This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-05-1024R entitled 'Financial Audits: The Vast Majority of Executive Branch Entities Included in the Federal Budget Are Statutorily Required to Have Their Financial Statements Audited' which was released on September 30, 2005. 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. September 30, 2005: Congressional Requesters: Subject: Financial Audits: The Vast Majority of Executive Branch Entities Included in the Federal Budget Are Statutorily Required to Have Their Financial Statements Audited: The Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act),[Footnote 1] as expanded by the Government Management Reform Act of 1994,[Footnote 2] requires 24 major executive branch departments and agencies to prepare annual financial statements and have them audited. The Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 (ATD Act) extended this requirement to most executive agencies not explicitly subject to the CFO Act, unless they received a waiver or exemption from the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (the Director).[Footnote 3] Further, chapter 91 of title 31 of the United States Code, commonly referred to as the Government Corporation Control Act, and certain federal agencies' enabling legislation also require annual financial statement audits. Given the importance of timely, reliable, and useful financial information in assessing the overall financial management of the government, you asked us to identify executive branch entities that are not subject to the requirements of preparing annual financial statements and having them audited.. In addition, you were interested in knowing certain budget information related to executive branch entities covered by the ATD Act that had received an exemption or waiver from the Director for fiscal years 2003 and 2004. This report summarizes the information provided during our June 27, 2005, briefing to your staff. The enclosed briefing slides and table highlight the results of our work and the information provided at the briefing. Based on your request letters and subsequent discussions with your staff, our objectives were to determine (1) which executive branch entities had received an exemption or waiver from the Director for preparing fiscal years 2003 and 2004 financial statements and having them audited in accordance with the ATD Act, (2) the amount of net budget authority and net outlays for these entities, and (3) which executive branch entities other than those subject to the CFO Act, ATD Act, Government Corporation Control Act, and enabling legislation do not annually prepare financial statements and have them audited. Such other entities include temporary commissions, task forces, advisory boards, and other special purpose entities. When performing our work, we (1) made inquiries to personnel from various federal agencies, including the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the General Services Administration (GSA),[Footnote 4] as well as personnel from selected ATD Act agencies and federal commissions not currently required to prepare financial statements and have them audited; (2) reviewed the CFO Act, the ATD Act, the Government Corporation Control Act, and enabling legislation requiring certain federal entities to prepare financial statements annually and have them audited; (3) obtained and analyzed the OMB letters that notified the required congressional committees of the names of the executive branch agencies for which the Director granted waivers or exemptions from having to prepare financial statements and having them audited for fiscal years 2003 and 2004; and (4) obtained and summarized certain net budget authority and net outlays reported in the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Years 2006 and 2005 Appendices (federal budget). We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Chief of the Financial Standards and Grants Branch at OMB and a Committee Management Specialist at GSA. We performed our work from January 2005 through June 2005 in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government auditing standards. In summary, we determined that almost 94 percent of the executive branch entities included in the federal budget are statutorily required to have their financial statements audited. Looking at the federal government as a whole, we determined that about 83 percent of federal entities (including the legislative and judicial branches) included in the federal budget are statutorily required to have their financial statements audited.[Footnote 5] To put this in perspective to federal spending, in fiscal year 2004, federal entities' reported net outlays[Footnote 6] totaled about $2.797 trillion, of which approximately $2.784 trillion, or about 99.5 percent, was related to federal entities whose fiscal year 2004 financial statements were subjected to audit.[Footnote 7] The ATD Act provided the Director with the authority to waive entities from having to prepare financial statements and having them audited for fiscal years 2002 and 2003, the initial phase in period of the act.[Footnote 8] In addition, beginning with fiscal year 2002, the Director could exempt an ATD Act agency if the total budget authority of the agency for the fiscal year does not exceed $25 million and if the Director determines that requiring annual audited financial statements for the agency with respect to the fiscal year is not warranted due to the absence of risks associated with the agency's operations, the agency's demonstrated performance, or other factors that the Director considers relevant.