This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-09-2SP 
entitled 'Citizens' Report: Fiscal Year 2008 Summary of GAO's 
Performance and Financial Results' which was released on January 15, 
2009. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

United States Government Accountability Office: 

Citizens’ Report: Fiscal Year 2008: Summary of GAO’s Performance and 
Financial Results: 

Serving the Congress and the Nation: 

Accountability: 
Integrity: 
Reliability: 

Figure: Serving The Congress: 

[Refer to PDF for image] 

Accountability: 

We help the Congress oversee federal programs and operations to ensure 
accountability to the American people. GAO’s analysts, auditors, 
lawyers, economists, information technology specialists, investigators, 
and other multidisciplinary professionals seek to enhance the economy, 
efficiency, effectiveness, and credibility of the federal government 
both in fact and in the eyes of the American people. 

Integrity: 

We set high standards for ourselves in the conduct of GAO’s work. Our 
agency takes a professional, objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, 
nonideological, fair, and balanced approach to all activities. 
Integrity is the foundation of our reputation, and the GAO approach to 
work ensures it. 

Reliability: 

We at GAO want our work to be viewed by the Congress and the American 
public as reliable. We produce high-quality reports, testimonies, 
briefings, legal opinions, and other products and services that are 
timely, accurate, useful, clear, and candid. 

Scope of work: 

GAO performs a range of oversight-, insight-, and foresight-related 
engagements, a vast majority of which are conducted in response to 
congressional mandates or requests. GAO’s engagements include 
evaluations of federal programs and performance, financial and 
management audits, policy analyses, legal opinions, bid protest 
adjudications, and investigations. 

Source: See Image Sources. 

[End of figure] 

Citizens Report: Fiscal Year 2008 Summary of Performance and Financial 
Results: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 

Budget, Performance, and Financial Snapshot: 

Fiscal Year 2008: 

Who We Are: 

Mission: The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, 
and investigative arm of the Congress, exists to support the Congress 
in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the 
performance and accountability of the federal government for the 
American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates 
federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, 
and other assistance to help the Congress make informed oversight, 
policy, and funding decisions. 

Organization and Strategic Focus: To fulfill its mission, GAO organizes 
and manages its resources to support four broad strategic goals. These 
include helping to address challenges to the well being and economic 
security of the American people, U.S. national and homeland security 
efforts, and modernizing government to meet current and emerging 
issues. Strategic goal 4 is an internal goal that focuses on enhancing 
GAO’s business and administrative processes through investments in 
human capital, financial management, information technology, and 
various processes and systems needed to support the agency and the 
Congress. 

Human Capital: We maintain a workforce of highly trained professionals 
across a breadth of academic and scientific disciplines. About three-
quarters of our approximately 3,100 employees are based at our 
headquarters in Washington, D.C; the rest are deployed in 11 field 
offices across the country. 

Budget and Financial Snapshot (dollars in millions): 

GAO’s Budgetary Resources: 

[Refer to PDF for image] 

This figure is a combination bar graph showing GAO's Budgetary 
resources. The X axis represents the fiscal year, and the Y axis 
represents the dollar value (in millions). 

Fiscal year: 2004; 
Value: $487.5.  

Fiscal year: 2005; 
Value: $493.8. 

Fiscal year: 2006; 
Value: $497.2. 

Fiscal year: 2007; 
Value: $498.9. 

Fiscal year: 2008; 
Value: $519.0. 

[End of figure] 

Fiscal Year 2008: 

Clean Opinion on Financial Statements: Yes; 
Timely Financial Reporting: Yes; 
Material Weaknesses: None; 
Total Assets: $111.3; 
Total Liabilities: $108.4; 
Net Cost of Operations[A]: $529.6[A]. 

[A] This includes nonbudgetary items, such as imputed pension and 
depreciation costs, which are not included in the figures for total 
budgetary resources. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of fiscal year 2008] 

Performance Snapshot: 

Accomplishments: In fiscal year 2008, GAO met or exceeded all mission-
related targets by, for example, identifying $58.1 billion in financial 
benefits—a return of $114 for every dollar GAO spent—and nearly 1,400 
improvements in government programs and operations. The rate at which 
GAO’s recommendations were implemented by federal agencies or the 
Congress rose to 83 percent, and over two- thirds of the products 
issued contained recommendations. GAO testified at over 300 hearings 
before the Congress on a variety of topics—our second highest 
performance in over 25 years—including the progress on U.S. 
counterterrorism measures and efforts in the Middle East and South 
Central Asia; the need for stronger regulation over financial 
institutions; and on federal programs and areas considered at high risk 
for fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. Also, results from our 
employee feedback survey—the source for several of our people measures, 
such as staff development and organizational climate—were the highest 
in the last 6 years. 

Challenges: For fiscal year 2008, GAO continued to address three 
management challenges—physical security, information security, and 
human capital. In particular, GAO implemented several initiatives aimed 
at promoting a fair and unbiased work environment where opportunity and 
inclusiveness are valued. 

Summary of GAO’s Performance Results and Targets for FY 2006–2009: 

GAO sets targets for its financial benefits, nonfinancial benefits, and 
testimonies measures at the agencywide level and then for each of its 
external strategic goals. 

Strategic Goal 1: Provide timely, quality service to the Congress and 
the federal government to address current and emerging challenges to 
the well-being and financial security of the American people. (Fiscal 
year 2008 net cost: $201.2 million) 

Performance Measures: Financial benefits (dollars in billions); 
2006 Actual: $22; 
2007 Actual: $12.9; 
2008 Target: $13.8; 
2008 Actual: $19.3; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: $13.4. 

Performance Measures: Nonfinancial benefits; 
2006 Actual: 268; 
2007 Actual: 238; 
2008 Target: 238; 
2008 Actual: 226; 
Met/Not Met: Not Met; 
2009 Target: 231. 

Performance Measures: Testimonies; 
2006 Actual: 97; 
2007 Actual: 125; 
2008 Target: 84; 
2008 Actual: 124; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 77. 

Strategic Goal 2: Provide timely, quality service to the Congress and 
the federal government to respond to changing security threats and the 
challenges of global interdependence. (Fiscal year 2008 net cost: 
$161.1 million) 

Performance measures: Financial benefits (dollars in billions); 
2006 Actual: $12.0; 
2007 Actual: $10.3; 
2008 Target: $11.3; 
2008 Actual: $15.4; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: $12.7. 

Performance measures: Nonfinancial benefits; 
2006 Actual: 449; 
2007 Actual: 468; 
2008 Target: 322; 
2008 Actual: 468; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 344. 

Performance measures: Testimonies; 
2006 Actual: 68; 
2007 Actual: 73; 
2008 Target: 69; 
2008 Actual: 96; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 64. 

Strategic Goal 3: Help transform the federal government’s role and how 
it does business to meet 21st century challenges. (Fiscal year 2008 net 
cost: $150.6 million). 

Performance Measures: Financial benefits (dollars in billions); 
2006 Actual: $17.0; 
2007 Actual: $22.8; 
2008 Target: $14.9; 
2008 Actual: $23.4; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: $15.9. 

Performance Measures: Nonfinancial benefits; 
2006 Actual: 625; 
2007 Actual: 648; 
2008 Target: 590; 
2008 Actual: 704; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 625. 

Performance Measures: Testimonies; 
2006 Actual: 73; 
2007 Actual: 74; 
2008 Target: 67; 
2008 Actual: 77; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 56. 

Strategic Goal 4: Maximize the value of GAO by being a model federal 
agency and a world-class professional services organization. (Fiscal 
year 2008 net cost: $22.6 million). 

* GAO received an unqualified opinion from an international team of 
peer reviewers on GAO’s quality assurance system processes and began 
implementing the team’s suggested improvements. 

* GAO fully implemented its new accounting system, Delphi, enhancing 
its ability to produce auditable financial statements, supporting A-123 
compliance, and improving its financial management processes, 
reporting, and internal controls. 

* GAO initiated an enterprise project to conceptualize, procure, and 
deploy a single, integrated, enterprise-wide automated system to 
capture, manage, store, preserve, protect, and deliver information 
consistent with its quality assurance framework throughout the life 
cycle of an engagement. 

