This is the accessible text file for CG Presentation number GAO-12-988CG entitled 'Anticipating and Meeting Accountability Challenges in a Dynamic Environment' which was released on August 7, 2012. 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. Anticipating and Meeting Accountability Challenges in a Dynamic Environment: American Bar Association: Chicago, Illinois: August 4, 2012: Gene L. Dodaro: Comptroller General: U.S. Government Accountability Office: GAO-12-988CG: GAO's Planning & Performance Documents: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/sp.html] * Strategic Plan. * Performance Plan. * Performance & Accountability Report. Strategic Planning Framework: Mission Goals: Goal 1: Address Current and Emerging Challenges to the Well-being and Financial Security of the American People: * Health care needs; * Lifelong learning; * Benefits and protections for workers, families, and children; * Financial security; * Effective system of justice; * Viable communities; * Stable financial system and consumer protection; * Stewardship of natural resources and the environment; * Infrastructure. Goal 2: Respond to Changing Security Threats and the Challenges of Global Interdependence: * Homeland security; * Military capabilities and readiness; * U.S. foreign policy interests; * Global market forces. Goal 3: Help Transform the Federal Government to Address National Challenges: * Government's fiscal position and options for closing gap; * Fraud, waste, and abuse; * Major management challenges and program risks. Trend 1: Threats Confronting U.S. National Security Interests: * Regional instability (Middle East, Central Asia, Africa). * Longstanding threats (extremism, terrorism, proliferation of weapons, cybersecurity). * Emerging threats (energy security, climate change, global recession). * Need for new capabilities alongside increasingly constrained resources. Trend 1: Threats Confronting U.S. National Security Interests: Related GAO work: * Reviewing U.S. security and reconstruction efforts related to Afghanistan, Iraq and other regions in conflict, including reviewing the effect of drawing down military resources in Iraq, and countering terrorism and nuclear supplier networks in Pakistan. * Assessing U.S. efforts to combat terrorism abroad, including assistance to Pakistan and Yemen. * Reviewing the government's efforts to identify and act on credible threats to homeland and border security, as well as those involving biological, chemical, and nuclear dimensions. * Analyzing military readiness and the funding and cost of weapons programs. * Evaluate efforts to ensure the reliability, security, and affordability of energy supply infrastructure and assess the implications of climate change for the federal government. Related GAO Work: Cybersecurity: * Reviewing the effectiveness of computer and network security at federal agencies to better ensure the protection of government and personal information. * Assessing key national threats, such as IT supply chain security, cybersecurity for critical infrastructure protection, the security of mobile devices, and cybersecurity for implantable medical devices. * Assessing cybersecurity challenges for the modernized electrical grid, known as the “smart grid”. * Reviewing the national cybersecurity strategy and its implementation by key agencies. * Assessing the extent to which federal agencies have addressed cybersecurity human capital needs. Trend 2: Fiscal Sustainability and Debt Challenges: Figure: Federal Budget Surpluses and Deficits under Different Fiscal Policy Simulations: [Refer to PDF for image: line graph] Percentage of GDP: Year: 2000; Baseline extended: 2.4%; Alternative: 2.4%. Year: 2001; Baseline extended: 1.3%; Alternative: 1.3%. Year: 2002; Baseline extended: -1.5%; Alternative: -1.5%. Year: 2003; Baseline extended: -3.4%; Alternative: -3.4%. Year: 2004; Baseline extended: -3.5%; Alternative: -3.5%. Year: 2005; Baseline extended: -2.6%; Alternative: -2.6%. Year: 2006; Baseline extended: -1.9%; Alternative: -1.9%. Year: 2007; Baseline extended: -1.2%; Alternative: -1.2%. Year: 2008; Baseline extended: -3.2%; Alternative: -3.2%. Year: 2009; Baseline extended: -10%; Alternative: -10%. Year: 2010; Baseline extended: -8.9%; Alternative: -8.9%. Year: 2011; Baseline extended: -8.5%; Alternative: -8.5%. Year: 2012; Baseline extended: -6.2%; Alternative: -6.4%. Year: 2013; Baseline extended: -3.2%; Alternative: -5.1%. Year: 2014; Baseline extended: -1.6%; Alternative: -4.3%. Year: 2015; Baseline extended: -1.1%; Alternative: -3.9%. Year: 2016; Baseline extended: -1.5%; Alternative: -4.3%. Year: 2017; Baseline extended: -1.2%; Alternative: -4.1%. Year: 2018; Baseline extended: -1.0%; Alternative: -4.1%. Year: 2019; Baseline extended: -1.2%; Alternative: -4.5%. Year: 2020; Baseline extended: -1.2%; Alternative: -4.7%. Year: 2021; Baseline extended: -1.2%; Alternative: -4.8%. Year: 2022; Baseline extended: -1.9%; Alternative: -5.9%. Year: 2023; Baseline extended: -2.1%; Alternative: -6.7%. Year: 2024; Baseline extended: -2.5%; Alternative: -7.5%. Year: 2025; Baseline extended: -2.7%; Alternative: -8.3%. Year: 