GAO BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS

Turn to page 9 of the printed statement. We have discussed with you the last several times we have been here the way we analyze our need for resources, and I thought I would spend a bit of time discussing that with you this morning. We consider the resources that will be required to fulfill responsibilities assigned to our individual divisions and offices. We also look at our need for resources by officewide program categories. It helps us to balance the way we apply our resources. Because we do have a difficult problem in GAO as to priorities, there is always a lot more that we could be looking at that we don't at any given time. We try to find ways in which we can be sure we are putting our staff on the highest priority work that we can.

Our justification of estimates considers each of these approaches in considerable detail.

APPLICATION OF RESOURCES

Attachment I is an overview of the way we plan to apply our resources by divisions and offices. That attachment also refers to the section of our "Justification of Estimates" which discusses resource needs of the various divisions and offices. They are our best estimates. However, changed condition, new legislation, and changing patterns of committee and member requests could-and probably will require us to make some shifts. Resource shifts, particularly those involving field staff, are an important way for us to respond to changed conditions.

As for our GAO-wide program categories, our needs for staff are as follows:

Mr. STAATS. These are the program categories that we are using in GAO to plan our work and to budget our funds, the special work mandated by statute. These are the kinds of things I referred to a few minutes ago where a statute says to GAO you do a specific assignment, and this plus eight is a net increase, because some of those made last year have been fulfilled.

DIRECT ASSISTANCE TO COMMITTEES AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

The direct assistance to committees and Members of Congress we estimate will take 10 additional staff-years. The third category is our ongoing work, normal audit responsibilities, 44; and then in the examination of agencies' financial systems, transactions, accounts, and so forth, minus four; financial management improvement, no change; claims settlement and debt collection activities, minus 27; legal services, no change; and executive direction and management, no change. Thus, our plans anticipate increases in special work mandated by statute, direct assistance to committees; and reviews of the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of existing programs. Some resource shifts from other program categories largely claims settlement and debt collection activities are planned. I will discuss each of these briefly highlighting some of the more significant changes. Detail is included in tab C of our "Justification Estimates."

Special work mandated by statute: I think I have covered that adequately and don't need to repeat that. I might add a bit to the next category, direct assistance to committees and Members of Congress. To committees and Members we have submitted in 1976 some 950 different reports. In testimony we appeared in fiscal year 1977, 140 times before different committees of Congress, which is just double the number of appearances we had in the prior fiscal year.

The staff assigned to congressional committees in 1976 total 89 people assigned to various committees of Congress. We had to absorb $830,000 of the costs of such assignments out of our budget because we were not reimbursed. On views on pending legislation we have literally hundreds of requests from committees for GAO views on proposed legislation, and that represents additional workload, accounting, auditing, advisory services for the House and Senate financial administrative operations. Mr. Sanger, over here with his staff, is stationed up here, and how much staff do you have, Harry?

Mr. SANGER. Nine permanent people.

Mr. STAATS. Nine full-time serving the Congress in this area. Congressional liaison activity, we have five people full-time who are working with each of the committees or Congress on the work that we are doing that relates to their committees, handling requests or negotiating the requests I mentioned to you a while ago. We do a great deal of briefing of committee members and staffs on our ongoing work, particularly if there is a connection with an appropriations hearing or connection with new legislation or reauthorization program, where they want to get the background and information from our people that may bear on that. We do work for virtually all the committees of Congress.

We have an attachment here which demonstrates this. These requests range from minor efforts involving less than a staff-year to major ones which may involve as much as 25 staff-years.

I think on the next page we have covered that in some detail already. I don't know that I need to repeat that, so I think we can move to page 13, unless you have some question.

ONGOING WORK

This category is the ongoing work, as I say, which we do under our basic statute. Basic statutes, as you know, of the budget and accounting act go back to 1921, but this has been added to substantially as years have gone by the Budget Accounting Act of 1950, the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, and particularly now the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. All of these have given us basic new responsibilities to make up this category of what we call reviews of economy, efficiency, and program effectiveness.

I don't need to read all of that page, Mr. Chairman. I think we have covered it well.

