This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-99 
entitled 'Financial Management: Status of the Government Efforts to 
Address Improper Payment Problems' which was released on October 17, 
2003.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting 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.

Report to the Subcommittee on Government Efficiency and Financial 
Management, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives:

October 2003:

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT:

Status of the Governmentwide Efforts to Address Improper Payment 
Problems:

[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-99] GAO-04-99:

GAO Highlights:

Highlights of GAO-04-99, a report to the Subcommittee on Government 
Efficiency and Financial Management, Committee on Government Reform, 
House of Representatives 

Why GAO Did This Study:

Improper payments are a longstanding, widespread, and significant 
problem in the federal government. This past April, the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) estimated these payments to be about $35 
billion annually for major federal benefit programs. Importantly, this 
estimate does not account for all federal programs and activities and 
considers less than half of the $2.3 trillion net cost of the federal 
government for fiscal year 2002.

Because of its continued interest and concerns regarding financial 
management in the federal government, the Subcommittee asked GAO to 
follow-up on the implementation of the recommendations contained in 
our August 2002 report (GAO-02-749).

Our 2002 report recommended that Chief Financial Officers Act (CFO 
Act) agencies take actions to minimize improper payments in their 
programs and activities and for OMB to assist agencies in developing 
methods to identify and implement those actions.

OMB described our report as largely fair and accurate. It 
characterized the administration’s current efforts to reduce erroneous 
payments as the most comprehensive assessment of the government’s 
payment processes in history. 

What GAO Found:

The ultimate success of the governmentwide effort to reduce improper 
payments hinges on each federal agency’s diligence and commitment to 
identify, estimate, determine the causes of, take corrective actions 
on, measure, and report progress in reducing all improper payments. 

While each of the 23 CFO Act agencies has assigned responsibility for 
the improper payment program to a senior official, GAO’s discussions 
with officials at these agencies revealed a wide disparity in the 
progress made in implementing actions to perform risk assessments, 
identify and take actions to address internal control problems 
identified during the risk assessments, and publicly report the 
results of actions to reduce improper payments. Generally, the 14 CFO 
Act agencies that OMB Circular A-11 required to report erroneous 
payment information in their initial budget submissions were more 
active in conducting risk assessments, implementing corrective 
actions, and reporting on improper payments than the 9 CFO Act 
agencies not cited in the circular. 

Officials at the 14 agencies noted that their agencies had completed 
risk assessments for 15 of the 44 programs cited in the circular. Of 
the 9 CFO Act agencies not cited in the circular, officials at only 
one agency stated that they had completed risk assessments of all of 
the agency’s programs. 

Not all agencies have implemented control activities to address 
internal control weaknesses identified through risk assessments 
designed to identify improper payments. While officials generally 
acknowledged that they had not fully assessed all of their programs 
and activities to identify program risks of improper payments, some 
stated that they had considered those risks when designing or 
modernizing their program’s general internal control systems. 
Specifically, officials stated that their agencies were relying on 
general internal control activities already in place to manage 
improper payments. 

Officials at each of the 23 CFO Act agencies stated that their agency 
would meet the reporting requirements in OMB’s guidance on the 
implementation of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002. This 
guidance calls for agencies to report significant amounts of improper 
payment information in their annual Performance and Accountability 
Reports. Depending on the agency and program, this reporting can begin 
as early as the fiscal year 2003 report but not later than the fiscal 
year 2004 report. 

OMB has taken actions to address each of our recommendations. It has 
met with officials from each of the CFO Act agencies to provide 
assistance and has issued guidance for agencies’ use in implementing 
their improper payment program including the performance of risk 
assessments, the identification of the causes of improper payments, 
and the issuance of reports on the results of the actions taken to 
reduce these payments. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-99

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click 
on the link above. For more information, contact McCoy Williams at 
(202) 512-6906 or williamsm1@gao.gov.

[End of section]

Contents:

Letter: 

Results in Brief: 

Background: 

Recent Legislation Targets Improper Payments: 

Executive Agency Actions to Implement Recommendations: 

OMB's Actions to Implement Recommendations: 

Conclusions: 

OMB's Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendixes:

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology: 

Appendix II: CFO Act Agencies and Related Programs for Which OMB 
Circular A-11 Requires Erroneous Payment Information: 

Appendix III: CFO Act Agencies Included in This Review: 

Appendix IV: Comments from the Office of Management and Budget: 

Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contacts: 

Acknowledgments: 

Abbreviations: 

CFO: Chief Financial Officer:

CFO Act: Chief Financial Officers Act:

CFOC: Chief Financial Officers Council:

COO: Chief Operating Officer:

DCI: Data Collection Instrument:

IG: Inspector General:

IRS: Internal Revenue Service:

OMB: Office of Management and Budget:

PCIE: President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency:

PMA: President's Management Agenda:

Letter October 17, 2003:

The Honorable Todd R. Platts 
Chairman 
The Honorable Edolphus Towns 
Ranking Minority Member 
Subcommittee on Government Efficiency and Financial Management 
Committee on Government Reform 
House of Representatives:

Improper payments are a longstanding, widespread, and significant 
problem in the federal government and few would argue that the goal of 
reducing them is not a worthy one. This past April, the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) estimated these payments to be about $35 
billion annually for major federal benefit programs. Importantly, this 
estimate does not account for all federal programs and activities and 
considers less than half of the $2.3 trillion net cost of the federal 
government for fiscal year 2002. In addition to these annual costs, the 
risk of improper payments and the government's ability to prevent them 
has important long-term implications. As the baby boom generation 
leaves the workforce, spending pressures will grow rapidly due to 
increased costs of programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social 
Security. Other federal expenditures are also likely to increase.

Improper payments include amounts that should not have been made or 
were made for incorrect amounts. Specifically, they include inadvertent 
errors, such as duplicate payments and calculation errors; payments for 
unsupported or inadequately supported claims; payments for services not 
rendered or rendered to ineligible beneficiaries; and payments 
resulting from fraud and abuse. Measuring improper payments and 
designing and implementing actions to reduce or eliminate them will not 
be easy. Agencies can have success in this area, but that success will 
be dependent on the design, development, and implementation of better 
internal controls. This will require strong support and active 
involvement from agency management, the administration, and the 
Congress. Once committed to a plan of action, all parties must remain 
involved and committed to the end goals and their support must be 
transparent to all.

Our August 2002 report[Footnote 1] called for a coordinated approach to 
address the governmentwide improper payment problem and recommended 
actions to be taken by federal agencies and OMB. Specifically, we 
recommended that the heads of all Chief Financial Officers Act (CFO 
Act) agencies assign responsibility for managing improper payments to a 
senior official, such as the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or the Chief 
Operating Officer (COO), and that those responsibilities include:

* establishing policies and procedures for assessing agency and program 
risks of improper payments;

* taking actions to reduce those payments; and:

* reporting the results of the agency actions to agency management for 
oversight, and other actions, as deemed appropriate.

We also recommended that the Director of OMB:

* develop information on improper payments and issue specific guidance 
to agencies that provides a comprehensive approach to reducing improper 
payments, including providing the transparency in reporting that is 
crucial to addressing the problem;

* work with agency officials to provide reasonable assistance in 
implementing corrective action plans developed to reduce improper 
payments;

* work with agency officials and the Congress to identify and help 
eliminate or reduce the barriers that restrict agency actions to reduce 
improper payments; and:

* require agencies to report improper payment information in a 
specific, publicly available document.

