Green Building: Federal Initiatives for the Nonfederal Sector Could Benefit from More Interagency Collaboration
Published: 2011-11-02T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Economic, environmental, and health concerns have spurred interest in "green building"--construction and maintenance practices designed to make efficient use of resources, reduce environmental problems, and provide long-term financial and health benefits. Federal laws and executive orders direct agencies to meet green building standards in federal buildings and to foster green building in the nonfederal sector; the latter includes private, state, local, and tribal entities and accounts for the majority of the nation's buildings. GAO was asked to (1) identify current initiatives by federal agencies to foster green building in the nonfederal sector and (2) determine what is known about the results of these initiatives. As part of the review, GAO sent questionnaires to the 11 agencies implementing the initiatives identified, including the Departments of Energy (DOE) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); examined agency documents; and spoke with agency officials. GAO did not report funding data because officials stated that agencies do not track many green building funds separately.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: GAO identified 94 federal initiatives--implemented by 11 agencies--that foster green building in the nonfederal sector. About two-thirds of these initiatives are implemented by HUD (29 initiatives), EPA (18), and DOE (17). According to GAO's analysis of agency questionnaire responses, the initiatives vary in how they foster green building in the following ways: (1) Elements fostered. All initiatives foster at least one of six green building elements GAO identified. Three-quarters foster more than one element, and 21 initiatives across 7 agencies foster all six elements. (2) Direct or indirect fostering. Over two-thirds (64) of the initiatives foster green building directly, and the rest foster green building as part of a broader effort that is focused not primarily on green building but on other purposes, such as expanding the supply of affordable housing for low-income elderly. (3) Type of assistance. The initiatives provide multiple types of assistance, mostly through grants (47 initiatives) and technical assistance (45). (4) Recipients expected to benefit. The direct beneficiaries identified by agencies range from individual property owners and renters to state governments. About one-third of the initiatives have green building goals and performance measures; however, the overall results of most initiatives and their related investments are unknown. For example, according to HUD officials, to measure the results of the Green Retrofit Program for Multifamily Housing, HUD analyzes energy consumption data before and after retrofitting properties. Other agency officials reported various reasons for not having goals and measures, such as challenges in gathering reliable performance data. GAO identified some instances in which agencies have begun to collaborate to assess results but did not identify governmentwide collaboration on initiatives for the nonfederal sector. As GAO has reported, agencies and programs working collaboratively can often achieve more public value than when they work in isolation. Agencies with green building initiatives for the nonfederal sector may be missing opportunities to, among other things, reach agreement on governmentwide goals and measures for assessing the overall progress of their green building efforts.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO recommends that DOE, HUD, and EPA lead an effort to collaborate with other agencies on assessing the results of federal green building initiatives for the nonfederal sector. DOE, HUD, and EPA generally agreed with the recommendation, and HUD and other agencies provided technical clarifications, which GAO incorporated into the report as appropriate.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Economic, environmental, and human health concerns have spurred  interest in “green building”—construction and maintenance practices  designed to make efficient use of resources, reduce environmental  problems, and provide long-term financial and health benefits through  lower annual operating costs and better indoor air quality. These  practices are intended to help address issues posed by traditional  commercial and residential construction and maintenance practices for  buildings. According to the Department of Energy (DOE), in 2008,  buildings in the United States consumed almost 40 percent of the nation’s  energy and emitted about 39 percent of its carbon dioxide, a greenhouse  gas recognized as a major contributor to climate change. In addition,  DOE reports that the approximately 30 million to 35 million tons of  construction, renovation, and demolition waste produced annually in the  nation accounts for about 24 percent of municipal solid waste, although  as much as 95 percent of this waste could be recycled. Furthermore,  according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), exposure to  indoor air pollutants, such as radon and formaldehyde, can lead to  harmful health effects, from headaches to respiratory diseases.
In response to concerns about energy consumption, among other things,  federal laws and executive orders have directed agencies to reduce  energy consumption and meet other green building requirements in  federally owned or leased buildings. For buildings not subject to these  requirements because they are owned or leased by private, state, local,  or tribal entities, laws have also directed federal agencies to foster green  building. In this report, we refer to these entities and their buildings as the  “nonfederal sector,” which accounts for the majority of the nation’s  buildings. For example, one provision of the Energy Independence and  Security Act of 2007 created DOE’s Office of Commercial High- Performance Green Buildings to facilitate the development of green  commercial buildings in partnership with other federal and nonfederal  entities. In addition, agencies have initiated their own efforts to foster  green building in the nonfederal sector. For example, as we reported in  2008, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)  promotes green building in public housing and a small segment of  multifamily properties by providing training and technical assistance;  offering financial incentives to housing authorities for energy conservation  measures; and leveraging resources through partnerships with DOE and  EPA to expand the use of energy-efficient products in public and assisted  housing. In 2010, the U.S. Green Building Council and other sponsoring  organizations in energy, housing, environment, and real estate identified  existing federal authorities and programs they believed could be used to  achieve green buildings for multifamily and commercial buildings. In  addition, a recent report by DOE’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory  assessed agency programs related to one component of green building— energy efficiency—but not others.
In this context, you asked us to review how the federal government is  fostering green building in the nonfederal sector. Our objectives were to (1)  identify current initiatives by federal agencies to foster green building in the  nonfederal sector and (2) determine what is known about the results of  these initiatives on fostering green building in the nonfederal sector.
To identify current initiatives by federal agencies to foster green building  in the nonfederal sector, we reviewed (1) the Energy Independence and  Security Act of 2007 requirements for a high-performance green building,  (2) the U.S. Green Building Council’s green building certification system,  (3) the Green Globes assessment and rating system, (4) the Enterprise  Community Partners green communities criteria, and (5) a 2006  memorandum of understanding signed by 19 federal agencies and offices  to commit to leadership in the design, construction, and operation of high- performance and sustainable buildings. From our review, we identified  six generally recognized green building elements and a list of key terms  based on these six elements. We searched federal documents, websites,  and databases for initiatives with descriptions containing the terms and  that were active during fiscal year 2011. On the basis of this search, we  identified initiatives and the 11 agencies responsible for them. We spoke  with officials at these agencies to confirm that the initiatives were current,  and we asked the officials to identify other initiatives they were aware of  that might fall within the scope of our objectives. We then designed a  questionnaire and submitted it to the agencies. For each initiative, the  questionnaire asked agency officials to (1) confirm general information,  (2) report funding, (3) identify goals and performance measures, and (4)  provide other information to help understand the initiative. We received a  questionnaire response for every initiative and conducted follow-up  discussions with officials, as needed, to clarify responses and collect  more data. To determine what is known about the results of these  initiatives on fostering green building in the nonfederal sector, in addition  to analyzing questionnaire data on goals and performance measures, we  selected a subgroup of initiatives for which fostering green building is a  primary goal. For this subgroup, we reviewed agency documents and  interviewed officials about their progress on fostering green building in the  nonfederal sector. We also visited projects receiving assistance from  some of these initiatives and interviewed project managers, among  others. During this review, we did not evaluate the effectiveness of green  building initiatives, including the extent to which entities may or may not  have received benefits, or the effectiveness of green building practices in  general. We did not report questionnaire responses about funding  because, during follow-up discussions, officials stated that, for many  initiatives, green building funds are not tracked separately from other  activities; therefore, we could not collect reliable funding data. We  recognize that the initiatives may vary greatly in the scale of their funding  or the number of entities expected to benefit, among other things;  however, in this report, we do not discuss these differences or compare  the scale of the initiatives we identified. A detailed description of our  scope and methodology is presented in appendix I, and a copy of our  questionnaire is presented in appendix IV.
