work in the Federal agencies and in contractor plant. It also provides policy guidance for preparing reports on our work which are submitted to the Congress and to Federal agency officials.

In the area of accounting policy, I am directed by the Budget and Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 to prescribe the principles, standards, and related requirements for accounting to be followed by the executive agencies. The Office of Policy and Special Studies performs the necessary research and consultation and formulates these accounting principles and standards which it recommends be prescribed.

The special studies referred to are those made by the Office of Policy and Special Studies of subjects which are best handled by the specialized staffs which this office has such as computer experts, actuaries, and systems analysts. A good recent example of such a study is our review of the acquisition and management of computer software in the Federal Government. This is a very comprehensive report on a highly technical subject that will be submitted to the Congress very shortly.

STUDIES REQUIRING SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OR TECHNIQUES

Senator HOLLINGS. How do these studies differ from the review and examinations of various governmental programs you mentioned earlier?

Mr. STAATS. There is no difference in the general objective of analyzing Government agency policies and procedures and identifying ways and means of strengthening operations or saving money. The special studies by this Office are those that, in our judgment, are best performed by its staff's because of their special knowledge of the fields covered or the techniques required. Another factor is that almost all of these studies cover more than one agency; in fact, many of them are of a Government-wide nature. The computer software report that I mentioned earlier is based on a study covering all major Federal agencies.

AUDITING FEDERAL GRANT PROGRAMS

Senator HOLLINGS. On page J-5, you mention the development of auditing standards and guidelines for application under Federal grant programs. What does this entail?

Mr. STAATS. This project grew out of recognition of the need for wider understanding of the kind of auditing needed of the Federal grant programs to provide information and evaluations for grant administrators, program managers, and other officials. Better information is needed on how grant funds are being applied. We are spending about $30 billion a year in the form of grants to State and local governments to assist in many kinds of programs. Auditors, whether they are Federal auditors, State auditors, or independently employed auditors, need better guidelines for making necessary audits. GAO is providing leadership in developing better audit standards for these programs. We have one man in the Office of Policy and Special Studies spending full time on this work. Other Federal agencies are also working on it-agencies such as the Departments of Health, Education, and Welfare, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, OEO, and several others. In addition, we are consulting with representatives of State and local governments and various professional accounting associations.

COMPILATION OF GOVERNMENT-WIDE FISCAL INFORMATION

Senator HOLLINGS. Is it contemplated that the compilation of budgetary and fiscal data-and you mention "expenditures" in item 2-will be Government wide? Will the GAO be the basic source of this fiscal information rather than, say, the Office of Management and Budget? Mr. STAATS. I believe you are referring to the directive in the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, that we cooperate with the Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget in developing a standardized information and data processing system for budgetary and fiscal data and also standard classifications of Federal programs, activities, receipts, and expenditures. This work will definitely be of a Government-wide nature. However, the basic source of fiscal information will still be the accounting systems of the Federal agencies-not GAO. The Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget have the primary responsibility under the law to develop these systems and classifications. Our job, as we see it, is to make sure that the interests of the Congress in the system are adequately provided for.

At this time, no decisions have been made as to what kind of a reporting system will evolve from this work or how frequently reports will be prepared.

AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING WORK FOR CONGRESS,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Senator HOLLINGS. On page J-7, you refer to the automatic data processing program for the House of Representatives. What does this involve, and what is the current status?

Mr. STAATS. During the 91st Congress, the House of Representatives through its Committee on House Administration, undertook a comprehensive study of its information needs and the development of concepts for systems to meet these needs. Since early in 1969, we have had anywhere from two to 10 staff members assigned to the so-called ADP working group which was made up of representatives from our office, the Library of Congress, and the Clerk of the House. This working group was formed to make the preliminary technical studies for the committee.

In addition to developing a basic study plan, the working group made a comprehensive survey of the interests and needs of House Members and staffs for information. They interviewed 105 Members and obtained questionnaire responses from the staffs of 212 Members. Several private contractors were engaged by the Committee on House Administration to develop systems concepts and layout plans. The ADP working group provided technical direction over the contractors. The areas covered by the contractor studies included electronic voting for the House Chamber, computerized addressing and mailing services for the House, a legislative information system, including information on status of bills, and retrieval of legal information.

The ADP working group is not being continued in the 92d Congress. The Committee on House Administration is hiring a permanent staff. We still have four staff members working part time with the new committee staff to assist in the transition. The House is putting primary emphasis on the electronic voting system and the addressing and mailing system.

SENATE

Senator HOLLINGS. Are you doing anything in this regard for the Senate?

Mr. STAATS. Yes. The Senate Rules and Administration Committee has created a subcommittee on computer services and has hired a profesional staff member. We are providing advice and assistance on an informal basis to the committee as they formulate a program for computer services. More formal arrangements will probably be established in the near future. The primary concerns of the committee are twofold: (1) working with GAO and others on the standard classifications of Federal programs, activities, receipts, and expenditures required by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, and (2) the development of a legal information processing and retrieval system for all components of the legislative branch.

