The essential point is that the GAO planning system provides an effective basis for marshalling resources to accomplish carefully determined objectives. In so doing, it alerts us to areas in which our coverage is in danger of becoming unacceptably thin.

Our request for 5,350 staff years in FY 1980 is based on the increase in GAO's workload which cannot be met by reprogramming, increased productivity or other measures. It is that level which we believe is necessary to maintain minimum overall coverage of agencies and their programs. We have been increasingly concerned that unless new requirements are funded, our audit and evaluation coverage will become unacceptably thin. Our work in defense related areas, particularly, has, in recent years, been diminishing as a percentage of our total work. It is important to prevent a de facto deemphasis in defense related work and to maintain such work at about 25% of total GAO effort.

WORK REQUIRED FOR OFFICE WIDE PROGRAM CATEGORIES

An important perspective by which we establish the need for and manage our use of resources is that of Office-wide program categories which require the participation of all or most GAO divisions. These program categories and our estimate of the staff years that they will require are:

The work that we do in each of these program categories, the congressional mandates giving rise to it, and the need for the FY 1980 resources that we are requesting are described in the following pages.

DIRECT ASSISTANCE TO CONGRESS

Work under this program category fulfills a very significant GAO responsibility. It is the category which covers the work that GAO does in direct support of the Congress, its Committees and Members. This category includes only that work which GAO is specifically required to do. It includes work under the following GAO responsibilities:

B-E

--Specific work mandated by statute or by specific recommendations for
GAO that are contained in committee reports on legislation or hearings.
This is one-time, specific work required of CAO usually for performance
by a stated date. It does not include work undertaken pursuant to
legislation giving GAO a continuing responsibility in a given area.
For example, it does not include GAO's cooperative assistance in the
development of government-wide fiscal information systems under the
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970. The new requirements of
specifically mandated work--for which we will need additional resources
in FY 1980--are described earlier on page B-3.

--Committee and Member requests. This involves work performed at the
specific, written request of a committee or member. Performance of
this work is usually required by the requestor in very tight time frames.
Such requests have been substantially increasing in recent years. A
discussion of this facet of our direct assistance work, as it relates
to our need for additional resources in FY 1980, is discussed earlier
on page B-5.

--Testimony relating to GAO work including staff effort required to
prepare for hearings. This is a significant role in that it gives
Congress the benefit of the results of our past work and our staff
expertise in particular areas. Increasingly the Congress is requesting
GAO testimony. For example, GAO representatives testified 111 times
in FY 1977. In FY 1978 we testified 164 times before 39 different
committees and subcommittees.

-Advice on pending legislation, rendering advisory legal opinions and
assistance in drafting legislation and other legal assistance.

--Staff assigned to Congressional Committees.

--Accounting, auditing and advisory services for House and Senate
financial and administrative operations.

--Congressional liaison activities.

The direct assistance program category is our fastest growing category. Its growth--relative to the other categories--results from the fact that the volume of such work has increased steadily in recent years. Mandated and request work is "must" work. It must be done in a particular--congressionally directed--time frame. Since in recent years we have not had the additional resources that we needed to meet the new mandated workload, we have had to reprogram from other program categories. This has impinged on our ability to effectively meet all of our responsibilities and underscores the importance of funding the requirements of new mandates that cannot be met by reprogramming.

Of the work in this category about 10% is specifically mandated by legislation and Committee reports, about 60% responds to the requests of Committees and 17% to the requests of Members. The remaining 13% is required for the other direct assistance functions described above. The proportion of our work responding to Member requests has declined in the past several years. Resource constraints have increasingly made it difficult for us to respond to all of the requests made by Members. To the extent that we cannot meet Member requests, we run the risk of depriving them of an audit and evaluation resource which is of great value in their legislative role. We, therefore, do not see further reductions in this function as a viable reprogramming device.

The work that we do in this category runs the gamut of current congressional interests and of Federal agencies and programs. Examples of our direct assistance work are included in a handout.

In all, our FY 1980 request for resources to meet our direct assistance responsibilities will total 2,084 staff years. This is an increase of 144 staff years over FY 1979 levels. The whole increase is needed to meet new workload over which we have little or no control. As previously pointed out, our increased workload substantially exceeds this amount. The requested

increase of 144 staff years is the amount which cannot be reprogrammed or otherwise absorbed.

REVIEWS OF PROGRAMS, UNDER CURRENT STATUTES,
FOR ECONOMY, EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS

This category of work had been our largest one, but--as pointed out earlier--because of serious resource constraints, it is one from which we have needed to "borrow" in recent years to meet the more time critical work requirements of our direct assistance program category.

It is by work under this program category that we fulfill our basic responsibilities for audits and evaluations of federal agencies and programs. (Audit work primarily directed to accounting and financial management objectives does not come within this program category but is included within the program category described on page B-10.)

Our reviews of program results, economy, and efficiency are performed in response to GAO's responsibility to the Congress under the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 and subsequent legislation which gives GAO continuing responsibilities. It is in very large measure by work under this category that we give the Congress information that it needs to oversee executive agencies and their programs. Work under this program category also gives the Congress a significant factual experience base for use as it considers proposals for program modifications or for new programs.