We conducted this performance audit from September 2010 to November  2011 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: Green building is the practice of designing, constructing, operating,  maintaining, and removing buildings in ways that conserve natural  resources and reduce pollution. There is no generally accepted definition  for green building, but according to our analysis of various standards, it  may incorporate one or more of the following six generally recognized  elements:    energy conservation or efficiency measures: the use of strategies to  reduce energy consumption in a building or use renewable sources of  energy;  indoor environmental quality measures: the use of strategies to  enhance indoor environmental quality through ventilation, control of  pollution sources, and the use of low pollution-emitting materials;    water conservation or efficiency measures: the use of strategies to  reduce water consumption inside and outside the building;  integrated design principles: the use of a collaborative planning and  design process that involves a project team with a variety of  stakeholders, such as architects, builders, and building engineers,  who participate in all stages of a building’s lifecycle, including  planning, building, and operation;  sustainable siting or location measures: the use of certain strategies  when deciding on building location, including discouraging  development on previously undeveloped land and minimizing a  building’s impact on the nearby ecosystem, among other things; and    measures to reduce the environmental impact of materials: the use of  strategies to reduce the environmental impact of materials, such as  using sustainably grown materials and products with high recycled  content, among other things.
Not having a generally accepted definition for green building has led to  the development of several national and regional standards that builders  and developers can use to certify whether a particular structure is a green  building. These standards include the Leadership in Energy and  Environmental Design (LEED) rating system—the most widely known  standard—which was developed and is administered by the U.S. Green  Building Council. Many of these standards use a system that assigns  points for a variety of practices and certifies a building at various levels of  “green” depending on the number of points acquired.
The federal government has long shown an interest in promoting green  building practices in buildings owned or leased by federal agencies. For  example, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 contains efficiency requirements  for the use of energy and water in federal buildings. Furthermore, the  federal Interagency Sustainability Working Group was formed under  DOE’s Interagency Energy Management Task Force in 2001 in response  to an executive order to, among other things, serve as a forum and  develop policy and technical guidance to promote green building for  federally owned, operated, and leased buildings. The group is  coordinated by DOE and consists of approximately 60 active members,  including at least one representative from every major federal department  and agency.
More recently, the federal government has also focused on promoting  green building practices in the nonfederal sector. For example, the  Energy Policy Act of 2005 provided tax credits for home improvements  that increase energy efficiency and tax deductions for commercial  buildings that meet specific efficiency standards; the Energy  Independence and Security Act of 2007 authorized $1.52 billion over 10  years, starting in fiscal year 2008, for DOE’s efforts to promote  commercial green building in partnership with other federal, as well as  nonfederal, entities; and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of  2009 (Recovery Act) provided at least $13 billion to foster green building  in the nonfederal sector through various agency initiatives, such as DOE’s  Weatherization Assistance Program—which is designed to make long- term energy-efficiency improvements to the homes of low-income  families. Weatherization includes installing high-efficiency boilers,  insulation, and energy-efficient windows.
The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) provides  tools that agencies can use to assess the results of their activities,  including efforts that foster green building. Under GPRA, federal  agencies are required to develop strategic plans with long-term, outcome- oriented goals and objectives, annual goals linked to achieving the long- term goals, and annual reports on the results achieved. Principles of good  governance also indicate that agencies should establish quantifiable  performance measures to demonstrate how they intend to achieve their  program goals and measure the extent to which they have done so.  These measures should allow agencies to compare their programs’ actual  results with desired results and should be linked to program goals.  Moreover, as we have reported, GPRA, with its focus on strategic  planning, the development of long-term goals, and accountability for  results, provides a framework that Congress, the Office of Management  and Budget, and executive branch agencies can use to consider the  appropriate mix of long-term strategic goals and strategies needed to  identify and address federal goals that cut across agency boundaries. For  example, we have reported that the strategic and annual performance  planning processes under GPRA provide opportunities for federal  agencies to identify other agencies addressing related outcomes and  coordinate with agencies across the government to ensure that program  goals are complementary; strategies are mutually reinforcing; and, as  appropriate, common performance measures are used. To this end,  under the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, agencies will be required to  adopt a more coordinated and crosscutting approach to achieving  common goals and will be required to describe in their fiscal year 2012  performance plans, and each fiscal year thereafter, how they are  coordinating and collaborating with other agencies to achieve the plans’  goals.
section_title: Agencies Foster Green Building in the Nonfederal Sector through More Than 90 Initiatives, Primarily for Energy Conservation or Efficiency
paragraphs: We identified 94 federal initiatives that foster green building in the  nonfederal sector; these initiatives, implemented by 11 agencies, vary in  how they foster green building, including which elements of green building  they foster, whether fostering green building is a primary purpose of the  initiative, what types of assistance they provide, and what groups are  expected to benefit. Furthermore, some of these initiatives are required  by statute, while others are being implemented under agencies’  discretionary authority. A description and other information for each  initiative are presented in appendixes II and III.
subsections: section_title: Eleven Agencies Foster Green Building in the Nonfederal Sector, Most Commonly through Energy Conservation or Efficiency
paragraphs: Table 1 shows the 11 federal agencies implementing the 94 green  building initiatives we identified. As table 1 indicates, 3 of the 11 agencies  fostering green building in the nonfederal sector—HUD, EPA, and DOE— are implementing most (about two-thirds) of these initiatives.
We examined the 94 initiatives by (1) the type of green building elements  they foster, (2) whether they foster green building directly or indirectly as  part of a broader effort, (3) the type of assistance they provide, and (4)  the recipients expected to directly benefit from the assistance.
Many of the initiatives we identified foster multiple elements of green  building. Table 2—which shows the green building elements fostered by  the 94 initiatives—indicates that energy conservation or efficiency is the  most commonly fostered element of green building.