Because of your continued interest and concerns regarding financial 
management in the federal government, you asked us to follow-up on the 
implementation of the recommendations contained in our 2002 report. 
Specifically, you requested that we determine the actions taken by the 
CFO Act agencies and OMB in designing and implementing programs to 
address our recommendations, including:

* assigning responsibility for agency improper payment activities to a 
senior official,

* developing detailed action plans to determine the nature and extent 
of possible improper payments,

* identifying and implementing cost-effective control activities to 
address identified risk areas, and:

* publicly reporting the results of their efforts.

Based on the results of our initial meetings with CFO Act agency 
officials, it became clear that many agencies were in the initial 
stages of designing and implementing actions to address the 
recommendations. Therefore, we limited our efforts to interviewing 
agency officials and obtaining documentation, when available, that 
identified and discussed agency actions on the recommendations. Again, 
because of the early stages of many of the agency actions, we did not 
assess the effectiveness of the agencies' efforts or independently 
validate the data they provided. We plan to concentrate on specific 
agency actions in future improper payments-related assignments. We also 
interviewed key OMB officials to determine the status of their actions 
to address the recommendations and the improper payment-related 
guidance that OMB issued in May 2003.[Footnote 2] Appendix I contains 
further details on our scope and methodology.

Results in Brief:

The ultimate success of the governmentwide effort to reduce improper 
payments hinges on each federal agency's diligence and commitment to 
identify, estimate, determine the causes of, take corrective actions, 
and measure progress in reducing all improper payments. Our 2002 report 
recognized the significance of the governmentwide improper payment 
problem and addressed recommendations to the 23 CFO Act 
agencies[Footnote 3] and OMB to focus attention on and take actions to 
reduce the problem. Subsequent to the issuance of our report, the 
Improper Payments Information Act of 2002[Footnote 4] (Improper 
Payments Act) was enacted. This legislation required many of the same 
actions that we previously recommended to federal agencies and OMB and 
that you asked us to address in this report.

We recommended that each CFO Act agency assign responsibility for 
managing improper payments to a senior official and noted that this 
individual should be responsible for establishing policies and 
procedures for assessing risks of improper payments, taking actions to 
reduce improper payments, and publicly reporting the results of the 
actions taken. Based on discussions with officials at each of the 23 
CFO Act agencies, a senior official, either the COO or the CFO, is now 
responsible for improper payment activities at each agency. The 
communication of the delegation of this responsibility varied by agency 
with 14 agencies issuing some type of agencywide announcement and 9 
agencies assigning responsibility but making no official announcement 
of the action.

While officials at each of the 23 CFO Act agencies told us that they 
had assigned improper payment program responsibilities to a senior 
official, our discussions revealed a wide disparity in the progress 
made in performing risk assessments, identifying and taking actions to 
address internal control problems identified during the risk 
assessments, and publicly reporting on the results of actions taken to 
reduce improper payments. The 2002 version of OMB Circular A-11, 
Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget, section 57, 
Information on:

Erroneous Payments, required 14 CFO Act agencies[Footnote 5] to report 
erroneous payment information in their initial budget submissions to 
OMB for 44 programs beginning with their fiscal year 2003 budget 
submissions. (GAO considers the terms "improper payments" and 
"erroneous payments" to be synonymous.) In general, these 14 agencies 
were more active in conducting risk assessments, implementing 
corrective actions, and reporting on improper payments than the 9 CFO 
Act agencies that were not cited in the circular. Despite this, 
discussions with officials at the 14 agencies revealed that the 
agencies had completed risk assessments for only 15 of the 44 programs 
cited in the circular. Further, these officials provided us with 
supporting documentation of these risk assessments for only 7 of the 15 
programs. Of the 9 CFO Act agencies that were not cited in the 
circular, officials at only one agency stated that they had completed a 
risk assessment of the agency's programs.

Another activity the agency improper payment designee should oversee is 
the identification and implementation of actions to address the 
internal control deficiencies identified by risk assessments. Not all 
agencies have implemented control activities to address internal 
control weaknesses identified through risk assessments designed to 
identify improper payments. Officials at the 14 agencies cited in OMB 
Circular A-11 told us that they have developed and implemented some 
internal control activities, such as data-matching and recovery 
auditing, based on the risk assessment results for 15 of the 44 
programs cited in the circular.

While officials generally acknowledged that they had not fully assessed 
all of their programs and activities to identify program risks of 
improper payments, some stated that they had considered those risks 
when initially designing or modernizing their general program internal 
control systems. Specifically, officials stated that their agencies 
rely on general internal control activities already in place, and that 
they will make appropriate modifications to their control systems once 
risk assessments are completed.

Our earlier review of agency fiscal year 2002 Performance and 
Accountability Reports showed that the type and amount of improper 
payment information reported were inconsistent across federal agencies. 
Public reporting of this information is critical to change and, under 
OMB's guidance for implementing the Improper Payments Act, agencies are 
to publicly report the results of their actions to reduce improper 
payments. This guidance calls for agencies with significant amounts of 
improper payments to report improper payment-related information in 
their annual Performance and Accountability Reports. Depending on the 
agency and program, this reporting can begin as early as the fiscal 
year 2003 report but not later than the fiscal year 2004 report. 
Officials at each of the 23 CFO Act agencies stated that their agencies 
will meet the reporting requirements.

OMB has taken several actions to address our recommendations. It has 
issued guidance for agencies' use in implementing their improper 
payment programs including the performance of risk assessments, 
determining the causes of improper payments, and reporting on the 
results of the actions taken to reduce improper payments. In addition, 
OMB officials stated that they have met with officials from each CFO 
Act agency to provide improper payment-related assistance and to ensure 
that agencies (1) understand the requirements set forth in the guidance 
implementing the Improper Payments Act, (2) have started to inventory 
their programs and activities to identify those at significant risk of 
improper payments, (3) understand the risk assessment process, and (4) 
understand the reporting requirements.

OMB officials also noted that they are working with agency officials 
and the Congress to identify and eliminate barriers that restrict 
agency actions to reduce improper payments, such as restricted access 
to data for eligibility verification and limited funding for the costs 
of eligibility reviews and other stewardship integrity activities. They 
further told us that, based on these discussions, they have initiated 
several actions, such as proposing legislation designed to improve 
certification of eligibility and allocating funds in the federal 
budget, to help measure, reduce, and recover improper payments.

In commenting on this report, OMB stated that the report provided an 
assessment of the administration's initiative to reduce erroneous 
payments that is largely fair and accurate. The response further noted 
that the administration's initiative to reduce improper payments is the 
most comprehensive assessment of the government's payment processes in 
its history. It further suggested changes to the report to reflect the 
progress made, or the benefits that have been, or will be, achieved 
when the administration's initiative is fully implemented.

Background:

As the steward of taxpayer dollars, the federal government is 
accountable for how its agencies and grantees spend hundreds of 
billions of dollars and is responsible for safeguarding those funds 
against improper payments. Our work over the past several years has 
demonstrated that improper payments are a significant and widespread 
problem in federal agencies. In addition, reports such as the Senate 
Committee on Governmental Affairs' Government at the Brink,[Footnote 6] 
the administration's President's Management Agenda, Fiscal Year 
2002[Footnote 7] (PMA), and the House Committee on Government Reform's 
The Federal Government's Continuing Efforts to Improve Financial 
Management[Footnote 8] highlight the impact of improper payments on 
federal programs and the need for actions to strengthen the system of 
internal control over areas where improper payments occur.