2026; Baseline extended: -3.0%; Alternative: -9.1%. Year: 2027; Baseline extended: -3.2%; Alternative: -9.8%. Year: 2028; Baseline extended: -3.4%; Alternative: -10.5%. Year: 2029; Baseline extended: -3.7%; Alternative: -11.1%. Year: 2030; Baseline extended: -3.9%; Alternative: -11.8%. Year: 2031; Baseline extended: -4.2%; Alternative: -12.5%. Year: 2032; Baseline extended: -4.3%; Alternative: -13.12%. Year: 2033; Baseline extended: -4.5%; Alternative: -13.7%. Year: 2034; Baseline extended: -4.8%; Alternative: -14.3%. Year: 2035; Baseline extended: -5.0%; Alternative: -14.8%. Year: 2036; Baseline extended: -5.2%; Alternative: -15.4%; Year: 2037; Baseline extended: -5.4%; Alternative: -16.0%. Year: 2038; Baseline extended: -5.6%; Alternative: -16.5%. Year: 2039; Baseline extended: -5.1%; Alternative: -17.1%. Year: 2040; Baseline extended: -6.0%; Alternative: -17.8%. Year: 2041; Baseline extended: -6.2%; Alternative: -18.4%. Year: 2042; Baseline extended: -6.4%; Alternative: -18.9%. Year: 2043; Baseline extended: -6.5%; Alternative: -19.5%. Year: 2044; Baseline extended: -6.9%; Alternative: -20.7%. Year: 2045; Baseline extended: -6.9%; Alternative: -20.7%. Year: 2046; Baseline extended: -7.1%; Alternative: -21.4%. Year: 2047; Baseline extended: -7.2%; Alternative: -22.0%. Year: 2048; Baseline extended: -7.4%; Alternative: -22.6%. Year: 2049; Baseline extended: -7.6%; Alternative: -23.2%. Year: 2050; Baseline extended: -7.6%; Alternative: -23.8%. Year: 2051; Baseline extended: -7.9%; Alternative: -24.5%. Year: 2052; Baseline extended: -8.0%; Alternative: -25.2%. Year: 2053; Baseline extended: -8.3%; Alternative: -25.9%. Year: 2054; Baseline extended: -8.4%; Alternative: -26.6%. Year: 2055; Baseline extended: -8.5%; Alternative: -27.4%. Year: 2056; Baseline extended: -8.9%; Alternative: -28.1%. Year: 2057; Baseline extended: -9.0%; Alternative: -28.8%. Year: 2058; Baseline extended: -9.2%; Alternative: -29.6%. Year: 2059; Baseline extended: -9.4%; Alternative: -30.4%. Year: 2060; Baseline extended: -9.6%; Alternative: -31.2%. Source: GAO. Note: Data are from GAO's Spring simulations based on the Trustees' assumptions for Social Security and the Trustees' and the CMS Actuary's assumptions for Medicare. [End of figure] Trend 2: Fiscal Sustainability and Debt Challenges Figure: Debt Held by the Public Under Two Fiscal Policy Simulations: [Refer to PDF for image: multiple line graph] Percent of GDP: Historical high: 109 percent in 1946. Fiscal year: 2000; Baseline extended: 34.7%; Alternative: 34.7%. Fiscal year: 2001; Baseline extended: 32.5%; Alternative: 32.5%. Fiscal year: 2002; Baseline extended: 33.6%; Alternative: 33.6%. Fiscal year: 2003; Baseline extended: 35.6%; Alternative: 35.6%. Fiscal year: 2004; Baseline extended: 36.8%; Alternative: 36.8%. Fiscal year: 2005; Baseline extended: 36.9%; Alternative: 36.9%. Fiscal year: 2006; Baseline extended: 36.5%; Alternative: 36.5%. Fiscal year: 2007; Baseline extended: 36.2%; Alternative: 36.2%. Fiscal year: 2008; Baseline extended: 40.2%; Alternative: 40.2%. Fiscal year: 2009; Baseline extended: 53.3%; Alternative: 53.3%. Fiscal year: 2010; Baseline extended: 62.2%; Alternative: 62.2%. Fiscal year: 2011; Baseline extended: 67.3%; Alternative: 67.3%. Fiscal year: 2012; Baseline extended: 71.2%; Alternative: 71.4%. Fiscal year: 2013; Baseline extended: 72.8%; Alternative: 74.8%. Fiscal year: 2014; Baseline extended: 71.6%; Alternative: 72.3%. Fiscal year: 2015; Baseline extended: 68.6%; Alternative: 75.9%. Fiscal year: 2016; Baseline extended: 67.2%; Alternative: 76.9%. Fiscal year: 2017; Baseline extended: 65.8%; Alternative: 78.0%. Fiscal year: 2018; Baseline extended: 64.3%; Alternative: 79.1%. Fiscal year: 2019; Baseline extended: 63.1%; Alternative: 80.5%. Fiscal year: 2020; Baseline extended: 62.0%; Alternative: 82.2%. Fiscal year: 2021; Baseline extended: 61.0%; Alternative: 84.0%. Fiscal year: 2022; Baseline extended: 60.8%; Alternative: 87.0%. Fiscal year: 2023; Baseline extended: 60.7%; Alternative: 90.5%. Fiscal year: 2024; Baseline extended: 61.1%; Alternative: 94.6%. Fiscal year: 2025; Baseline extended: 61.7%; Alternative: 99.4%. Fiscal year: 2026; Baseline extended: 62.6%; Alternative: 104.9%. Fiscal year: 2027; Baseline extended: 63.6%; Alternative: 110.8%. Fiscal year: 2028; Baseline extended: 64.8%; Alternative: 117.1%. Fiscal year: 2029; Baseline extended: 66.3%; Alternative: 123.9%. Fiscal year: 2030; Baseline extended: 67.8%; Alternative: 131.0%. Fiscal year: 2031; Baseline extended: 69.6%; Alternative: 138.6%. Fiscal year: 2032; Baseline extended: 71.4%; Alternative: 146.4%. Fiscal year: 2033; Baseline extended: 73.4%; Alternative: 154.4%. Fiscal year: 2034; Baseline extended: 75.5%; Alternative: 162.7%. Fiscal year: 2035; Baseline extended: 77.7%; Alternative: 171.3%. Fiscal year: 2036; Baseline extended: 80.1%; Alternative: 180.1%. Fiscal year: 2037; Baseline extended: 82.5%; Alternative: 189.1%. Fiscal year: 2038; Baseline extended: 85.0%; Alternative: 198.1%. Fiscal year: 2039; Baseline extended: 87.5%; Alternative: 207.3%. Fiscal year: 2040; Baseline extended: 90.3%; Alternative: 217.0%. Fiscal