FINANCIAL SAVINGS AND OTHER BENEFITS We examined contracts negotiated by five agencies and found that many noncompetitively negotiated procurements were unjustified. In a September 15, 1977. report we recommended that the Congress require all Federal agencies to provide annual statistics on supplies and services procured through noncompetitive contracts. information on actions taken to increase competitive procurements, and that the agencies prepare written justifications for all noncompetitive procurements over $10,000. In January 1978, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy indicated that the General Services Administration is to amend the Federal Procurement Regulation to include a requirement for approval at a level above the contracting officer prior to entering into noncompetitive procurements over $10,000. It further stated that a Federal Procurement Data System, to be operational later in 1978. would provide timely procurement management data on a Government-wide basis, including the extent of competition. We believe that the new regulations and statistics will help limit the use of noncompetitive procurements to the exceptional cases where it is appropriate. Improvement of Joint United States/ Colombia Foot-and-Mouth Program In an August 1977 letter report to the Secretary of Agriculture we furnished our observations and conclusions that the joint United States Colombian foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) control and eradication program has not been effective. We recommended the development of an overall plan to eliminate the threat of FMD spreading northward via the Pan American Highway system. Our review proved timely and appropriate since Department of Agriculture and State Department officials used our report to strengthen their position during negotiations with Colombian Government officials when specific steps were outlined to correct program deficiencies. -Establish teams of top management and scien tific personnel to make laboratory walk-throughs. -Establish laboratory equipment pools or give the head of the agency written reasons why such pools are not needed. -Prepare an annual report for the agency head on the use and effectiveness of the pooling of equip ment. -Make periodic independent reviews of walkthrough practices and equipment pool operations, to determine their effectiveness. On July 5, 1978. GSA amended its Federal Property Management Regulations to strengthen controls for use by agencies in managing research equipment in Federal laboratories. These controls are intended to further promote the use of already-owned equipment instead of the procurement of similar new equipment. Use of Software Tools and Techniques to Improve the Performance of Computers At Facilities Systems Office (FASCO), Port Hueneme, California, and the Marine Corps Automated Services Center, Camp Pendleton, California, we worked with personnel from these installations to improve the performance of two production application computer programs through the use of software tools and techniques. This resulted in freed computer resources and .possible reduced production run costs associated with these programs. Improved Controls for Managing Research Equipment at Federal Labs In a report to the Congress in December 1975 we recommended that the Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA) issue guidance to agencies to ensure better laboratory and research equipment use. This guidance should require that each agency: GAO'S CONTINUING EFFORT TO CUT COSTS Mr. STAATS. This concludes our prepared statement. Mr. Chairman, again, as I said at the outset, we do face a very serious problem in GAO for the reasons that I have indicated. We have done everything we know how to do to cut the cost of our work. We have been making a number of changes in our process where we think it will make it possible to get our work done more rapidly. However, these changes to the process will require more travel to get the work done, so it will have some effect on our travel costs. We have all been searching for ways in which we can absorb this work, but there comes a point where your coverage of some of these operations gets so thin that we can't say we are carrying out our statute, which requires us to audit all these activities with the exception of the CIA. Mr. BENJAMIN. Thank you, Mr. Staats. Mr. Staats, you have listed 16 different specific mandates. Are these the mandates you spoke of earlier in your testimony, in which you enumerated only seven? Mr. STAATS. Yes. Mr. BENJAMIN. Let's include that for the record. And on those seven you ascribed to each the staff years required. Mr. STAATS. Yes, sir. Mr. BENJAMIN. Would you do that for the remaining nine as we insert this in the record? Mr. STAATS. Yes. [The information referred to appears on pages 1717-1720.] Mr. BENJAMIN. Mr. Staats, this is your thirteenth appearance before the subcommittee in behalf of your regular annual budget. The subcommittee was assigned jurisdiction over the GAO in 1967 at the beginning of the 90th Congress. The late George Andrews of Alabama was chairman, and you appeared on May 9, 1967 to justify a budget for fiscal year 1968 totaling $52,900,000 and 4,600 permanent positions. The request for the General Accounting Office for fiscal year 1980 totals $206,763,000 and 5,350 average positions. Dollar-wise, the budget has increased almost four times in that 13-year period and is $21,007,000 over the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1979 and 86 staff years over that previously allowed. INTRODUCTION OF WITNESSES Mr. Staats, at this time I would appreciate your introducing the staff members that you have with you. Mr. STAATS. Mr. Chairman, to my right is Mr. Keller, the Deputy Comptroller General; Mr. Milton Socolar, our General Counsel; and Mr. John Heller, Assistant to the Comptroller General. Why don't I save my voice and let them introduce themselves? Mr. AHART. Greg Ahart, Director of the Human Resources Division. Mr. HAVENS. Harry Havens, Director of the Program Analysis Division. Mr. ESCHWEGE. Henry Eschwege, Director of the Community and Economic Development Division. Mr. HORAN. Don Horan, Deputy Director, Logistics and Communications Division. Mr. SHELEY. Walt Sheley, Deputy Director of Procurement and Systems Acquisition Division. Mr. SCANTLEBURY. Don Scantlebury, Director of the Financial and General Management Studies Division. Mr. PEACH. Dexter Peach, Director of the Energy and Minerals Division. Mr. BROWN. Richard Brown, Controller. Mr. PIN. Clerio Pin, Assistant to the Comptroller General. Mr. SANGER. Harry Sanger, Assistant Director, General Government Division. Mr. Voss. Allen Voss, Director, General Government Division. Mr. KRIEGER. Hyman Krieger, Director, Federal Personnel and Compensation Division. Mr. HYLANDER. Charles Hylander, Deputy Director, International Division. Mr. LEARY. Dan Leary, Director of Claims Division. Mr. YUILLE. Ryan Yuille, Director of Equal Employment Opportunity Office. Mr. STAATS. That is it. MEASURABLE SAVINGS ATTRIBUTABLE TO GAO WORK Mr. BENJAMIN. In delivering your status earlier, you indicated that the GAO savings was $8.2 billion, three-quarters of which was by self-initiated work, and in your prepared text you indicated for 1978 it was $22 billion of the assertable savings. Can you distinguish between these two figures for me again? Mr. STAATS. The difference between the $8.2 and the $2.5? Mr. STAATS. The $8.2 covers both years, $5.7 in 1977, and $2.5 plus in 1978. Mr. BENJAMIN. For calendar years 1977 and 1978? Mr. STAATS. Fiscal years. EFFECT OF FIVE PERCENT CUT IN FISCAL YEAR 1979 Mr. BENJAMIN. You also mentioned the effect of the 5 percent cut in the aggregate. How much is being withheld from obligation and expenditures and the effect on personnel and the effect of the programs? In other words, where did you really apply this withholding? Mr. PIN. The total was $9.3 million. I don't have the data immediately available, but I can supply it for the record, where we cut, whether staff years, travel, contracts, and other services. Mr. BENJAMIN. Would you do that, please? Mr. PIN. Yes, sir. [The information follows:] |