All 11 agencies reported implementing initiatives that foster green building  through the energy conservation or efficiency element. For example, DOE’s  Tribal Energy Program offers financial and technical assistance to Indian  tribes to help them evaluate and develop methods to reduce their energy  consumption through energy efficiency and weatherization of buildings.  This program also provides education and training opportunities to develop  and implement energy-efficiency and renewable-energy projects. In  addition, the tax code offers the Energy Investment Tax Credit— implemented by the Department of the Treasury’s (Treasury) Internal  Revenue Service (IRS)—which provides tax credits to businesses for  certain qualified renewable-energy and energy-efficiency technologies. This  program includes incentives for combined heat and power investment and  for fuel cells and microturbines. However, the agencies reported that most  initiatives fostering green building through the energy conservation or  efficiency element also foster green building through one or more additional  elements. For example, the National Institute of Standards and  Technology’s (NIST) Improved Building Energy Performance Program is  intended to develop better tools for accurately evaluating a building’s  energy consumption and indoor air quality after it is constructed.
According to our analysis of questionnaire responses, about three- quarters of the 94 initiatives foster green building through more than one  element, including 21 initiatives across seven agencies that foster green  building through all six green building elements. For example, through the  Tribal Green Building Initiative, EPA is working with tribal and federal  partners to advance tribes’ efforts to adopt building codes related to green  building and to address barriers associated with developing and  implementing these codes. The initiative supports tribal building codes  that reduce energy and water use, improve indoor air quality, use  nontoxic building materials, and conserve other resources—all of which  touch on the six elements of green building. In addition, HUD’s Green  Retrofit Program for Multifamily Housing makes loans and grants for  retrofits (i.e., the addition of new technology or features to older systems)  that foster any or all of the green building elements in certain HUD- assisted multifamily buildings.
According to our analysis, over two-thirds (64) of the 94 initiatives foster  green building directly—that is, one of their primary purposes is to foster  green building through one or more green building elements. For  example, EPA’s Indoor Environments Program is intended to provide  resources to promote and protect occupants’ health while saving energy  and money. These resources include Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools,  a program whose goal is to help schools establish and maintain a healthy  environment in school buildings by providing guidance, training,  checklists, and other resources to identify, correct, and prevent indoor air  quality problems; and the Radon Program, which is intended to promote  radon-resistant construction techniques for new homes and to educate  the public on radon testing and mitigation technologies in existing homes.
The remaining 30 initiatives foster green building indirectly—that is, as  part of a broader effort not primarily focused on green building. For  example, HUD’s Supportive Housing for the Elderly (Section 202)  program is intended to expand the supply of affordable housing with  services for the low-income elderly by providing them with options for  independent living in an environment with support activities, such as  cleaning, cooking, and transportation. HUD seeks to accomplish this  purpose by providing interest-free capital advances to private and  nonprofit sponsors to finance development of the housing. To support  HUD’s strategic goal of reducing energy consumption, however, HUD  requires applicants seeking Section 202 funding for new construction and  substantial rehabilitation projects to include energy efficiency and water  conservation strategies. In addition, HUD requires pre- and post- construction energy audits for other types of rehabilitation projects funded  through the Section 202 program.
Agencies reported that many of the 94 initiatives foster green building by  providing multiple types of assistance, most commonly through grants or  technical assistance, as shown in table 3. Technical assistance can take  many forms, including technical guidance and expert advice; tools to  evaluate performance against green building metrics; education on the  benefits of green building; and work with organizations and end users to  develop strategies to achieve their green building goals.
Agencies reported providing grants for different purposes related to green  building. For example, DOE’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block  Grant is intended to assist U.S. cities, counties, states, territories, and  Indian tribes to develop, promote, implement, and manage energy  efficiency and conservation projects for buildings, among other things. In  addition, the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Small Business  Energy Audit and Energy Efficiency Program makes grants to Small  Business Development Centers—partnerships primarily between the  federal government and colleges and universities—to provide green  building-related training to small businesses. Also, the Department of  Transportation’s (DOT) Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and  Energy Reduction Program is intended to provide grants to public transit  agencies to implement new strategies to reduce greenhouse gas  emissions or reduce energy usage from their operations.
Agencies reported that the 94 initiatives are expected to directly benefit a  variety of recipients and can directly benefit multiple recipients, as shown  in table 4.
As table 4 indicates, the types of recipients that agencies reported  expecting to directly benefit from these initiatives range widely. For  example, under IRS’s Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Deduction,  businesses can claim a tax deduction for equipment that reduces energy  costs in buildings associated with lighting systems; building envelopes;  and heating, cooling, ventilation, and hot water systems. In addition,  through the Sustainable Community Challenge Planning Grants Program,  HUD makes funds available to state and local governments, tribal  governments, and other entities to, among other things, promote green  building and revise their building codes to allow for more energy-efficient  rehabilitation of older buildings. Furthermore, through the WaterSense  program, EPA partners with local water utilities, local governments,  product manufacturers, retailers, and consumers to promote water- efficient products and practices, which can benefit a wide variety of  recipients—including individual property owners, state and local  governments, public housing agencies, and businesses. Products and  new homes can earn the WaterSense label by being independently  certified to meet EPA’s criteria for efficiency and performance. For  example, WaterSense-labeled plumbing fixtures reportedly use at least  20 percent less water and perform as well or better than standard models.
Recipients of some of these initiatives told us that these initiatives provide  indirect benefits as a result of the money saved through green building  retrofits. For example, officials representing two apartment complexes we  visited said they are able to use the money saved to offer additional  services to their tenants that improve their quality of life. One official  stated these additional services include after-school programs and dental  services.
section_title: Some Agency Efforts to Foster Green Building Are Required by Statute
paragraphs: According to our analysis of questionnaire responses, agencies are  implementing many of the initiatives we identified because they are  required to by statute. For example, the Energy Independence and  Security Act of 2007 directed DOE to conduct outreach activities to inform  the public about education resources, technical assistance, or other forms  of assistance useful in planning and constructing high-performance green  building. DOE officials stated that they are implementing the Commercial  Building Initiative because of this requirement. According to DOE, this  initiative is intended to improve the energy efficiency of new and existing  commercial buildings by researching technologies, strategies, and tools  that improve energy savings and by working with commercial building  owners and operators to ensure these technologies are market ready.
In addition, EPA’s Brownfields Program—required by the Small Business  Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act—provides financial and  technical assistance intended to encourage states, communities, and  other stakeholders to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and reuse  brownfields, which are properties where reuse may be complicated by the  potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.  By reusing brownfields, this program, among other things, is attempting to  encourage economic activity on previously developed land rather than on  undeveloped land, according to an EPA official.