year: 2041; Baseline extended: 93.2%; Alternative: 226.8%. Fiscal year: 2042; Baseline extended: 96.1%; Alternative: 236.9%. Fiscal year: 2043; Baseline extended: 99.0%; Alternative: 247.1%. Fiscal year: 2044; Baseline extended: 102.0%; Alternative: 257.5%. Fiscal year: 2045; Baseline extended: 105.1%; Alternative: 268.1%. Fiscal year: 2046; Baseline extended: 108.2%; Alternative: 278.9%. Fiscal year: 2047; Baseline extended: 111.4%; Alternative: 289.9%. Fiscal year: 2048; Baseline extended: 114.6%; Alternative: 301.1%. Fiscal year: 2049; Baseline extended: 117.9%; Alternative: 312.3%. Fiscal year: 2050; Baseline extended: 121.0%; Alternative: 323.8%. Fiscal year: 2051; Baseline extended: 124.5%; Alternative: 335.8%. Fiscal year: 2052; Baseline extended: 127.9%; Alternative: 348.0%. Fiscal year: 2053; Baseline extended: 131.5%; Alternative: 360.4%. Fiscal year: 2054; Baseline extended: 135.0%; Alternative: 373.0%. Fiscal year: 2055; Baseline extended: 138.5%; Alternative: 385.9%. Fiscal year: 2056; Baseline extended: 142.3%; Alternative: 399.0%. Fiscal year: 2057; Baseline extended: 146.0%; Alternative: 412.3%. Fiscal year: 2058; Baseline extended: 149.7%; Alternative: 425.8%. Fiscal year: 2059; Baseline extended: 153.6%; Alternative: 439.6%. Fiscal year: 2060; Baseline extended: 157.4%; Alternative: 453.6. Source: GAO. Note: Data are from GAO's Spring 2012 simulations based on the Social Security Trustees' assumptions for Social Security and the Trustees' Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Office of the Actuary's assumptions for Medicare. [End of figure] Figure: Daily Average Number of Baby Boomers Turning 65: [Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] Year: 2000; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 5,500. Year: 2001; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 5,500. Year: 2002; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 5,500. Year: 2003; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 5,800. Year: 2004; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 6,000. Year: 2005; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 6,200. Year: 2006; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 6,700. Year: 2007; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 7,200. Year: 2008; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 7,200. Year: 2009; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 7,200. Year: 2010; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 7,151. Year: 2011; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 9,100. Year: 2012; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 9,100. Year: 2013; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 9,200. Year: 2014; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 9,100. Year: 2015; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 9,400. Year: 2016; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 9,400. Year: 2017; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 9,700. Year: 2018; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 1000. Year: 2019; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 10,200. Year: 2020; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 10,700. Year: 2021; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 10,700. Year: 2022; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,000. Year: 2023; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,200. Year: 2024; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,200. Year: 2025; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,600. Year: 2026; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,400. Year: 2027; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,400. Year: 2028; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,300. Year: 2029; Daily average number of people turning 66 each year: 11,400. Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data. Note: Data are from the U.S. Census Bureau's National Population Projections. For this analysis, we used data from the low net international migration series. [End of figure] Key Drivers of the Long-Term Fiscal Challenge: Growth in Health Care Spending: Figure: Cumulative Growth in Real Health Care Spending Per Capita and Real GDP Per Capita, 1960-2010: [Refer to PDF for image: line graph] Real health care spending per capita: Average annual growth rate of 4.6%: Real GDP per capita: Average annual growth rate of 2.1%. 1960: Real health care spending per capita: 0; Real GDP per capita: 0. 1961: Real health care spending per capita: 3.6%; Real GDP per capita: 0.7%. 1962: Real health care spending per capita: 10.2%; Real GDP per capita: 5.3%. 1963: Real health care spending per capita: 16.9%; Real GDP per capita: 8.3%. 1964: Real health care spending per capita: 26.1%; Real GDP per capita: 13%. 1965: Real health care spending per capita: 33.4%; Real GDP per capita: 18.9%. 1966: Real health care spending per capita: 41.4%; Real GDP per capita: 25.3%. 1967: Real health care spending per capita: 52.2%; Real GDP per capita: 27.3%. 1968: Real health care spending per capita: 64.4%; Real GDP per capita: 32.2%. 