* GAO assisted in building the Iraqi Board of Supreme Audit’s capacity 
through a modified version of our International Auditor Fellowship 
program to help increase accountability for public funds spent in Iraq. 

[End of Budget, Performance, and Financial Snapshot] 

From the Acting Comptroller General: 

January 15, 2009: 

It is my pleasure to present GAO’s Citizens’ Report: Fiscal Year 2008 
Summary of GAO’s Performance and Financial Results. This report 
provides highlights of information contained in our fiscal year 2008 
performance and accountability report that discusses the outstanding 
achievements of the GAO team in serving the Congress and helping to 
improve government and the actions we have taken to address the 
challenges facing our organization. Once again we received an 
unqualified or “clean” opinion from independent auditors on our 
financial statements for fiscal year 2008. Also, two separate 
independent peer review teams gave us unqualified opinions on the 
quality assurance systems used to produce our products and testimonies 
that examine the performance and ensure the accountability of a broad 
range of federal programs, policies, and activities. 

We experienced heavy demand from the Congress for our work during 
fiscal year 2008 and issued over 1,200 products on a variety of topics, 
including the progress on U.S. counterterrorism measures and efforts in 
Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan; the need for stronger regulation over 
FannieMae and FreddieMac; aviation emissions and noise issues; health 
reassessments for veterans; federal actions needed to help some youth 
reconnect with education and employment; and disaster preparedness, 
response, and reconstruction. Our products also focused on federal 
programs and areas that we consider at high risk for fraud, waste, 
abuse, mismanagement, or transformation, such as the Department of 
Defense’s weapon systems acquisition processes and contract management, 
the Medicare and National Flood Insurance Programs, the federal 
government’s oversight of food safety, and the 2010 Census. GAO senior 
executives and I testified at over 300 hearings before the Congress—our 
second highest performance in over 25 years. Our clients who responded 
to our survey indicated that 95 percent of the products we prepared for 
them were received or delivered on time, allowing us to solidly achieve 
the timeliness target we set. 

It has been my privilege to lead GAO since becoming Acting Comptroller 
General in March 2008 when former Comptroller General David M. Walker 
resigned. I want to express my pride in GAO’s many accomplishments and 
underscore the dedication and commitment of our workforce. We met or 
exceeded all of our agencywide mission-related targets. Specifically, 
in fiscal year 2008 we documented $58.1 billion in financial benefits—a 
return of $114 for every dollar we spent—and nearly 1,400 nonfinancial 
benefits. The work we did to produce these benefits helped to shape 
important legislation, such as the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 
2008 (Pub. L. No. 110-289) and the Medicare Improvements for Patients 
and Providers Act of 2008 (Pub. L. No. 110-275), and increase the 
efficiency and effectiveness of various federal programs thus improving 
the lives of millions of Americans. Also, the rate at which our 
recommendations were implemented by federal agencies or the Congress 
rose to 83 percent in fiscal year 2008, and over two-thirds of the 
products we issued contained recommendations. These two “pipeline” 
measures are very important; when entities act on our recommendations 
their actions often lead to financial and nonfinancial benefits that 
change laws, improve services for citizens, save money, and promote 
better management throughout government. 

In addition, we planned how we will support the 111th Congress and the 
next administration with their transition after the presidential 
election and assist the Congress with overseeing the new Troubled Asset 
Relief Program (TARP). While we have traditionally served as a resource 
for new Congresses by providing insight into the issues upon which we 
focused our work, amendments to the Presidential Transition Act 
specifically identified GAO as a source for information concerning key 
management challenges and risks to help new presidential appointees 
make the leap from campaigning to governing. We synthesized the 
hundreds of reports and testimonies we issue every year so we could 
help as new policymakers quickly zero in on critical issues during the 
first days of the new Congress and administration. Concerning our 
responsibilities related to TARP—the centerpiece of the Emergency 
Stabilization Act of 2008 enacted by the Congress in response to the 
ongoing financial and credit crisis—we began to plan how we will 
monitor its implementation in the coming months in accordance with the 
law. 

To continue to achieve this level of performance and fulfill our 
mission of serving the Congress and the public, it is critical that we 
effectively recruit, retain, and invest in every one of our employees 
and provide the developmental and leadership experiences that they need 
to grow professionally. We measure how well we do this by using eight 
people measures—new hire rate, acceptance rate, retention rate with 
retirements, retention rate without retirements, staff development, 
staff utilization, leadership, and organizational climate. We exceeded 
the fiscal year 2008 targets we set for all but one of these measures, 
and the results for organizational climate, staff development, staff 
utilization, and leadership were the highest in the last 6 years. 
Because we lost more staff than expected for reasons other than 
retirement, we were slightly under the target we set for retention rate 
without retirements. 

We also reached a tentative agreement on the first-ever interim 
collective bargaining agreement between GAO management and the new 
employees union—the GAO Employees Organization, International 
Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE). I am very 
pleased that we were able to quickly reach a good agreement that covers 
such matters as official time and grievance procedures. We will 
continue to work hard to build and maintain open, constructive union 
and management relations as we address other issues affecting our 
employees. We also reconstituted the Employee Advisory Council to 
ensure that the views of nonbargaining unit employees are represented 
and took steps to implement several key recommendations resulting from 
an independent study of our employees’ performance appraisals over time 
that addressed the issues related to certain ratings disparities for 
African American analysts. These first steps included developing a 
Workforce Diversity Plan; convening an agencywide Diversity Committee, 
which includes representatives from the interim council of the IFPTE, 
other employee interest organizations, and management; and issuing 
interim guidelines for reviewing performance ratings to be used for the 
2008 performance appraisal cycle. These actions are a good start, but I 
am committed to doing more to ensure that every person is treated 
fairly and equitably. In addition, the GAO Act of 2008 was signed into 
law on September 22, 2008. The law (Pub. L. No. 110-323) includes, 
among other things, provisions designed to benefit our employees’ pay; 
help continue to attract, retain, and reward a top-flight workforce; 
and replace our administrative Inspector General with a statutory one. 
We will implement this act expeditiously and continue to address other 
human capital challenges along with our physical and information 
security challenges consistent with our bargaining obligations with the 
IFPTE. In closing, the GAO team remains committed to achieving its 
mission to provide accurate, objective, nonpartisan, and constructive 
information to the Congress to help it confront difficult challenges 
facing our nation and to help improve government for the benefit of the 
American people. 

Signed by: 

Gene L. Dodaro: 
Acting Comptroller General of the United States: 

[End of From the Acting Comptroller General] 

About GAO: 

GAO is an independent, nonpartisan professional services agency in the 
legislative branch of the federal government. Commonly known as the 
audit and investigative arm of the Congress or the congressional 
watchdog, GAO examines how taxpayer dollars are spent and advises 
lawmakers and agency heads on ways to make government work better. As a 
legislative branch agency, GAO is exempt from many laws that apply to 
the executive branch agencies. However, we generally hold ourselves to 
the spirit of many of the laws, including 31 U.S.C. 3512 (commonly 
referred to as the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act), the 
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, and the Federal 
Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996. Accordingly, this 
performance and accountability report for fiscal year 2008 provides 
what we consider to be information that is at least equivalent to that 
supplied by executive branch agencies in their annual performance and 
accountability reports. 

We accomplish our mission by providing objective and reliable 
information and informed analysis to the Congress, to federal agencies, 
and to the public, and we recommend improvements, when appropriate, on 
a wide variety of issues. Three core values—accountability, integrity, 
and reliability—form the basis for all of our work, regardless of its 
origin. These are described on the inside front cover of this report. 