Furthermore, USDA’s Rural Energy for America Program—required by  the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008—promotes energy  efficiency and renewable energy for agricultural producers and rural small  businesses through the use of (1) grants and loan guarantees for energy- efficiency improvements and renewable-energy systems and (2) grants  for energy audits and renewable energy development assistance.
According to our analysis of questionnaire responses, agencies are also  using their discretionary authority to implement some of the initiatives we  identified. For example, EPA’s Green Infrastructure Program is intended to  promote cost-effective strategies for storm-water management, including  using rain gardens, porous pavements, green roofs, trees and tree boxes,  and rainwater harvesting for nonpotable uses such as landscape irrigation.  In addition, DOE’s Superior Energy Performance Program is a certification  program intended to provide managers of industrial and commercial  buildings with guidance on how to achieve continual improvement in  energy efficiency while maintaining competitiveness. The program is  intended to provide a transparent, globally accepted system for verifying  energy performance improvements and management practices.
section_title: The Overall Results of Federal Green Building Initiatives in the Nonfederal Sector Are Unknown
paragraphs: About one-third of the federal initiatives we identified have green building  goals and performance measures; therefore, the overall results of most  initiatives and their related investments are unknown. Agency officials  provided several reasons for not having performance information on the  results of most green building initiatives for the nonfederal sector. To  assess initiatives’ results, some agencies have begun to collaborate, but  we did not identify any broader, or governmentwide, efforts to collaborate  on assessing the results of these initiatives in the nonfederal sector.
subsections: section_title: Some Initiatives Have Green Building Goals and Performance Measures
paragraphs: According to our analysis of questionnaire responses, about one-third of  the 94 federal initiatives we identified that foster green building in the  nonfederal sector had goals and performance measures specific to green  building. Following are two examples:    Under the Recovery Act, HUD established the Green Retrofit Program  for Multifamily Housing, which makes grants or loans to owners of  residential assisted housing for energy retrofit or other green  investments. According to HUD officials and our review of program  requirements and documents, HUD measures this initiative’s progress  toward green building goals by collecting energy consumption data for  participating properties before and after they are retrofitted and plans  to compare these data to calculate savings and evaluate  effectiveness. The Castle Square Apartments in Boston received  assistance under this initiative. Once completed, the project’s 192  midrise apartments will reduce energy consumption by 72 percent,  according to estimates by HUD officials and the private developer.    DOE’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program is a  $3.2 billion Recovery Act program that makes grants to cities,  counties, states, territories, and Indian tribes to develop and  implement energy efficiency and conservation projects for buildings,  among other things. DOE officials stated that the program has  implemented projects in more than 16,000 buildings. For example,  according to DOE’s response to our questionnaire, the city of San  Francisco used these funds to help multifamily residential property  owners replace aging, inefficient boiler systems. Also, according to its  response, DOE has established project management milestones and  goals for the program that measure overall progress. DOE officials  told us the program has no official green building targets, and grant  recipients determine their own green building goals, such as the  amount of building space they want to retrofit. According to its  questionnaire response, DOE strongly encourages, but does not  require, grant recipients conducting green building activities to  perform industry-standard measurement and verification of their  projects to track performance on key metrics such as energy savings  and emissions reductions. To accomplish this purpose, DOE has  issued optional guidance for grant recipients on program evaluation  and has provided resources and training on suggested methods for  recipients to estimate energy savings and collect data.
As we have reported, leading organizations commonly define clear goals  and related outcomes, measure performance to gauge progress, and use  performance information to assess the results of their efforts and the  related investment. Leading organizations recognize, as well, that  performance measures can create powerful incentives to influence  organizational and individual behavior. When resources are limited and  public demands are high, it is particularly important that agencies are  accountable to Congress, the executive branch, and the public for the  results of their activities and investments. In the federal sector, agencies  are required to meet green building goals for energy and water efficiency,  among other things. Federal agencies are also required to measure and  report to DOE the progress they have made meeting federal green  building goals. DOE, in turn, uses this information to report annually to  Congress on agencies’ energy use and progress toward meeting federal  green building goals.
section_title: Agency Officials Provided Reasons for Not Having Performance Information on the Results of Green Building
paragraphs: Agency officials provided various reasons for not having performance  information on the results of green building initiatives for the nonfederal  sector. For example, some agency officials said that many of the initiatives  we identified have a broader focus than green building and may have  performance goals and measures but not ones specific to green building.  Therefore, key performance information related to green building is often  not available. For instance, the HUD Supportive Housing for the Elderly  (Section 202) program is designed to help expand the supply of affordable  housing with services for the low-income elderly by providing them with  options for independent living in a supportive environment. According to our  analysis of questionnaire responses and program documents supplied by  HUD, in fiscal year 2010, HUD incorporated green building into this  program by establishing both minimum requirements as well as incentives  for, among other things, energy efficiency and water conservation practices  for these properties. In addition, Department of Defense (DOD) officials told  us that the main goal of DOD’s Environmental Security Technology  Certification Program is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and suitability of  energy technologies that could help DOD meet mandated reductions in  energy use. DOD officials said that the program has no overall goals  specific to green building; instead, individual demonstration projects under  the program use goals and performance measures specific to those  projects. The officials stated that it would not be appropriate for DOD to  expend the funds needed to assess the extent to which any of the  technologies developed affect green building.
In addition, agencies reported that they may not have information on the  results of green building initiatives for the nonfederal sector, in part,  because they face several challenges in gathering and analyzing  appropriate and reliable performance data. A 2011 industry report identified  several challenges in gathering utility usage data for multifamily properties,  including difficulty in obtaining the resources necessary to develop systems  for accurate data collection, a lack of industry standards for performance  data collection, and utility companies’ diverse policies governing data  sharing, as well as their wide-ranging capacities to collect data. HUD  officials told us the quality of utility data can vary by utility, especially for  water consumption data—which can be incomplete and inaccurate and is  often not available in electronic form. In addition, the results of some green  building elements are more easily measured than others. For example, a  General Services Administration official we interviewed testified before  Congress in 2010 that it is easier to compare before and after utility  consumption data (water or energy conservation or efficiency) than to  measure indoor environmental air quality or the impact a building’s siting  has on transportation. However, several federal and local agencies and  entities we reviewed reported making progress toward overcoming data  gathering and reporting challenges through better use of technology. For  example, officials at the Cambridge Housing Authority in Massachusetts  told us that they are developing an electronic billing system and installing  the technology necessary to collect and track utility usage. They said they  anticipate being able to use the system to generate quantitative energy  reports—a major step toward accurately measuring, analyzing, and  reporting energy consumption in the housing authority’s buildings.
section_title: Agencies Have Begun to Collaborate to Assess Results for Some Initiatives, but without Apparent Governmentwide Collaboration to Assess Overall Results
paragraphs: We identified some instances in which agencies are collaborating on  specific initiatives, including establishing compatible procedures and  adopting common performance measures for assessing results. As we  have previously reported, achieving results for the nation increasingly  requires that federal agencies work together to identify ways to deliver  results more efficiently and in a way that is consistent with their multiple  demands and limited resources. Agencies and programs working  collaboratively can often achieve more public value than when they work  in isolation. We have also identified key practices that can help enhance  and sustain such federal agency collaboration.
