defense related work. When I joined the GAO, we had 45 percent of our total staff allocated to work on defense work. We are down now to a little less than 21 percent.

In fiscal years 1979 and 1980 we think we need to stop this decrease and increase from the 21 percent that I mentioned to 25 percent of our total effort devoted to defense work.

We have identified and asked only for partial funding of the workload increases that we now know will impact on GAO in 1980, but we are certain that there will be other workload increases which cannot now be identified. Without a doubt, there will be other new legislation which will require us to perform particular audits and evaluations. And the enactment of new or expanded Federal programs will place its own new workload demands on us. We cannot, however, reasonably estimate these requirements or what their demands on our resources will be. Consistent with our longstanding policy we have not made any provision in our resource request for prospective legislation no matter how likely its passage seems.

FINANCIAL SAVINGS

In asking the committee's support for our appropriation request, it is important to point out that measurable savings resulting from GAO work greatly exceed amounts appropriated for our use. As you know, we do not have authority to direct agencies to accept our recommendations. The extent to which we are successful in bringing about improvements depends basically on the adequacy of our factual analysis and the persuasiveness of our findings and recommendations and the support our reports receive from the Congress. I might add here that GAO work-our findings and recommendations-are, by and large, well supported by the Congress. In this connection, I just reread the House Appropriations Committee Report on the Department of Defense fiscal year 1979 appropriations bill. That report refers some 93 times to GAO reports and recommendations. It points to diseconomies, areas of ineffectiveness and weaknesses in the management and controls that we have reported on. In many instances, it translates our findings and recommendations into reductions in DOD appropriations. In others it highlights the need for further Department of Defense action on our recommendations. This kind of committee action not only takes good advantage of the work that we have done; it also is a tangible demonstration of the need for Federal agencies to correct deficiencies promptly when we do identify them.

GÃO's impact is sometimes clear and easily measured. However, in many cases it is not easy to measure because agencies make changes not only because of our recommendations but because of recommendations from other sources-committees of Congress, outside organizations, and even editorials in the press. Some such changes take place many months after our reports are issued. Nevertheless, GAO does keep a record of changes that are clearly related to our efforts. During fiscal year 1978, savings attributable to GAO recommendations totaled over $2.5 billion. I would quickly add that these dollar accomplishments, while impressive, are not the total or even necessarily the most important-of GAO's accomplishments. Management improvements that cannot be readily

quantified and GAO recommendations that make programs more effective are also important.

Then, too, the very presence of an oversight agency like GAOthat can ferret out problems and make them visible to the public and to the Congress-is an important asset in any governmental setting. I am distributing a separate document drawn from our annual report which sets forth GAO's accomplishments in fiscal year 1978. Mr. Chairman, if it is agreeable with you, I would like to include that in the record at this point.

Mr. BENJAMIN. Please do.

[The information follows:]

FINANCIAL SAVINGS AND OTHER BENEFITS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE WORK OF THE U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE FISCAL YEAR 1978

U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
JANUARY 1979