Our past reports have shown that relatively few agencies report 
improper payments in their financial statements, even though our audits 
and those of agency offices of the Inspector General (IG) continue to 
identify serious improper payment problems and related internal control 
issues. Federal agency financial statements for fiscal years 2000, 
2001, and 2002 reported improper payments of about $20 billion each 
year. In April 2003, OMB estimated that improper payments amount to 
about $35 billion annually for major federal benefit programs. 
Importantly, this estimate does not account for all federal programs 
and activities and considers less than half of the $2.3 trillion net 
cost of the federal government for fiscal year 2002.

The PMA includes five governmentwide initiatives--one of which is 
improved financial management. This initiative calls for the 
administration to establish a baseline on the extent of erroneous 
payments. Under it, agencies were to include, in their 2003 budget 
submissions to OMB, information on improper payment rates, including 
actual and target rates, where available, for benefit and assistance 
programs over $2 billion. The PMA also notes that, using this 
information, OMB will work with agencies to establish goals to reduce 
improper payments identified in their programs.

In July 2001, as part of its efforts to advance the PMA initiative, OMB 
revised Circular A-11 to require 16 federal agencies (15 CFO Act 
agencies and the Railroad Retirement Board) to submit erroneous payment 
data, assessments, and action plans for about 50 programs to OMB with 
their initial budget submissions. Specifically, the circular required 
that agencies submit information including estimated erroneous payment 
rates, target rates for future reductions in these payments, the types 
and causes of these payments, and variances from targets or goals 
established. In addition, agencies were to provide a description and 
assessment of the current methods for measuring the rate of erroneous 
payments and the quality of data resulting from these methods. Based on 
an August 2001 memorandum from the Deputy Controller, OMB, to the CFOs 
and budget officers of executive departments and agencies, agencies 
were to first include this erroneous payment information in their 
initial fiscal year 2003 budget submissions. A June 2002 revision to 
the circular reduced the number of CFO Act agencies required to submit 
erroneous payment data to 14 (OMB removed the Agency for International 
Development from the list) and reduced the number of programs for which 
improper payment information was required to 44. (Appendix II lists the 
agencies and programs.) In July 2003, OMB revised the circular by 
eliminating the requirement for information on improper payments. 
Despite this action, OMB officials have stated that they will require 
the agencies cited in the earlier version of the circular to report 
their efforts to reduce improper payments in the programs previously 
identified in the circular.

Recent Legislation Targets Improper Payments:

In November 2002, the Congress passed the Improper Payments Act. The 
requirements of the act correspond to the recommendations in our 2002 
report. Specifically, it requires agency heads to annually review all 
programs and activities that they administer and identify those that 
may be susceptible to significant improper payments. Once agencies 
identify their susceptible programs, the act requires them to estimate 
the annual amount of improper payments in those programs and 
activities. For programs for which estimated improper payments exceed 
$10 million, agencies are to report to the Congress on the actions they 
are taking to reduce those payments. The report is also to include a 
discussion of the causes of the improper payments identified, actions 
taken to correct those causes, and the results of the actions taken to 
address those causes. It further requires OMB to prescribe guidance for 
federal agency use in implementing the act. OMB issued this guidance in 
May 2003.

Executive Agency Actions to Implement Recommendations:

While all 23 CFO Act agencies have assigned responsibility for improper 
payment activities to a senior official, we found limited progress in 
the performance of risk assessments, the design and implementation of 
actions to address improper payment problems identified, and public 
reporting of improper payment amounts. Of the 23 CFO Act agencies, OMB 
Circular A-11 (2002)[Footnote 9] required 14 agencies to report 
improper payment information in their initial budget submissions to OMB 
beginning with their fiscal year 2003 submissions. However, even though 
the requirements have existed for two years, the applicable agencies 
have only conducted risk assessments for 15 of the 44 programs listed 
in the circular. In addition, these agencies had implemented more of 
our recommendations than the 9 CFO Act agencies not cited in the 
circular.

Assign Responsibility to a Senior Official:

Officials at each of the 23 CFO Act agencies told us that a senior 
official now has responsibility for managing improper payments. The 
communication of that responsibility varied by agency with 14 agencies 
issuing some type of announcement of the designation and 9 agencies 
making no formal announcement of the assignment.

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

By focusing their attention on and communicating their intent to reduce 
improper payments throughout an organization and to all affected 
organizational units and individuals, top-level officials set the stage 
for change. They instill a culture of accountability by adopting a 
positive and supportive attitude toward improvement and the achievement 
of established program outcomes. They also establish a transparent 
environment in which their expectations for program improvement are 
clearly defined and accountability for achieving these improvements is 
set. The actions of these officials should include setting and 
maintaining the ethical tone, delegating roles and responsibilities, 
and implementing human capital initiatives clearly communicating the 
need for change.

Based on our discussions with officials at the 23 CFO Act agencies and 
review of documents that they provided, 21 agencies have assigned 
responsibility for managing improper payments to the agency CFO and 2 
have assigned the responsibility to the COO. This assignment of 
responsibility was communicated to agency personnel by various means. 
Fourteen of the agencies made either oral or written announcements of 
the designation and 9 made no formal announcement. Specifically, agency 
officials described the communication of the assignment as follows.

* Nine agencies communicated the assignment by issuing written 
communications or sending e-mail to bureau CFOs or office directors.

* Four agency officials told us that the agency had communicated this 
assignment agencywide through staff meetings.

* One agency communicated the assignment orally through high-level 
meetings held with executive management or department CFOs.

* Officials at five agencies told us that, while the role was assigned 
to an agency official, there was no official communication or 
documentation of the assignments.

* Officials at four agencies informed us that job descriptions in the 
agency personnel manual, agency policies, directives, and delegations 
of authority--which usually give a broad range of financial management 
responsibility to the CFO/COO but do not specifically mention improper 
payments--sufficiently covered the assignment and the agencies did not 
issue any formal or official communication to agency staff regarding 
the designated agency official's improper payment responsibilities.

Regardless of the method used to delegate improper payment 
responsibilities and communicate that delegation, successful 
implementation of an improper payment program depends on the ability of 
the individual given the responsibility to set the tone that the 
organization regards improper payments as unacceptable. This may 
require a change in organizational culture for some agencies and 
programs. In the organizations we studied in our executive 
guide,[Footnote 10] the pressures for change applied by top management 
were instrumental as change agents. These officials not only defined 
and communicated a need for improved program operations but, most 
important, they redefined the organizational culture. Further, by being 
transparent in redefining the culture, top management set expectations 
and obtained buy-in on the need for and importance of change from 
individuals throughout the organizations. This culture of 
accountability was essential to begin the critical next step in 
managing improper payments--the risk assessment process.

Status of Actions to Determine the Nature and Extent of Improper 
Payments:

Based on our discussions with officials at the 23 CFO Act agencies, 9 
of the 14 CFO Act agencies cited in OMB Circular A-11 had not yet 
developed action plans to conduct or had conducted risk assessments for 
all of their programs and activities cited in the circular. Officials 
at 8 of the 9 CFO Act agencies not cited in the circular stated that 
their agencies were in the initial stages of developing action plans to 
perform risk assessments. Officials at the other agency stated that the 
risk assessments have been completed.