We found instances in which agencies used some of these key practices,  including establishing compatible procedures and adopting common  performance measures for assessing results, when working together on  specific initiatives that cut across agencies. For example, under the  Partnership for Sustainable Communities, DOT, EPA, and HUD  collaborated on a number of grant and technical assistance initiatives,  including recently developing guidance for HUD’s Community Challenge  Planning Grants Program. This program makes funds available to state  and local governments, tribal governments, and other entities to promote  affordable, economically vital, and sustainable communities through  green building and a variety of other eligible activities, including  developing building codes that promote the energy-efficient rehabilitation  of older buildings to create affordable and healthy housing. According to  earlier guidance, the agencies plan to adopt a common set of  performance measures for this and other related initiatives, but the more  recent guidance does not define these measures. Also, through the  Partnership for Sustainable Communities, DOT and HUD coordinated to  accept a single application for their respective transportation and  community planning grant programs that, according to agency  documents, made it easier for communities to apply to both programs  simultaneously. HUD officials told us that, other than through the  Partnership for Sustainable Communities, they typically coordinate on  green building on a targeted basis with DOE and EPA. According to these  officials, HUD has collaborated with EPA on the adoption of the Energy  Star standard in HUD programs. In addition, according to these officials,  HUD established an active partnership with DOE on the implementation  of the Recovery Act-funded Weatherization Assistance Program, as well  as on elements of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant  Program.
Furthermore, DOE chairs the Interagency Energy Management Task  Force, a group of agency headquarters energy managers who, among  other things, address energy issues affecting federal buildings and  operations. The task force includes 10 of the 11 agencies implementing  the initiatives in our review and establishes working groups for specific  issues—including green building—across federal agencies. Since 1988,  this task force has served as the interagency group for collaborating on  green building in the federal sector, measuring progress, and acting as a  forum for addressing challenges to green building and developing  common solutions for the federal sector. For example, one of the task  force’s working groups sought EPA’s expertise in storm-water  management to respond to new requirements in the Energy  Independence and Security Act of 2007. EPA developed and provided  guidance that other agencies could use in meeting the new requirements.
However, we did not identify a governmentwide effort to collaborate on  green building issues, including shared goals and common performance  measures, for the nonfederal sector that is comparable to the task force’s  efforts for the federal sector. Without such an effort, agencies may be  missing opportunities to, among other things, reach agreement on  governmentwide goals and measures for assessing the overall progress  of their efforts to foster green building in the nonfederal sector.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: The federal government has launched a variety of initiatives to promote  green building in the nonfederal sector—the vast majority of the nation’s  building stock. These initiatives are intended to reach many types of  beneficiaries, ranging from individual renters and homeowners to state  governments. In some cases, agencies have measured progress for  individual initiatives and have collaborated on initiatives across agencies,  including identifying shared goals and adopting common performance  measures for assessing results. However, the overall effect of these  initiatives on the nation’s nonfederal buildings is unknown because agencies  have largely not assessed either the individual or the combined results of  green building initiatives in the nonfederal sector or the related investments.  In contrast, the federal government has been measuring, and reporting on,  its progress in making federal buildings greener. Because federal agencies  have experience with measuring progress in the federal sector, they are well- positioned to apply this experience to measuring such progress in the  nonfederal sector, as well. In addition, DOE’s Interagency Energy  Management Task Force has served as an agency forum for 10 of the 11  agencies implementing the initiatives to discuss challenges to green building  and develop common solutions for the federal sector. However, we did not  identify a similar governmentwide effort among the 11 agencies to  collaborate on green building in the nonfederal sector. Without  comprehensive information about individual initiatives’ effects on fostering  green building, and without collaboration across federal agencies to establish  green building goals and ways to measure progress, Congress, agency  heads, and the public—including potential beneficiaries of federal  initiatives—have incomplete information about the effectiveness of individual  and overall federal efforts to foster green building in the nonfederal sector.
section_title: Recommendation for Executive Action
paragraphs: To help assess the results of investments in individual federal initiatives to  foster green building in the nonfederal sector, as well as their combined  results, we recommend that the Secretaries of Energy and of Housing  and Urban Development work with the Administrator of EPA in leading an  effort with other agencies that are implementing green building initiatives  to collaborate on identifying performance information, such as shared  goals and common performance measures, for green building initiatives  for the nonfederal sector. This effort should include, if necessary, an  exploration of the need for additional legislative or executive authority,  such as the authority to establish a coordinating entity (e.g., an  interagency working group).
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report for review and comment to the U.S.  Department of Agriculture (USDA), DOD, the Department of Education  (ED), DOE, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), HUD,  and DOT, as well as EPA, IRS, NIST, and SBA. In written comments,  reproduced in appendix V, DOE generally agreed with our  recommendation. In written comments, reproduced in appendix VI, HUD  stated that it welcomes our recommendation and provided technical  clarifications, which we incorporated into the report as appropriate. On  October 17, 2011, USDA provided comments in an e-mail message,  stating that it generally concurred with the information applicable to its  Rural Development programs. USDA also provided technical  clarifications, which we incorporated into the report as appropriate. On  October 20, 2011, DOD provided comments in an e-mail message,  stating that it concurred with the draft report as written. On October 21,  2011, EPA provided comments in an e-mail message, stating that it  generally agreed with our findings, conclusions, and recommendation. In  particular, EPA stated that it believes significant benefits could be  achieved by identifying information on performance for green building  efforts in the nonfederal sector across federal agencies and that our  recommendation supports the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. DOT,  ED, IRS, and SBA did not provide formal written comments but provided  technical clarifications, which we incorporated into the report as  appropriate. In its technical clarifications, ED noted the announcement of  its new Green Ribbon Schools Initiative, which is being implemented in  fiscal year 2012. According to ED, the initiative resulted from cooperative  efforts made with other federal agencies, state and local school officials,  and other potential stakeholders. ED also stated that the initiative’s  preparation work and announcement is already having a positive impact  on the “efforts of state and local officials to recognize the exemplary  efforts of schools and communities to be energy conscious, promote  healthy and sustainable environments, and educate students to become  environmentally literate citizens.” HHS and NIST stated that they did not  have any comments on the draft 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, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human  Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation; the  Administrators of EPA and SBA; the Commissioner of Internal Revenue;  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 have any questions about this report, please contact  Frank Rusco at (202) 512-3841 or ruscof@gao.gov or David J. Wise at  (202) 512-2834 or wised@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 VII.
section_title: Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: Our objectives were to (1) identify current initiatives by federal agencies  to foster green building in the nonfederal sector and (2) determine what is  known about the results of these initiatives on fostering green building in  the nonfederal sector. For the purposes of this review, the nonfederal  sector includes private, state, local, and tribal entities.