1969: Real health care spending per capita: 74.7%; Real GDP per capita: 35%. 1970: Real health care spending per capita: 85.2%; Real GDP per capita: 33.6%. 1971: Real health care spending per capita: 93.7%; Real GDP per capita: 36.4%. 1972: Real health care spending per capita: 105.7%; Real GDP per capita: 42.3%. 1973: Real health care spending per capita: 114.7%; Real GDP per capita: 49.3%. 1974: Real health care spending per capita: 121.5%; Real GDP per capita: 47.3%. 1975: Real health care spending per capita: 128.8%; Real GDP per capita: 45.8%. 1976: Real health care spending per capita: 145.6%; Real GDP per capita: 52.3%. 1977: Real health care spending per capita: 160.4%; Real GDP per capita: 58.1%. 1978: Real health care spending per capita: 171.2%; Real GDP per capita: 65.3%. 1979: Real health care spending per capita: 181.0%; Real GDP per capita: 68.8%. 1980: Real health care spending per capita: 194.1%; Real GDP per capita: 66.7%. 1981: Real health care spending per capita: 208.8%; Real GDP per capita: 69.3%. 1982: Real health care spending per capita: 225.1%; Real GDP per capita: 64.3%. 1983: Real health care spending per capita: 241.5%; Real GDP per capita: 70.2%. 1984: Real health care spending per capita: 259.4%; Real GDP per capita: 80.7%. 1985: Real health care spending per capita: 278.0%; Real GDP per capita: 86.5%. 1986: Real health care spending per capita: 293.0%; Real GDP per capita: 91.1%. 1987: Real health care spending per capita: 312.0%; Real GDP per capita: 95.5%. 1988: Real health care spending per capita: 342.1%; Real GDP per capita: 101.9%. 1989: Real health care spending per capita: 369.7%; Real GDP per capita: 106.7%. 1990: Real health care spending per capita: 400.1%; Real GDP per capita: 108.2%. 1991: Real health care spending per capita: 421.5%; Real GDP per capita: 105.3%. 1992: Real health care spending per capita: 445.5%; Real GDP per capita: 109.7%. 1993: Real health care spending per capita: 466.7%; Real GDP per capita: 113.2%. 1994: Real health care spending per capita: 479.5%; Real GDP per capita: 119.5%. 1995: Real health care spending per capita: 493.5%; Real GDP per capita: 122.7%. 1996: Real health care spending per capita: 507.2%; Real GDP per capita: 128.7%. 1997: Real health care spending per capita: 523.7%; Real GDP per capita: 136.5%. 1998: Real health care spending per capita: 546.1%; Real GDP per capita: 144.3%. 1999: Real health care spending per capita: 570.8%; Real GDP per capita: 153.6%. 2000: Real health care spending per capita: 596.1%; Real GDP per capita: 161.6%. 2001: Real health care spending per capita: 631.4%; Real GDP per capita: 161.8%. 2002: Real health care spending per capita: 681.0%; Real GDP per capita: 164.1%. 2003: Real health care spending per capita: 722.3%; Real GDP per capita: 168.5%. 2004: Real health care spending per capita: 748.7%; Real GDP per capita: 175.4%. 2005: Real health care spending per capita: 769.6%; Real GDP per capita: 181.3%. 2006: Real health care spending per capita: 789.3%; Real GDP per capita: 186.1%. 2007: Real health care spending per capita: 809.2%; Real GDP per capita: 188.7%. 2008: Real health care spending per capita: 822.5%; Real GDP per capita: 185.1%. 2008: Real health care spending per capita: 840.3%; Real GDP per capita: 173%. 2010: Real health care spending per capita: 858.4%; Real GDP per capita: 179.1%. Source: GAO analysis of data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Note: The most current data available on health care spending per capita are for 2010. [End of figure] Figure: State and Local Operating Balance Measure, as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product: [Refer to PDF for image: line graph] Fiscal year: 2005: 0.1%; Fiscal year: 2006: 0.3%; Fiscal year: 2007: 0.1%; Fiscal year: 2008: -0.5%; Fiscal year: 2009: -0.5%; Fiscal year: 2010: 0%; Fiscal year: 2011: -0.4%; Fiscal year: 2012: -0.8%; Fiscal year: 2013: -1.2%; Fiscal year: 2014: -1.4%; Fiscal year: 2015: -1.4%; Fiscal year: 2016: -1.2%; Fiscal year: 2017: -1.2%; Fiscal year: 2018: -1.2%; Fiscal year: 2019: -1.3%; Fiscal year: 2020: -1.3%; Fiscal year: 2021: -1.4%; Fiscal year: 2022: -1.4%; Fiscal year: 2023: -1.5%; Fiscal year: 2024: -1.5%; Fiscal year: 2025: -1.6%; Fiscal year: 2026: -1.6%; Fiscal year: 2027: -1.7%; Fiscal year: 2028: -1.7%; Fiscal year: 2029: -1.8%; Fiscal year: 2030: -1.9%; Fiscal year: 2031: -1.9%; Fiscal year: 2032: -2%; Fiscal year: 2033: -2%; Fiscal year: 2034: -2.1%; Fiscal year: 2035: -2.1%; Fiscal year: 2036: -2.2%; Fiscal year: 2037: -2.2%; Fiscal year: 2038: -2.3%; Fiscal year: 2039: -2.3%; Fiscal year: 2040: -2.4%; Fiscal year: 2041: -2.5%; Fiscal year: 2042: -2.5%; Fiscal year: 2043: -2.6%; Fiscal year: 2044: -2.6%; Fiscal year: 2045: -2.7%; Fiscal year: 2046: -2.7%; Fiscal year: 2047: -2.7%; Fiscal year: 2048: -2.8%; Fiscal year: 2049: -2.8%; Fiscal year: 2050: -2.8%; Fiscal year: 2051: -2.9%; Fiscal year: 2052: -2.9%; Fiscal year: 2053: -2.9%; Fiscal year: 2054: -2.9%; Fiscal year: 2055: -3%; Fiscal year: 2056: -3%; Fiscal year: 2057: -3%; Fiscal year: 2058: -3%; Fiscal year: 2059: -3.1%; Fiscal year: 2060: -3.1%. Source: GAO simulations, updated