Skip to main content

Army Corps of Engineers: Budget Formulation Process Emphasizes Agencywide Priorities, but Transparency of Budget Presentation Could Be Improved

GAO-10-453 Published: Apr 02, 2010. Publicly Released: Apr 02, 2010.
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is the world's largest public engineering, design, and construction management agency. In fiscal year 2006 it began incorporating performance information into its budget process, but Congress raised concerns that the criteria used by the Corps to prioritize projects are not transparent and the budget formulation process could achieve a higher return on investment. GAO was asked to (1) describe the information the Corps uses in its budget formulation process and the implications of the process, and (2) evaluate whether the President's recent budget requests for the Corps are presented so that agency priorities are clear and proposed use of funds transparent. GAO reviewed the Corps' internal budget guidance, documentation of its project rankings and budget formulation process, performance review materials, and budget presentation materials. GAO also interviewed Corps and Office of Management and Budget officials.

With the introduction of performance-based budgeting in fiscal year 2006, the Corps began emphasizing projects with the highest anticipated returns on investment. Previously, Corps division officials sought to provide continued funding to all ongoing projects that fit within administration guidelines. Now, under the current process, Corps headquarters plays an increased role in selecting projects, and evaluates projects using certain performance metrics. The Corps gives priority to those projects with the highest anticipated returns for the economy and the environment, as well as those that reduce risk to human life. The Corps' use of performance metrics makes projects in certain geographic areas more likely to be included in the budget request. For example, the benefit-cost ratio, a measure of economic benefit that is used to rank certain projects, tends to favor areas with high property values. Another effect of the Corps' use of performance-based budgeting is that fewer construction and investigation projects--studies to determine whether the Corps should initiate construction projects--have been included in the budget request in recent years. In contrast, the number of projects in the Operation and Maintenance account has been relatively stable, which Corps officials attributed partially to its emphasis on routine activities. While the metrics used by the Corps in its budget formulation process focus on anticipated benefits, the Corps monitors the progress of ongoing projects through review boards at the headquarters, division, and district levels. However, the Corps does not have written guidance establishing a process for incorporating information on demonstrated performance, such as review board findings, into budget formulation decisions. In the absence of such a process, the Corps may miss opportunities to make the best use of this performance information. The budget presentation for the Corps lacks transparency on key elements of the budget request. It focuses on requested construction and investigations projects, but does not describe how the decisions made during the budget formulation process affected the budget request. For example, the budget presentation does not include an explanation of the relative priority given to project categories or how they are evaluated against each other. Also, while the number of construction and investigations projects receiving appropriations is typically much greater than the number requested, the budget presentation does not include detailed information on all projects with continuing resource needs. The budget presentation also lacks detail on the amount of the balance of unobligated appropriations (carryover) that remain available for each project. Users of the budget presentation told GAO that these two types of project information would be useful.

Recommendations

Recommendations for Executive Action

Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Department of Defense To ensure that all relevant information is considered during the budget formulation process, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to establish a documented process to incorporate assessments of ongoing project performance, such as information from review boards, into the budget formulation process.
Closed – Not Implemented
The Army Corps of Engineers has not taken action on this recommendation.
Department of Defense To improve the transparency and usefulness of the Corps' budget presentation to Congress, building on the information the appropriators have requested the Corps provide, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to work with OMB and Congress to include in the annual budget presentation for the Corps summary-level information on how the budget request reflects decisions made across project categories, business lines, and accounts.
Closed – Not Implemented
The Army Corps of Engineers has not taken action on this recommendation.
Department of Defense To improve the transparency and usefulness of the Corps' budget presentation to Congress, building on the information the appropriators have requested the Corps provide, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to work with OMB and Congress to continue to include in the annual budget presentation for the Corps project-level details for the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) account, including an explanation of how the requested funding for each project will be used.
Closed – Implemented
According to an Army Corps of Engineers Budget official, and as demonstrated by the budget justification, the Corps has continued to include information on the projects in its O&M account.
Department of Defense To improve the transparency and usefulness of the Corps' budget presentation to Congress, building on the information the appropriators have requested the Corps provide, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to work with OMB and Congress to provide project-level information on all projects with continuing resource needs, either as part of the budget presentation or as supplementary information.
Closed – Not Implemented
The Army Corps of Engineers has not taken action on this recommendation.
Department of Defense To improve the transparency and usefulness of the Corps' budget presentation to Congress, building on the information the appropriators have requested the Corps provide, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief of Engineers and Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to work with OMB and Congress to, as a supplement to the budget presentation, provide Congress with information on the estimated carryover of unobligated appropriations that remain available for each project.
Closed – Implemented
The Corps included information on each project's estimated carryover balance in the budget justification for the fiscal year 2013 budget request. As such, it has implemented this recommendation.

Full Report

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs

Topics

AppropriationsBudget activitiesBudget functionsBudget obligationsBudgetsFuture budget projectionsMilitary appropriationsPerformance measuresPresidential budgetsPrioritizingProgram evaluationStrategic planningUnobligated budget balancesUse of fundsFunds managementEvaluation methodsAppropriated fundsTransparencyConstruction