To identify current initiatives by federal agencies to foster green building  in the nonfederal sector, we first developed a working definition of green  building, which often varies, depending on the stakeholder. To develop  the definition, we reviewed and analyzed five sources for key elements of  a green building: (1) the requirements for a high-performance green  building in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, (2) the  U.S. Green Building Council’s green building certification system, (3) the  Green Globes assessment and rating system, (4) the Enterprise  Community Partners green communities criteria, and (5) a memorandum  of understanding signed by many federal agencies to commit to federal  leadership in the design, construction, and operation of high-performance  and sustainable buildings. We identified these five sources on the basis  of background research and interviews with knowledgeable stakeholders  from the following nonprofit groups and trade associations: the Building  Owners and Managers Association International, the Housing Assistance  Council, the International Facility Management Association, the National  Housing Trust, the National Institute of Building Sciences’ High  Performance Building Council, Neighborworks America, the Public  Housing Authorities Directors Association, and the U.S. Green Building  Council. Knowledgeable stakeholders from these organizations stated  that these sources represent leading efforts to promote green building  nationwide. From our analysis of these sources, we determined that, for  the purposes of this report, a “green building” is a building that, through its  design, construction, rehabilitation, operation, or maintenance,  incorporates one or more of the following six elements: (1) integrated  design principles, (2) energy conservation or efficiency measures, (3)  water conservation or efficiency measures, (4) indoor environmental  quality measures, (5) measures to reduce the environmental impact of  materials, and (6) sustainable siting or location measures.
With this definition of a green building, we then developed a list of key  terms and used them to search a broad range of sources for federal  initiatives with descriptions containing any of the terms. The sources we  searched primarily included federal agency budget justifications, program  websites, and databases. We also searched Federal Register  announcements, agencies’ news releases, and strategic planning  documents. We analyzed each initiative identified through this process to  determine whether it fell within the scope of our objectives, including  whether it was active anytime during fiscal year 2011, and through this  analysis, we developed a list of initiatives organized by agency. We  confirmed these initiatives with officials at the federal agencies with roles  in implementing the initiatives, and we asked the officials to identify other  initiatives they were aware of that might fall within the scope of our  objectives. We identified at least one initiative at each of the following 11  agencies: the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Education, Energy  (DOE), Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development  (HUD), Transportation (DOT), and the Treasury (Treasury); the  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); the National Institute of  Standards and Technology; and the Small Business Administration.  Although we attempted to ensure that we had a complete list of federal  green building initiatives, our list is not intended to be comprehensive  because, in part, of differences in definitions of a green building across  agencies.
We then developed a questionnaire to collect information on the green  building initiatives we identified at the 11 agencies. To identify officials  who were most knowledgeable about each initiative, and thus the most  appropriate person to complete the questionnaire, we used information  from our initial meetings with agency officials and information gathered by  each agency’s audit liaisons. Working with an independent GAO survey  expert, we conducted, in person, pretests of draft questionnaires with  officials we had identified at three agencies. The pretests took place with  officials with expertise in green building at HUD’s Office of Public and  Indian Housing, officials with tax credit expertise at Treasury’s Internal  Revenue Service, and commercial and residential building program  officials at DOE. We conducted pretests 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. Using the feedback we received, we made  changes to the content and format of the questionnaire. After deciding on  the final questionnaire, we sent it to the appropriate agency officials by e- mail in an attached Microsoft Word form. For each initiative, the  questionnaire asked officials to (1) confirm general information, (2) report  funding for green building, (3) identify goals and performance measures  for green building, and (4) provide additional information that would help  us further understand the initiative. We received a questionnaire response  for each initiative and, thus, had a response rate of 100 percent. After  analyzing the responses, we conducted follow-up interviews, e-mail  exchanges, or telephone discussions with agency officials when  responses were unclear or conflicting, such as when both “Yes” and “No”  boxes were checked or boxes were left completely unchecked. 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. During our follow-up conversations, agency  officials stated that, for many initiatives, green building funds are not  tracked separately from other related activities; therefore, we could not  determine governmentwide funding for green building in the nonfederal  sector because we could not collect complete or reliable funding data. As  a result, we did not report the responses about funding for green building.  In addition, the questionnaire asked agency officials to identify entities  expected to directly benefit from the initiatives. However, we did not  evaluate the effectiveness of the initiatives, including the extent to which  the entities identified may or may not have received benefits. The  initiatives we identified may vary in the scale of their funding or the  number of entities expected to benefit from them, among other things;  however, in this report, we do not discuss these differences or compare  the scale of the initiatives we identified. A copy of our questionnaire is  presented in appendix IV.
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. We took  steps in developing the questionnaire and collecting and analyzing the  data to minimize such nonsampling errors. For example, social science  survey specialists designed the questionnaire in collaboration with GAO  staff who had subject matter expertise. We pretested the draft  questionnaire to ensure that the questions were relevant, clearly stated,  and easy to understand. When we analyzed the data using computer  programs, an independent analyst checked the results from all the  computer programs. 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 determine what is known about the results of these initiatives on  fostering green building in the nonfederal sector, in addition to analyzing  questionnaire data on goals and performance measures, we conducted  follow-up interviews with officials representing initiatives for which  fostering green building is a primary purpose. We identified this subgroup  of initiatives by conducting a content analysis of the initiative descriptions  each agency had confirmed or updated in its questionnaire responses.  More specifically, based on the research we conducted to develop our full  list of initiatives, we had prepopulated each questionnaire with a  description of the initiative and then asked respondents to confirm the  description or edit it, as appropriate. Using these confirmed or edited  descriptions, we categorized initiatives into two groups: those where a  primary purpose of the initiative was to foster the use of one or more  green building elements by nonfederal entities, and those where it was a  secondary or other purpose. Our content analysis results indicated that  64 of the 94 initiatives had green building as a primary purpose. In  consideration of resource constraints, to limit the number of follow-up  interviews, we listed the initiatives in the primary purpose subgroup by  agency to identify the agencies with the most initiatives. On the basis of  this analysis, we determined that HUD, DOE, and EPA were the three  agencies that had the most initiatives with green building as a primary  purpose, accounting for about 67 percent of the initiatives in our  subgroup. We then conducted follow-up interviews with officials from the  offices chiefly responsible for implementing the three agencies’ initiatives,  based on the number of initiatives, general mission of the office, or both.  During these interviews, we asked officials about their progress and the  challenges they face, if any, in implementing the pertinent initiatives,  including the extent to which the agency collects performance data and  coordinates—internally and with other agencies—on similar initiatives.  We also asked the officials to provide related documents, and we  reviewed these and other relevant documents from their offices.
