Of the $5.55 billion the Recovery Act provided to GSA’s Federal Buildings Fund, $750 million is being used by GSA for new federal buildings and U.S. courthouses, $300 million is being used for new border stations and land ports of entry, and $4.5 billion is being used for measures necessary to convert existing GSA facilities to high-performance green buildings. Overall, for its Recovery Act program, GSA selected 263 projects in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 2 U.S. territories. As shown in table 1, GSA’s Recovery Act projects fall into the following four main categories: (1) new construction, (2) full and partial building modernizations, (3) limited scope projects, and (4) small projects. The following information describes the four main categories for GSA’s Recovery Act projects: New construction: Projects associated with building entirely new structures or significant extensions to existing structures, including the construction of new federal buildings and courthouses, as well as border stations and land ports of entry. Full and partial building modernizations: Projects associated with the replacement or upgrade of multiple building systems and components (such as windows, roofs, and plumbing, electrical, and mechanical systems), which are intended to significantly increase the usable life of the buildings. Full modernizations are comprehensive renovations that replace or restore nearly all the major systems in a building. Partial modernizations are more limited and address one or a few systems in the building. Limited scope projects: Projects associated with a single building system—such as lighting or plumbing—that could include upgrading existing systems or installing energy and environmental improvements, such as installing energy-generating photovoltaic panels on the roof of a building. Small projects: Limited scope projects whose costs are below the prospectus level. GSA officials told us that in selecting Recovery Act projects, they gave priority to those projects that would help transform federal buildings into high-performance green buildings and obligate funds quickly. Obligating funds quickly was important because the Recovery Act requires GSA to obligate $5 billion by September 30, 2010, and to obligate the full Recovery Act funding amount, $5.55 billion, by September 30, 2011. To reflect these priorities, GSA developed selection criteria for full and partial building modernization projects, which are presented in table 2 in descending order of weight. GSA scored projects in accordance with the relative priority it assigned to each criterion and then ranked potential Recovery Act projects on the basis of these results. GSA assigned the highest priority to the first three criteria listed in table 2. The execution timing and minimizing execution risk criteria are designed to identify projects that could be started quickly, would create jobs as soon as possible, and would also have a low risk of not being completed within the Recovery Act’s deadlines. Recovery Act funds must be spent no later than 5 years after the end of the fiscal year in which the funds are required to be obligated. Typically, the funds for a large construction project are obligated throughout the life of the project, and the 5-year limitation on expenditures generally does not apply to funds made available to GSA for acquisition and construction. Therefore, the Recovery Act’s establishment of deadlines for obligating and spending funds differs from the typical time frames for GSA’s construction projects. Many of the projects GSA selected for new construction and full and partial building modernizations had previously received partial funding for design or for early project phases. For example, 41 of the 63 new construction and full and partial building modernization projects had received funding from previous fiscal year appropriations. GSA officials said that they used Recovery Act funding to quickly start or expand construction on these projects, while also identifying ways to incorporate energy savings or environmental improvements into their design. Additionally, GSA funded cost escalation for some ongoing projects—that is, projects that needed additional funding to start or to complete construction. For example, according to GSA officials, the renovation of the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse in New York, a full building modernization, needed Recovery Act funding to address an increase in cost after bids from contractors came in higher than expected. According to GSA officials, the other five criteria listed in table 2 are those GSA typically uses when selecting capital projects, such as improving facility condition. In GSA’s supplemental information to its financial statements for fiscal year 2009, GSA reported an inventory of capital repairs and alterations estimated to cost approximately $5.0 billion. The buildings GSA selected for its Recovery Act program account for about $3.7 billion of this estimate, but the Recovery Act funding will not fully address the needs of each selected building, since reducing GSA’s capital repairs and alterations inventory was not the intent of the Recovery Act, according to GSA officials. GSA officials also stated that they will use Recovery Act funds for projects or elements of projects that are not among the estimated capital improvement needs, such as projects to incorporate high-performance green building