supported  all four. For example, NASA’s Solar Probe Plus Technology Development  initiative—which tests the performance of solar cells in elevated  temperature and radiation environments such as near the sun— supported applied research exclusively. In contrast, NASA’s Small  Business Innovations Research/Small Business Technology Transfer  Research initiative—which seeks high-technology companies to  participate in government-sponsored research and development efforts  critical to NASA’s mission—supported all four technology advancement  activities. The technology advancement activities supported by the  initiatives were applied research (47 initiatives), demonstration (41 initiatives), basic research (27 initiatives), and  commercialization (17 initiatives).
The initiatives supported these technology advancement activities by  providing funding to four types of recipients: universities, industry,  nonprofit organizations, and federal laboratories and researchers. The  initiatives most often supported universities and industry. In many cases,  initiatives provided funding to more than one type of recipient.  Specifically, our analysis showed that of the 65 initiatives, 23 of the  initiatives (35 percent) supported one type of recipient; 21 of the initiatives  (32 percent) provided funding to at least two types of recipients; 17  initiatives (26 percent) supported three types; and 4 initiatives (6 percent)  supported all four. In two cases, agency officials reported that their  initiatives supported “other” types of recipients, which included college  students and military installations.
Initiatives often supported a variety of recipient types, but individual  agencies more often supported one or two types. As shown in figure 2,  DOE’s initiatives most often supported federal laboratories and  researchers; DOD’s most often supported industry recipients; NASA’s  supported federal laboratories and industry equally; NSF’s supported  universities exclusively. For example, NASA’s Small Business  Innovations Research/Small Business Technology Transfer Research  initiative provided contracts to industry to participate in government- sponsored research and development for advanced photovoltaic  technologies to improve efficiency and reliability of solar power for space  exploration missions. NSF’s Emerging Frontiers in Research and  Innovation initiative provided grants to universities for, among other  purposes, promoting breakthroughs in computational tools and intelligent  systems for large-scale energy storage suitable for renewable energy  sources such as solar energy.
Federal solar-related initiatives provided funding to these recipients  through multiple mechanisms, often using more than one mechanism per  initiative. As shown in figure 3, the initiatives primarily used grants and  contracts. Of the 65 initiatives, 27 awarded grants, and 36 awarded  contracts; many awarded both. Agency officials also reported funding  solar projects via cooperative agreements, loans, and other  mechanisms.
Agency officials reported that the 65 initiatives as a group used multiple  funding mechanisms, but we found that individual agencies tended to use  primarily one or two funding mechanisms. For example, USDA  exclusively used grants, while DOD tended to use contracts. DOE  reported using grants and cooperative agreements almost equally. For  example, DOE’s Solar ADEPT initiative, an acronym for “Solar Agile  Delivery of Electrical Power Technology,” awards cooperative  agreements to universities, industry, nonprofit organizations, and federal  laboratories and researchers. Through a cooperative agreement, the  initiative supported a project at the University of Colorado at Boulder that  is developing advanced power conversion components that can be  integrated into individual solar panels to improve energy yields. According  to the project description, the power conversion devices will be designed  for use on any type of solar panel. The University of Colorado at Boulder  is partnering with industry and DOE’s National Renewable Energy  Laboratory on this project.
In responding to our questionnaire, officials from the six agencies reported  that they obligated around $2.6 billion for the 1,506 solar projects in fiscal  years 2010 and 2011. These obligations data represented a mix of actual  obligations and estimates. Actual obligations were provided for both years  for 51 of 65 initiatives. Officials provided estimated obligations for 12  initiatives for at least 1 of the 2 years, and officials from another 2 initiatives  were unable to provide any obligations data. Those officials who provided  estimates or were unable to provide obligations data noted that the  accuracy or the availability of the obligations data was limited because  isolating the solar activities from the overall initiative obligations can be  difficult. (See app. II for a full list of the initiatives and their related  obligations.) As shown in table 2, over 90 percent of the funds (about $2.3  billion of $2.6 billion) were obligated by DOE. The majority of DOE’s  obligations (approximately $1.7 billion) were obligated as credit subsidy  costs—the government’s estimated net long-term cost, in present value  terms, of the loans—as part of Title XVII Section 1705 Loan Guarantee  Program from funds appropriated by Congress under the American  Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act). Even excluding the  Loan Guarantee Program funds, DOE obligated $661 million, which is  more than was obligated by the other five agencies combined.