Finally, we conducted site visits to green building projects that have  received support from some of the initiatives we identified. During these  site visits, we interviewed officials connected to the projects—including  developers, resident groups, and property managers; local housing  authority officials implementing green building projects; and regional  federal officials with expertise in fostering green building through some of  the initiatives. We identified sites to visit from examples provided in  agency responses to our questionnaire, and we selected locations that  had several projects that could be visited, covered a range of agencies  and building types, and were convenient to GAO offices. During these  visits, we toured projects at varying stages of completion. Specifically, we  toured projects funded by the HUD Green Retrofit Program at Castle  Square Apartments in Boston and Eden Issei Terrace Apartments in  Hayward, California. In addition, we toured a project being conducted by  the Cambridge Housing Authority in Massachusetts that participates in  the HUD Moving to Work program. We toured projects funded by the  DOT Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction  program at Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District facilities in Oakland,  California. We also toured two Energy Star hotels in Boston and San  Francisco. We interviewed officials responsible for overseeing the  projects and asked them to discuss, among other things, the progress  and challenges they faced, if any, in implementing the projects. The  findings from our site visit interviews cannot be generalized to sites or  projects not included in this nonprobability sample.
We conducted this performance audit from September 2010 to November  2011 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: Federal Initiatives Identified That Foster Green Building in the Nonfederal Sector
paragraphs: We identified 11 federal agencies with 94 initiatives that foster green  building in the nonfederal sector, which includes private, state, local, and  tribal entities. The following tables provide summaries, based on the  questionnaire responses, of each of these initiatives by agency, and  whether—according to our analysis—they foster green building directly or  indirectly. A primary purpose of direct initiatives is to foster green building  (or any element thereof); thus, they foster one or more green building  elements directly. Indirect initiatives are part of broader efforts not  focused primarily on green building (or any element thereof); thus, they  foster green building elements indirectly.
section_title: Appendix III: Selected Questionnaire Responses for Federal Initiatives That Foster Green Building in the Nonfederal Sector
paragraphs: We identified 11 federal agencies with 94 initiatives that foster green  building in the nonfederal sector, which includes private, state, local, and  tribal entities. We developed a questionnaire about the initiatives and  submitted it to the agencies. The following tables provide selected  questionnaire responses for each of the initiatives, by agency. We are  reporting responses that elaborate on our report findings and for which  agencies provided the most complete information.
section_title: Appendix IV: GAO’s Questionnaire for Federal Agencies with Initiatives That Foster Green Building in the Nonfederal Sector
paragraphs: QUESTIONS ABOUT FEDERAL INITIATIVES TO FOSTER GREEN  BUILDING AMONG LOCAL, STATE, AND PRIVATE ENTITIES  Introduction  The United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), an independent, legislative branch  agency, is examining how the federal government is fostering green building among local, state,  and private entities across the United States—that is, for buildings that are not owned or leased  by the federal government. GAO is undertaking this work at the request of the Chairman of the  Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services,  and International Security of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental  Affairs. Specifically, we are first seeking to identify federal government initiatives to foster  green building among local, state, and private entities active during fiscal year 2011, including  those funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Second, we are  seeking to collect certain information about these initiatives, including the progress federal  agencies are making and the challenges they face, if any, in implementing them.
For our purposes, a green building is one that, through the design, building, rehabilitation, and/or  maintenance or operation of the building, incorporates one or more of the following: (1)  integrated design principles, (2) energy conservation or efficiency measures, (3) water  conservation or efficiency measures, (4) indoor environmental quality measures, (5) measures to  reduce the environmental impact of materials, or (6) sustainable siting or location measures.
For our purposes, a green building initiative is any program or activity related to one or more of  these six elements, regardless of funding, that an agency is implementing for the purpose of  fostering green building among local, state, and private entities. These initiatives may include  direct financial support, research and development, technical assistance, tax credits, tax  deductions or other types of support or assistance provided by the federal government to local,  state, and private entities.
Through this questionnaire, we are asking federal agencies to provide certain information about  the initiatives that we have identified. After we have gathered the responses, we plan to speak  with pertinent agency officials to discuss in more detail the agency’s role in implementing the  initiatives and to collect other information related to this review, such as the progress that the  agency has made in implementing the initiative and the challenges it has faced, if any.
Please complete this questionnaire and return it to one of the individuals mentioned below by  May 5, 2011. When returning the questionnaire, please attach any relevant supporting  documentation to your email.
If you have any questions or comments about this questionnaire, please call or e-mail John  Barrett at (202) 512-5902 (barrettj@gao.gov) or Nathan Morris at (617) 788-0553  (morrisn@gao.gov). Thank you very much for your assistance.
This questionnaire can be filled out using MS-Word and returned via e-mail to barrettj@gao.gov  or morrisn@gao.gov. Please complete this questionnaire and return it by May 5, 2011.
Please use your mouse to navigate by clicking on the field or check box  answer.
To select a check box or button, simply click on the center of the box and an ‘X’ will  appear.
To change or deselect a check box response, simply click on the check box and the ‘X’  will disappear.
To answer a question that requires that you write a comment, click on the answer box            and begin typing. The box will expand to accommodate your answer.
SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION FOR INITIATIVE  We have collected some preliminary information on your initiative, which is listed below.    a)  Initiative Title:  b)  Implementing Agency:  c)  Implementing Office:  d)  Description:  1)  Is the information provided above about the initiative correct and complete?
Yes ............................. No…...........................
If you answered No, what information is incorrect or incomplete, and what is the correct or  complete information? Please use the space provided below. 2)  Has this initiative been active at your agency at any time during fiscal year 2011?
Yes ............................. No…...........................
3)  Is your agency required to implement this initiative by statute, executive order or other  mandate external to the agency?  a)  Statute?................................................................. b)  Executive Order? ................................................. c)  Other mandate external to the agency?................ d)  Other?  .......................................
If you answered Yes to any of the above, please provide the name or citation for the specific  statute(s), executive order(s) or other mandate(s) in the space provided below.
If you answered No to all of the above, please explain the impetus for the initiative in the  space provided below.  4)  Does your agency have documents describing how this initiative should be implemented?
Yes .......................... No............................
