Five-Year Budget Projections, Hearings before the Subcommittee on Priorities and Economy in Government of the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States, 94th Congress, 1st Session, April 3 and 4, 1975 (60-835).

Long-Range Economic Growth, Hearings before the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United

States, 94th Congress, 1st Session, October 23 and 24, 1975 (68-332).

Long-Range Planning, prepared for the Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, 94th Congress, 2nd Session by the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, Serial BB (70-315 0) May, 1976.

Introduction

Government statisticians have long been concerned about minimizing the burden of providing information required for statistical inquiries. This concern has been expressed in various efforts to eliminate duplication, to develop uniform classifications, definitions and standards so that data are comparable, and to design increasingly efficient sampling methodologies.

Administration of the Federal Reports Act of 1942 is one of the important control mechanisms for reducing reporting burden for all types of Federal inquiries, including grant applications for participation in Federal programs, program administration forms, evaluation studies, and statistical surveys. It has traditionally been linked with the statistical policy function in the Office of Management and Budget. However, few people realize that the statisticians' concern about consistency in data collection and minimizing reporting burden predates the Federal Reports Act by several years. In fact, the Central Statistical Board in 1936 developed a procedure by which it would informally review all data collection instruments to identify data which might be available in other agencies, to make suggestions concerning statistical procedures, and to make recommendations concerning classification concepts. While the agencies were not required to follow the suggestions from the Central Statistical Board, they did actively participate in the cooperative process since the statistician's advice was usually very helpful. It is a consequence of this early involvement with standardizing data collection that administration of the Federal Reports Act was linked with the statistical policy function which, at that time, was in the Bureau of the Budget.

There have been many attempts to respond to the public's concern about the burden of data collection. One of the early attempts was in 1887, when a high level investigative commission was appointed to analyze the problem.' The Central Statistical Board,

'Paul Feldman, "Commissions on Statistics: Statistics on Commissions," Statistical Reporter, November 1970, pp. 73-79.

at the request of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, undertook a study of reporting burden.2

Other studies of paperwork burden include the Mills-Long Report (1948), the Federal Paperwork Jungle Hearings of the Subcommittee on Census and Population (1965-1966), the Kaysan Committee (1966), and the President's Commission on Federal Statistics (1971).3

The most recent investigation of reporting burden was undertaken by the Commission on Federal Paperwork which was established by Public Law 93556 (December 27, 1974). The Commission began operation in October 1975 and completed its work in October 1977. The overall materials in A Framework for Planning U.S. Federal Statistics for the 1980's were made available to the Commission staff for their use and for comments on specific chapters. The personnel in the Statistical Policy Division of the Office of Management and Budget (now the Office of Federal Statistical Policy and Standards in the U.S. Department of Commerce) worked closely with the Commission staff throughout the course of the Commission's study. Therefore, this particular chapter reflects the findings of the Commission in relation to the topics which are discussed throughout the Framework.

The Commission on Federal Paperwork

The Commission on Federal Paperwork was established by the Congress as a result of its view that "Federal information reporting requirements have placed an unprecedented paperwork burden upon

'See Joseph W. Duncan and William C. Shelton, Revolution in United States Governmental Statistics, 1926-1976, Chapter 5.

'These studies are discussed in the report of the Commission on Federal Paperwork entitled Statistics, pp. 45-49. See also the report of the Commission on Federal Paperwork entitled History of Paperwork Reform Efforts.

Reporting burden has been also the subject of the following Statistical Reporter articles: (1) "The Paperwork Predicament" (September 1974); "Seeking Reductions in the Federal Paperwork Burden" (July 1975); "Measuring the Burden of Reporting to the Federal Government" (October 1975); "President's Reporting Reduction Program" (April 1976); and "President Ford Opens Second Phase of Reporting Reduction Program" (August 1976).

private citizens, recipients of Federal assistance, businesses, governmental contractors, and State and local government." In establishing the Commission, the Congress emphasized that reporting burden was to be minimized, consistent with the Government's needs for information to set policy and operate its lawful programs. The emphasis throughout the Commission's studies was on Federal information gathering in its broadest sense. Its studies cover all types of Federal reporting, of which statistics is only one relatively small part.

The Commission was established to consider (as stated in Public Law 93-556):

1. the nature and extent of current Federal requirements for information from other public and private entities;

2. the effect of existing statutes on the information requirements of the Federal Government and authorities of existing Federal agencies to collect information;

3. the nature and extent of management and control over the determination of Federal information needs and the choice of information gathering, processing, and dissemination methods;

4. the nature and extent to which Federal agencies cooperate with State and local governments and private agencies in collecting, processing, and disseminating information;

5. the procedures used and the extent to which considerations of economy and efficiency impact upon Federal information activities, particularly as these matters relate to costs burdening the Federal Government and providers of information;

6. the ways in which policies and practices relating to the maintenance of confidentiality of information impact upon Federal information activities; and

7. such other matters as the Commission may decide affect Federal reporting requirements.