To accomplish our mission, we use a strategic planning and management 
process that is based on a hierarchy of four elements—strategic goals, 
strategic objectives, performance goals, and key efforts. Our strategic 
plan framework, shown in figure 1, outlines our four strategic goals 
and 21 strategic objectives that guided our work in fiscal year 2008. 
Our mission work is primarily aligned under the first three strategic 
goals, which span issues that are both domestic and international, 
affect the lives of all Americans, and influence the extent to which 
the federal government serves the nation’s current and future 
interests. (See fig. 2.) The fourth goal is our only internal one and 
is aimed at enhancing our business and administrative processes to be a 
model federal agency. A complete description of the steps in our 
strategic planning and management process is included in our strategic 
plan for fiscal years 2004 through 2009, which is available on our Web 
site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

GAO’s History: 

The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 required the President to issue 
an annual federal budget and established GAO as an independent agency 
to investigate how federal dollars are spent. In the early years, we 
mainly audited vouchers, but after World War II we started to perform 
more comprehensive financial audits that examined the economy and 
efficiency of government operations. By the 1960s, GAO had begun to 
perform the type of work we are noted for today—program 
evaluation—which examines whether government programs are meeting their 
objectives. 

[End of About GAO] 

Figure 1: GAO's Strategic Plan Framework: 

[Refer to PDF for Image] 

Serving the Congress and the Nation: 

GAO's Strategic Plan Framework: 

Mission: 

GAO exists to support the Congress in meeting its constitutional 
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and ensure the 
accountability of the federal government for the benefit of the 
American people. 

Themes: 

* Changing Security Threats; 

* Sustainability Concerns; 

* Economic Growth and Competitiveness; 

* Global Interdependency; 

* Societal Change; 

* Quality of Life; 

* Science & Technology; 

Goals & Objectives: 

Provide Timely, Quality Service to the Congress and the Federal 
Government to: 

1) Address Current and Emerging Challenges to the Well-being and 
Financial Security of the American People related to: 

* Health care needs; 

* Lifelong learning; 

* Work benefits and protections; 

* Financial security; 

* Effective system of justice; 

* Viable communities; 

* Natural resources use and environmental protection; 

* Physical infrastructure. 

2) Respond to Changing Security Threats and the Challenges of Global 
Interdependence involving: 

* Homeland security; 

* Military capabilities and readiness; 

* Advancement of U.S. interests; 

* Global market forces. 

3) Help Transform the Federal Government’s Role and How It Does 
Business to Meet 21st Century Challenges by assessing: 

* Roles in achieving federal objectives; 

* Government transformation; 

* Key management challenges and program risks; 

* Fiscal position and financing of the government. 

4) Maximize the Value of GAO by Being a Model Federal Agency and a 
World-Class Professional Services Organization in the areas of: 

* Client and customer satisfaction; 

* Strategic leadership; 

* Institutional knowledge and experience; 

* Process improvement; 

* Employer of choice. 

Core Values: 

* Accountability; 

* Integrity; 

* Reliability. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of Figure 1, GAO's Strategic Plan Framework] 

Figure 2: How GAO Assisted the Nation: Fiscal Year 2008: 

[Refer to PDF for Image] 

Strategic Goal 1: Provide timely, quality service to the Congress and 
the federal government to address current and emerging challenges to 
the well-being and financial security of the American people: 

* identified shortcomings in processes for providing health care to 
servicemembers and veterans; 

* reduced food stamp payment errors; 

* highlighted challenges in the Food and Drug Administration’s 
inspection programs for drugs made overseas for the U.S. market; 

* strengthened higher education access and affordability; 

* identified information gaps for 401(k) participants related to their 
fund allocations and fees; 

* focused attention on challenges transportation systems face as demand 
and congestion grow; 

* outlined progress made as the nation transitions to digital 
television; 

* recommended ways to improve safety on U.S. highways and airport 
runways; 

* highlighted oversight deficiencies in the Small Business 
Administration’s Historically Underutilized Business Zone program. 

Strategic Goal 2: Provide timely, quality service to the Congress and 
the federal government to respond to changing security threats and the 
challenges of global interdependence: 

* assessed military readiness and operations in Iraq and Afghanistan; 

* oversaw U.S. efforts to fight terrorism in Pakistan and secure and 
rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan; 

* realigned funds for a U.S. program that helps Russia dispose of 
nuclear 
materials; 

* improved the monitoring and assessment of nonemergency food aid 
programs; 

* enhanced the Department of Defense’s (DOD) preparedness for homeland 
security missions; 

* identified ways to improve DOD’s acquisition management process; 

* identified implementation challenges with the U.S. Secure Border 
Initiative; 

* defined the federal role in sustaining centers that promote homeland 
security information sharing; 

* improved the National Flood Insurance Program’s data and analyses; 

* reformed the federal housing government sponsored enterprises 
regulatory structure; 

* brought attention to the need for governmentwide action to better 
protect personally identifiable information. 

Strategic Goal 3: Help transform the federal government’s role and how 
it does business to meet 21st century challenges: 

* identified the risks of relying on private contractors for defense 
and homeland security functions; 

* improved accountability for excess DOD parts and equipment that can 
be improperly sold to the public; 

* referred for prosecution individuals who fraudulently accepted 
federal disaster assistance payments; 

* identified border security vulnerabilities through undercover 
investigations; 

* strengthened DOD business systems modernization management; 

* improved the cost-effectiveness of filling the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve; 

* identified incremental approaches for reducing the tax gap; 

* monitored the development of the 2010 Census; 

* improved federal human capital management practices; 

* enlightened the public about the nation’s long-term fiscal challenge. 

Strategic Goal 4: Maximize the value of GAO by being a model federal 
agency and a world-class professional services organization: 

* increased understanding between the United States and the Iraqi 
Supreme Audit Institution (SAI) through our assistance with building 
the Iraqi Board of Supreme Audit’s capacity to improve accountability 
for Iraq’s expenditures; 

* enhanced communications with and service to our external clients 
through refinements to our external Web site; 

* strengthened public sector financial management and accountability at 
the global level through GAO’s partnership with the World Bank and the 
International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions Development 
Initiative to design, develop, and deliver the SAI Transformation 
Seminar. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of Figure 2, How GAO Assisted the Nation: Fiscal Year 2008] 

Throughout GAO, we maintain a workforce of highly trained professionals 
with degrees in many academic disciplines, including accounting, law, 
engineering, public and business administration, economics, and the 
social and physical sciences. About three-quarters of our approximately 
3,100 employees are based at our headquarters in Washington, D.C; the 
rest are deployed in 11 field offices across the country (see fig. 3). 
Staff in these field offices are aligned with our research, audit, 
investigative, and evaluation teams and perform work in tandem with our 
headquarters staff. 

Figure 3: GAO’s Office Locations: 

[Refer to PDF for Image] 

This figure is a map of the United States depicting the following GAO 
Office Locations: 

Atlanta, Georgia: 
Boston, Massachusetts: 
Chicago, Illinois: 
Dallas, Texas: 
Dayton, Ohio: 
Denver, Colorado: 
Huntsville, Alabama: 
Los Angeles, California: 
Norfolk, Virginia: 
San Francisco, California: 
Seattle, Washington: 
Washington, D.C. 

Source: See Image Sources. 

[End of Figure 3, GAO's Office Locations] 

GAO’s Performance: 

In fiscal year 2008, we monitored our performance using 16 annual 
performance measures, and they indicate that we had an impressive 
year—we met or exceeded our performance targets for all but one of our 
measures (see table 1). We accomplished real results for the nation, 
surpassing our financial benefits target for the year and exceeding our 
annual target for nonfinancial benefits. Our financial benefits of 
$58.1 billion represents a $114 return on every dollar invested in us, 
and nearly 1,400 benefits resulting from our work helped to improve the 
efficiency and effectiveness of federal government programs that serve 
the public. In addition, we also exceeded our targets for past 
recommendations implemented and new products with recommendations. In 
addition, we exceeded our target of 220 hearings at which we were asked 
to testify and met the target for delivering our products and 
testimonies to our clients in a timely manner. 

We also met or exceeded our annual targets for seven of our eight 
people measures. Success in this area indicates that our efforts under 
goal 4 to attract, retain, and develop staff paid off. We did not meet 
our target for retention rate without retirements because we lost more 
staff than expected for reasons other than retirement. We discuss our 
human capital activities in appendix 2 of our full performance and 
accountability report for fiscal year 2008. 