section_title: Initiatives Are Fragmented across Agencies and Sometimes Overlap, but Agency Officials Reported Coordination to Avoid Duplication
paragraphs: The 65 solar-related initiatives are fragmented across six agencies and  many overlap to some degree, but agency officials reported a number of  coordination activities to avoid duplication. We found that many initiatives  overlapped in the key characteristics of technology advancement activities,  types of technologies, types of funding recipients, or broad goals; however,  these areas of overlap do not necessarily lead to duplication of efforts  because the initiatives sometimes differ in meaningful ways or leverage the  efforts of other initiatives, and we did not find clear evidence of duplication  among initiatives. Officials from most initiatives reported that they engage  in a variety of coordination activities with other solar-related initiatives, at  times specifically to avoid duplication.
subsections: section_title: Fragmented Initiatives Overlapped in Their Technology Advancement Activities, Types of Technologies, Funding Recipients, and Goals
paragraphs: The 65 solar-related initiatives are fragmented in that they are  implemented by various offices across six agencies and address the  same broad area of national need. In March 2011, we reported that  fragmentation has the potential to result in duplication of resources.  However, such fragmentation is, by itself, not an indication that  unnecessary duplication of efforts or activities exists. For example, in our  March 2011 report, we stated that there can be advantages to having  multiple federal agencies involved in a broad area of national need— agencies can tailor initiatives to suit their specific missions and needs,  among other things. In particular, DOD is able to focus its efforts on solar  energy technologies that serve its energy security mission, among other  things, and NASA is able to focus its efforts on solar energy technologies  that aid in aeronautics and space exploration, among other things.
As table 3 illustrates, we found that many initiatives overlap because they  support similar technology advancement activities and types of funding  recipients. For example, initiatives that support basic and applied  research most often fund universities, and those initiatives that support  demonstration and commercialization activities most often fund industry.
Almost all of the initiatives overlapped to some degree with at least one  other initiative in that they support broadly similar technology  advancement activities, types of technologies, and eligible funding  recipients.
Twenty-seven initiatives support applied research for photovoltaic  technologies by universities. For example, NSF’s Engineering  Research Center for Quantum Energy and Sustainable Solar  Technologies at Arizona State University pursues cost-competitive  photovoltaic technologies with sustained market growth. The Air  Force’s Space Propulsion and Power Generation Research initiative  partners with various universities to develop improved methods for  powering spacecraft, including solar cell technologies.
Sixteen initiatives support demonstration activities focused on  photovoltaic technologies by federal laboratories and researchers. For  example, NASA’s High-Efficiency Space Power Systems initiative  conducts activities at NASA’s Glenn Research Center to develop  technologies to provide low cost and abundant power for deep space  missions, such as highly reliable solar arrays, to enable a crewed  mission to explore a near Earth asteroid. DOE’s Solar Energy  Technologies Program (SETP), which includes the Photovoltaic  Research and Development initiative, works with national laboratories  such as the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Sandia National  Laboratories, Brookhaven National Laboratory, and Oak Ridge  Laboratory to advance a variety of photovoltaic technologies to enable  solar energy to be as cost competitive as traditional energy sources  by 2015.
Seven initiatives supported applied research on concentrated solar  power technologies by industry. For example, DOE’s SETP  Concentrated Solar Power subprogram, which focuses on reducing  the cost of and increasing the use of solar power in the United States,  funded a company to develop the hard coat on reflective mirrors that  is now being used in concentrated solar power applications. In  addition, DOD’s Fast Access Spacecraft Testbed Program, which  concluded in March 2011, funded industry to demonstrate a suite of  critical technologies including high-efficiency solar cells, sunlight  concentrating arrays, large deployable structures, and ultra- lightweight solar arrays.
Additionally, 40 of the 65 initiatives overlap with at least one other  initiative in that they supported similar broad goals, types of technologies,  and technology advancement activities.