COORDINATION WITH CRS, CBO, AND OTA

I might make some reference at the bottom of page 13, if I may. We have attempted to work closely, particularly on the work that we do in response to requests that we receive, with the Congressional Research Service, the Congressional Budget Office, and the Office of Technology Assessment to be sure that we are exchanging information, that we are avoiding any duplication of effort, and I believe we have been successful on that. I have a more detailed statement on that, and if you would like, I would be happy to have it inserted in the record because this has been a matter that has come up from time to time.

Mr. SHIPLEY. This committee would be very interested, as you very well know, and we might go into it right now a little bit if that is agreeable with the committee.

Of course, you remember very well a couple of years ago we received a lot of criticism because of the creation of the new Congressional Budget Office, and they said there was a lot of duplication. Now you do have a system set up called the interagency research notification system, and from what I understand, it has been working, and you have been able to meet regularly and find out what is going on. And you have taken steps, as I understand it, to prevent duplication, not only within the legislative branch, but throughout the Federal Government. Why don't you tell us what you are doing?

Mr. STAATS. I would like to ask Mr. Hughes and Mr. Heller here if they wish to address that, and perhaps you would be agreeable to having this put in the record.

Mr. SHIPLEY. That would be fine.

[The information referred to follows:]

LIAISON AND COORDINATING ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN GAO/CBO/CRS AND OTA

The establishment of the Office of Technology Assessment and the Congressional Budget Office and the enlargement of the scope and purposes of the Congressional Research Service provide increased opportunities for cooperation in support of congressional purposes. Each of the congressional agencies named, together with the General Accounting Office, contributes in a distinctive way to the Congress in its legislative and oversight roles. Yet the work of each frequently benefits from the views and perspectives of the other.

In our liaison and coordinating arrangements, we seek to :

enable each agency to continue serving Congress in accord with its particular mandates, and inform congressional clients of the work being done by each agency.

encourage the sharing of information and work products and, in appropriate cases, the conduct of joint research activities.

keep Congress informed or resources available and projects underway or recently completed.

facilitate the improvement of products by stimulating interagency contacts at both the research and management levels.

There follow some of the overall liaison and coordinating approaches common to all of the four agencies. Specific information on coordination with each agency is indicated thereafter.

Overall

The first step in any significant General Accounting Office project is a search and review by project staff of the work already completed or in process on the subject, either in other Government agencies or outside the Government. Work completed or underway in CBO, CRS, or OTA, of course, is identified immediately. A biweekly report of study and research projects in process at GAO, CBO, CRS, and OTA was instituted in January 1976, in line with the recommendation of Senate Report No. 94-511. The report lists assignments in process and new starts in each of the agencies as well as those which were completed in the last six months. It shows for each assignment-the assignment title, and number, a brief description of its objectives, the source (whether requested by committee, Member, or, in GAO's case, self-initiated), the end product sought, the date initiated, and the planned completion date. It indicates whether liaison for that particular assignment is planned with each of the other agencies, and for ready reference provides the name of the person most knowledgeable about the assignment. The report is used by GAO to keep abreast of ongoing work at the other congressional staff agencies and, in so far as possible, to supplement other coordinating approaches already in effect. The monthly report is supplemented by a weekly one which shows new starts and completions during the week. The weekly report is not cumulative.

An informal, unstructured group comprising top level representatives from GAO/CBO/CRS and OTA meets monthly to assure that the various coordinating arrangements are working effectively. The representatives are: Phillip Samuel Hughes, Assistant Comptroller General, GAO; Robert Levine, Deputy Director, CBO; Dan DeSimone, Deputy Director, OTA; and Replacement for Norman Beckman, CRS (formerly chairman) has not been designated by the new CRS director, Mr. Gude.

The group promotes additional cooperation among the four congressional support agencies, sharing information and work products, and dealing with issues of mutual concern as they may arise.

A GAO instruction (GAO Order 1420.1-titled "Cooperation and Coordination with the Congressional Budget Office, the Congressional Research Service, and the Office of Technology Assessment" dated August 24, 1976) emphasizes to GAO staff the need for effective coordination and cooperation and provides specific guidance to facilitate it.