Table 1: Agencywide Summary of Annual Measures and Targets: 

Performance Measure: Results: Financial benefits (dollars in billions); 
2004 Actual: $44.0 billion; 
2005 Actual: $39.6 billion; 
2006 Actual: $51.0 billion; 
2007 Actual: $45.9 billion; 
2008 Target: $40.0 billion; 
2008 Actual: $58.1 billion; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: $42.0 billion. 

Performance Measure: Results: Nonfinancial benefits; 
2004 Actual: 1,197; 
2005 Actual: 1,409; 
2006 Actual: 1,342; 
2007 Actual: 1,354; 
2008 Target: 1,150; 
2008 Actual: 1,398; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 1,200. 

Performance Measure: Results: Past recommendations implemented; 
2004 Actual: 83%; 
2005 Actual: 85%; 
2006 Actual: 82%; 
2007 Actual: 82%; 
2008 Target: 80%; 
2008 Actual: 83%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 80%. 

Performance Measure: Results: New products with recommendations; 
2004 Actual: 63%; 
2005 Actual: 63%; 
2006 Actual: 65%; 
2007 Actual: 66%; 
2008 Target: 60%; 
2008 Actual: 66%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 60%. 

Performance Measure: Client: Testimonies; 
2004 Actual: 217; 
2005 Actual: 179; 
2006 Actual: 240; 
2007 Actual: 276; 
2008 Target: 220; 
2008 Actual: 304; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 200. 

Performance Measure: Client: Timeliness[A]; 
2004 Actual: 92%; 
2005 Actual: 92%; 
2006 Actual: 93%; 
2007 Actual: 95%; 
2008 Target: 95%; 
2008 Actual: 95%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 95%. 

Performance Measure: People: New hire rate; 
2004 Actual: 98%; 
2005 Actual: 94%; 
2006 Actual: 94%; 
2007 Actual: 96%; 
2008 Target: 95%; 
2008 Actual: 96%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 95%. 

Performance Measure: People: Acceptance rate; 
2004 Actual: 72%; 
2005 Actual: 71%; 
2006 Actual: 70%; 
2007 Actual: 72%; 
2008 Target: 72%; 
2008 Actual: 77%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: [B]. 

Performance Measure: People: Retention rate: With retirements; 
2004 Actual: 90%; 
2005 Actual: 90%; 
2006 Actual: 90%; 
2007 Actual: 90%; 
2008 Target: 90%; 
2008 Actual: 90%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 90%. 

Performance Measure: People: Retention rate: Without retirements; 
2004 Actual: 95%; 
2005 Actual: 94%; 
2006 Actual: 94%; 
2007 Actual: 94%; 
2008 Target: 94%; 
2008 Actual: 93%; 
Met/Not Met: Not met; 
2009 Target: 94%. 

Performance Measure: People: Staff development[C]; 
2004 Actual: 70%; 
2005 Actual: 72%; 
2006 Actual: 76%; 
2007 Actual: 76%; 
2008 Target: 76%; 
2008 Actual: 77%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 76%. 

Performance Measure: People: Staff utilization[D]; 
2004 Actual: 72%; 
2005 Actual: 75%; 
2006 Actual: 75%; 
2007 Actual: 73%; 
2008 Target: 75%; 
2008 Actual: 75%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 75%. 

Performance Measure: People: Leadership; 
2004 Actual: 79%; 
2005 Actual: 80%; 
2006 Actual: 79%; 
2007 Actual: 79%; 
2008 Target: 80%; 
2008 Actual: 81%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 80%. 

Performance Measure: People: Organizational climate; 
2004 Actual: 74%; 
2005 Actual: 76%; 
2006 Actual: 73%; 
2007 Actual: 74%; 
2008 Target: 75%; 
2008 Actual: 77%; 
Met/Not Met: Met; 
2009 Target: 75%. 

Performance Measure: Internal operations[E]: Help get job done; 
2004 Actual: 4.01; 
2005 Actual: 4.10; 
2006: Actual: 4.10; 
2007: Actual: 4.05; 
2008 Target: 4.00; 
2008 Actual: N/A; 
Met/Not Met: N/A; 
2009 Target: 4.00. 

Performance Measure: Internal operations[E]: Quality of work life; 
2004 Actual: 3.96; 
2005 Actual: 3.98; 
2006 Actual: 4.00; 
2007 Actual: 3.98; 
2008 Target: 4.00; 
2008 Actual: N/A; 
Met/Not Met: N/A; 
2009 Target: 4.00. 

Source: GAO. 

Note: Information explaining all of the measures included in this table 
appears in the Data Quality and Program Evaluations section in part II 
of our full performance and accountability report for fiscal year 2008.

[A] In our timeliness calculations for fiscal years 2004 through 2007, 
we inadvertently included nonresponses to the timeliness questions in 
our client feedback survey—the data source for our timeliness measure. 
We therefore recalculated the survey results for these fiscal years and 
fiscal year 2008. The numbers shown reflect the correct calculation. 

[B] Considering the challenging hiring environment due to uncertain 
budgets and high competition for talent, measuring our acceptance rate 
is less meaningful to us. Therefore, we will eliminate this measure 
beginning in fiscal year 2009. 

[C] Beginning in fiscal year 2006 we changed the way that the staff 
development people measure was calculated. Specifically, we dropped one 
question regarding computer-based training because we felt such 
training was a significant part of (and therefore included in) the 
other questions the survey asked regarding training. We also modified a 
question on internal training and changed the scale of possible 
responses to that question. We show the fiscal year 2004 and 2005 data 
on a separate line so as to indicate that those data are not comparable 
to the data beginning in fiscal year 2006. 

[D] Our employee feedback survey asks staff how often the following 
occurred in the last 12 months (1) my job made good use of my skills, 
(2) GAO provided me with opportunities to do challenging work, and (3) 
in general, I was utilized effectively. 

[E] For our internal operations measures, we will report actual data 
for fiscal year 2008 once data from our November 2008 internal customer 
satisfaction survey have been analyzed. N/A indicates that the data are 
not available yet. 

[End of Table 1] 

Concerning our two internal operations measures, we will assess our 
performance related to how well our internal administrative services 
(e.g., computer and Internet support, security, personnel benefits, and 
report production) help employees get their jobs done or improve 
employees’ quality of work life once data from our November 2008 annual 
customer satisfaction survey have been analyzed. These measures are 
directly related to our goal 4 strategic objectives of continuously 
enhancing our business and management processes and becoming a 
professional services employer of choice. There will always be a lag in 
reporting on this measure because our customer feedback survey results 
are not available until after we issue the performance and 
accountability report. In fiscal year 2007, we exceeded our target of 
4.0 (a composite score based on employees’ responses from an internal 
survey) for our measure of services that help staff do their jobs and 
slightly missed the target for our measure of services that affect the 
quality of staff work life. These scores indicate that our employees 
were very satisfied with the internal administrative services they used 
during their workday. The survey asked staff to rank the importance of 
each service to them and indicate their satisfaction with it on a scale 
from 1 to 5. 

[End of GAO's Performance] 

Results Measures: 

Focusing on outcomes and the efficiency of the processes needed to 
achieve them is fundamental to accomplishing our mission. The following 
four annual measures indicate that we have fulfilled our mission and 
delivered results that benefit the nation. 

Financial Benefits and Nonfinancial Benefits: 

We describe many of the results produced by our work as either 
financial or nonfinancial benefits. Both types of benefits result from 
our efforts to provide information to the Congress that helped to (1) 
change laws and regulations, (2) improve services to the public, and 
(3) promote sound agency and governmentwide management. In many cases, 
the benefits we claimed in fiscal year 2008 are based on work we did in 
past years because it often takes the Congress and agencies time to 
implement our recommendations or to act on our findings. 

Financial Benefits: 

Our findings and recommendations produce measurable financial benefits 
for the federal government after the Congress acts on or agencies 
implement them and the funds are made available to reduce government 
expenditures or are reallocated to other areas. The monetary effect 
realized can be the result of: 

* changes in business operations and activities; 

* the restructuring of federal programs; or: 

* modifications to entitlements, taxes, or user fees. 