April 2012. [End of figure] Related GAO work: * Performing long-term fiscal simulations and analyses of federal deficits, federal debt levels, and the state and local sector. * Identifying elements to help address the nation’s financial challenges including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, tax reform, retirement, and disability programs; opportunities to reduce spending; and reducing the gap between taxes owed and taxes collected. * Performing financial statement audits (IRS, Schedule of Federal Debt, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, FDIC, FHFA, SEC, Consolidated Financial Statements). * Identifying and recommending solutions to reduce the risk of waste, fraud, and abuse and improper payments. * Conducting work to assess duplication and overlap among federal programs and agencies. 2012 Annual Report on Duplication, Overlap, and Fragmentation (GAO-12- 342SP): * 32 areas where agencies, offices, or initiatives have similar or overlapping objectives or provide similar services to the same populations; or where government missions are fragmented across multiple agencies or programs. * 19 additional areas describing other opportunities for agencies or Congress to either reduce the cost of government operations or enhance revenue collections for the Treasury. * Collectively, we identified about 130 actions that the executive branch or Congress could take. Depending on the extent of actions taken, these savings and revenues could collectively result in billions of dollars in savings. Examples of Duplication, Overlap, and Fragmentation Issues in 2012 Annual Report: Figure: Duplication, Overlap, and Fragmentation: [Refer to PDF for image: 5 photographs] Overlap in Unmanned Aircraft Systems programs; Overlapping and fragmented housing assistance programs; Potentially duplicative information technology investments; Multiple overlapping Science,Technology, Engineering, and Math education programs; Duplicate facility risk assessments at federal facilities. Source photos: U.S. Air Force and Art Explosion. [End of figure] Examples of Cost Saving or Revenue Enhancement Issues in 2012 Annual Report: Figure: Cost Saving or Revenue Enhancement: [Refer to PDF for image: 4 photographs] Better detection of Medicaid and Medicare improper payments; Opportunities to reassess and adjust federal user fees; Opportunities to reduce the gap between taxes owed and paid; Options to market excess uranium inventories for commercial use. Source photos: Art Explosion. [End of figure] Duplication, Overlap, and Fragmentation: Status of 176 Actions in 2011: Figure: The majority of 176 actions needed within the 81 areas identified by GAO have been partially addressed: [Refer to PDF for image: pie-chart] Addressed: 23 (13%); Partially addressed: 99 (56%); Not addressed: 54 (31%). Source: GAO analysis, as of February 10, 2012. [End of figure] Consolidated Financial Statements FY 2010, 2011: Key Issues: * 3 major impediments have been consistent over time—-areas on which to focus moving forward: - DOD: unauditable financial statements caused by serious financial management problems; - Intragovernmental activity & balances; - Ineffective preparation process. * Statement of Social Insurance (SOSI): significant uncertainties related to achievement of projected reductions in Medicare cost growth reflected in the statements. Consolidated Financial Statements: Significant Progress and Moving Forward: Progress to FY 2011: * Unqualified audit opinions for 21 CFO Act agencies. * DHS moved to qualified opinion on Balance Sheet and Statement of Custodial Activity. * DoD ongoing initiatives to achieve auditability. Continued progress requires: * Sustained commitment at agency level critical. * Sustained commitment by Treasury & OMB to resolve the intragovernmental and consolidated financial statement preparation issues. Trend 3: Economic Recovery and Restored Growth: * Different scenarios for economic recovery; * Replacement of lost jobs; * Role of consumers; * Housing and commercial real estate; * The timing of fiscal & monetary support. Recession Affects the Federal Budget: 1980-2011: [Refer to PDF for image: line graph] Percentage of GDP: Period of recession: 1980, Q2, Q3. Fiscal year: 1980; Revenue: 19%; Outlays: 22%. Period of recession: 1981 Q4-1983 Q1. Fiscal year: 1981; Revenue: 20%; Outlays: 22%. Fiscal year: 1982; Revenue: 19%; Outlays: 23%. Fiscal year: 1983; Revenue: 17%; Outlays: 23%. Fiscal year: 1984; Revenue: 17%; Outlays: 22%. Fiscal year: 1985; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 23%. Fiscal year: 1986; Revenue: 17%; Outlays: 22%. Fiscal year: 1987; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 22%. Fiscal year: 1988; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 21%. Fiscal year: 1989; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 21%. Period of recession: 1990 Q1-1991 Q2. Fiscal year: 1990; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 22%. Fiscal year: 1991; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 22%. Fiscal year: 1992; Revenue: 17%; Outlays: 22%. Fiscal year: 1993; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 