Our responsibilities for work under this program category are immense; they are as encompassing as are the operations of the Federal government itself. Consequently, the GAO planning system needs to--and does--provide the basis for highlighting what most needs to be done during a particular period with assurance that, over time, no agencies or programs get short shrift.

For example, it has become increasingly apparent that GAO work in defense related areas needs shoring up. This work involving 45.5% of GAO's audit effort in FY 1970 had, by FY 1977, dropped to 23%. In FY 1980 we will need to add resources to this work so that defense related work will constitute 25% of the total GAO effort. This level is, we believe, a minimum one consistent with the audit requirements of the nation's defense activities.

GAO work under this category is accomplished through a large number of individual assignments each of which seeks particular, defined objectives. GAO's program planning system provides an important vehicle by which individual assignments are the "building blocks" by which GAO performs audits and evaluations of major issues of highest national interest.

In planning our work under this program category we give first consideration to the interests of the Congress. We maintain close and continuing contacts with congressional committees to help assure the usefulness of our work products.

D-S

In determining the work that we should undertake under this program category we consider matters such as:

--expressions of congressional interest,

--the importance of programs and activities judged by such means as public impact, amount of expenditures, investment in assets, and amount of revenues, --the newness of programs and activities,

--public criticism indicating the need for corrective action, and

--the extent and recency of prior work by GAO or by agency internal
review and evaluation groups.

In work under this category, we consider what is happening in programs and activities of virtually all executive agencies. With GAO staff physically stationed in department and agency locations in Washington, D.C., 15 Regional Offices and in four such offices overseas, we identify problems as they develop and keep on top of what is happening day-to-day in the planning and operation of Federal programs. Our government-wide responsibilities give us the perspective to make recommendations to improve interagency relationships, to eliminate program overlaps and duplication, and to correct gaps in program coverage. In so doing, we point out to the Congress how program effectiveness, efficiency and economy can be improved.

In FY 1980 we will require the use of 1,752 staff years for work in this program category. The small increase of 21 staff years over FY 1979 levels is needed to meet the audit and evaluation requirements of recent legislation which added new programs or modified existing ones. These requirements are described and illustrated earlier on page B-4. Examples of our reviews of programs, under current statutes for economy, efficiency and effectiveness are included in a handout.

ANALYSIS OF COSTS AND BENEFITS

OF ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES

This program category, which analyzes the costs and benefits of alternative programs, has as its main thrust the cost/benefit and probable impact and implications of different approaches to significant problems which are usually national in scope. Its emphasis is on alternative actions needed to deal with an important issue or problem at the national level, whether or not any Federal programs or legislation are in place to deal with the problem. Studies under this category generally start with the recognition of a significant problem and explore various different ways by which Federal action could best solve or alleviate it.

Illustrative of our work in this category is that which is directed to determining the benefits, costs and other impacts of regulation and to exploring what viable alternatives there are to regulation over a range of Federal objectives now sought by that means.

We plan to use the same number of staff years in FY 1980 as in FY 1979.

B-S

AUDITS OF FINANCIAL OPERATIONS AND ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS WORK

Work under this program category is directed toward improving accounting and financial accountability of Federal agencies and their programs. Work under this category includes:

--Improving the accounting systems of Federal executive agencies. It
includes the work that we do in prescribing principles and
standards, cooperating with agencies as they develop their systems,
reviewing the design of completed systems, and approving them when
the system's design meets GAO prescribed principles and standards.

--Reviewing accounting systems as they actually operate in connection
with agency programs throughout the Government. By such work,
we determine whether accounting systems are in fact operating as
intended.

--Auditing and settling accounts of accountable officers in both
civil and military departments and at military finance centers.
This work meets our statutory responsibilities for assuring the
validity and legal sufficiency of financial transactions and for
settling the accounts of those who, under the law, are accountable
for them. This work is closely related to, and benefits from,
reviews of accounting systems discussed above.

--Auditing the Government corporations and other governmental activities
for which we are assigned responsibility by various pieces of
legislation primarily the Government Corporation Control Act of 1945.
These audits and examinations are made in accordance with principles
and procedures applicable to commercial enterprises. They determine
the propriety of financial transactions and the fairness of financial
statements. They also provide comments and information which may
be necessary to keep Congress informed of corporation activities.
--Assisting Federal, State, and local governments to strengthen their
auditing and evaluation standards and methods. A major objective
is to improve auditing at Federal, State, and local governmental
levels to provide greater assurance that Federal grant and revenue
sharing funds are given proper audit attention by Federal, State and
local governmental audit organizations.

--Participating in the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program. This Government-wide program to stimulate improvements in accounting and other financial management practices will continue to be emphasized in FY 1980.

--Helping congressional committees get the fiscal, budgetary, and
program information that they need and to effectively use the
information that they get. This is an increasingly important
part of our work--one which got particular emphasis as a result
of the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of FY 1974.

--Improving the program evaluation methods used by executive agencies and helping Congress to use program evaluation information. This work was emphasized by the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

B-10