Financial benefits result if, for example, the Congress reduces the 
annual cost of operating a federal program or lessens the cost of a 
multiyear program or entitlement. Financial benefits could also result 
from increases in federal revenues— because of changes in laws, user 
fees, or asset sales—that our work helped to produce. 

Financial benefits included in our performance measures are net 
benefits—that is, estimates of financial benefits that have been 
reduced by the estimated costs associated with taking the action that 
we recommended. We convert all estimates involving past and future 
years to their net present value and use actual dollars to represent 
estimates involving only the current year. 

To document financial benefits, our staff members complete reports 
documenting accomplishments that are linked to specific recommendations 
or actions. Each accomplishment report for financial benefits is 
documented and reviewed by (1) another GAO staff member not involved in 
the work and (2) a senior executive in charge of the work. The GAO 
Inspector General (IG) also performed an independent review of all 
accomplishment reports claiming benefits of $500 million or more in 
fiscal year 2008. 

Figure 4 briefly describes the types of financial benefits we 
documented in fiscal year 2008. Table 2 lists several of our major 
financial benefits for fiscal year 2008. 

Figure 4: Types of Financial Benefits Recorded in Fiscal Year 2008 from 
Our Work: 

[Refer to PDF for image] 

This figure is a pie chart representing the following data: 

Financial Benefits, Total: $58.1 billion; 
* Agencies acted on GAO information to improve services to the public: 
$11.7 billion (20%); 
* Information GAO provided to the Congress resulted in statutory or 
regulatory changes: $31.6 billion (54%); 
* Core business processes improved at agencies and governmentwide 
management reforms advanced by GAO’s work: $14.8 billion (26%). 

Source: GAO. 

[End of Figure 4, Types of Financial Benefits Recorded in Fiscal Year 
2008 from Our Work] 

Table 2: GAO’s Selected Major Financial Benefits Reported in Fiscal 
Year 2008 (Dollars in Billions): 

Description: Improved spectrum management by extending auction 
authority. We recommended that the Congress extend beyond the scheduled 
expiration date the Federal Trade Commission’s authority to conduct 
auctions to assign spectrum licenses to commercial users for mobile 
telephone services. In March 2008, the 700 megahertz auction generated 
about $19 billion, and a portion of the proceeds will be used to 
support public safety and the transition to digital television. 
Amount: $8.6. 

Description: Encouraged the Department of Defense (DOD) to reexamine 
cost estimates for a new military concept. The military services are 
either considering or actively pursuing the purchase of new ships and 
weapon systems to support joint seabasing—an evolving concept for 
projecting and sustaining forces for joint military operations without 
relying on nearby land bases. We recommended that the DOD evaluate the 
concept further and synchronize cost estimates to improve information 
for decision makers. DOD subsequently reduced the number of ships that 
it plans to procure in fiscal years 2009 through 2011 in support of 
this concept. 
Amount: $2.0. 

Description: Realized savings from suspending the royalty-in-kind oil 
program. We testified that since the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), 
operated by the Department of Energy (DOE), had reached sufficient size 
to address near-term supply disruptions, suspending the fill of the SPR 
would also have a dampening effect on gasoline prices because more 
supply would be available. At the time of our testimony, the SPR was 
being filled with oil from the Department of the Interior’s (Interior) 
royalty-in-kind program that allows Interior to receive oil as payments 
from companies that lease federal land for oil development. In May 
2008, DOE subsequently suspended the fill and sold the royalty-in-kind 
oil for almost $2 billion. 
Amount: $1.9. 

Description: Encouraged DOD to scale back a costly satellite program. 
We recommended that DOD reassess its investment in the Alternative 
Infrared Satellite System and alternative ways for reducing risk. DOD 
reexamined the system to clarify program objectives and in its 2009 
budget request redirected system resources to pursue risk reduction, 
system definition, and ground tests resulting in a reduction in funding 
for this system from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2012. 
Amount: $1.5. 

Description: Analyzed the fiscal year 2008 appropriation for the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). Our work showed that MCC had 
disbursed only about $68 million of the $2.1 billion obligated for 
foreign assistance compacts and could have significant undisbursed 
balances when compacts expire. As a result, the Congress reduced MCC’s 
fiscal year 2008 appropriation by $1.4 billion from the President’s $3 
billion request. 
Amount: $1.4. 

Source: GAO.

[End of Table 2] 

Nonfinancial Benefits: 

Many of the benefits that result from our work cannot be measured in 
dollar terms. During fiscal year 2008, we recorded a total of 1,398 
nonfinancial benefits, significantly exceeding our target by almost 22 
percent because of actions taken as a result of our bid protest work 
and by agencies in response to our recommendations dealing with 
governmentwide information technology and accounting issues. Figure 5 
briefly describes the types of nonfinancial benefits we documented in 
fiscal year 2008. Table 3 provides examples of some of nonfinancial 
benefits we claimed as accomplishments in fiscal year 2008. 

Figure 5: Types of Nonfinancial Benefits Documented in Fiscal Year 
2008 from Our Work: 

[Refer to PDF for image] 

This figure is a pie chart representing the following data: 

Nonfinancial Benefits, Total: 1,398; 
* Agencies acted on GAO information to improve services to the public: 
628 (44.9%); 
* Information GAO provided to the Congress resulted in statutory or 
regulatory changes: 77 (5.5%); 
* Core business processes improved at agencies and governmentwide 
management reforms advanced by GAO’s work: 693 (49.6%). 

Source: GAO. 

[End of Figure 5, Types of Nonfinancial Benefits Documented in Fiscal 
Year 2008 from Our Work] 

Table 3: GAO’s Selected Nonfinancial Benefits Reported in Fiscal Year 
2008: 

1) that helped to change laws: 

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-161: 

* Prohibited tax debtors from receiving large federal contracts. 

Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-246: 

* Increased penalties to deter food stamp fraud. 

Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008, Pub. L. 
No. 110-275: 

* Improved Medicare payment methods.  

Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-289:  

* Identified need for a single regulator for the federal housing 
finance system. 

2) that helped to improve services to the public: 

* Required fire-deterring sprinklers in nursing homes. 

* Improved mail delivery standards. 

* Encouraged the Environmental Protection Agency to clarify definition 
of mercury debris. 

* Improved screening of the Army’s contract security guards. 

3) that helped to promote sound agency and governmentwide management:  

* Identified individuals who fraudulently accepted disaster assistance 
payments. 

* Highlighted problems taxpayers can face when using tax preparation 
chains. 

* Identified U.S. border security vulnerabilities.  

Source: GAO. 

[End of Table 3] 

Past Recommendations Implemented: 

One way we measure our effect on improving the government’s 
accountability, operations, and services is by tracking the percentage 
of recommendations that we made 4 years ago that have since been 
implemented. At the end of fiscal year 2008, 83 percent of the 
recommendations we made in fiscal year 2004 had been implemented, 
primarily by executive branch agencies. Putting these recommendations 
into practice generates tangible benefits for the nation. 

New Products Containing Recommendations: 

In fiscal year 2008, about 66 percent of the 629 written products we 
issued (excluding testimonies) contained recommendations. We track the 
percentage of new products with recommendations because we want to 
encourage staff to develop recommendations that when implemented by the 
Congress and agencies, produce financial and nonfinancial benefits for 
the nation. We exceeded our target of 60 percent by 6 percentage points 
because our audit teams are better emphasizing the need to identify 
possible recommendations as they plan and carry out their work. Our 
informational reports have the same analytical rigor and meet the same 
quality standards as those with recommendations and, similarly, can 
help to bring about significant financial and nonfinancial benefits. 
Hence, this measure allows us ample leeway to respond to requests that 
result in reports without recommendations. 

[End of Results Measures] 

Client Measures: 

To fulfill the Congress’s information needs, we strive to deliver the 
results of our work orally as well as in writing at a time agreed upon 
with our client. 