Providing lightweight, portable energy sources. Officials from several  initiatives within DOD reported that their initiatives supported  demonstration activities with the broad goal of providing lightweight,  portable energy sources for military applications. For example, the  goal of the Department of the Army’s Basic Solar Power Generation  Research initiative is to determine the feasibility and applicability of  lightweight flexible, foldable solar panels for remote site power  generation in tactical battlefield applications. Similarly, the goal of the  Office of the Secretary of Defense’s Engineered Bio-Molecular Nano- Devices and Systems initiative is to provide a low-cost, lightweight,  portable photovoltaic device to reduce the footprint and logistical  burden on the warfighter.
Artificial photosynthesis. Several initiatives at DOE and NSF reported  having the broad goal of supporting artificial photosynthesis, which  converts sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water into a fuel, such as  hydrogen. For example, one of DOE’s Energy Innovation Hubs, the  Fuels from Sunlight Hub, supports basic research to develop an  artificial photosynthesis system with the specific goals of (1)  understanding and designing catalytic complexes or solids that  generate chemical fuel from carbon dioxide and/or water; (2)  integrating all essential elements, from light capture to fuel formation  components, into an effective system; and (3) providing a pragmatic  evaluation of the system under development. NSF’s Catalysis and  Biocatalysis initiative has a specific goal of developing new materials  that will be catalysts for converting sunlight into usable energy for  direct use, or for conversion into electricity, or into fuel for use in fuel  cell applications.
Integrating solar energy into the grid. Officials from several initiatives  reported focusing on demonstration activities for technologies with the  broad goal of integrating solar or renewable energies into the grid or  onto military bases. For example, DOE’s Smart Grid Research and  Development initiative has a goal of developing smart grid  technologies, particularly those that help match supply and demand  in real time, to enable the integration of renewable energies, including  solar energy, into the grid by helping stabilize variability and facilitate  the safe and cost-effective operation by utilities and consumers. The  goal of this initiative is to achieve a 20 percent improvement in the  ratio of the average power supplied to the maximum demand for  power during a specified period by 2020. DOD’s Installation Energy  Research initiative has a goal of developing better ways to integrate  solar energy into a grid system, thereby optimizing the benefit of  renewable energy sources.
Some initiatives may overlap on key characteristics such as technology  advancement activities, types of technologies, types of recipients, or  broad goals, but they also differ in meaningful ways that could result in  specific and complementary research efforts, which may not be apparent  when analyzing the characteristics. For example, an Army official told us  that both the Army and Marine Corps were interested in developing a  flexible solar substrate, which is a photovoltaic panel laminated onto  fabric that can be rolled up and carried in a backpack. The Army  developed technology that included a battery through its initiative, while  the Marine Corps, through a separate initiative, altered the Army’s  technology to create a flexible solar substrate without a battery. Other  initiatives may also overlap on key characteristics, but the efforts  undertaken by their respective projects may complement each other  rather than result in duplication. For example, DOE officials told us that  one solar company may receive funding from multiple federal initiatives  for different components of a larger project, thus simultaneously  supporting a common goal without providing duplicative support.
While we did not find clear instances of duplicative initiatives, it is possible  that there are duplicative activities among the initiatives that could be  consolidated or resolved through enhanced coordination across agencies  and at the initiative level. Also, it is possible that there are instances in  which recipients receive funding from more than one federal source or  that initiatives may fund some activities that would have otherwise sought  and received private funding. Because it was beyond the scope of this  work to look at the vast number of activities and individual awards that are  encompassed in the initiatives we evaluated, we were unable to rule out  the existence of any such duplication of activities or funding.
section_title: To Avoid Duplication, Agencies Coordinate and Verify That Recipients Did Not Receive Duplicative Funding
paragraphs: Officials from 57 of the 65 initiatives (88 percent) reported coordinating  with other solar-related initiatives. Coordination is important because, as  we have previously reported, a lack of coordination can waste scarce  funds and limit the overall effectiveness of the federal effort. We have  also previously reported that coordination across programs may help  address fragmentation, overlap, and duplication. Officials from nearly all  initiatives that we identified as overlapping in their broad goals, types of  technologies, and technology advancement activities, reported  coordinating with other solar-related initiatives. In October 2005, we  identified key practices that can help enhance and sustain federal agency  coordination, such as (1) establishing joint strategies, which help align  activities, core processes, and resources to accomplish a common  outcome; (2) developing mechanisms to evaluate and report on the  progress of achieving results, which allow agencies to identify areas for  improvement; (3) leveraging resources, which helps obtain additional  benefits that would not be available if agencies or offices were working  separately; and (4) defining a common outcome, which helps overcome  differences in missions, cultures, and established ways of doing  business. Agency officials at solar-related initiatives reported  coordination activities that are consistent with these key practices, as  described below.