Cooperation with CBO//CRS and OTA has been emphasized throughout GAO. A block of instruction on this subject has been included in training courses given to professional staff-from trainee to supervisory levels.

Liaison with the Congressional Budget Office

Day-to-day GAO/CBO liaison is informal and ad hoc featuring close personal contact between CBO staff and that of GAO's Program Analysis Divisionthe GAO division assigned office-wide responsibility for liaison with the Congressional Budget Office.

More formal liaison and coordination occurs on specific program evaluation or congressional information projects. For example:

A GAO product titled "Evaluation and Analysis to Support Decisionmaking" was circulated to CBO, among others, for comment.

GAO work to standardize terminology and definitions includes close and continuing exchanges with CBO.

Development of functional classification recommendations similarly involves continuing liaison and coordination, particularly with CBO and the Budget Committees.

GAO and CBO closely coordinate their assistance to authorizing committees in preparing views and estimates reports.

More detail on GAO/CBO cooperation and coordination follows:

Information reporting and systems

Budget functional classifications.-GAO initiated the establishment of a legislative branch task group to recommend revisions to budget functional classifications-required by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. With GAO, CBO, and Budget Committees participating in the task group, it was an effective means of exchanging views on changes needed to existing functional classifications. We are continuing to work with CBO and the Budget Committees on improvements in the functional categories.

Budget program classifications.-As required by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, we are also working with various committees of the Congress to develop more useful program-oriented budget classification structures. CBO is kept advised of the details of this work where it relates to their budgeting information systems.

Committee information and report requirements.-Our work in this area includes helping both appropriations and authorizing committees to identify their information needs. Work with authorizing committees includes assisting them to obtain the information they need for analysis leading to their "Views and Estimates" reports to the Budget Committees-required by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. CBO also provides information for use in preparing these reports and the Budget Committees-the recipients of the reports-provide guidance for their preparation. Frequent meetings of CBO, GAO, authorizing committee staffs and agency personnel, are held to discuss information needed for "Views and Estimates" reports and to promote effective coordination. Requirements for data systems. Data systems are used by GAO to support our own analytical work, in automating sourcebooks, and in maintaining program information files to support congressional authorizing committees. CBO uses data systems to maintain their scorekeeping system, the account level legislative classification system and to support their analytical work. GAO and CBO's information systems groups are in almost daily contact with each other. They exchange computer reports wherever possible to eliminate duplication of effort.

Definition of terms.-GAO is required by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to develop standard terms and definitions in cooperation with CBO, as well as OMB and Treasury. We are currently preparing for publication in March a revised edition of a glossary of budget terms-Budgetary Definitions. Two drafts of the revised glossary have been provided to both CBO and the House and Senate Budget Committees for their review and comment. Their comments and suggestions for terms and definitions have been considered and included in the glossary.

Budget practices.-Two current projects illustrate the way we cooperate on issues involving budget practices.

1. Our work in developing a letter report to Senator McClellan, concerning the creation of budget authority for the Department of Housing and Urban Development's emergency mortgage purchase assistance program, has involved considerable coordination with the budget committees and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Staff of the committees and CBO were consulted on technical and other matters in the letter preparation stage-extensive contacts were made with CBO's scorekeeping staff all during the review. In addition, CBO was asked for formal comments on a draft of the letter.

2. The multi-agency review we are beginning on budget authority roll-over involves coordination with CBO and the Congressional Research Service. We have discussed this review with staff of these organizations and are keeping them informed of its progress.

Economic analysis.-GAO uses economic analysis as a tool in performance of its reviews. This includes use of the major economic models-DRI, Wharton, and Chase. Budget Committees also use models as a analytical tool in considering alternative levels of expenditures and revenues. CBO uses such models in its forecasting of alternative fiscal policies. Work in connection with these models is coordinated through informal meetings and exchange of ideas, commenting on each others work, and closely coordinating new job starts. Additionally, we have made a number of computer runs for CBO on energy problems and helped them obtain econometric services from DRI and Wharton. We negotiated a Wharton contract for CBO and the Budget Committees under a GAO "umbrella."