Review and Clearance Process Problems and

Recommendations

In a series of reports, the Commission on Federal Paperwork has identified a number of flaws and

limitations in the present clearance system. Among these deficiencies, the Commission points out that: 1. The clearance process focuses on symptoms: paperwork and not primarily or principally on causal factors;

2. The clearance process is largely a piecemeal process which examines reporting forms rather than the larger paperwork and management systems of which the paperwork is a part; 3. Review generally occurs too late in the developmental process of a program to be effective in stopping unnecessary information requirements;

4. Coverage of informational requirements is incomplete and the authority is split among three agencies;

5. The process is slow, adversarial and does not differentiate important from unimportant data burdens and projects;

6. There is no detailed listing of all data requirements;

7. There is little in the way of compliance sanctions on the data collection agencies;

8. The Federal Report Acts does not specify the management control responsibilities of the data collecting agencies.

The Commission points out that the clearance process is in itself but a step in the life cycle of information and that it takes place too late in that cycle to be effective. Effective information resources management must start at the front end of the process as an integral part of the planning stage and continue throughout strategic points along the line to final implementation. The Commission proposes three general steps:

1. Redesigning the clearance process to eliminate overlap and duplication among agency requests through strengthened guidelines and standards.

2. Developing and implementing more effective methodologies for determining information requirements, and for weighing the cost to the

public of data collection against the values expected from the use of the data.

3. Decentralization of the routine clearance workload to the Federal agencies, with prescribed policy guidelines and standards, and a concentrated focus on policy development, oversight and politically sensitive issues in statistical activities at the central review level.

Included in the Commission's reports are an extensive set of recommendations for improvement in the central review and clearance process. Basically these are intended to shift the focus of review from the symptoms, as evidenced by excessive and unnecessary paperwork, to the causes, exemplified as "bad organization, poor management, and poorly designed information requirements." The recommendations include actions to: end exemptions from the Federal Reports Act; end split jurisdiction between OMB and GAO; provide tools to eliminate duplication through a Federal Information Locator System and the assignment of coordination or collection responsibility to a single agency in specific programmatic areas; use of best available methodologies in information resources management; provide consultation services for statistical and research design and development; place increased responsibility for information management on the agencies, with improved statistical guidelines and standards and the continuation of central statistical review of generalpurpose surveys and forms; expand the examination of the practical utility of selected reports, through postaudit assessment of the uses made of the data collected, with increased resources for these audit functions; develop administrative and information standards to reduce paperwork; improve guidelines and standards for agencies to follow in developing and designing programs and information requirements; and improve the methodology for measuring costs to the public and the benefits to Federal programs of the data requirements.

These recommendations and the overall scope of the findings of the Commission clearly indicate the need for an expanded scope to the review and clearance activity. This review would focus on the planning and development stages of projects and programs for data collection to a greater extent that has been possible previously; it would extend into the assessment of the practical utility of the data collected, through postaudits of the application of the

'Commission on Federal Paperwork, The Reports Clearance Process, pp. 45-59.

data to the operating and administrative problems of Federal programs.

These recommendations and findings clearly indicate an intent to both increase the responsibilities of the agencies for assuring the compliance of their data collection activities to the guidelines and standards of the Federal central review and clearance system and to provide greater oversight of the planning process and the utilization of the data collected from the public. It also clearly indicates a need for further development of guidelines and standards for statistical and research activity and for the expansion of resources to implement both the early planning, coordination and development stages of the review process and the assessment of data utilization through the post-audit process.

The Public Burden of Statistical Surveys

The completion of statistical reports to the executive agencies of the Federal Government by individuals and businesses throughout our society requires millions of man-hours of time. There is no single statistical summary of all of the inquiries which are made of individuals, businesses, and institutions. An important indicator is provided, however, by those inquiries which are subject to the Federal Reports Act. Statistics compiled by the Office of Management and Budget show that in June 1976, nearly 27.5 million man-hours were spent in replying to statistical inquiries."

While this is a substantial number, it is a small proportion of the total reporting burden placed on the public by Government inquiries. This point is clearly made by the Commission on Federal Paperwork which stated:

Statistics constitute a fairly small share of Federal reports as a whole. On June 30, 1976, they represented about one-fourth of the number of reporting forms of systems and about 13 percent of the annual hours spent by respondents in replying to Federal requests coming from the agencies under the Federal Reports Act. (This total excludes tax returns to the Internal Revenue Service and reports to the bank regulatory agencies, which are exempt from the Federal Reports Act.)"

It is apparent, then, that statistical agencies are not the principal creators of Federal paperwork. The

'Commission on Federal Paperwork, Statistics, p. 7.

'Ibid., p. 7. For a more complete discussion see a technical paper developed by Aryness Joy Wickens for the Commission entitled "Profile of Federal Paperwork-A Graphic Summary." Copies are available from Office of Federal Statistical Policy and Standards.