ASSIGNMENTS TO THE CONGRESS

Senator HOLLINGS. I was interested in your reference to assignment of GAO personnel to congressional committees. How prevalent is that, how long are these assignments, how many employees are involved, what is the cost to GAO, and how much, if any, is reimbursed? Please provide for the record a tabulation supplying this information for, say, a 5-year period.

Mr. STAATS. During fiscal year 1970, GAO personnel were assigned to 22 committees and subcommittees on assignments of varying lengths; however, the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-510, approved Oct. 26, 1970) provided that no employee of the GAO may be assigned or detailed to full-time duty on a continuing basis with any committee for a period of more than 1 year. During fiscal year 1970, the latest completed fiscal year, we assigned 115 employees to the committees at a total cost of $620,617. Of this amount we were reimbursed $92,230.

(The table follows:)

SUMMARY, BY FISCAL YEARS, OF ASSIGNMENTS OF PERSONNEL TO CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES, FISCAL YEARS 1966 THROUGH 1970

Senator COTTON. When you assign GAO staff members to other agencies, such as the 10 assigned full time to the Procurement Commission, are you reimbursed for your costs by the other agency?

Mr. STAATS. No, we are not being reimbursed for our staff members assigned to the Procurement Commission and are not reimbursed for

other assignments of this nature. The legislation establishing the Procurement Commission authorizes use of employees of other agencies without reimbursement upon agreement with the head of the agency involved. As I mentioned we are reimbursed by some of the congressional committees for our staff members assigned to them. Government Corporations reimburse us for the costs of audits we perform.

CIVIL DIVISION

Senator HOLLINGS. Turning now to the Civil Division

You are requesting $12,841,740 for this Division's work in fiscal year 1972. This is $1,254,920 over your revised 1971 appropriations. I will have placed in the record the departments and agencies, listed on page K-2, this Division audits and investigates.

(The information follows:)

I note you are requesting an additional 40 average positions for the Washington staff and another 147 positions for the field staff. In total, you will then have 1,556 employees performing these activities if the increases are approved, of which 841 will be in the field staff category. Are these 841 field staff people based outside of Washington? Mr. STAATS. Our budget provides for a total of 1,894 average positions for our 15 regional offices, including the regional office located at Falls Church, Va. These 15 regional offices perform assigned accounting and auditing work generally in accordance with plans and work programs provided by the Washington operating divisions. Regional office staff members generally work on a number of different assignments during the course of the year, and we are estimating that 841 man-years of effort will be applied by the field staffs to Civil Division work.

63-065 0-71- -5

TRAVEL AND OTHER EXPENSES

Senator HOLLINGS. Of your total appropriation request, $584,640 is listed as travel and other expenses. Is per diem included in this category? How much?

Mr. SAMUELSON. Of the $584,640, $320,000 is for travel and transportation of persons, of which about $98,000 is for per diem. The remaining $264,640 is for other expenses such as communications, supplies, printing, and equipment.

DEVELOPMENT OF WORK PLANS

Senator HOLLINGS. Give the committee an example of how you operate: For instance, when the decision is made to audit certain Department of Health, Education, and Welfare functions, how do you program the investigations, Washington versus the field staff?

Mr. STAATS. In the usual circumstance, the decision to program a specific audit is made after a considerable amount of information has been assembled on the function or activity concerned. The purpose of assembling this information, which may be done by staff either in Washington or in one of the field offices or by both, is to provide a basis for making judgments as to (1) the specific objectives of undertaking more detailed work in the area, and (2) the scope of work necessary to meet these objectives, including the number of locations at which work is to be performed. In most cases work is required both at agency headquarters in Washington and at one or more locations outside the Washington area.

These judgments are the responsibility of the Washington staff, but are often made in consultation with knowledgeable field staff members. Once these judgments have been made, the work is carried out by Washington and/or field staff. The respective staffs in close communication with each other as the work progresses to enable timely judgments to be made on any changes which should be made in the work plan based on the information developed. This close association continues through the development of a report on the results of the work, with the Washington and field staff working as a team for the purpose of accomplishing the objectives of the particular assignment.

DEFENSE DIVISION

Senator HOLLINGS. For the Defense Division, you are requesting an additional 27 positions; yet, according to the table on page L-2, in the comparison column, you show a net decrease of 71. Explain this and your reason for the change in emphasis from the field staff to the Washington staff.

Mr. STAATS. Our projection of staff requirements for the Defense Division shows a need for an additional 27 positions for the Washington staff-an increase from 333 to 360-and a reduction of 98 positions for the field staff-a decrease from 994 to 896. This represents a net decrease of 71 positions.

The projected increase in the Washington staff, despite the projected decrease in the field staff, reflects the growing complexity of the programed work of the Defense Division. The work in such areas as acquisitions of weapon systems and "should cost" studies requires