[Footnote 9] As a result, we found that primarily due to the expiration of the Director's authority to waive the requirements of the ATD Act, for fiscal year 2004, the Director granted exemptions to 12 ATD Act agencies with net outlays totaling approximately $30 million. By comparison, 21 ATD Act agencies were granted exemptions or waivers for fiscal year 2003 with net outlays totaling about $1.669 billion. Enclosure II documents which federal executive branch entities were granted waivers or exemptions from the Director and the amount of net budget authority and net outlays for these entities. Aside from these 12, another 9 agencies with net outlays totaling about $521 million did not prepare and have audited financial statements for fiscal year 2004. Their reasons varied. However, officials for 5 of the 9 agencies stated that they will prepare and have audited financial statements for fiscal year 2005. Of the remaining 4, one official expressed the view that his agency is exempt from the ATD Act, one stated that it is not cost effective for it to prepare financial statements and have them audited, one has already requested an exemption from the Director for fiscal year 2005, and one stated that it plans to request an exemption for fiscal year 2005. In addition, we found that the timing of when the Director notifies certain congressional committees of the ATD Act agencies exempted from preparing financial statements and having them audited may not be optimal for congressional consideration in its decision making and oversight. The ATD Act is silent on when, other than annually, OMB should provide Congress with a list of executive branch agencies exempted from preparing financial statements and having them audited. For fiscal years 2003 and 2004, OMB's letters related to waivers or exemptions were provided to Congress after the end of each fiscal year subject to audit. Based on inquiries to OMB and others, we are not aware of any comprehensive list or database of other executive branch entities that receive federal funding. Such other entities include temporary commissions, task forces, and advisory boards. However, based on the limited information available, we were able to determine that the costs related to these types of entities are primarily administrative, such as travel, payroll, rent, and procurements, and may or may not be covered by separate appropriations. For example, we noted that entities subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act included committees, boards, and councils that generally do not receive separately allocated budgets; therefore, the costs reported would likely be included in the costs of the departments, agencies, or bureaus involved.[Footnote 10] As a result, such costs could be subjected to audit as part of the annual audits of those entities' financial statements. Finally, the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB)[Footnote 11] is currently considering undertaking a project that would, among other things, reconsider the definition of a federal entity and address criteria and possible disclosures relative to entities not considered federal entities under Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Concepts No. 2, Entity and Display,[Footnote 12] but which present significant financial or other accountability issues for the federal government. Such a project could identify special purpose and other entities funded by the federal government.[Footnote 13] OMB and GSA officials orally agreed with the matters discussed in this report. In response to an OMB suggestion, we modified the report to include the percentage of executive branch agencies statutorily required to have their financial statements audited. We are sending copies of this report to other congressional committees, the Director of OMB, the Administrator of GSA, and other interested parties. Copies will be made available to others upon request. This report is also available at no charge on: GAO's Web site at www.gao.gov. We look forward to continuing to work with your staff to help improve financial management in the federal government. If you have any questions about the contents of this report, please contact me at (202) 512-3406. Signed by: Gary T. Engel: Director: Financial Management and Assurance: Enclosure -2: List of Congressional Requesters: The Honorable Tom Coburn, Chairman: The Honorable Thomas R. Carper, Ranking Minority Member: Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, and International Security: Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: United States Senate: The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka, Ranking Minority Member: Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia: Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: United States Senate: The Honorable Tom Davis, Chairman: The Honorable Henry A. Waxman, Ranking Minority Member: Committee on Government Reform: House of Representatives: The Honorable Todd Platts, Chairman: Subcommittee on Government Management, Finance and Accountability: Committee on Government Reform: House of Representatives: Enclosure I: [See PDF for images] [End of slide presentation] [End of section] Enclosure II: Federal Entities for Which the Director of OMB Granted Waivers or Exemptions from the Accountability of Tax Dollars Act's Audit Requirements for FY 2003 or FY 2004 (dollars in millions): [See PDF for image] [End of table] [End of section] FOOTNOTES [1] Pub. L. No. 101-576, 104 Stat. 2838 (Nov. 15, 1990). [2] Pub. L. No. 103-356, 108 Stat. 3410 (Oct. 13, 1994). [3] Pub. L. No. 107-289, 116 Stat. 2049 (Nov. 7, 2002); see 31 U.S.C. § 3515. [4] GSA is responsible for developing regulations and guidance and maintaining data for advisory committees as defined by and subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended. It also provides support services, including accounting services, to various commissions and boards. [5] Federal entities include executive, legislative, and judicial branch entities. Seven government-sponsored enterprises and an additional entity funded from Federal Home Loan banks' contributions, although statutorily required to be audited, are not included in the federal budget and therefore are not included in this report. [6] Net outlays represent gross outlays net of offsetting collections. [7] Certain federal entities, although subject to audit, received disclaimers of opinion on their fiscal year 2004 financial statements. [8] Sections 2(a)(1)(c) and (b)(1) of the ATD Act. [9] Sections 2(a)(4) of the ATD Act. [10] GSA's fiscal year 2004 Federal Advisory Committee Act database, as of May 2005, reported 944 advisory committees with total costs of about $300 million. [11] The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board was established by the Secretary of the Treasury, the Director of OMB, and the Comptroller General in October 1990. It is responsible for promulgating accounting standards for the United States government. These standards are recognized as generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for the federal government. [12] In FASAB's current exposure draft, Technical Agenda Options, it is noted that in SFFAC 2, FASAB established concepts for identifying what components to include in reporting entities. [13] Such as federally funded research and development centers and public private partnerships.