21%. Fiscal year: 1994; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 21%. Fiscal year: 1995; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 21%. Fiscal year: 1996; Revenue: 19%; Outlays: 20%. Fiscal year: 1997; Revenue: 19%; Outlays: 19%. Fiscal year: 1998; Revenue: 20%; Outlays: 19%. Fiscal year: 1999; Revenue: 20%; Outlays: 18%. Fiscal year: 2000; Revenue: 21%; Outlays: 18%. Period of recession: 201 Q3-202 Q2. Fiscal year: 2001; Revenue: 19%; Outlays: 18%. Fiscal year: 2002; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 19%. Fiscal year: 2003; Revenue: 16%; Outlays: 20%. Fiscal year: 2004; Revenue: 16%; Outlays: 20%. Fiscal year: 2005; Revenue: 17%; Outlays: 20%. Fiscal year: 2006; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 20%. Fiscal year: 2007; Revenue: 19%; Outlays: 20%. Period of recession: 2008 Q1-2009 Q3. Fiscal year: 2008; Revenue: 18%; Outlays: 21%. Fiscal year: 2009; Revenue: 15%; Outlays: 25%. Fiscal year: 2010; Revenue: 15%; Outlays: 24%. Fiscal year: 2011; Revenue: 15%; Outlays: 24%. Source: CBO, National Bureau of Economic Research. [End of figure] GAO and FDIC’s Ongoing Reviews of Bank Failures: Figure: Number of Bank Failures (2008-2011) by State and by Year: Number of failures per year: 2008: 25; 2009: 140; 2010: 157; 2011: 92. No failures: Alaska; Connecticut; Delaware; District of Columbia; Hawaii; Maine; Montana; New Hampshire; North Dakota; Tennessee; Vermont. 1 to 4 failures: Arkansas: 2; Idaho: 1; Indiana: 2; Iowa: 2; Kentucky: 1; Louisiana: 2; Massachusetts: 1; Mississippi: 2; Nebraska: 3; New Jersey: 4; New Mexico: 3; New York: 4; North Carolina: 4; Ohio: 4; Oklahoma: 4; Pennsylvania: 4; Rhode Island: 2; South Dakota: 1; Virginia: 4; West Virginia: 1; Wyoming: 1. 5 to 9 failures: Alabama: 6; Colorado: 9; Kansas: 8; Maryland: 6; Oregon: 6; South Carolina: 7; Texas: 9; Utah: 6; Wisconsin: 6. 10 or more failures: Arizona: 12; California: 38; Florida: 58; Georgia: 74; Illinois: 47; Michigan: 12; Minnesota: 17; Missouri: 12; Nevada: 11; Washington: 17. Source: GAO analysis od FDIC data; Map: Map REsources. [End of figure] Trend 3: Economic Recovery and Restored Growth: Related GAO work: * Assessing the effectiveness of financial and regulatory reform efforts and plans to ensure the stability of the overall banking, housing, and financial markets. * Monitoring and evaluating various federal assistance programs designed stabilize U.S. financial markets and boost the economy, including investments in infrastructure and job expansion. * Continuing to perform our responsibilities under the Recovery Act. * Providing analysis on the functioning of the mortgage market and the ultimate disposition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. * Monitoring services to assist job seekers and supports for low- income families. Trend 4: The Changing Dynamics of Global Interdependence: Figure: International Reserves in Developing & Emerging Economies Have Increased More Than Twelvefold: [Refer to PDF for image: multiple line graph] Dollars in trillions: Year: 1990; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.36; Advanced Economies: $0.63; World: $0.99. Year: 1991; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.27; Advanced Economies: $0.78; World: $1.05. Year: 1992; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.28; Advanced Economies: $0.77; World: $1.05. Year: 1993; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.34; Advanced Economies: $0.81; World: $1.15. Year: 1994; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.40; Advanced Economies: $0.91; World: $1.31. Year: 1995; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.50; Advanced Economies: $1.03; World: $1.53. Year: 1996; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.59; Advanced Economies: $1.11; World: $1.70. Year: 1997; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.65; Advanced Economies: $1.11; World: $1.76. Year: 1998; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.66; Advanced Economies: $1.15; World: $1.81. Year: 1999; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.70; Advanced Economies: $1.23; World: $1.93. Year: 2000; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.76; Advanced Economies: $1.31; World: $2.07. Year: 2001; Emerging and Developing Economies: $0.85; Advanced Economies: $1.35; World: $2.19. Year: 2002; Emerging and Developing Economies: $1.02; Advanced Economies: $1.55; World: $2.57. Year: 2003; Emerging and Developing Economies: $1.32; Advanced Economies: $1.88; World: $3.21. Year: 2004; Emerging and Developing Economies: $1.75; Advanced Economies: $2.18; World: $3.92. Year: 2005; Emerging and Developing Economies: $2.16; Advanced Economies: $2.13; World: $4.29. Year: 2006; Emerging and Developing Economies: $2.85; Advanced Economies: $2.30; World: $5.14. Year: 2007; Emerging and Developing Economies: $4.04; Advanced Economies: $2.47; World: $6.52. Year: 2008; Emerging and Developing Economies: $4.50; Advanced Economies: $2.54; World: $7.03. Source: GAO analysis of International Monetary Fund data. [End of figure] Related GAO work: * Understanding