Some agency officials reported undertaking formal activities within their  own agency to coordinate the efforts of multiple initiatives. For example:
Establishing a joint strategy. NSF initiatives reported participating in  an Energy Working Group, which includes initiatives in the agency’s  Directorates for Mathematical and Physical Sciences and for  Engineering. Officials from initiatives we identified as overlapping  reported participating in the Energy Working Group. NSF formed this  group to initiate coordination of energy-related efforts between the two  directorates, including solar efforts, and tasked it with establishing a  uniform clean, sustainable energy strategy and implementation plan  for the agency.
Developing mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and report results. DOD  officials from initiatives in the Army, Marine Corps, and Navy that we  identified as overlapping reported they participated in the agency’s  Energy and Power Community of Interest. The goal of this group is  to coordinate the R&D activities within DOD. The group is scheduled  to meet every quarter, but an Army official told us the group has been  meeting every 3 to 4 weeks recently to produce R&D road maps and  to identify any gaps in energy and power R&D efforts that need to be  addressed. Because of the information sharing that occurs during  these meetings, the official said the risk of such duplication of efforts  across initiatives within DOD is minimized.
In responding to our questionnaire, agency officials also reported  engaging in formal activities across agencies to coordinate the efforts of  multiple initiatives. For example:
Leveraging resources. The Interagency Advanced Power Group  (IAPG), which includes the Central Intelligence Agency, DOD, DOE,  NASA, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, is a  federal membership organization that was established in the 1950s to  streamline energy efforts across the government and to avoid  duplicating research efforts. A number of smaller working groups were  formed as part of this effort, including the Renewable Energy  Conversion Working Group, which includes the coordination of solar  efforts. The working groups are to meet at least once each year, but  according to a DOD official, working group members often meet more  often than that in conjunction with outside conferences and  workshops. The purpose of the meetings is to present each agency’s  portfolio of research efforts and to inform and ultimately leverage  resources across the participating agencies. According to IAPG  documents, group activities allow agencies to identify and avoid  duplication of efforts. Several of the initiatives that we identified as  overlapping also reported participating in the IAPG.
Leveraging resources and defining a common outcome. DOE’s SETP  in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)  coordinates with DOE’s Office of Science and the Advanced  Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) through the SunShot  Initiative, which according to SunShot officials, was established  expressly to prevent duplication of efforts while maximizing  agencywide impact on solar energy technologies. The goal of the  SunShot Initiative is to reduce the total installed cost of solar energy  systems by 75 percent. SunShot officials said program managers  from all three offices participate on the SunShot management team,  which holds “brain-storming” meetings to discuss ideas for upcoming  funding announcements and subsequently vote on proposed funding  announcements. Officials from other DOE offices and other federal  agencies are invited to participate, with coordination occurring as  funding opportunities arise in order to leverage resources. Officials  said meetings may include as few as 25 or as many as 85 attendees,  depending on the type of project and the expertise required of the  attending officials. Additionally, DOE and NSF coordinate through the  SunShot Initiative on the Foundational Program to Advance Cell  Efficiency (F-PACE), which identifies and funds solar device physics  and photovoltaic technology research and development that will  improve photovoltaic cell performance and reduce module cost for  grid-scale commercial applications. The initiatives that reported  participating in SunShot activities also included many that we found to  be overlapping.
Developing joint strategies; developing mechanisms to monitor,  evaluate, and report results; and defining a common outcome. The  National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) an interagency program,  which includes DOD, DOE, NASA, NSF, and USDA, among others,  was established to coordinate the nanotechnology-related activities  across federal agencies that fund nanoscale research or have a stake  in the outcome of this research. The NNI is directed to (1) establish  goals, priorities, and metrics for evaluation for federal nanotechnology  research, development, and other activities; (2) invest in federal R&D  programs in nanotechnology and related sciences to achieve these  goals; and (3) provide for interagency coordination of federal  nanotechnology research, development, and other activities. The NNI  implementation plan states that the NNI will maximize the federal  investment in nanotechnology and avoid unnecessary duplication of  efforts. NNI includes a subgroup that focuses on nanotechnology for  solar energy collection and conversion. Specifically, this subgroup is  to (1) improve photovoltaic solar electricity generation with  nanotechnology, (2) improve solar thermal energy generation and  conversion with nanotechnology, and (3) improve solar-to-fuel  conversions with nanotechnology.