Testimonies: 

Our clients often invite us to testify on our current and past work 
when it addresses issues that congressional committees are examining 
through the hearing process. During fiscal year 2008, experts from our 
staff testified at 304 congressional hearings covering a wide range of 
complex issues, and we significantly exceeded our target of 220 
hearings at which we testify. (For a summary of issues we testified on 
by strategic goal in fiscal year 2008, see fig.17 in our full 
performance and accountability report.) Over 100 of our testimonies 
were related to high-risk areas and programs that we discuss on page 
17. 

In fiscal year 2008, we exceeded our target and surpassed our actual 
performance on this measure over the last 4 years. In fact, only one 
time in the last 25 fiscal years have we delivered testimonies at more 
hearings. The Congress was extremely interested in our past and current 
work on a variety of issues and asked us to testify at 84 more hearings 
than we anticipated. The Congress asked our executives to testify in 
fiscal year 2008 more than 40 times on homeland security issues, more 
than 10 times on the Iraq conflict and Afghanistan, and 8 times on 
military and veterans’ health care and disability benefits. 

Timeliness: 

To be useful to the Congress, our products must be available when our 
clients need them. We used the results of our client feedback survey as 
the primary data source for our external timeliness measure because the 
responses come directly from our clients. Because our products usually 
have multiple requesters, we often survey more than one congressional 
staff person per testimony or product. Each survey asks the client 
whether the product was provided or delivered on time. In fiscal year 
2008, we had a 25 percent response rate from the congressional staff 
surveyed, which provided us with feedback on 56 percent of the products 
for which we sent surveys. 

In fiscal year 2008 we met our timeliness target of 95 percent. We have 
always set our target for timeliness high because it is important for 
us to meet congressional needs when they occur. Therefore, we will 
continue to emphasize to our audit teams the importance of 
communicating with the requesters of our work to determine when they 
will need testimony statements and products and delivering these 
statements and products when agreed to allow the requesters enough time 
to prepare for hearings and other congressional activities. 

[End of Client Measures] 

People Measures: 

Our highly professional, multidisciplinary staff were critical to the 
level of performance we demonstrated in fiscal year 2008. Our ability 
to hire, develop, retain, and lead staff is a key factor to fulfilling 
our mission of serving the Congress and the American people. 

In fiscal year 2008, we met or exceeded all but one of our eight people 
measure. All eight measures are directly linked to our goal 4 strategic 
objective of becoming a professional services employer of choice. For 
more information about our people measures, see Verifying and 
Validating Performance Data on page 76 of the full performance and 
accountability report. 

New Hire Rate and Acceptance Rate: 

Our new hire rate is the ratio of the number of people hired to the 
number we planned to hire. Annually, we develop a workforce plan that 
takes into account strategic goals; projected workload changes; and 
other changes such as retirements, other attrition, promotions, and 
skill gaps. The workforce plan for the upcoming year specifies the 
number of planned hires. In fiscal year 2008, our adjusted plan was to 
hire 356 staff. We were able to bring on board 343 staff by year-end. 
Our acceptance rate measure is a proxy for our attractiveness as an 
employer and an indicator of our competitiveness in bringing in new 
talent. It is the ratio of the number of applicants accepting offers to 
the number of offers made. 

Retention Rate: 

We continuously strive to make GAO a place where people want to work. 
Once we have made an investment in hiring and training people, we would 
like them to stay with us. This measure is one indicator of whether we 
are attaining this objective. We calculate this measure by taking 100 
percent minus the attrition rate, where attrition rate is defined as 
the number of separations divided by the average onboard strength. We 
calculate this measure with and without retirements. We have 
consistently performed at the 90 percent level for retention rate with 
retirements for the last 5 fiscal years, but in fiscal year 2008 we 
missed our target for retention without retirements by 1 percentage 
point because we lost more employees for reasons other than 
retirements. 

Staff Development and Utilization, Leadership, and Organizational 
Climate: 

One way that we measure how well we are supporting our staff and 
providing an environment for professional growth and improvement is 
through our annual employee feedback survey. Through the survey, we 
encourage our staff to indicate what they think about our overall 
operations, work environment, and organizational culture and how they 
rate their immediate supervisors on key aspects of their leadership 
styles. In fiscal year 2008, to better ensure confidentiality of 
individual responses, we used the same outside contractor that 
administered the survey to also analyze the data. 

This fiscal year about 76 percent of our employees completed the 
survey—a 4 percentage point increase over last year’s response rate—and 
we met or exceeded all four targets. 

[End of People Measures] 

Internal Operations Measures: 

Our mission and people are supported by our internal administrative 
services, including information management, facility management, 
knowledge services, human capital, financial management, and other 
services. To assess our performance related to how well our internal 
administrative services help employees get their jobs done or improve 
employees’ quality of work life, we use information from our annual 
customer satisfaction survey to set targets and assess our performance 
for both of these measures, along with baseline data that we recorded 
for them in fiscal year 2004. Our internal operations measures are 
directly related to our goal 4 strategic objectives of continuously 
enhancing our business and management processes and becoming a 
professional services employer of choice. 

[End of Internal Operations Measures] 

GAO’s High-Risk Program:  

Since 1990, our high-risk program has highlighted long-standing 
challenges facing the federal government. Increasingly, the program has 
focused on those major programs and operations that are in urgent need 
of broad-based transformation and congressional as well as executive 
branch action, to ensure that our national government functions in the 
most economical, efficient, and effective manner possible. Our latest 
regular update, released in January 2007, highlights 27 troubled areas 
across government. Many of these areas involve critical public service 
providers, such as the Department of Agriculture; Internal Revenue 
Service; and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which 
provides services to Medicare and Medicaid recipients. 

In March 2008 we added the 2010 Census to the high-risk list because of 
the census’s impact on everything from the apportionment of 
congressional seats to the distribution of billions of dollars of 
federal funds and because of a combination of long-standing 
deficiencies and emerging challenges, including shortcomings in the 
U.S. Census Bureau’s (Bureau) management of information technology, 
weak performances by technology that the Bureau plans to use for data 
collection, uncertainty of cost estimates, and the elimination of 
several dress rehearsals activities. 

Issued to coincide with the start of each new Congress, our high-risk 
updates have helped sustain attention from members of the Congress who 
are responsible for oversight and from executive branch officials who 
are accountable for performance. Our focus on high-risk problems 
contributed to the Congress enacting a series of governmentwide reforms 
to address critical human capital challenges, strengthen financial 
management, improve information technology (IT) practices, and instill 
a more results-oriented government. Overall, our high-risk program has 
served to identify and help resolve serious weaknesses in areas that 
involve substantial resources and provide critical services to the 
public. 

To learn more about our work on the high-risk areas or to download our 
latest high- risk update in full, go to [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/docsearch/featured/highrisk.html]. 

Our high-risk list work in fiscal year 2008: 
* 227 reports; 
* 128 testimonies; 
* $26.1 billion in financial benefits.

[End of GAO's High-Risk Program] 

Management Challenges and Mitigating External Factors That Could Affect 
Our Performance: 

Management Challenges: 

At GAO, management challenges are identified by the Comptroller 
General, the Executive Committee, and the agency’s senior executives 
through the agency’s strategic planning, management, and budgeting 
processes. Each year, we ask our IG to examine management’s assessment 
of the challenges and the agency’s progress in addressing them. 

For fiscal year 2008, we continued to address three management 
challenges— physical security, information security, and human capital. 
We anticipate that we will need to address all three challenges in 
future years because they are evolving and will require us to 
continually identify ways to adapt and improve. 

Physical Security Challenge: 

To strengthen our ability to protect our people and our assets, we must 
constantly assess our physical security profile and continuity of 
operations programs vis-à-vis the domestic and international climate. 
For example, during fiscal year 2008, we: 

* strengthened our emergency readiness in headquarters through 
training, exercises, and drills and enhanced security in our field 
offices and: 

* conducted a security assessment (through an independent contractor) 
on a full range of security disciplines to examine the effectiveness of 
recent improvements and provide recommendations for future 
enhancements. 

Information Security Challenge: 

Given the constantly evolving nature of threats to information and 
information system assets, information security will continue to be a 
management challenge for us and all government and private sector 
entities in the foreseeable future. 

