Federal Buildings: GSA Can Improve Its Communication about and Assessment of Major Construction Projects

As the federal government's landlord, GSA annually spends hundreds of millions of dollars on major construction projects, which includes constructing new buildings and modernizing federal buildings. In 2019, GAO reported that GSA has publicly reported high-level information on its construction project performance in its Annual Performance Reports, which GSA provides to Congress and publishes on GSA's website. While GSA took steps to improve the content and usefulness of its annual reports over the period from fiscal year 2014 through 2018, GAO found that neither GSA's Annual Performance Reports nor its public website provide information on the extent to which projects have been rebaselined-reestablishing the point at which GSA measures on-schedule and on-budget performance-or the final costs of projects. Simply measuring and reporting performance based on the most recent baseline may obscure how projects have performed over their entire construction time frame. Being more transparent about which projects or how many projects were rebaselined, as well as reporting cost and schedule growth from original baselines, can provide stakeholders with a more accurate view of project performance and enhance accountability. Without that information, it is not possible for Congress to know how projects performed against approved estimated costs and whether final project costs are consistently above, below, or meeting estimated costs. Therefore, GAO recommended that GSA should report for Congress and the public the extent to which completed projects' construction costs and schedules were rebaselined and final construction costs. In November 2020, GAO confirmed that GSA published on its public website summary schedule and budget results for 13 major projects that were completed in fiscal year 2020. The summary information in tabular format shows the original and, as applicable, rebaselined information on the planned completion date and estimated cost of each project in addition to the project's actual completion date and cost. For example, of the 13 projects, eight show a planned completion date that was rebaselined to a later date than initially set. Further, the data show that 11 of the 13 projects experienced schedule growth from their original baselines, meaning that the actual project duration was greater than initially planned, while two projects were completed in less time than initially planned. As related to cost, eight of the 13 projects in the table show that their estimated costs were rebaselined. In addition, the data reveal that 10 projects experienced cost growth, meaning that actual costs exceeded their final baselines, while the cost of two projects held steady and the cost of one project decreased compared to their final baselines. According to GSA, reasons for rebaselining projects' schedules and costs include the award of pre-priced options, modifications for customer changes, unforeseen site conditions, and other issues outside of GSA's control. As a result of reporting this information on projects' schedule and cost rebaselining, and projects' final durations and costs, GSA has provided a more accurate view of project performance that could benefit Congress in its oversight role and improve public knowledge about the full costs of major federal construction projects.

As the federal government's landlord, GSA annually spends hundreds of millions of dollars on major construction projects, which includes constructing new buildings and modernizing federal buildings. In general, GSA develops and implements projects through a sequential process that includes, among other things, ensuring that "commissioning" is performed during the project. Commissioning is an industry-recognized quality assurance process for validating that the building's performance and systems meet the designer's intent and the owner's and tenants' requirements. In 2019, GAO reported that GSA conducts commissioning according to the process that the agency set out in The Building Commissioning Guide (Guide), which was issued in 2005. However, GAO found that the 2005 Guide was outdated and that there were disconnects between the 2005 Guide and GSA's current design standards or industry practices. For example, the Guide referenced the 2003 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Green Building Rating System, Version 2.1; however, Version 4.1 had recently been issued in 2019. Moreover, while the 2005 Guide stated that GSA buildings should be LEED certified and strive for a Silver certification, GSA's then-current design standards required buildings to achieve a higher certification, LEED Gold. Further, the Guide did not mention changes to industry building certifications that have occurred since the Guide was issued that have moved the federal government and industry toward more real-time, continuous monitoring and commissioning in cases where advanced building-automation systems, energy information-management systems, and advanced meters have been installed. Without updated guidance, GSA's commissioning activities may be limited in their effectiveness in assuring building systems are operating optimally. Therefore, GAO recommended that GSA should update its 2005 Commissioning Guide--or replace it with appropriate industry-recognized standards and guidance--to be consistent with GSA's current design standards and industry practices. In 2020, GAO confirmed that GSA issued an updated version of its 2005 Guide. The 2020 Guide reflects GSA's current project management processes and tools and identifies the most current references and resources. For example, the update features new processes for commissioning building enclosures, such as windows and roofing, and describes ongoing and continuing commissioning processes. By having updated its 2005 Guide, GSA is better able to ensure that completed projects are meeting its design standards and reflect current industry building certification practices.

As the federal government's landlord, GSA annually spends hundreds of millions of dollars on major construction projects, which includes constructing new buildings and modernizing federal buildings. According to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance, Post Occupancy Evaluations (POE) are tools to evaluate the effectiveness of an agency's overall capital acquisition process. POEs are to be conducted on such projects to (1) identify how accurately a project meets its objectives, expected benefits, and strategic goals of the agency and (2) ensure the continual improvement of an agency's capital-programming process based on lessons learned. In 2019, GAO reported that while OMB guidance notes that a POE should generally be conducted 12 months after the project has been occupied, GSA did not conduct any POEs on its completed major construction projects in the 4-year period from 2014 to 2017. However, in 2018 and 2019, GSA contracted with the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) to conduct a total of 13 POEs. GSA officials told GAO that resources to conduct POEs were limited and that they did not have a specific policy for conducting POEs or selecting completed projects for POEs. GSA officials said that when selecting which projects should undergo a POE they sought to ensure that there was a representation of different building types and a mix of new construction and modernization projects. However, GAO found that when GSA selected projects for a POE, it was not clear that GSA's selection factors helped ensure that GSA made the best use of its limited resources. GAO determined that GSA could benefit from a more strategic approach to select the projects for POEs. Further, GSA officials told GAO that while they made POE reports available to their project managers on GSA's internal intranet site and periodically held knowledge-sharing webinars with project managers where lessons learned from specific projects were presented, there was no prescribed format or requirements for content for these presentations. Communicating information via such means provided ad-hoc benefits to only the select individuals who knew about and chose to access the information. This approach may not effectively expand the broader knowledge base of the organization or best position GSA to ensure continual improvement of its capital-programming process based on lessons learned. As a result, GAO recommended that GSA should identify and communicate (a) when and how POEs should be conducted for completed projects considering resource constraints and (b) how recommendations or lessons learned from those evaluations are effectively communicated to future project teams. In September 2020, GSA developed and disseminated guidance on its POE program. The guidance states that the POE process is to commence with the selection of projects that have been completed and the occupying tenant has been in the facility for at least one year. In addition, the guidance describes that NIBS will be contracted to undertake POEs using qualitative and quantitative techniques to systematically evaluate how the facility is functioning and how well the workplace environment supports the mission and requirements of the tenant agencies. The guidance further notes that the results of each POE are to be disseminated throughout GSA via a Post Occupancy Evaluation Report to provide lessons learned to GSA staff to use in future projects. According to the guidance, a program goal is that all information gathered from the POE process is to be kept in a simple and searchable database that provides easy access to data, lessons learned, best practices, and synthesized conclusions. By implementing this guidance, GSA is better positioned to conduct POEs that will enable it to determine how accurately projects are meeting objectives and expand its broader knowledge base to ensure continual improvement of its capital-programming process based on lessons learned.