In addition to the coordination efforts above, officials reported through our  questionnaire that their agencies coordinate through discussions with  other agency officials or as part of the program and project management  and review processes. Some officials said such discussions and reviews  among officials occur explicitly to determine whether there is duplication  of funding occurring. For example, SETP projects include technical merit  reviews, which include peer reviewers from outside of the federal  government, as well as a federal review panel composed of officials from  several agencies. Officials from SETP also participate in the technical  merit reviews of other DOE offices’ projects. ARPA-E initiatives also go  through a review process that includes federal officials and independent  experts. DOE officials told us that an ARPA-E High Energy Advanced  Thermal Storage review meeting, an instance of potential duplicative  funding was found with an SETP project. Funding of the project through  SETP was subsequently removed because of the ARPA-E review  process, and no duplicative funds were expended.
In addition to coordinating to avoid duplication, officials from 59 of the 65  initiatives (91 percent) reported that they determine whether applicants  have received other sources of federal funding for the project for which  they are applying. Twenty-one of the 65 initiatives (32 percent) further  reported that they have policies that either prohibit or permit recipients  from receiving other sources of federal funding for projects. Some  respondents to our questionnaire said it is part of their project  management process to follow up with funding recipients on a regular  basis to determine whether they have subsequently received other  sources of funding. For example, DOE’s ARPA-E prohibits recipients from  receiving duplicative funding from either public or private sources, and  requires disclosure of other sources of funding both at the time of  application, as well as on a quarterly basis throughout the performance of  the award. Even if an agency requires that such funding information be  disclosed on applications, applicants may choose not to disclose it. In  fact, it was recently discovered that a university researcher did not identify  other sources of funding on his federal applications as was required and  accepted funding for the same research on solar conversion of carbon  dioxide into hydrocarbons from both NSF and DOE. Ultimately, the  professor was charged with and pleaded guilty to wire fraud, false  statements, and money laundering in connection with the federal  research grant.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided DOD, DOE, EPA, NASA, NSF, and USDA with a draft of this  report for review and comment. USDA generally agreed with the overall  findings of the report. NASA and NSF provided technical or clarifying  comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. DOD, DOE, and EPA  indicated that they had no comments on the report.
As agreed with your offices, 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 to the Secretaries of  Agriculture, Defense, and Energy; the Administrators of EPA and NASA;  the Director of NSF; the appropriate congressional committees; and other  interested parties. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on  the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on  the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this  report are listed in appendix IV.
section_title: Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: The objectives of our report were to identify (1) solar-related initiatives  supported by federal agencies in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 and key  characteristics of those initiatives and (2) the extent of fragmentation,  overlap, and duplication, if any, among federal solar-related initiatives, as  well as the extent of coordination among these initiatives.
To inform our objectives, we reviewed a February 2012 GAO report that  was conducted to identify federal agencies’ renewable energy initiatives,  which included solar-related initiatives, and examine the federal roles the  agencies’ initiatives support. The GAO report on renewable energy- related initiatives identified nearly 700 initiatives that were implemented  in fiscal year 2010 across the federal government, of which 345 initiatives  supported solar energy. For purposes of this report, we only included  those solar-related initiatives that we determined were focused on  research and development (R&D), and commercialization, which we  defined as follows:
Research and development. Efforts ranging from defining scientific  concepts to those applying and demonstrating new and improved  technologies.
Commercialization. Efforts to bridge the gap between research and  development activities and the marketplace by transitioning  technologies to commercial applications.
We did not include those initiatives that focused solely on deployment  activities, which include efforts to facilitate or achieve widespread use of  existing technologies either in the commercial market or for nonmarket  uses such as defense, through their construction, operation, or use.  Initiatives that focus on deployment activities include a variety of tax  incentives. We also narrowed our list to only those initiatives that focused  research on advancing or developing new and innovative solar  technologies.
Next, we shared our list with agency officials and provided our definitions  of R&D and commercialization. We asked officials to determine whether  the list was complete and accurate for fiscal year 2010 initiatives that met  our criteria, whether those initiatives were still active in fiscal year 2011,  and whether there were any new initiatives in fiscal year 2011. If officials  wanted to remove an initiative from our list, we asked for additional  information to support the removal. In total, we determined that there  were 65 initiatives that met our criteria.
To identify and describe the key characteristics of solar-related initiatives  implemented by federal agencies, we developed a questionnaire to  collect information from officials of those 65 federal solar energy-related  initiatives. The questionnaire was prepopulated with information that was  obtained from the agencies for GAO’s renewable energy report including  program descriptions, type of solar technology supported, funding  mechanisms, and type of funding recipients. Questions included the type  of technology advancement activities, obligations for solar activities in  fiscal years 2010 and 2011, initiative-wide and solar-specific goals, and  coordination efforts with other solar-related initiatives. We conducted  pretests with officials of three different initiatives at three different  agencies to check that (1) the questions were clear and unambiguous, (2)  terminology was used correctly, (3) the questionnaire did not place an  undue burden on agency officials, (4) the information could feasibly be  obtained, and (5) the questionnaire was comprehensive and unbiased. An  independent GAO reviewer also reviewed a draft of the questionnaire  prior to its administration. On the basis of feedback from these pretests  and independent review, we revised the survey in order to improve its  clarity.
After completing the pretests, we administered the questionnaire. We  sent questionnaires to the appropriate agency liaisons in an attached  Microsoft Word form, who in turn sent the questionnaires to the  appropriate officials. We received questionnaire responses for each  initiative and, thus, had a response rate of 100 percent. After reviewing  the responses, we conducted follow-up e-mail exchanges or telephone  discussions with agency officials when responses were unclear or  conflicting. When necessary, we used the clarifying information provided  by agency officials to update answers to questions to improve the  accuracy and completeness of the data.
Because this effort was not a sample survey, it has no sampling errors.  However, the practical difficulties of conducting any survey may introduce  errors, commonly referred to as nonsampling errors. For example,  difficulties in interpreting a particular question, sources of information  available to respondents, or entering data into a database or analyzing  them can introduce unwanted variability into the survey results. However,  we took steps to minimize such nonsampling errors in developing the  questionnaire—including using a social science survey specialist for  design and pretesting the questionnaire. We also minimized the  nonsampling errors when collecting and analyzing the data, including  using a computer program for analysis, and using an independent analyst  to review the computer program. Finally, we verified the accuracy of a  small sample of keypunched records by comparing them with their  corresponding questionnaires, and we corrected the errors we found.  Less than 0.5 percent of the data items we checked had random  keypunch errors that would not have been corrected during data  processing. To conduct our analysis, a technologist compared all of the  initiatives and identified overlapping initiatives as those sharing at least  one common technology advancement activity, one common technology,  and having similar goals. A second technologist then completed the same  analysis, and the two then compared their findings and, where they  differed, came to a joint decision as to which initiatives broadly  overlapped on their technology advancement activities, technologies, and  broad goals. If the two technologists could not come to an agreement, a  third technologist determined whether there was overlap. To assess the  reliability of obligations data, we asked officials of initiatives that  comprised over 90 percent of the total obligations follow-up questions on  the data systems used to generate that data. While we did not verify all  responses, on the basis of our application of recognized survey design  practices and follow-up procedures, we determined that the data used in  this report were of sufficient quality for our purposes.
We conducted this performance audit from September 2011 to August  2012 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: Solar-Related Initiatives at Six Federal Agencies, Descriptions and Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011 Obligations
paragraphs: Tables 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 provide descriptions, by agency, of the 65  initiatives that support solar energy technologies and the obligations for  those initiatives’ solar activities in fiscal years 2010 and 2011.
section_title: Appendix III: GAO’s Questionnaire for Federal Agencies with Initiatives Supporting Solar Energy Technologies
section_title: Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the individual named above, key contributors to this report  included Karla Springer (Assistant Director), Tanya Doriss, Cindy Gilbert,  Jessica Lemke, Cynthia Norris, Jerome Sandau, Holly Sasso, Maria  Stattel, and Barbara Timmerman.