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Agencies demonstrate a strong control environment and interest in 
addressing improper payment issues by taking appropriate actions to 
address risks. An essential element of developing an action plan is the 
completion of a risk assessment, which can be used to prioritize time 
and resources and set error rate reduction targets. A risk assessment 
is a key step in gaining assurance that programs are operating as 
intended and are achieving their expected outcomes. It entails a 
comprehensive review and analysis of program operations to determine 
where risks exist, what those risks are, and the potential or actual 
impact of those risks on program operations. The specific risk 
assessment methodology used can vary by organization because of 
differences in missions and the methods used in assigning risk levels. 
The information developed during a risk assessment forms the foundation 
or basis upon which management can determine the nature and type of 
corrective actions needed. It also gives management baseline 
information for measuring progress in reducing improper payments.

The performance of risk assessments will make information on the causes 
and extent of improper payments available to agency officials, program 
managers, and others with oversight and monitoring responsibilities. 
While no requirement to perform assessments to identify the risk of 
improper payments for all agency programs and activities existed prior 
to the Improper Payments Act, OMB Circular A-11 required that 14 CFO 
Act agencies perform these assessments for 44 selected programs. 
Specifically, the circular required the agencies to:

* determine program-wide estimates for each listed program for which 
erroneous payments are currently being estimated,

* provide the implementation status of action plans to perform risk 
assessments or develop baseline estimates for programs that are not 
currently estimating erroneous payments,

* provide the status of action plans for preventing and/or reducing 
erroneous payments for all programs cited in the circular, and:

* report the results of these assessments in agency initial budget 
submissions to OMB.

The Improper Payments Act and the related OMB guidance to implement the 
act extended the improper payment requirements to programs and 
activities beyond those cited in OMB Circular A-11. The act requires 
all agencies:

* to review all programs and activities and identify those that are 
susceptible to significant improper payments;

* to identify programs where the risk of improper payments is 
significant, estimate the annual amount of improper payments, and 
submit those estimates to the Congress;

* that identify programs with estimates of improper payments that 
exceed $10 million, to include, with the improper payment estimates, a 
report discussing the causes, actions taken, and results of actions 
taken to address those causes. The report should also include a 
statement regarding the capability of the agencies' information systems 
and infrastructure to reduce improper payments or a description of the 
related resources needed to do so, as well as a description of the 
steps the agency has taken to ensure that agency managers are held 
accountable for reducing improper payments.

Although the act did not quantify "significant improper payments," 
OMB's May 2003 guidance on implementing the act--which we will discuss 
later in this report--defined the term as "annual erroneous payments in 
the program exceeding both 2.5 percent of program payments and $10 
million.":

As a result of OMB Circular A-11, improper payment-related 
identification and reporting requirements existed at 14 of the CFO Act 
agencies before such requirements existed at the remaining 9 CFO Act 
agencies. Because of this earlier requirement, we will summarize and 
present the results of our interviews and documentation reviews for the 
14 agencies cited in the circular separately from the 9 CFO Act 
agencies not cited.

We found that, according to agency officials, 9 of the 14 CFO Act 
agencies cited in OMB Circular A-11 had not yet developed action plans 
to conduct or had conducted risk assessments for all of their programs 
and activities cited in the circular.

* While the agencies identified in OMB Circular A-11 are responsible 
for additional programs and activities other than those identified in 
the circular, agency officials told us that the focus at those agencies 
has been on the programs cited in the circular. They further stated 
that their primary attention was on programs of higher risk or those 
constituting larger dollar amounts.

* Agency officials told us that they had completed risk assessments for 
15 of 44 programs cited in the circular. Officials could provide us 
with supporting documentation of these risk assessments for only 7 of 
the 15 programs.

* We found that three of the agencies that had not completed 
comprehensive risk assessments of a circular program had estimated and 
reported improper payment amounts in those programs in their annual 
Performance and Accountability Reports. Another agency was able to 
report improper payment estimates because, according to agency 
officials, it had assessed a portion of its programs listed in the 
circular. However, they further told us that they were still assessing 
other aspects of their programs for the risk of improper payments and 
would consider additional controls and revise their estimate based on 
the assessment results.

* Officials at five of the agencies stated that the significance of the 
risk of improper payments in their programs--including some of the OMB 
Circular A-11 programs--that were not yet assessed was unknown. 
Officials at two CFO Act agencies identified in the circular told us 
that they believed the risk of improper payments in the programs not 
yet assessed was insignificant, but acknowledged that they had not 
performed detailed risk assessments to confirm that view.

Prior to the passage of the Improper Payments Act, the nine CFO Act 
agencies not cited in the circular had no requirement to perform the 
improper payment-related activities called for in the legislation. In 
general, we found that most of these agencies were in the initial 
stages of developing action plans to perform risk assessments, as 
indicated below.

* Seven agencies were in the process of planning and developing action 
plans for conducting risk assessments of their programs and activities.

* One agency had completed its risk assessments and provided us with 
supporting documentation. The agency requires department managers to 
submit quarterly reports on improper payments and then, based on a 
review of those reports, may require corrective actions such as 
automating a previous manual process or providing training to 
individuals processing payments. According to agency officials, these 
detailed reports allow agency leaders to continually monitor payment 
performance.

* One agency had no plans to conduct a risk assessment because the 
agency only made administrative payments, such as payroll and 
commercial and travel payments, and did not consider those payments to 
be susceptible to improper payments.

While we found that most improper payment-related risk assessments 
conducted focused on the OMB Circular A-11 programs, under the 
requirements of the Improper Payments Act, all agencies are now 
required to annually assess all of their programs and activities for 
improper payments. OMB's guidance for agency implementation of the 
Improper Payments Act states that agencies are required to annually 
review all programs, identify those susceptible to significant 
erroneous payments, and maintain documentation to support the review 
and the results.

Agency Actions to Identify and Implement Control Activities to Reduce 
Improper Payments:

By identifying programs and activities with improper payments and the 
causes of these payments, risk assessments set the stage for the 
identification, design, and implementation of control activities to 
address the causes of the problems. We found that, although most 
agencies acknowledged that they had not fully assessed all of their 
programs and activities to identify the magnitude of improper payments, 
if any, some stated that they had addressed those risks when initially 
designing or modernizing their general program internal control 
systems. Specifically, the agency officials we interviewed said that 
they rely on general internal control activities already in place to 
minimize improper payments. These general internal control activities 
include data-sharing, computer-editing techniques, on-site visits, 
manual claims reviews, prepayment accuracy reviews, inspector general 
reviews, and postpayment recovery audits. Further, some agency 
officials indicated that, with the diverse missions of their programs 
and the different processes used in the administration of those 
programs, developing an agencywide methodology for assessing risk and 
accumulating the resulting data might take considerable time. Rather 
than waiting for comprehensive risk assessments to be completed, some 
agency officials told us that they had begun to implement additional 
pre-and postpayment controls designed to help identify and reduce 
improper payments resulting from duplicate payments, split purchases, 
and miscalculations. They noted that, as additional data become 
available from the risk assessments, control system weakness can be 
remedied.

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Control activities are the policies, procedures, techniques, and other 
mechanisms designed to help ensure that management's decisions and 
plans are carried out and program objectives are met. The control 
activities used by organizations to address improper payments vary 
according to the specific risks incurred. As noted in our executive 
guide, the types of payment activities identified as presenting the 
most significant risk of improper payments and the kinds of data and 
other resources available dictate the specific changes in internal 
control systems needed to adequately guard against improper payments.

Not all agencies have implemented control activities to address 
internal control weaknesses identified through risk assessments 
designed to identify improper payments. Officials of programs already 
required by OMB Circular A-11 to report improper payment information in 
their initial budget submissions to OMB told us that they understand 
some of the causes of their improper payments and have begun 
implementing actions, as demonstrated below.