the effects of a global supplier base on U.S. national security interests and evaluating the effectiveness of programs to protect critical technologies. * Evaluating efforts to ensure a safe food supply. * Evaluating the effectiveness of federal programs to prevent, prepare for, and respond to public health emergencies. * Evaluating the effectiveness of international food security and food aid delivery. * Assessing U.S. export promotion programs and other trade-related jobs creation efforts. * Analyzing energy market regulation, competition, and information. Trend 5: Advances in Science and Technology: * Nanotechnology. * Biomedical technology. * Information technology: - Quantum computing; - Cloud computing; - Virtualization technologies; - Health IT. Figure: China Has Caught Up to the United States in Terms of the Number of Scientific Researchers Full-time equivalents: [Refer to PDF for image: multiple line graph] Full-time equivalents (in thousands): Year: 1995; Russia: 8; Taiwan: No data; Singapore: 610; China: 522; South Korea: 100; Japan: 673; European Union: 964; United States: 1036. Year: 1996; Russia: 9; Taiwan: 46; Singapore: 562; China: 548; South Korea: 99; Japan: 617; European Union: 960; United States: 1098. Year: 1997; Russia: 10; Taiwan: 48; Singapore: 533; China: 589; South Korea: 103; Japan: 625; European Union: 956; United States: 1160. Year: 1998; Russia: 11; Taiwan: 54; Singapore: 493; China: 486; South Korea: 93; Japan: 653; European Union: 994; United States: 1210. Year: 1999; Russia: 13; Taiwan: 55; Singapore: 497; China: 531; South Korea: 100; Japan: 659; European Union: 1036; United States: 1261. Year: 2000; Russia: 17; Taiwan: 56; Singapore: 506; China: 695; South Korea: 108; Japan: 648; European Union: 1079; United States: 1289. Year: 2001; Russia: 17; Taiwan: 60; Singapore: 506; China: 743; South Korea: 136; Japan: 676; European Union: 1116; United States: 1320. Year: 2002; Russia: 18; Taiwan: 70; Singapore: 492; China: 811; South Korea: 142; Japan: 647; European Union: 1174; United States: 1343. Year: 2003; Russia: 20; Taiwan: 75; Singapore: 488; China: 862; South Korea: 151; Japan: 675; European Union: 1206; United States: 1431. Year: 2004; Russia: 21; Taiwan: 81; Singapore: 478; China: 926; South Korea: 156; Japan: 677; European Union: 1239; United States: 1394. Year: 2005; Russia: 24; Taiwan: 89; Singapore: 465; China: 1119; South Korea: 180; Japan: 705; European Union: 1292; United States: 1388. Year: 2006; Russia: 25; Taiwan: 95; Singapore: 464; China: 1224; South Korea: 200; Japan: 710; European Union: 1342; United States: 1426. Year: 2007; Russia: 27; Taiwan: 104; Singapore: 469; China: 1423; South Korea: 222; Japan: 710; European Union: 1360; United States: 1442. Source: National Science Board. Note: 2007 data for United States are estimated based on annual growth rate between 1995 and 2006. [End of figure] Related GAO work: * Performing specialized studies and technology assessments of a wide range of science and technology issues, such as climate change, radiation detection systems, biotechnology, border security, the challenges of developing sophisticated space and defense systems, and renewable and sustainable energy. * Assessing the government’s planning, implementation, and use of IT, including cloud computing and data center consolidation. * Examining federal funding for environmental, health, and safety research related to nanotechnology. * Reviewing plans and recent actions to meet future spectrum needs. * Assessing the management and results of the federal investment in science and technology and the effectiveness of efforts to protect intellectual property. * Reviewing federal efforts to safeguard student aid dollars while ensuring access to and affordability of higher education. Trend 6: Increasing Impact of Networks and Virtualization: * Less-expensive technology that is increasingly more powerful. * Greater prevalence of wireless networks. * More powerful portable devices. * Increased collaboration and sharing at home, in school, and at work. * Consumers are becoming content creators. * Location and time independence (telework, virtual meetings). Related GAO work: * Assessing federal efforts to promote affordable access to telephone and broadband Internet services, including cloud computing. * Reviewing the management of government telecommunications and interconnected systems and federal agencies' effectiveness in providing secure, reliable, and fast Internet and Web connections. * Assessing DOD and DHS's efforts to enhance the resiliency of critical national assets, networks, and systems. * Analyzing and supporting efforts to improve the federal workforce infrastructure. Trend 7: Shifting Roles in Government and Governance: * Evolving roles for the public, private, and NGO sectors. * Contracting. * State and local government. * Non-profit and non-governmental organizations. Figure: FY 2011 Total Contract Obligations: $538 Billion: [Refer to PDF for image: horizontal bar graph] Total Obligations of Products and Services: Products: Civilian: $36 billion; Defense: $177 billion; Total: $213 billion. Services: Civilian: $127 billion; Defense: $199 billion; Total: $325 billion[A]. Source: GAO analysis. [A] Services does not add up to $325 billion due to rounding. [End of figure] Related GAO work: * Assessing the government’s strategy for managing its reliance on contractors to ensure that agencies determine the right mix of as well as proper roles and responsibilities for government and contractor employees. * Identifying ways to improve the acquisition of goods and services by federal agencies. * Identifying opportunities to improve the coordination, collaboration, and governance of networks of governmental and nongovernmental organizations to address complex national issues. * Focusing on major areas that are at high-risk, including the U.S. Postal Service’s financial condition, and on implementation of Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Modernization Act of 2010. GPRA Modernization Act Goals: * Adopting a more coordinated and crosscutting approach to achieving common goals. * Addressing weaknesses in major management functions. * Ensuring performance information is both useful and used in decision making. * Instilling sustained leadership commitment and accountability for achieving results. * Engaging Congress in identifying management and performance issues to address. GAO’s Role in Evaluating Implementation of the Modernization Act: The act includes provisions requiring GAO to evaluate implementation over time: * By June 2013, GAO is to report on implementation of the act’s planning and reporting requirements at both the governmentwide and agency levels. * By September 2015 and 2017, GAO is to evaluate whether performance management is being used by federal agencies to improve results. * Also by September 2015 and 2017-—and every 4 years thereafter—-GAO is to evaluate implementation of the federal government priority goals and performance plans, and related reporting requirements. Trend 8: Demographic and Societal Changes Confronting Young and Old: Figure: Fewer Workers Will Be Supporting Each Retiree: [Refer to PDF for image: line graph] Year: 1960; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Historical: 5.1. Year: 1970; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Historical: 3.7. Year: 1980; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Historical: 3.2. Year: 1990; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Historical: 3.4. Year: 2000; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Historical: 3.4 Year: 2010; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 3.0. Year: 2020; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 2.4. Year: 2030; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 2.2. Year: 2040; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 2.1. Year: 2050; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 2.1. Year: 2060; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 2.1. Year: 2070; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 2.0. Year: 2080; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 2.0. Year: 2085; Covered workers per OASDI beneficiary (percentage), Estimated: 1.9. Source: Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees. [End of figure] Figure: Estimated Number of Individuals Age 65 or Older, 2010-2050: [Refer to PDF for image: stacked vertical bar graph] Year: 2010; Age 65-84: 34.5 million; Age 85+: 5.8 million; Total: 40.3 million. Year: 2020; Age 65-84: 48.2 million; Age 85+: 6.6 million; Total: 54.8 million. Year: 2030; Age 65-84: 63.3 million; Age 85+: 8.7 million; Total: 72.0 million. Year: 2040; Age 65-84: 67.0 million; Age 85+: 14.2 million; Total: 81.2 million. Year: 2050; Age 65-84: 69.5 million; Age 85+: 19.0 million; Total: 88.5 million. Source: GAO analysis of Census Bureau data reported on the Administration of Aging website. * Number of older Americans is projected to more than double between 2010 and 2050. * Changing demographics also translates to increased numbers of individuals with disabilities. [End of figure] Related GAO work: * Supporting health care financing and reform efforts through analyses of Medicare, Medicaid, and other health programs. * Assessing policy and administrative challenges to the federal government in providing for Americans' financial security in retirement, as well as options and strategies to help individuals ensure retirement security for themselves and their families. * Assessing financial and administrative challenges to providing employer-sponsored pensions and retaining older Americans in the workforce, and their implications for retirement security. * Evaluating the federal government's efforts to assist communities with combating crime and to safely and effectively manage a growing federal prison population. On the Web: Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/] Contact: Chuck Young, Managing Director, Public Affairs: youngc1@gao.gov; (202) 512-4800: U.S. Government Accountability Office: 441 G Street NW, Room 7149: Washington, D.C. 20548: Copyright: This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, 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. [End of presentation]