Our overall goal is to ensure that information protection requirements 
extend across the life cycle of documentation: from data collection, 
report production, and data transmission and storage to the eventual 
archiving and disposal of data. In fiscal year 2008, we strengthened 
our information security by: 

* establishing a dedicated Information Security Branch responsible for 
general information security support, security education, security 
inspections, and the newly certified Sensitive Compartmented 
Information Facility, and a formal agencywide Security Manager Program 
intended to focus and improve security education and awareness at the 
team level; 

* improving our assessment of systems operated on behalf of GAO by 
third parties by developing guidance and testing our procedures for 
conducting site visits and validating the protection of GAO information 
based upon established standards from the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB), the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and 
the Federal Information Security and Management Act; and: 

* implementing encryption in the images of our new workstations to 
protect data on our laptops and on mobile media, such as USB flash 
drives. 

Human Capital Challenge: 

We strive to ensure that the design and implementation of our programs 
are consistent with four key elements we have identified as critical to 
human capital management—leadership; strategic human capital planning; 
acquiring, developing, and retaining talent; and a results-oriented 
organizational culture—and that we follow our own advice and guidance. 

We depend on a talented and diverse, high-performing, knowledge-based 
workforce to accomplish our work and carry out our mission in support 
of the Congress. Attracting and retaining the best is a top priority 
and a key challenge as we look for opportunities to improve our 
strategies and leverage what works well during this period of steadily 
rising competition for talent among knowledge-based organizations. 
While we continue to be highly successful in attracting talent and our 
attrition rates remain steady, we are beginning to see that younger 
staff appear to be less likely to make a long-term workplace 
commitment, while at the same time mid- and senior-level staff with 
great institutional knowledge are becoming retirement eligible in 
greater numbers. We recognize that one of our current and future 
challenges is to continue to reexamine our recruitment and retention 
strategies and flexibilities. 

In fiscal year 2008, we strengthened our human capital and related 
processes by taking the following actions: 

* Contracting with the Ivy Planning Group to examine the differences in 
average performance appraisals between African American and Caucasian 
analysts. The Ivy Planning Group delivered its report in April 2008; 
the report included over 25 recommendations and many helpful insights. 
The Acting Comptroller General expressed his commitment to addressing 
each of the recommendations, with immediate attention to creating a 
more inclusive work environment for all staff, reassessing how we 
evaluate performance, and refining recruiting and hiring practices. 

* Working in a labor relations environment with the GAO Employee 
Organization, International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers. We successfully negotiated the first pay agreement affecting 
2008 salaries with the union’s Interim Council and reached an interim 
collective bargaining agreement. 

* Working closely with our congressional oversight committee on 
compensation issues and other agency management issues. For example, we 
worked with the Congress to implement the GAO Act of 2008, which 
contains important provisions that will help GAO with a variety of 
human capital and administrative matters, including establishing a 
floor guarantee for all staff (except those in the developmental pay 
plans and Senior Executive Service/Senior Level positions) that 
provides that staff will, at a minimum, receive the General Schedule 
pay increase for the locality in which their office is located and 
providing for certain of our employees to receive retroactive lump sum 
payments and pay adjustments if they did not receive at least 2.6 
percent and 2.4 percent base pay increases in 2006 and 2007, 
respectively. 

We have significant efforts planned for continuing to meet all three of 
our management challenges in fiscal year 2009. For further information 
about these efforts, see part I in our full performance and 
accountability report for fiscal year 2008. 

Mitigating External Factors That Could Affect Our Performance: 

Several external factors could affect the achievement of our 
performance goals, including the amount of resources we receive, shifts 
in the content and volume of our work, and national and international 
developments. Limitations imposed on our work by other organizations or 
limitations on the ability of other federal agencies to make the 
improvements we recommend are additional factors that could affect the 
achievement of our goals. 

As the Congress focuses on unusual events, the mix of work we are asked 
to undertake may change, diverting our resources from some strategic 
objectives and performance goals. The total number of requests in 
fiscal year 2007 was up 14 percent from the preceding year, and this 
increase remained about the same from fiscal year 2007 through fiscal 
year 2008. As an indicator of future congressional demand, potential 
mandates for our work being included in proposed legislation as of 
September 30, 2008, totaled over 800, a 40 percent increase from a 
similar period in the 109th Congress. For example, the Emergency 
Economic Stabilization Act directs us to report to the Congress every 
60 days findings from our oversight of the activities and performance 
of the Troubled Asset Relief Program and to conduct an annual financial 
audit of the program. The act also mandates a one-time report to the 
Congress on the role that leveraging and sudden deleveraging of 
financial institutions played in the nation’s financial crisis spurred 
by subprime home loans. 

Our staff members are stretched in striving to meet the Congress’s 
increasing needs. Given the difficult federal budget decisions that lie 
ahead, the Congress is likely to place increasing emphasis on fiscal 
constraint. While it is unclear how we will ultimately be affected, it 
is reasonable to assume that any attempt to exercise additional 
budgetary discipline in the legislative branch will include our agency. 
As a result, while we believe that we submit reasonable and responsible 
budget requests, and we know that the return on investment that we 
generate is unparalleled, we must plan and prepare for the possibility 
of significant and recurring constraints on the resources made 
available to us. In addition, as we stated previously, almost 80 
percent of our budget is composed of people-related costs, and any 
serious budget situation will have an impact on our human capital 
policies and practices. This, in turn, will have an impact on our 
ability to serve the Congress and meet our performance targets. While, 
as noted above, the nature and extent of any such budget constraints 
cannot be determined at the present time, our executive team is engaged 
in a range of related planning activities. 

Another external factor that affects our ability to serve the Congress 
is the extent to which we can obtain access to information that plays 
an essential role in our ability to report on issues of importance to 
the Congress and the American people. Most departments and agencies are 
very cooperative with our requests for information. However, our 
experience with some agencies, such as the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS), CMS, and the Department of Justice, has proven more 
challenging. For instance, unlike our interactions with many other 
agencies, most of our interactions with DHS are layered and time-
consuming. DHS’s processes for working with us include extensive 
coordination among program officials, liaisons, and attorneys at the 
departmental and component levels and centralized control for all 
incoming GAO requests for information and outgoing documents.[Footnote 
1] In response to a fiscal year 2008 appropriations restriction 
directing DHS to revise its departmental guidance to include expedited 
time frames, providing us timely and complete access to records and 
interviews, DHS revised its departmental guidance concerning relations 
with us in July 2008. While GAO does not view the revised procedures as 
constituting a “significant streamlining” of the process, we will 
closely monitor how the revised procedures are implemented. We 
appreciate the interest of the Congress in helping to ensure that we 
obtain access to information and the efforts by agencies to cooperate 
with our requests. We will continue to work to identify opportunities 
for strengthening our access to information as necessary and 
appropriate. 

[End of Management Challenges and Mitigating External Factors That 
Could Affect Our Performance] 

Overview of Resources, Financial Management, and Controls: 

Resources Used to Achieve Our Fiscal Year 2008 Goals: 

Our financial statements for fiscal year 2008 received an unqualified 
opinion from an independent auditor, Clifton Gunderson, LLP. The 
auditor found our internal controls to be effective—which means that no 
material weaknesses were identified— and the auditor reported 
substantial compliance with the requirements for financial systems in 
the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996. In addition, 
the auditor also found no instances of noncompliance with the laws or 
regulations in the areas tested. Table 4 summarizes key data. (To see 
our full financial statements and financial statement notes, see part 
III of our full performance and accountability report for fiscal year 
2008.) 

Table 4: GAO’s Financial Highlights: Resource Information (Dollars in 
Millions): 

Total budgetary resources[A]: 
Fiscal year 2008: $519.0 million; 
Fiscal year 2007: $498.9 million. 

Total outlays[A]: 
Fiscal year 2008: $500.4 million; 
Fiscal year 2007: $490.5 million. 

Net cost of operations: Goal 1: Well-being and Financial security of 
the American people; 
Fiscal year 2008: $201.2 million; 
Fiscal year 2007: $177.4 million. 