* According to officials at 6 of the 14 agencies, their control 
activities include monitoring and reviewing the results of Single Audit 
Act[Footnote 11] and IG audits and reviews for questionable costs or 
other potential improper payment activity.

* Officials at three agencies reported that they are analyzing payment 
data for potential improper payments and are using data-mining 
techniques as a postpayment procedure to review and analyze diverse 
data for relationships that have not previously been 
discovered.[Footnote 12]

* Officials at five agencies stated that they perform data-sharing or 
data-matching with other government agencies to compare information 
from different sources to verify that accurate eligibility information 
is reported to help ensure that payments are appropriate before they 
are made.

* Officials at four agencies mentioned their use of recovery auditing-
-the examination of agency payments to identify duplicate payments, 
errors on invoices, payments for items not received, errors in 
determining payment amounts and executing payments, and the failure to 
account for credits for applicable discounts or returned merchandise.

Officials at most of the 9 agencies not cited in OMB Circular A-11 
stated that they are generally still assessing their programs for risks 
and have not identified cost-effective controls designed to target 
improper payment activities. They rely on their general internal 
control procedures already in place to ensure payments are correct. 
However, like the 14 CFO Act agencies that were cited in the circular, 
some plan to implement, have begun to implement, or have implemented 
pre-and postpayment controls designed to help identify and reduce 
improper payments resulting from duplicate payments, split purchases, 
and miscalculations.

* Officials at one agency told us that they have initiated recovery 
auditing programs, as required by legislation, to identify errors made 
in paying contractors and to recover amounts erroneously paid to 
contractors.

* Officials at two agencies cited plans to begin a recovery auditing 
program. Officials at one of these agencies stated that the agency has 
begun a recovery auditing pilot program while the other agency was 
still meeting with outside auditors to discuss contracting the effort.

* Officials at two agencies mentioned that a portion of their funds 
were cross-serviced by another federal government agency. For these 
funds, they are relying exclusively on the internal controls of the 
agency service provider in detecting and preventing improper payments.

Although comprehensive risk assessments and action plans to perform 
them may not be completed, some agency officials reported that they are 
developing and performing risk assessments and, at the same time, are 
beginning to develop additional control activities to reduce improper 
payment activity in their programs. As further risk assessments are 
completed and potential improper payments are identified, additional 
controls can be developed and implemented to target these problem 
areas.

Public Reporting on Improper Payments and Progress in Reducing Them:

Improper payments are a significant problem and information on federal 
actions and the results of those actions is a critical element in the 
overall process of reducing those payments. Currently, few agencies 
publicly report the amounts of their improper payments or other 
information such as barriers to identifying and/or reducing improper 
payments, targets and goals set for improvement, and progress in 
identifying, minimizing, and recovering improper payments. For example, 
for fiscal years 2000 through 2002, agencies reported improper payment 
information in their annual Performance and Accountability Reports 
totaling about $20 billion each year. However, the type and amount of 
information reported was inconsistent across federal agencies. Some 
agencies estimated amounts for one or some of their programs but not 
others, while others acknowledged making improper payments but did not 
report specific improper payment amounts. Some agencies reported 
amounts in their Performance and Accountability Reports one year but 
not the next. One agency did not update its annual estimate one year 
and reported the same estimated amount from the prior year.

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Minimizing improper payments often requires the exchange of relevant, 
reliable, and timely information between individuals and units within 
an organization and with external entities with oversight and 
monitoring responsibilities or interests. As we reported in our 
executive guide, it is important that the results of the actions taken 
be openly communicated or available not only to the Congress and agency 
management but also to the general public. This transparency 
demonstrates the importance that the government places on the need for 
change and openly communicates performance results. It also acts as an 
incentive for agencies to be ever vigilant in their efforts to address 
the wasteful spending that results from lapses in controls that lead to 
improper payments.

An August 2001 memorandum from the Deputy Controller, OMB, to the CFOs 
and budget officers of executive departments and agencies noted that 
"Public reporting of progress in meeting goals for minimizing erroneous 
payments enhances accountability and we expect agencies to do so." OMB 
strengthened its position on the importance of public reporting when, 
in May 2003, it issued guidance on implementing the Improper Payments 
Act and required agencies to report improper payment information in 
their annual Performance and Accountability Reports. Depending on the 
agency and program, this reporting can begin as early as the fiscal 
year 2003 report but not later than the fiscal year 2004 report.

To determine the extent that agencies were already reporting improper 
payment information publicly, we reviewed agency fiscal year 2002 
Performance and Accountability Reports. Of the 14 CFO Act agencies that 
were required to report improper payment rates, estimates, and other 
information for 44 programs in their initial budget submissions to OMB, 
4 reported improper payment estimates for all required programs in 
their fiscal year 2002 financial statements. (Financial statements are 
an integral component of the annual Performance and Accountability 
Reports.) Another 3 agencies reported partial estimates for some of 
their programs. The remaining 7 agencies--accounting for 20 of the 44 
programs--did not report current estimates of improper payments in 
their fiscal year 2002 Performance and Accountability Reports.

In our discussions with agency officials about public reporting, 
officials at one agency reported that the agency makes improper 
overpayment and underpayment rate information available for one of its 
programs, but that it does not report annual dollar estimates. An 
official at another agency told us that when required to do so, the 
agency will publicly report all improper payment information; however, 
it feels that this is sensitive information and is concerned that the 
information may be used inappropriately.

Further, officials at some agencies stated that they consider 
disclosure of improper payment information in public hearings or in 
federal budget documents submitted to OMB to be public reporting. In 
making our recommendation, we envisioned a more transparent medium such 
as agency annual Performance and Accountability Reports where not only 
the Congress but the public and others with oversight and monitoring 
interests could obtain and use the information to hold agencies 
accountable for achieving target rates or otherwise implementing 
specifically planned actions to reduce improper payments.

Eventually, agencies will provide public reporting since current OMB 
guidance, which resulted from the Improper Payments Act, calls for 
agencies to report significant amounts of improper payment-related 
information in their annual Performance and Accountability Reports. 
This reporting can begin as early as the fiscal year 2003 report but 
not later than the fiscal year 2004 report. Officials at each of the 23 
CFO Act agencies stated that their agency will meet the reporting 
requirements.

OMB's Actions to Implement Recommendations:

As the President's agent for managing and implementing policy, OMB 
issues guidance and oversees the administrative organization and 
operations of federal agencies. Its role in managing, implementing, and 
overseeing governmentwide administrative policy, its interagency 
perspective, and its leadership role on interagency councils make it a 
key player in the government's effort to reduce improper payments. OMB, 
which has shown leadership in the improper payments area, has issued 
guidance to federal agencies on the design and implementation of 
improper payment programs and has initiated contact and is working with 
agency officials to address improper payment-related issues. OMB 
Circular A-11's improper payment-related requirements, the OMB guidance 
issued for implementing the Improper Payments Act, and OMB contacts 
with agency and congressional officials have fulfilled the intent of 
the majority of our OMB-related recommendations. It is important to 
remember, however, that the effectiveness of the governmentwide effort 
to reduce improper payments is largely dependent on individual agency 
assessments of the extent of their improper payment problems, the 
causes of those problems, and the implementation of actions to reduce 
their problems.

Issue Specific Guidance on an Approach to Reduce Improper Payments:

OMB has issued two key guidance documents that, in addition to 
addressing our recommendations, have provided agencies with 
instructions for identifying, measuring, and reporting their improper 
payments.