features. While improving facility condition was one of GSA’s selection criteria, making facilities greener and obligating funds quickly received higher priority. GSA officials estimated that Recovery Act projects will reduce the agency’s total capital repairs and alterations estimate by $1.5 to $2.0 billion. According to the Web site, www.recovery.gov (Recovery.gov), the Recovery Act has three immediate goals: (1) create new jobs and save existing ones, (2) spur economic activity and invest in long-term growth, and (3) foster “unprecedented” levels of accountability and transparency in government spending. In addition, GSA’s Recovery Act program plan states that GSA will maintain an unprecedented level of openness and transparency in operations. GSA has published information on its Recovery Act program on both its own Recovery Act Web site and Recovery.gov. The information includes the following documents: The Agencywide Recovery Plan details GSA’s broad Recovery Act goals for the entire agency, GSA programs funded by the Recovery Act, contracting operations, and agency accountability efforts. The agencywide plan also outlines the public benefits GSA expects from its investments, such as job creation and environmental benefits. The Federal Buildings Fund Program Plan contains a summary of the objectives and activities that GSA’s Public Buildings Service (PBS) plans to implement with the $5.55 billion in Recovery Act funds. The plan also includes information on the projects’ selection, delivery schedule, and performance measures. Additionally, the plan describes how GSA will address issues such as monitoring and evaluation, transparency, and accountability for its Recovery Act program. The PBS Project Plan details how GSA will spend its $5.55 billion in Recovery Act funds. The project plan lists all of the GSA building projects that will receive Recovery Act funds and, for each project, includes the name, location (city and state), and estimated cost. GSA has the ability to shift funds from one project to another but must give the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations 15 days notice before doing so. Agency officials stated that they will continue to revise GSA’s project plan in the future. The weekly financial and activity reports contain information on GSA’s Recovery Act weekly appropriations, obligations, and disbursements, along with activities and planned actions. The Federal Buildings Fund Investments Map shows where GSA is spending its Recovery Act funds and provides information on spending to date, measured in obligations and expenditures, for individual projects or states. GSA posted an interactive map on its Web site, which graphically depicts its Recovery Act obligations and expenditures by state and project. Recipient reporting guidance for registration and reporting offers assistance for prime recipients of Recovery Act funds, who must register with the government and report on how Recovery Act funds were used. GSA posts its recipient reporting data on Recovery.gov, along with other participating agencies. GSA also reports frequently to OMB and congressional committees on Recovery Act plans, progress, and accomplishments. For example, at the request of OMB and the White House, GSA produced a 100 Days Report, which updated current Recovery Act obligations and reported planned obligations to the end of calendar year 2009. GSA also produces monthly reports on obligations versus expenditures for the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Since the 1970s, federal statutes and executive orders have established and revised a number of requirements and goals for changing the way federal agencies use or obtain energy. For example, EISA established new energy management requirements and goals, such as energy-efficiency performance standards for new buildings and major renovations. In addition, EISA defined a high-performance green building, which includes eight elements, as shown in table 3. While the Recovery Act specifies that GSA should use Recovery Act funds for measures necessary to convert GSA facilities to high-performance green buildings, as defined in section 401 of EISA, GSA also has to follow federal energy and water conservation requirements and goals established in federal statutes and executive orders. The federal energy and water conservation requirements and goals which we refer to later in this report are summarized in table 4. In March 2009, GSA created a national program management office (PMO) to oversee its Recovery Act program and established interim obligation milestones to help it achieve its Recovery Act obligation deadlines. The PMO is supported by the Recovery Program Executive Steering Committee headed by the PBS Deputy Commissioner. The Executive Steering Committee has developed a nationwide program strategy and priorities for the program. Figure 1 illustrates the organization of the PMO. A program management recovery executive heads the PMO and is supported by zone and regional recovery executives, who are responsible for monitoring and reviewing the performance of Recovery Act projects and managing risks at the regional level. In addition, subject matter experts support the regional teams in delivering projects, and two contractors are responsible for project tracking and for reporting and communication. The PMO uses data from projects to look for trends in cost and schedule performance for the program.