5)  For our purposes, a green building is one that, through the design, building, rehabilitation,  and/or maintenance or operation of the building, incorporates one or more of the elements  defined below. Additionally, a green building initiative is any program or activity related to  one of these six elements, regardless of funding, that an agency is implementing for the  purpose of fostering green building among local, state, and private entities.
Based on the definitions below, which of the following element(s) of green building pertain  to this initiative?  a) Integrated design: Integrated design can involve the use of a collaborative,  integrated planning and design process that initiates and maintains an integrated  project team in all stages of a building’s lifecycle, including planning, building,  and deconstruction. Integrated design can also entail the use of ongoing  maintenance and operation to verify performance of building components and  systems and help ensure that design requirements are met........................................ b) Energy conservation/efficiency: The energy conservation/efficiency element can  involve the use of strategies to reduce energy consumption, such as through  ongoing maintenance; energy use monitoring; efficient design and construction;  efficient appliances, systems and lighting; the use of renewable and clean  sources of energy generated on-site or off-site; and other innovative strategies…    c) Water conservation/efficiency: The water conservation/efficiency element can  involve the use of various strategies to reduce water consumption inside and  outside the building, such as through more efficient appliances, fixtures and  fittings inside and water-wise landscaping outside. .................................................. d) Indoor environmental quality: The indoor environmental quality element can  involve the use of various strategies to enhance indoor environmental quality  through ventilation, thermal comfort, acoustics, moisture control, daylighting,  pollution source control, and the use of low-emission materials. ............................. e) Environmental impact of materials: The environmental impact of materials  element can involve the use of various strategies to reduce the environmental  impact of materials such as using sustainably grown, harvested, and transported  products and materials; using products with high recycled and/or biobased  content; reducing or eliminating the use of ozone depleting compounds; and  promoting the reduction of waste through reuse and recycling. ............................... f)  Sustainable siting or location: The sustainable siting or location element can  involve using certain strategies when deciding on building location, including  discouraging development on previously undeveloped land; minimizing a  building's impact on ecosystems and waterways; encouraging regionally  appropriate landscaping; rewarding smart transportation choices; controlling  stormwater runoff; and reducing erosion, light pollution, heat island effect and  construction-related pollution.  ..................................................................................
If needed, please use the space provided below to provide further details regarding your answers  above.    If you answered No to all green building elements listed above, please stop and return this  questionnaire or contact us to discuss whether your initiative should be included in our  review (see page one for contact information). Thank you very much for your time.   6)  For this initiative, what type(s) of assistance or support does it provide to foster green  building?   a)  Contracts? ................................................ b)  Direct loans?............................................ c)  Grants?..................................................... d)  Mortgage-related assistance?................... e)  Rent subsidies? ........................................ f)  Research and development? .................... g)  Tax credits?.............................................. h)  Tax deductions?....................................... i)  Technical assistance?............................... j)  Other?  ...........................
If needed, please use the space provided below to provide further details regarding your  answers above.
7)  What type(s) of buildings are eligible for this initiative? a)  Education? ............................................... b)  Hospital / Health Care? ........................... c)
Industrial?  ............................................... d)  Laboratory?.............................................. e)  Lodging?  ................................................. f)  Office? ..................................................... g)  Residential (owner-occupied or rental  property)? ................................................ h)  Retail?  ..................................................... i)  Warehouse? ............................................. j)  Other? ............................
8)  Which entities are expected to directly benefit from the assistance or support provided by this  initiative?  a)  Businesses? .............................................. b)
Individual property owners or renters?.... c)  Local governments?................................. d)  Nonprofit organizations? ......................... e)  Public housing agencies? ......................... f)  State governments? .................................. g)  Other? ............................ 9)  If possible, please describe two or three examples of specific projects funded or supported by  this initiative in the space provided below.
If needed, please use the space provided below to provide further details about your answers  in Section I of this questionnaire.     SECTION II: FUNDING FOR INITIATIVE 10) For each of the following, please indicate whether your agency dedicated funds to this  initiative. “Dedicated funds” means that the Congress or the agency set aside money to fund  the initiative.  a)  From the American Recovery and  Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)?........ b)  In fiscal year 2009 (excluding ARRA)?.... c)  In fiscal year 2010? ................................... d)  In fiscal year 2011? ...................................
11) If you answered Yes to any of the above in Question 10, please provide the exact or  estimated amount dedicated to the green building portion of this initiative. Please round to  the nearest $100,000 (e.g., $1.2 million).
Dedicated  ($million) a)  From the American Recovery and  Reinvestment Act of 2009  (ARRA)?....................................... b)  In fiscal year 2009 (excluding  ARRA)? ........................................ c)  In fiscal year 2010? ....................... d)  In fiscal year 2011? .......................
12) Does this initiative, or any portion of it, currently have an expiration date?
Yes .......................... No............................ Not Sure .................. Not Applicable........
If you answered Yes, please provide date:              If you answered Yes, and if only a portion of the initiative is set to expire, please provide  details on the portion that is set to expire in the space provided below.
SECTION III: GOALS AND PERFORMANCE METRICS FOR INITIATIVE 13) Has your agency established goals for the green building portion of this initiative?
Yes .............................  No.............................. Not Sure ..................... Not Applicable...........
If you answered Not Sure or Not Applicable, please explain using the space provided below.     If you answered Yes, does your agency have documents describing the goals for the green  building portion of this initiative?
Yes ....................... No......................... Not Sure ............... Not Applicable.....
14) Has your agency established performance metrics or measures for the green building portion  of this initiative?
Yes ............................. No............................... Not Sure ..................... Not Applicable...........
If you answered Not Sure or Not Applicable, please explain using the space provided below.     If you answered Yes, does your agency have documents describing the performance metrics or  measures for this initiative?
Yes ......................  No........................ Not Sure ............... Not Applicable.....
SECTION IV: OTHER INFORMATION FOR INITIATIVE 15) Are there any additional data, further sources of information, or comments that would help us  further understand and report on how this initiative is being implemented? If so, please  describe and/or provide link(s) to the relevant website(s) in the space provided below. If  applicable, please provide electronic copies of the relevant documents when returning this  questionnaire. Alternatively, you can suggest that further discussion about this initiative be  conducted through follow-up conversations with GAO.  16) Please provide the contact information for a representative from your agency for follow-up  questions we may have about this initiative:  Please remember to attach any relevant supporting documentation when returning this  questionnaire to either barrettj@gao.gov or morrisn@gao.gov.
Thank you for your time!
section_title: Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Energy
section_title: Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of Housing and Urban Development
section_title: Appendix VII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contacts named above, Karla Springer (Assistant  Director), Maria Edelstein (Assistant Director), John Barrett, Cindy Gilbert,  Chad M. Gorman, Gary Guggolz, Nathan Morris, Carol Herrnstadt  Shulman, and Barbara Timmerman made key contributions to this report.