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

The PMA established priorities for five crosscutting initiatives to 
improve the management and performance of the federal government. One 
of the initiatives, to improve financial performance, focuses special 
attention on addressing improper payments. To assist agencies in 
implementing the PMA initiatives, in June 2001 OMB revised Circular A-
11, adding Section 57, Information on Erroneous Payments, which 
provided some degree of guidance to agencies by:

* defining the term "erroneous payments,":

* establishing a formula for determining error rates and amount 
estimates, and:

* setting the format for agency reporting.

While this guidance was a good first start, the circular was not 
applicable to all agencies or all programs and activities and the 
required reporting was limited to the agency's initial budget 
submissions to OMB. Since these submissions are not publicly disclosed, 
the improper payment information contained in them is not routinely or 
consistently available for congressional or public review and analysis, 
or for holding federal agencies accountable for improvement. OMB 
updated the guidance in June 2002 and required a more in-depth analysis 
of improper payment information from agencies, but the reporting 
mechanism continued to be the initial budget submissions.

In May 2003, OMB included a requirement for public reporting in its 
guidance on implementing the Improper Payments Act. This guidance 
defines key terms used in the law, addresses the specific reporting 
requirements provided by the act, and lays out the steps necessary for 
agencies to meet those requirements. For example, it:

* defines annual improper payments to include both over-and 
underpayments;

* defines the term "programs and activities" to include "activities or 
sets of activities recognized as programs by the public, OMB, or 
Congress as well as those that entail program management or policy 
direction;":

* defines "significant erroneous payments" as annual erroneous payments 
in the program exceeding both 2.5 percent of program payments and $10 
million,

* denotes that "grants" include competitive and block/formula grant 
programs, regulatory activities, research and development activities, 
direct federal programs, all procurements including capital assets and 
service acquisition, credit programs, and agency activities that 
support its programs;

* sets statistical sampling confidence and precision levels for 
estimating improper payments; and:

* requires agencies with estimated improper payments exceeding $10 
million in any program or activity to include, along with the estimated 
amount, a discussion of the amount of actual improper payments the 
agency expects to recover and how it will go about recovering them in 
the management discussion and analysis section of their annual 
Performance and Accountability Report.

The guidance provides information for agency use that had not 
previously been available. However, as with any legislation or 
implementing guidance, the ultimate success or failure of the Improper 
Payments Act hinges on each agency's diligence and its commitment to 
identify, estimate, determine the causes of, take corrective actions 
on, measure, and report progress in reducing all improper payments.

Work With Agencies to Reduce Improper Payments:

According to officials at OMB, they have been working with agency 
officials and interagency councils to provide assistance to agencies as 
they begin to address their improper payment problems.

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

As part of the PMA initiative to improve financial performance, 
officials at OMB told us they have met with officials from all relevant 
agencies to provide assistance and to ensure that agencies (1) 
understand the requirements set forth in the guidance implementing the 
Improper Payments Act, (2) have started to inventory their programs and 
activities for significant risk of improper payments, (3) understand 
the risk assessment process, and (4) understand the reporting 
requirements under the Improper Payments Act.

OMB officials also told us that they have been working with a joint 
work group of members of the Chief Financial Officers Council (CFOC) 
and the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE)[Footnote 
13] to address improper and erroneous payments. The work group 
periodically convenes to discuss and develop best practices and other 
methods to reduce or eliminate, where possible, improper and erroneous 
payments made by federal government agencies. It has issued reports and 
other outputs to the CFOC/PCIE, reflecting work group deliberations and 
determinations. For example, the following guidance documents are 
available through the website [Hyperlink, www.ignet.gov/pande/
audit.html#sub] www.ignet.gov/pande/audit.html#sub.

* Report on improper payment indicators--lists events or conditions 
that either demonstrate that an erroneous payment has been made or 
suggest that erroneous payments are likely to occur. The report 
includes a list of methods used to identify erroneous payments, 
possible indicators of erroneous payments, and limitations or obstacles 
to agencies' use of indicators to identify and prevent improper 
payments.

* Report on benchmarks--discusses the process of continually measuring 
performance and comparing against the best performing organizations to 
gain information on best practices that will help organizations improve 
performance.

* Critique on the effectiveness of the differing processes used to 
determine improper payment rates--identifies and discusses the 
effectiveness of the methodologies used by 9 federal agencies and 17 
different programs, ranging from entitlement programs to grant and 
credit programs, to determine improper payment rates.

The work group is considering further best practices guidance to assist 
agencies in implementing the Improper Payments Act.

In July 2003, OMB and the joint CFOC/PCIE Erroneous and Improper 
Payments Working Group hosted an Improper Payments Act kick-off 
meeting. This meeting provided agencies with information on the 
legislation and the guidance and presented information on various ways 
agencies could begin to address their improper payment problems.

OMB officials also told us that the meetings with agency officials, 
along with meetings of the joint CFOC/PCIE Erroneous and Improper 
Payments Working Group, have provided OMB with the opportunity to 
explicitly encourage information sharing across agencies, offer 
assistance to agencies in measuring their improper payments and 
developing action plans, and discuss actions to reduce or eliminate 
barriers that restrict agency actions to reduce improper payments.

Work With Agencies to Address Barriers to Reducing Improper Payments:

OMB and agency officials told us that they have jointly identified and 
discussed barriers that restrict agency actions to better manage their 
improper payments. OMB further told us that, based on these 
discussions, it has initiated several actions, such as proposing 
legislation designed to improve certification of eligibility and 
allocating funds in the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal 
Year 2004, to help measure, reduce, and recover improper payments.

:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

Examples of agency barriers that OMB stated it has begun to contend 
with include restricted access to data for verification of benefit 
eligibility and the lack of agency funding to perform analysis of 
payment accuracy and/or implement corrective actions. To address these 
barriers, OMB stated that it has proposed data-sharing legislation to 
the Congress to address restricted agency access to needed data and has 
acted as an advocate for agencies' needs in requesting funding for 
improper payment-related efforts to implement the PMA's call for 
actions to better manage improper payments.

For example, the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 
2004, includes the following improper payment-related provisions.

* A proposal allows the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to match income 
data reported in the Department of Education's student aid applications 
with the applicant's tax data to ensure that students do not receive 
awards in excess of the amount for which they are eligible. The 
proposal is projected to save $638 million in Pell Grant costs over 
2003-2004.

* Allocate $20 million in Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control funding 
to help finance an initiative for the Health and Human Services agency 
to develop a methodology to measure Medicaid and State Children's 
Health Insurance Program improper payments, including producing error 
rates.

* Increase the IRS budget by $100 million to lower erroneous earned 
income tax credit payments.

Transparency in Reporting:

OMB has set a requirement for the 14 CFO Act agencies identified in OMB 
Circular A-11 to begin annual reporting of improper payment information 
in their fiscal year 2003 Performance and Accountability Reports and 
for all other agencies to begin annual reporting in their fiscal year 
2004 Performance and Accountability Reports.

:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

In May 2003, OMB issued guidance implementing the Improper Payments Act 
that states that information on the results of improper payment-related 
efforts must be reported in agency Performance and Accountability 
Reports for fiscal years ending on or after September 30, 2004. (These 
reports should be available in November 2004.) Moreover, the guidance 
requires the 14 CFO Act agencies already required by OMB Circular A-11 
to report improper payment information in their initial budget 
submissions to OMB to also include that improper payment information in 
their fiscal year 2003 Performance and Accountability Reports. This 
should result in publicly available information on improper payments 
for about 44 major federal programs, such as Medicare and Food Stamps, 
about one year earlier than the reporting date for all other federal 
programs and activities. These actions will help ensure transparency in 
reporting for those agencies with programs and activities with 
significant risks for improper payments.