Net cost of operations: Goal 2: Changing security threats and 
challenges of globalization; 
Fiscal year 2008: $161.1 million; 
Fiscal year 2007: $157.5 million. 

Net cost of operations: Goal 3: Transforming the federal government's 
role; 
Fiscal year 2008: $150.6 million; 
Fiscal year 2007: $146.6 million. 

Net cost of operations: Goal 4: Maximizing the value of GAO; 
Fiscal year 2008: $22.6 million; 
Fiscal year 2007: $23.9 million. 

Less reimbursable services not attributable to goals:  
Fiscal year 2008: ($5.9 million); 
Fiscal year 2007: ($5.7 million). 

Total net cost of operations[A]: 
Fiscal year 2008: $529.6 million; 
Fiscal year 2007: $499.7 million. 

Actual FTEs: 
Fiscal year 2008: 3,081; 
Fiscal year 2007: 3,152. 

Source: GAO. 

[A] The net cost of operations figures include nonbudgetary items, such 
as imputed pension and depreciation costs, which are not included in 
the figures for total budgetary resources or total outlays. 

[End of Table 4] 

We focus most of our financial activity on the execution of our 
congressionally approved budget with most of our resources devoted to 
the human capital needed for our mission of supporting the Congress 
with professional, objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, nonideological, 
fair, and balanced information and analysis. 

Our budget consists of an annual appropriation covering salaries and 
expenses and revenue from reimbursable audit work and rental income. 
Our total assets were $111.3 million, consisting mostly of property and 
equipment (including the headquarters building, land and improvements, 
and computer equipment and software) and funds with the U.S. Treasury. 
Our annual appropriation for fiscal year 2008 of $501 million was $15 
million greater than that for fiscal year 2007. Total liabilities of 
$108.4 million were composed largely of employees’ accrued annual 
leave, amounts owed to other government agencies, accounts payable, and 
employees’ salaries and benefits. The greatest change in our 
liabilities is an increase of $5 million in intragovernmental accounts 
payable as a result of timing differences of billings from government 
entities. Also, our capital leases increased by $2.5 million due to new 
lease purchases, including updated laptop computers. 

The net cost of operating GAO during fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year 
2007 was approximately $530 million and $500 million, respectively. 
Expenses for salaries and related benefits accounted for 78 and 81 
percent of our net cost of operations in fiscal years 2008 and 2007, 
respectively. Figure 6 shows how our fiscal year 2008 costs break down. 

We report net cost of operations according to our four strategic goals, 
consistent with our strategic plan. Overall, our net costs of 
operations increased by $30 million, due primarily to increases in 
salaries and benefits as well as IT services and maintenance contract 
activity. 

Figure 6: Use of Fiscal Year 2008 Funds by Category: 

[Refer to PDF for Image] 

This figure is a pie chart representing the following data: 

Percentage of Total Net Costs: 

Salaries and benefits: 78.2%; 
Building and hardware maintenance services: 12.53%; 
Rent (space and hardware): 2.3%; 
Depreciation: 2.1%; 
Other: 4.9%. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of Figure 6, Use of Fiscal Year 2008 Funds by Category] 

Planned Resources to Achieve Our Fiscal Year 2009 Performance Goals: 

As we go to press on this report, the Congress has not completed action 
on our fiscal year 2009 budget request. We, as well as most of the 
federal government, are operating under a continuing resolution 
appropriation at fiscal year 2008 levels through March 6, 2009, pending 
enactment of the remaining fiscal year 2009 appropriations bills for 
the federal government. Our fiscal year 2009 budget request to the 
Congress for $546 million represents an increase of about 7.5 percent 
over our fiscal year 2008 funding level. Table 5 reflects our requested 
funding level and full- time equivalent (FTE) figures to support our 
strategic plan. We will update these data when the final appropriation 
has been approved by the Congress. 

Table 5: Requested Fiscal Year 2009 Budgetary Resources by Strategic 
Goal: 

Strategic Goal: Goal 1: Address challenges to the well-being and 
financial security of all Americans; 
FTEs: 1,148; 
Amount: $195 million. 

Strategic Goal: Goal 2: Respond to changing security threats of 
globalization; 
FTEs: 1,073; 
Amount: $162 million. 

Strategic Goal: Goal 3: Help transform the federal government's role; 
FTEs: 898; 
Amount: $139 million. 

Strategic Goal: Goal 4: Maximize the value of GAO; 
FTEs: 137; 
Amount: $50 million. 

Total: 
FTEs: 3,251; 
Amount: $546 million. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of Table 5] 

Financial Systems and Internal Controls: 

We recognize the importance of strong financial systems and internal 
controls to ensure our accountability, integrity, and reliability. To 
achieve a high level of quality, management maintains a quality control 
program and seeks advice and evaluation from both internal and external 
sources. 

We complied with the spirit and intent of Appendix A, OMB Circular No. 
A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control, which provides 
guidance for agencies’ assessments of internal control over financial 
reporting. We performed this assessment by identifying, analyzing, and 
testing internal controls for key business processes. Based on the 
results of the assessment, we have reasonable assurance that internal 
control over financial reporting, as of September 30, 2008, was 
operating effectively and that no material control weaknesses exist in 
the design or operation of the internal controls over financial 
reporting. 

GAO’s IG also conducts audits and investigations that are internally 
focused, functions as an independent fact-gathering adviser to the 
Comptroller General, and reviews all accomplishment reports totaling 
$500 million or more. The IG independently tests our compliance with 
procedures related to our performance data on a rotating basis over a 3-
year period; these actions are specifically identified in the table 
that begins on page 76 in our full fiscal year 2008 performance and 
accountability report. No material weaknesses were reported by the IG. 

Our Audit Advisory Committee assists the Comptroller General in 
overseeing the effectiveness of our financial reporting and audit 
processes, internal controls over financial operations, and processes 
that ensure compliance with laws and regulations relevant to our 
financial operations. The committee’s report is presented on page 96 in 
our fiscal year 2008 performance and accountability report. 

[End of Overview of Resources, Financial Management, and Controls] 

Image Sources: 

This section contains credit and copyright information for images and 
graphics in this product, as appropriate, when that information was not 
listed adjacent to the image or graphic. 

Front cover: (GAO Capitol), PhotoDisc (bills, scale, computer). 

Inside front cover: Corbis (statue of Thomas Jefferson and inscription 
of his words at the Jefferson Memorial). 

Page 9: Map Resources (map). 

Inside back cover: Corbis (words of Thomas Jefferson inscribed on his 
Washington, D.C., memorial), GAO (GAO building), and Comstock (Lincoln 
Memorial). 

Providing Comments on This Report: 

To provide comments for improving this document, please contact our 
Chief Quality Officer, who can be reached at (202) 512-6100, at 
qci@gao.gov, or at the following address: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 6K17Q: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Documents: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO’s Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday afternoon, GAO posts on its Web site newly released reports, 
testimony, and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select “E-
mail Updates.” 

However, you can also order GAO documents by phone. The price of each 
GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and 
distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and 
whether the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing 
and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

This document and related products are available through our Web site 
at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/sp.html]. 

Also linked to that page are our strategic plan and our past 
performance and accountability publications. 

Other Web pages of possible interest: 

Presidential transition issues: 

Review 13 urgent issues needing attention during the transition and 
first year of the new administration and 111th Congress and information 
about major governmentwide cost-saving opportunities, management 
challenges, and the long-term fiscal outlook at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/transition_2009] 

Legal products: 

Download legal decisions and opinions about appropriations, bid 
protests, and major federal agency rules at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/legal.htm] 

E-mail alerts: 

Get automatic updates on new GAO products at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/subtest/subscribe.html] 

Careers at GAO: 

Access current job openings, apply online, and learn about GAO’s teams 
and offices at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/jobopp.htm] 

Fraud Net: 

Report allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, or mismanagement of federal 
funds at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm] 

[End of section] 

Footnote: 

[1] See, GAO, Department of Homeland Security: Observations on GAO 
Access to Information on Programs and Activities, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-700T] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 25, 
2007). 

[End of Citizens Report 2008]