While OMB has shown progress in developing the framework and issuing 
guidance to agencies to implement the requirements of the Improper 
Payments Act, additional or supplemental guidance may be necessary to 
ensure consistency in measuring and reporting among agencies. 
Importantly, commitment from the CFO Act agencies and OMB's continued 
leadership and support will be needed as agencies begin to scrutinize 
their programs and activities for improper payments and design and 
implement actions to address the causes of the improper payments 
identified.

Conclusions:

The governmentwide effort to identify and assess the magnitude of 
improper payments, to take actions to reduce those payments, and to 
publicly report the results of those efforts is generally in its 
infancy stages. All CFO Act agencies have assigned improper payment 
evaluation and reduction responsibilities to a senior level official. 
However, while some agencies have taken significant actions to identify 
improper payments in selected programs, officials at only one of these 
agencies indicated that they have completed assessments of all agency 
programs and activities to determine if improper payments are 
occurring, their magnitude, and the need for actions to address the 
problems identified. Further, although OMB Circular A-11 has required 
14 CFO Act agencies to report selected improper payment information on 
44 programs to OMB beginning with their fiscal year 2003 budget 
submissions, those agencies have completed risk assessments for only 15 
of the programs. Based on discussions with officials at the 23 CFO Act 
agencies, risk assessments have either not begun or are in progress for 
the other programs cited in the circular and all other agency programs 
and activities.

By legislatively requiring assessment of significant improper payments, 
corrective action, and reporting responsibilities, the Improper 
Payments Act could result in a focused governmentwide approach to 
clearly defining the magnitude of the improper payment problem and to 
actions to reduce or eliminate the problem. However, as we stated in 
our 2002 report, measuring improper payments and designing and 
implementing actions to reduce or eliminate them are not simple tasks. 
They will require strong support and active involvement from agency top 
management, the administration, and the Congress. As important as this 
OMB and congressional involvement is, however, the ultimate success of 
the govenrmentwide effort to reduce improper payments hinges on each 
federal agency's diligence and commitment to identify, estimate, 
determine the causes of, take correction actions on, measure, report 
progress on, and hold officials accountable for reducing all improper 
payments.

The public reporting of improper payment information called for in the 
Improper Payments Act will begin with the fiscal year 2003 Performance 
and Accountability Reports for selected agencies and programs and for 
all other agencies beginning no later than their fiscal year 2004 
Performance and Accountability Reports. Review and evaluation of the 
information in these reports should help clarify the actual magnitude 
of the governmentwide improper payments problem, the actions taken to 
address them, and future planned efforts in this area. The reports will 
also provide a clearer picture of the level of effort and importance 
that each agency has placed on the identification and reduction of 
improper payments within their programs and activities. As such, they 
will provide useful information for continuing coordination and 
communications among the agencies, the administration, and the 
Congress.

OMB's Comments and Our Evaluation:

We received written comments from OMB on a draft of this report, which 
are reprinted in appendix IV. In its response, OMB stated that the 
report provided an assessment of the administration's initiative to 
reduce erroneous payments that is largely fair and accurate. The 
response further noted that the administration's initiative to reduce 
improper payments is the most comprehensive assessment of the 
government's payment processes in its history. It further suggested 
changes to the report to reflect the progress made, or the benefits 
that have been, or will be, achieved when the administration's 
initiative is fully implemented.

We recognize that OMB has shown leadership in the improper payments 
area, however, as we stated in our report, the ultimate success of the 
governmentwide effort to reduce improper payments is largely dependent 
on the specific actions taken by each of the agencies. Until the 
administration's initiative is fully or significantly implemented and 
the results of agency actions to address improper payments are made 
public, it would be premature to assess the achievement of actual or 
potential benefits. We considered all of OMB's comments and made 
changes to the report as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the Chairman and Ranking 
Minority Members of the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, the 
House Committee on Government Reform, the Senate Committee on the 
Budget, the House Committee on the Budget, and other appropriate 
congressional committees. We will also be sending copies to the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the heads of the 
CFO Act agencies. Copies will also be made available to others upon 
request. In addition, the report will be available at no cost on the 
GAO Web site at [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] http://www.gao.gov.

This report was prepared under the direction of McCoy Williams, 
Director, Financial Management and Assurance, who may be reached at 
(202) 512-6906 or [Hyperlink, williamsm1@gao.gov] williamsm1@gao.gov 
if you or your staff have any questions. Staff contacts and other key 
contributors to this report are listed in appendix V.

Signed by:

McCoy Williams 
Director 
Financial Management and Assurance:

[End of section]

Appendixes:

[End of section]

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:

The Government Management Reform Act of 1994 expanded the requirements 
of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 by requiring, among other 
things, the annual preparation and audit of organizationwide financial 
statements of 24 executive departments and agencies. Since March 2003, 
when the Federal Emergency Management Agency was incorporated into the 
Department of Homeland Security, 23 agencies are subject to this act.

To obtain information on the status of agency actions on the 
recommendations contained in our 2002 report, we developed a data 
collection instrument (DCI) that contained a standardized set of 
questions for each recommendation. Using this instrument, we 
interviewed officials at each of the 23 CFO Act agencies and OMB to 
obtain information on the status of their implementation of the 
recommendations and to discuss implementation of the Improper Payments 
Information Act of 2002 and the related OMB implementation guidance. A 
list of the CFO Act agencies, which accounted for about 89 percent of 
the government's net cost in fiscal years 2001 and 2002, is presented 
in appendix III. We also requested that the agency officials provide 
all available documentation to support their statements about the 
status of agency actions to implement the recommendations. At one 
agency's request, we conducted the interview by telephone. In addition, 
we reviewed relevant agency documents including strategic plans, agency 
performance plans and reports, and reports from agency program 
partners.[Footnote 14]

We completed DCIs for all 23 CFO Act agencies and OMB. We reviewed the 
completed DCIs and all accompanying documentation. To facilitate our 
analysis, we developed a database to sort agency responses and 
categorize them across several dimensions. Where necessary, we 
contacted agencies to clarify responses, request additional 
information, and update the initial responses. Because the agencies are 
generally in the initial stages of their implementation efforts, we did 
not determine the validity of representations made or the documentation 
provided.

We performed our work in Washington, D.C. between January and September 
2003 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 
standards. We requested written comments on a draft of this report from 
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. The comments are 
discussed in the section entitled OMB Comments and Our Evaluation and 
are reprinted in appendix IV. We considered all of OMB's comments and 
made changes to the report as appropriate.

:

[End of section]

Appendix II: CFO Act Agencies and Related Programs for Which OMB 
Circular A-11 Requires Erroneous Payment Information:

1. Department of Agriculture: 

1. Food Stamps; 2. Commodity Loan Program; 3. National School Lunch and 
Breakfast; 4. Women, Infants, and Children.

2. Department of Defense: 

5. Military Retirement; 6. Military Health Benefits.

3. Department of Education: 

7. Student Financial Assistance; 8. Title I.

4. Department of Health and Human Services: 

9. Head Start; 10. Medicare; 11. Medicaid; 12. TANF; 13. Foster Care - 
Title IV-E; 14. State Children's Insurance Program 15 Child Care and 
Development Fund.

5. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

16. Low Income Public Housing 17. Section 8 Tenant Based; 18. Section 8 
Project Based; 19. Community Development Block Grants (Entitlement 
Grants, States/Small Cities).

6. Department of Labor.

20. Unemployment Insurance; 21. Federal Employee Compensation Act; 22. 
Workforce Investment Act.

7. Department of the Treasury.

23. Earned Income Tax Credit.

8. Department of Transportation.

24. Airport Improvement Program; 25. Highway Planning and Construction; 
26. Federal Transit - Capital Investment Grants; 27. Federal Transit - 
Formula Grants.

9. Department of Veterans Affairs.

28. Compensation; 29. Dependency and Indemnity Compensation; 30. 
Pension; 31. Insurance Programs.

10. Environmental Protection Agency.

32. Clean Water State Revolving Funds 33. Drinking Water State 
Revolving Funds.

11. National Science Foundation.

34. Research and Education Grants and Cooperative Agreements.

12. Office of Personnel Management.

35. Retirement Program (Civil Service Retirement System and Federal 
Employees'; Retirement System); 36. Federal Employees Health Benefits 
Program; 37. Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance.

13. Small Business Administration.

38. 7(a) Business Loan Program; 39. 504 Certified Development 
Companies; 40. Disaster Assistance; 41. Small Business Investment 
Companies.

14. Social Security Administration.

42. Old Age and Survivors' Insurance; 43. Disability Insurance; 44. 
Supplemental Security Income Program.

Source: GAO.

[End of table]

[End of section]

Appendix III CFO Act Agencies Included in This Review1:

CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement.

1. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Agriculture.

2. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Defense.

3. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Education.

4. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Health and Human Services.

5. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Housing and Urban Development.

6. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Labor.

7. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of the Treasury.

8. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Transportation.

9. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement: 
Department of Veterans Affairs.

10. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Environmental Protection Agency.

11. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: National Science Foundation.

12. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Office of Personnel Management.

13. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Small Business Administration.

14. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Social Security Administration.

CFO Act Agencies With No Prior Improper Payment Reporting Requirement.

15. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Department of Commerce.

16. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Department of Energy.

17. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Department of the Interior.

18. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Department of Justice.

19. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Department of State.

20. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Agency for International Development.

21. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: General Services Administration.

22. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

23. CFO Act Agencies With Prior Improper Payment Reporting 
Requirement: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Source: GAO.

[End of table]

[Footnote 15]

[End of section]

Appendix IV: Comments from the Office of Management and Budget:

THE CONTROLLER:

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20803:

OCT 15 2003:

Mr. McCoy Williams 
Director:

Financial Management and Assurance 
U.S. General Accounting Office 
Washington, D.C. 20548:

Dear Mr. Williams:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft report, 
"Financial Management: Status of the Governmentwide Efforts to Address 
Improper Payments." The report provides an assessment of the 
Administration's initiative to reduce erroneous payments that is 
largely fair and accurate. I want to emphasize several points, however, 
that could be missed by someone reading your report.

First, the Administration's Reducing Erroneous Payments initiative is 
the most comprehensive assessment of the government's payment processes 
in its history. When agency efforts are fully implemented, virtually 
every dollar the government spends will 
be subject to some level of scrutiny to assess the appropriateness of 
the payment.

Second, agencies are publishing statistically valid error rates more 
regularly today than ever before. And beginning with FY 2003, more 
agencies will be reporting those error rates in their annual 
Performance and Accountability Reports.

Third, we have met individually with every agency's Chief Financial 
Officer and Inspector General to ensure that: each agency has 
identified the individual responsible for managing the initiative to 
reduce erroneous payments, agency management understands 
the requirements of the initiative, and agency management is 
implementing those requirements comprehensively and aggressively.

I believe your report should be modified to more appropriately reflect 
the progress we have made or the benefits we have, and will have, 
achieved when the Administration's initiative is fully implemented.

Thank you, again, for the opportunity to provide the views of the 
Office of Management and Budget.

Sincerely,

Linda M. Springer 
Controller:

Signed by Linda M. Springer: 

[End of section]

Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:

GAO Contacts:

Tom Broderick, (202) 512-8705 Bonnie McEwan, (202) 512-4668:

Acknowledgments:

In addition to those named above, Donell Ries made important 
contributions to this report.

(195004):

FOOTNOTES

[1] U.S. General Accounting Office, Financial Management: Coordinated 
Approach Needed to Address the Government's Improper Payments Problems, 
GAO-02-749 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 9, 2002).

[2] OMB Memorandum M-03-13, Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 
(Public Law 107-300), May 21, 2003.

[3] We originally made recommendations to 24 CFO Act agencies. We 
subsequently omitted the Federal Emergency Management Agency, a CFO Act 
agency that became part of the Department of Homeland Security in March 
2003.

[4] Pub. L. No. 107-300, 116 Stat. 2350 (2002).

[5] The circular required certain improper payment-related actions by 
15 federal agencies--14 CFO Act agencies and the Railroad Retirement 
Board. 

[6] Senator Fred Thompson, Committee on Governmental Affairs, United 
States Senate, Government at the Brink, Volume I, Urgent Federal 
Government Management Problems Facing the Bush Administration 
(Washington, D.C.: June 2001).

[7] Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, 
The President's Management Agenda, Fiscal Year 2002 (Washington, D.C.: 
Aug. 2001).

[8] Dan Burton, Committee on Government Reform, United States House of 
Representatives, The Federal Government's Continuing Efforts to Improve 
Financial Management (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 2002).

[9] Unless noted otherwise, when referring to OMB Circular A-11 in this 
report, we are referring to the circular as revised in June 2002.

[10] U.S. General Accounting Office, Strategies to Manage Improper 
Payments: Learning From Public and Private Sector Organizations, GAO-
02-69G (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 2001).

[11] The Single Audit Act, as amended, requires nonfederal entities 
that expend $300,000 ($500,000 for fiscal years ending after December 
31, 2003) or more in a year in federal awards to have a single or 
program-specific audit conducted for that year and provide a copy of 
the audit report to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse. The Clearinghouse 
will forward a copy of the report to the awarding agency when the 
report discloses audit findings relating to that agency's programs.

[12] The central repository of data commonly used to perform data-
mining is called a data warehouse. Data warehouses store historical and 
current data and consist of tables of information that are logically 
grouped together. The data warehouse allows program and financial data 
from different nonintegrated systems throughout an organization to be 
captured and placed in a single database where users can query the 
system for information. The information can then be "mined" or searched 
according to specific criteria to identify associations, sequences, 
patterns, and clusters between different pieces of information--
relationships that are often hidden in separate databases. 

[13] The PCIE is an interagency council comprising principally the 
Presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed IGs, which were 
established by Executive Order No. 12301 in 1981 to coordinate and 
enhance the work of the IGs.

[14] Program partners can include other agencies or intermediaries 
responsible for carrying out different aspects of the program and might 
include federal agencies, states or localities, grant recipients, 
participating financial institutions, regulated bodies, and 
contractors. 

[15] This list, previously comprising 24 agencies, has been revised to 
omit the Federal Emergency Management Agency, a former independent CFO 
Act agency that became part of the Department of Homeland Security in 
March 2003.

GAO's Mission:

The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, 
exists to support 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 Congress make 
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to 
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 
integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 
graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its 
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order 
GAO Products" heading.

Order by Mail or Phone:

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to:

U.S. General Accounting Office

441 G Street NW,

Room LM Washington,

D.C. 20548:

To order by Phone:. 

	Voice: (202) 512-6000:

	TDD: (202) 512-2537:

	Fax: (202) 512-6061:

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

Public Affairs:

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.

General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.

20548: