This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-12-56 
entitled 'Intragovernmental Revolving Funds: Commerce Departmental and 
Census Working Capital Funds Should Better Reflect Key Operating 
Principles' which was released on November 18, 2011. 

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. 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

Report to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related 
Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives: 

November 2011: 

Intragovernmental Revolving Funds: 

Commerce Departmental and Census Working Capital Funds Should Better 
Reflect Key Operating Principles: 

GAO-12-56: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-56], a 
report to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related 
Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

Agencies can improve their efficiency through the use of shared 
services, which are often financed through intragovernmental revolving 
funds (IRF). GAO was asked to (1) identify key operating principles the 
Commerce Departmental and Census Bureau Working Capital Funds (WCF), 
which are one type of IRF, should follow to ensure appropriate tracking 
and use of federal funds and (2) evaluate how departmental and Census 
policies and procedures for managing these WCFs reflect these 
principles. GAO identified four key operating principles based on a 
review of governmentwide guidance on business principles, internal 
controls, managerial cost accounting, and performance management. GAO 
also discussed the reasonableness of the principles with staff of the 
two WCFs and the Office of Management and Budget; these staff generally 
found the principles to be reasonable. GAO reviewed WCF authorizing 
legislation and statutory authorities, analyzed agency policies and 
data, and interviewed agency officials. 

What GAO Found: 

Four key operating principles offer a framework for effective WCF 
management: 

* Clearly delineate roles and responsibilities; 
* Ensure self-sufficiency by recovering the agency’s actual costs; 
* Measure performance; 
* Build in flexibility to obtain customer input and meet customer 
needs; 

Commerce and Census guidance do not identify the roles and 
responsibilities of all key WCF personnel. While all involved had a 
clear informal understanding of who is responsible for managing the 
Departmental WCF, Commerce’s guidance does not discuss its CFO Council—
an entity with an important role related to WCF increases and changes. 
Census lacks a process to coordinate and consolidate information 
managed by disparate divisions and ensure appropriate tracking of 
funds. There are also opportunities for the agencies to achieve greater 
management efficiencies by consolidating certain WCF services. Commerce 
has a transparent process to ensure recovery of actual costs. However, 
Census’ process could be more transparent. The Commerce Departmental 
WCF’s rate setting and review processes are clearly described, 
coordinated, and designed to recover actual annual costs. Entities such 
as the Commerce CFO Council and algorithm review group help to 
facilitate shared understanding among fund managers, customers, and 
service providers. Census has a fragmented and limited description of 
its processes and lacks a formal process to communicate with customers. 
Census customers GAO spoke with had a mixed understanding about how 
certain WCF costs are determined, limiting their ability to make 
appeals and suggest improvements. 

Both WCFs could benefit from performance measures that assess 
operational effectiveness. Commerce and Census have identified 
performance measures related to organizational strategic goals. 
However, neither has established WCF operational performance measures 
such as responsiveness to customer inquiries and billing error rates. 
Moreover, both WCFs support similar management and administrative 
services that could potentially be consolidated. 

Both WCFs obtain customer input and have flexibility to adjust to 
customer needs, but challenges exist. In general, customers GAO 
interviewed said they had regular and ongoing discussions with fund 
managers or service providers. At Commerce, its CFO Council and WCF 
managers periodically assess and shift resources to address changes in 
customer needs and prioritize requests for services. However, the 
statutory cap on one bureau’s payments into the WCF limits the level of 
services that can be provided to all Commerce bureaus. To provide 
services beyond the capacity of the WCF, Commerce enters into a 
memorandum of understanding with specific customers. The Census WCF’s 
ability to build and maintain an operating reserve helps to provide 
price stability for customers throughout the decennial census cycle 
when the costs of management and administrative services supported 
through the WCF fluctuate dramatically. Similar to Commerce, Census has 
the flexibility to provide additional services by billing customers 
directly. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO is making seven recommendations to improve the management of the 
two WCFs, including updating and consolidating WCF guidance, 
establishing a process to measure WCF performance, and examining 
opportunities to consolidate certain WCF services. The Commerce 
Secretary agreed with all of our findings and recommendations and has 
directed managers of both the departmental WCF and the Census WCF to 
begin implementing GAO’s recommendations. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-56]. For more 
information, contact Denise M. Fantone at (202) 512-6806 or 
fantoned@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Background: 

Key Operating Principles Provide a Framework for Effective WCF 
Management: 

Principle 1: Clearly Delineate Roles and Responsibilities: 

Principle 2: Ensure Self-sufficiency by Recovering the Agency's Actual 
Costs: 

Principle 3: Measure Performance: 

Principle 4: Build in Flexibility to Obtain Customer Input and Meet 
Customer Needs: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendix I: Expanded Version of WCF Key Operating Principles: 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Commerce: 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Table: 

Table 1: Largest Customers of Services Supported by the Commerce 
Departmental and Census Working Capital Funds, Fiscal Year 2009: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Overview of the Flow of Funds for the Commerce Departmental 
WCF: 

Figure 2: Overview of the Flow of Funds for the Census WCF: 

Figure 3: Working Capital Fund Key Operating Principles: 

Abbreviations: 

BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics: 

CFO: Chief Financial Officer: 

CBS: Commerce Business System: 

HUD: Department of Housing and Urban Development: 

IRF: Intragovernmental Revolving Fund: 

ITA: International Trade Administration: 

M&A: Management and Administrative: 

MOU: Memorandum of Understanding: 

NIST: National Institute of Standards and Technology: 

NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: 

OEB: Office of Executive Budgeting: 

OMB: Office of Management and Budget: 

TAS: Treasury Account Symbol: 

WCF: Working Capital Fund: 

[End of section] 

November 18, 2011: 

The Honorable Frank R. Wolf: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Chaka Fattah: 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies: 
Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives: 

In an increasingly constrained budget environment, federal agencies are 
asked to operate as efficiently as possible. One way federal agencies 
can increase their efficiency is to share services, by consolidating 
services used by multiple organizations within an agency or more than 
one agency within a department. Consolidated services may be financed 
or supported through an intragovernmental revolving fund (IRF). IRFs, 
such as working capital funds (WCF), are primarily used to conduct 
business-like activities within and between federal agencies. 

This report is the second in response to the Committee's request to 
review IRFs and builds upon our work on the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology's (NIST) Working Capital Fund and its 
interagency agreements.[Footnote 1] In this report, we examined two 
WCFs--the Department of Commerce (Commerce Departmental) and Census 
Bureau (Census) WCFs--which collected approximately $143 million and 
$912 million respectively in fiscal year 2010 to support a variety of 
administrative and specialized activities. To analyze these funds, we 
(1) identified key operating principles these WCFs should follow to 
ensure the appropriate tracking and use of federal funds and (2) 
evaluated how departmental and Census policies and procedures for 
managing these WCFs reflect these principles. 

To identify key principles, we reviewed governmentwide guidance on 
business operating principles, internal controls, managerial cost 
accounting, and performance management.[Footnote 2] In addition, we met 
with the agency staff responsible for managing the two WCFs, as well as 
staff from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to obtain their 
views on the use of these principles to assess WCFs. Commerce 
Departmental, Census, and OMB staff generally found the principles to 
be reasonable. Moreover, our prior work on user fees, franchise 
funds,[Footnote 3] performance management, and customer service also 
informed the development of these principles. Finally, we considered 
agency guidance and requirements. 

To evaluate each fund's management against these key principles, we 
reviewed Commerce Departmental and Census WCF authorizing legislation 
and statutory authorities, supporting guidance and transactional data, 
and various budget documents and data from fiscal years 2001 through 
2010. In addition, we analyzed policies and procedures for charging and 
monitoring WCF resources. We also met with budget and finance officials 
responsible for managing each WCF, as well as their major customers. We 
identified the funds' largest customers based on the amounts they paid 
into the respective WCFs in fiscal year 2009. We interviewed customer 
agencies' program and budget officials to obtain their perspective on 
services they received, billing and payment methods, and communication 
with WCF managers. 

During our review, we identified discrepancies between aggregate and 
the corresponding disaggregate amounts of funds collected in the Census 
WCF. A Census official explained that the aggregate amounts are 
reported externally, but the disaggregate amounts had to be created 
upon our request. We worked with Census to resolve the discrepancies in 
the data and received multiple data revisions that included unexplained 
adjustments. In the final analysis, we considered the data to be 
sufficiently reliable for the purpose of providing background 
information on the relative size of WCF activity. We examined the rate-
setting process for both WCFs; however, we did not independently verify 
whether the process resulted in the equitable distribution of costs 
among customers or in the recovery of actual costs. 

We conducted our review from July 2010 through November 2011 in 
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those 
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 
conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

Background: 

IRFs generally do not receive appropriations directly. Instead, they 
are accounts that may receive reimbursements and advances from other 
federal accounts. In addition, they may accept fees collected from 
nonfederal sources for the sale of government products or services. The 
use of IRFs to fund consolidated or shared services allows agencies to 
benefit from economies of scale or take advantage of specialized 
expertise that they may not have. The market-like atmosphere promoted 
by IRF-supported services is intended to create incentives for federal 
customers and managers to exercise cost control and economic restraint. 
IRF management affects the success of the programs they support. 

Within the Department of Commerce (Commerce), there are six 
IRFs[Footnote 4] that support either management and administrative 
services--such as building security and human capital management--or 
specialized services based on the unique nature of the agency's 
mission. For example, Census maintains a nationwide survey 
infrastructure and has expertise and address lists that would be 
uneconomical for others to replicate. Thus, it conducts surveys on 
behalf of other organizations (e.g., Department of Housing and Urban 
Development's (HUD) American Housing Survey and the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics' (BLS) Consumer Expenditure Survey). 

The Commerce Departmental and the Census WCFs were established to 
support services and projects that are performed more advantageously 
when centralized, such as information technology services and 
acquisition management.[Footnote 5] The statutory authority requires 
both funds to charge rates that recover agencies' actual costs of 
operations. Customers of both WCFs either pay in advance or reimburse 
the fund depending on the terms of the agreement. 

Three entities play important roles in the management of the Commerce 
Departmental WCF. First, the Commerce Office of Executive Budgeting 
(OEB) is responsible for overall management of the Commerce 
Departmental WCF. Second, the algorithm review group, which includes 
representatives from the fund's customer bureaus and OEB, convenes 
every other year to review rate-setting formulas. At this meeting, 
service providers present their billing methods and implement any 
changes to the rate-setting formulas that are agreed upon within the 
group. Finally, the Commerce Chief Financial Officer Council (Commerce 
CFO Council) is comprised of the CFOs from each of Commerce's bureaus, 
giving each customer bureau a "seat at the table." This Commerce CFO 
Council has an important role related to WCF increases and changes to 
the algorithms used to determine charges. It meets at least annually to 
review and update service rates, but may meet more frequently as needs 
arise. 

Management responsibility for the Census WCF is delegated across 
various divisions of the bureau. For example, the Budget Division leads 
the setting and reviewing of service rates each year as well as fund 
reconciliation. The Finance Division records and tracks customer 
charges and payments in the Commerce Business System (CBS), which is 
the financial system used throughout the Department of Commerce. The 
Acquisition Division reviews, approves, and tracks the status of 
interagency agreements with Census' external customers. The program 
offices--also referred to as the sponsoring divisions--are responsible 
for the day-to-day management of the agreements and build relationships 
with the customer agencies. 

Both WCFs Support Management and Administrative Services, but the 
Census WCF Also Supports Mission Activities: 

Both the Commerce Departmental and Census WCFs primarily support 
centralized management and administrative services (M&A) for their 
respective bureaus and programs. For example, almost all of the 
Commerce Departmental WCF collections support centralized M&A services 
for its 13 bureaus. In contrast, about half of the Census WCF 
collections support M&A services for its internal divisions; most of 
the remaining collections support survey-related services Census 
performs for other federal agencies and a small share is provided to 
nonfederal entities.[Footnote 6] This range of activities complicates 
management of the fund. Accordingly, Census maintains separate fund 
components to account for these different activities. 

Figure 1 illustrates the flow of funds from customers into the Commerce 
Departmental WCF for the provision of M&A services. The majority of 
activity is attributed to services provided by four offices--General 
Counsel, Human Resources Management, Security, and Administrative 
Services. Customers of the Commerce Departmental WCF are billed 
directly for services provided. 

Figure 1: Overview of the Flow of Funds for the Commerce Departmental 
WCF: 

[Refer to PDF for image: text box illustration] 

Source of Funds/Customers of Commerce Departmental WCF: 

Commerce Bureaus: 

Commerce Departmental WCF: 

Customers pay in advance or reimburse the WCG for services provided: 

Examples of Activities Supported: 

* Legal Services: 

* Civil Rights/EEO services

* Facility services: 

* Personnel services: 

* Procurement services: 

* IT Support services: 

* Security services: 

* Financial Management/Budget services: 

* Risk Assessment services: 

* Grants Management: 

* FOIA/Privacy Act services: 

* HR Management services: 

Source: GAO analysis of Department of Commerce data. 

[End of figure] 

A combination of mostly federal customers, including internal Census 
divisions/offices, pay into each of the various components of the 
Census WCF: Reimbursable, Cost Collection, and Cost Allocation. As 
shown in figure 2, the Reimbursable component supports services 
purchased by a single federal agency or nonfederal entity, such as the 
American Housing Survey for HUD, or services for New York City and Duke 
University. The Cost Collection component supports services where 
multiple federal agencies or customers share the costs and benefits of 
a single project, such as the Current Population Survey.[Footnote 7] In 
addition, the direct and indirect costs for customers are distributed 
among separate components of the Census WCF: direct costs are 
distributed to the Reimbursable and Cost Collection components whereas 
indirect costs are distributed to the Cost Allocation component. 

Figure 2: Overview of the Flow of Funds for the Census WCF: 

[Refer to PDF for image: text box illustration] 

Source of Funds/Customer of Census WCF: 

Nonfederal Entities: Pointing to Reimbursable Component[B]: 

Federal Agencies[A]: Pointing to Reimbursable Component[B] and Cost 
Collection Component): 

Internal Census Divisions/Offices Pointing to Cost Collection Component 
and Cost Allocation Component: 

Census WCF Components: 

Reimbursable Component[B]: (35 percent of WCF Activity): 
Customer pays in advance or billed twice-monthly: 

Cost Collection Component: (10 percent of WCF activity): 
Customers billed monthly: 

Cost Allocation Component: (55 percent of WCF activity): 
Customers billed monthly: 

Reimbursable Component[B] Pointing to: 

Examples of Activities Supported by Census WCF Components: 
* American Housing Survey: 
* National Health Interview: 
* Services for single customer: 

Cost Collection Component Pointing to: 

Examples of Activities Supported by Census WCF Components: 
* Current Population Survey: 
* Data Access and Dissemination System: 
* Services for multiple customers: 

Cost Allocation Component Pointing to: 

Examples of Activities Supported by Census WCF Components: 
* Acquisition, finance, information technology, and human resource 
management services: 
* Services for internal Census divisions/offices: 

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data. 

[A] Charges to external customers include management and administrative 
(overhead) costs. As a result, some of the funds in the Cost Allocation 
component are from other federal agencies and nonfederal entities. 

[B] The Reimbursable component includes activity from the Fixed Fee 
component, which accounts for less than 1 percent of total WCF 
receipts. 

[End of figure] 

While all Commerce bureaus pay into the Commerce Departmental WCF, 3 of 
the 13 bureaus provided the majority of funds. For the Census WCF, the 
majority of funds were provided by 4 of the 33 federal customers for 
which the bureau performed work and by internal Census program offices 
(see table 1). 

Table 1: Largest Customers of Services Supported by the Commerce 
Departmental and Census Working Capital Funds, Fiscal Year 2009: 

Commerce customers; 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

Commerce customers; 
International Trade Administration (ITA). 

Commerce customers; 
Census Bureau. 

Census customers; 
Department of Labor/Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

Census customers; 
Department of Health and Human Services/National Center for Health 
Statistics. 

Census customers; 
Department of Housing and Urban Development. 

Census customers; 
Department of Justice/Bureau of Justice Statistics. 

Census customers; 
Internal Census Programs. 

Source: GAO analysis of Department of Commerce and U.S. Census Bureau 
data. 

Note: The largest internal Census customers are the 2010 Decennial 
Census program, the American Community Survey, the Current Economic 
Statistics program, and the Economic Census program. 

[End of table] 

Key Operating Principles Provide a Framework for Effective WCF 
Management: 

We identified four key operating principles that offer a framework to 
effectively manage WCFs. As previously discussed, to identify key 
principles, we reviewed governmentwide guidance on business operating 
principles, internal controls, managerial cost accounting, and 
performance management. In addition, we met with staff from the two 
WCFs and OMB to obtain their views on the use of these principles to 
assess WCFs. Commerce Departmental, Census, and OMB staff generally 
found the principles to be reasonable. Moreover, we considered our past 
work. The significance of these four principles is described below. 

1. Clearly Delineate Roles and Responsibilities: Appropriate 
delineation of roles and responsibilities promotes a clear 
understanding of who will be held accountable for specific tasks or 
duties such as authorizing and reviewing transactions, implementing 
controls over WCF management, and helping ensure that related 
responsibilities are coordinated. In addition, this reduces the risk of 
mismanaged funds and tasks or functions "falling through the cracks." 
Moreover, it helps customers know who to contact in the event they have 
questions. 

2. Ensure Self-Sufficiency by Recovering the Agency's Actual Costs: 
Transparent and equitable pricing methodologies allow agencies to 
ensure that rates charged recover agencies' actual costs and reflect 
customers' service usage. If customers understand how rates are 
determined or changed including the assumptions used, customers can 
better anticipate potential changes to those assumptions, identify 
their effect on costs, and incorporate that information into budget 
plans. A management review process can help to ensure the methodology 
is applied consistently over time and provides a forum to inform 
customers of decisions and discuss as needed. 

3. Measure Performance: Performance goals and measures are important 
management tools applicable to all levels of an agency, including the 
program, project, or activity level.[Footnote 8] Performance measures 
and goals could include targets that assess fund managers' 
responsiveness to customer inquiries, the consistency in the 
application of the funds' rate-setting methodology, the reliability of 
cost information, and the billing error rates. Performance measures 
that are aligned with strategic goals can be used to evaluate whether, 
and if so how, WCF activities are contributing to the achievement of 
agency goals. A management review process comparing expected to actual 
performance allows agencies to review progress towards goals and 
potentially identify ways to improve performance. 

4. Build in Flexibility to Obtain Customer Input and Meet Customer 
Needs: Opportunities for customers to provide input about WCF services, 
or voice concerns about needs, in a timely manner enable agencies to 
regularly assess whether customer needs are being met or have changed. 
This also enables agencies to prioritize customer demands and use 
resources most effectively,[Footnote 9] enabling them to adjust WCF 
capacity up or down as business rises or falls. 

By incorporating these principles in written guidance, agencies promote 
consistent application of management processes and provide a baseline 
for agency officials to assess and improve management processes. 
Moreover, agencies can use the guidance as a training tool for new 
staff and as an information tool for customers, program managers, 
stakeholders, and reviewers. 

Figure 3 summarizes the four principles and their underlying 
components. 

Figure 3: Working Capital Fund Key Operating Principles: 

[Refer to PDF for image: text box interactive graphic] 

Key principle: Clearly delineate roles and
responsibilities; 
Description: Appropriate delineation of roles and responsibilities 
promotes a clear understanding of who will be held accountable for 
specific tasks or duties, such as authorizing and reviewing 
transactions, implementing controls over WCF management, and helping 
ensure that related responsibilities are coordinated. In addition, this 
reduces the risk of mismanaged funds and tasks or functions "falling 
through the cracks." Moreover, it helps customers know who to contact 
in the event they have questions; 
Components of principle: Segregate duties to reduce error or fraud; 
Example: Written roles and responsibilities specify how key duties and 
responsibilities are divided across multiple individuals/offices and 
are subject to process of checks and balances. This should include 
separating responsibilities for authorizing transactions, processing 
and recording them, and reviewing the transactions. 

Key principle: Clearly delineate roles and
responsibilities; 
Description: Appropriate delineation of roles and responsibilities 
promotes a clear understanding of who will be held accountable for 
specific tasks or duties, such as authorizing and reviewing 
transactions, implementing controls over WCF management, and helping 
ensure that related responsibilities are coordinated. In addition, this 
reduces the risk of mismanaged funds and tasks or functions "falling 
through the cracks." Moreover, it helps customers know who to contact 
in the event they have questions; 
Components of principle: Define key areas of authority and 
responsibility; 
Example: Written description of all WCF roles and responsibilities in 
an accessible format such as a fund manual. Discussion with providers 
and clients confirm a clear understanding. 

Key principle: Clearly delineate roles and
responsibilities; 
Description: Appropriate delineation of roles and responsibilities 
promotes a clear understanding of who will be held accountable for 
specific tasks or duties, such as authorizing and reviewing 
transactions, implementing controls over WCF management, and helping 
ensure that related responsibilities are coordinated. In addition, this 
reduces the risk of mismanaged funds and tasks or functions "falling 
through the cracks." Moreover, it helps customers know who to contact 
in the event they have questions; 
Components of principle: Establish management review and approval 
process at the functional or activity level that ensures appropriate 
tracking and use of funds; 
Example: A routine review process exists to ensure proper execution of 
transactions and events. 

Key principle: Ensure self-sufficiency by recovering the
agency’s actual costs; 
Description: Transparent and equitable pricing methodologies allow 
agencies to ensure that rates charged recover agencies actual costs and 
reflect customers service usage. If customers understand how rates are 
determined or changed including the assumptions used, customers can 
better anticipate potential changes to those assumptions, identify 
their effect on costs, and incorporate that information into budget 
plans. A management review process can help to ensure the methodology 
is applied consistently over time and provides a forum to inform 
customers of decisions and discuss as needed; 
Components of principle: Establish transparent and equitable pricing 
methodology; 
Example: Published price sheets for services are readily available. 
Documentation of pricing formulas supports equitable distribution of 
costs. 

Key principle: Ensure self-sufficiency by recovering the
agency’s actual costs; 
Description: Transparent and equitable pricing methodologies allow 
agencies to ensure that rates charged recover agencies actual costs and 
reflect customers service usage. If customers understand how rates are 
determined or changed including the assumptions used, customers can 
better anticipate potential changes to those assumptions, identify 
their effect on costs, and incorporate that information into budget 
plans. A management review process can help to ensure the methodology 
is applied consistently over time and provides a forum to inform 
customers of decisions and discuss as needed; 
Components of principle: Set rates to cover agency’s actual costs of 
providing service; 
Example: Pricing methodology and accompanying process ensures that, in 
aggregate, charges recover the actual costs of operations. 

Key principle: Ensure self-sufficiency by recovering the
agency’s actual costs; 
Description: Transparent and equitable pricing methodologies allow 
agencies to ensure that rates charged recover agencies actual costs and 
reflect customers service usage. If customers understand how rates are 
determined or changed including the assumptions used, customers can 
better anticipate potential changes to those assumptions, identify 
their effect on costs, and incorporate that information into budget 
plans. A management review process can help to ensure the methodology 
is applied consistently over time and provides a forum to inform 
customers of decisions and discuss as needed; 
Components of principle: Establish management review process for rate-
setting; 
Example: Management review process allows fund managers to receive and 
incorporate feedback from customers. Discussions with customers confirm 
and understanding of the charges that they are viewed as transparent 
and equitable. 

Key principle: Measure performance; 
Description: Performance management goals and measures are important 
management tools applicable to all operations of an agency, including 
the program, project, or activity level. Performance measures and goals 
could include targets that assess fund managers' responsiveness to 
customer inquiries, the consistent in the application of the funds' 
pricing or rate-setting methodology, the reliability of cost 
information, and the billing error rates. Performance measures that are 
aligned with strategic goals can be used to evaluate whether and, if 
so, how WCF activities are contributing to the achievement of agency 
goals. A management review process comparing expected to actual 
performance allows agencies to review progress towards goals and 
potentially identify ways to improve performance; 
Components of principle: Establish performance measures and goals; 
Example: Performance indicators and metrics for WCF management (not 
just for the services provided) are documented. 

Key principle: Measure performance; 
Description: Performance management goals and measures are important 
management tools applicable to all operations of an agency, including 
the program, project, or activity level. Performance measures and goals 
could include targets that assess fund managers'' responsiveness to 
customer inquiries, the consistent in the application of the funds' 
pricing or rate-setting methodology, the reliability of cost 
information, and the billing error rates. Performance measures that are 
aligned with strategic goals can be used to evaluate whether and, if 
so, how WCF activities are contributing to the achievement of agency 
goals. A management review process comparing expected to actual 
performance allows agencies to review progress towards goals and 
potentially identify ways to improve performance; 
Components of principle: Align performance measures with strategic 
goals; 
Example: Indicators or metrics to measure outputs and outcomes are 
aligned with strategic goals and WCF priorities. 

Key principle: Measure performance; 
Description: Performance management goals and measures are important 
management tools applicable to all operations of an agency, including 
the program, project, or activity level. Performance measures and goals 
could include targets that assess fund managers'' responsiveness to 
customer inquiries, the consistent in the application of the funds' 
pricing or rate-setting methodology, the reliability of cost 
information, and the billing error rates. Performance measures that are 
aligned with strategic goals can be used to evaluate whether and, if 
so, how WCF activities are contributing to the achievement of agency 
goals. A management review process comparing expected to actual 
performance allows agencies to review progress towards goals and 
potentially identify ways to improve performance; 
Components of principle: Establish management review of WCF 
performance; 
Example: WCF managers regularly compare actual and performance with 
planned or expected results and make improvements as appropriate. In 
addition, performance results are periodically benchmarked against 
standards or "best in class" in a specific activity. 

Key principle: Build in flexibility to obtain customer
input and meet customer needs; 
Description: Opportunities for customers to provide input about WCF 
services, or voice concerns about needs, in a timely manner enable 
agencies to regularly asses whether customer needs are being met or 
have changed. This also enables agencies to prioritize customer demands 
and use resources most effectively, enabling them to adjust WCF 
capacity up or down as business rises or falls; 
Components of principle: Communicate with customers regularly and in a 
timely manner; 
Example: Established forum, routine meetings and/or surveys solicit 
information on customer needs and satisfaction with WCF performance. 

Key principle: Build in flexibility to obtain customer
input and meet customer needs; 
Description: Opportunities for customers to provide input about WCF 
services, or voice concerns about needs, in a timely manner enable 
agencies to regularly asses whether customer needs are being met or 
have changed. This also enables agencies to prioritize customer demands 
and use resources most effectively, enabling them to adjust WCF 
capacity up or down as business rises or falls; 
Components of principle: Develop process to assess resources needed to 
meet changes in customer demand; 
Example: Established communication channels regularly and actively seek 
information on changes in customer demand and asses the resources 
needed to accommodate those changes. 

Key principle: Build in flexibility to obtain customer
input and meet customer needs; 
Description: Opportunities for customers to provide input about WCF 
services, or voice concerns about needs, in a timely manner enable 
agencies to regularly asses whether customer needs are being met or 
have changed. This also enables agencies to prioritize customer demands 
and use resources most effectively, enabling them to adjust WCF 
capacity up or down as business rises or falls; 
Components of principle: Establish process to prioritize requests for 
services; 
Example: Established management review process that allows for trade-
off decisions to prioritize and shift limited resources needed to 
accommodate changes in demand across the organization. 

Source: GAO analysis. 

[End of figure] 

Principle 1: Clearly Delineate Roles and Responsibilities: 

Agencies' Guidance Does Not Identify Roles and Responsibilities of All 
Key Personnel: 

The responsibility for managing and overseeing aspects of the Commerce 
Departmental and Census WCFs is segregated across a number of offices 
and entities, thus minimizing the risk of error in fund management. 
However, neither agency's WCF guidance includes complete information on 
the roles and responsibilities of all key personnel. 

The Commerce Department's Office of Executive Budgeting has created a 
working environment that promotes communication, according to customers 
and service providers. This has resulted in a clear understanding among 
Commerce Departmental WCF managers, service providers, and customers 
about the roles and responsibilities of key personnel who manage the 
Commerce Departmental WCF. Customers and service providers we 
interviewed said that OEB is where they go to get answers or raise 
concerns. In addition, customers and service providers said they 
communicate directly with each other or through OEB about services they 
receive and rates charged. Service providers expressed appreciation for 
OEB's role in facilitating and coordinating regular communication 
between the service providers and customers. For example: 

* two of the four service providers said they interact with OEB on a 
daily basis, and: 

* all four service providers said that communication occurs on at least 
a monthly or quarterly basis through meetings or status reports. 

However, while the Commerce Departmental WCF handbook includes the 
roles and responsibilities of many key personnel and review groups 
involved with fund management, it leaves out information on the cross-
departmental role of the Commerce CFO Council, which is comprised of 
the CFOs from each of Commerce's bureaus and has an important role 
regarding increases or changes to the WCF. The absence of this entity 
from the handbook results in an incomplete reflection of the process 
and a missed opportunity to promote understanding by new staff and 
customers. 

In contrast to the centralized management of the Commerce Departmental 
WCF, management responsibilities for the Census WCF are delegated 
across several divisions including the Census Budget, Finance, and 
Acquisition Divisions. Although decentralization provides segregation 
of duties, Census does not have a formal process to coordinate and 
consolidate information managed by these disparate divisions to provide 
a corporate view of the WCF. In addition, information about the roles 
and responsibilities of Census management is incomplete, spread across 
three documents, and contains varying levels of detail and clarity. For 
example, the Census WCF Manual lists key personnel responsible for 
management of the WCF but does not describe their duties and 
responsibilities or provide specific contact information. This limits 
the usefulness of the guidance for bureau staff, customers, and other 
stakeholders. For example, one of the Census WCF's larger customers we 
interviewed was unsure who to speak with about questions relating to 
service needs (e.g., the level of service to expect and the wait times 
before receiving services) and suggested that the Census WCF develop 
guidelines about service needs and expectations. 

Commerce Business System Does Not Facilitate Appropriate Tracking and 
Use of Funds: 

The Commerce Business System (CBS), which is the financial system used 
throughout most of Commerce, does not provide a mechanism to record the 
period of availability of appropriations[Footnote 10] advanced from 
customer agencies. The Commerce Department advised us that both WCFs 
accept advances or reimbursements. When customers pay in advance, those 
advances have not yet been "earned"[Footnote 11] in performance of an 
agreed-upon service and still retain the period of availability from 
the original appropriation.[Footnote 12] If the providing agency were 
to obligate against advanced funds after the appropriation account 
closes, the customer agency would be required to transfer currently 
available funds to the WCF. If the customer does not have such funds 
available,[Footnote 13] they could be exposed to possible Anti-
Deficiency Act violations.[Footnote 14] Thus, to appropriately manage 
the use of funds, agencies need a way to track whether funds remain 
available for purposes of the interagency agreement when it bills 
against the advance. 

Similar to what we found in our prior work at NIST, Census tracks 
customer funds by the period of performance, which may not always 
coincide with the availability of the funds. Although customer agencies 
bear ultimate responsibility for proper use of their funds, we have 
previously reported that the performing agency shares responsibility 
with its customer agencies to ensure the proper use of federal funds 
when entering into interagency agreements.[Footnote 15] Census 
officials can verify the availability of advanced funds through the 
Treasury Account Symbol (TAS);[Footnote 16] however, TAS is not 
electronically captured in CBS. Unless CBS is updated to include a 
mechanism for tracking the availability of funds, the performing agency 
cannot ensure that funds are legally available when it bills against 
the advances. This is an indication of a potential internal control 
weakness over resources and, as mentioned above, creates a risk that 
customer agencies may incur an Anti-Deficiency Act violation. 

Principle 2: Ensure Self-sufficiency by Recovering the Agency's Actual 
Costs: 

Commerce Has a Transparent Process for Ensuring Recovery of Actual 
Costs: 

According to service providers and customers, the rate-setting 
processes for the Commerce Departmental WCF are transparent, clearly 
coordinated, and designed to recover annual actual costs. For example, 
the meetings of the Commerce CFO Council--which is comprised of CFOs 
from each of the Commerce Department's bureaus--provide a regular 
source of information on the status of funding recommendations to 
Commerce's CFO. In addition, the algorithm review group and OEB review 
rates charged at least annually to determine how much each customer 
bureau will pay into the Commerce Departmental WCF. These rates are 
based on algorithms that include variables such as prior year actual 
costs associated with customers' service usage. For example, when 
determining rates for building maintenance, one important variable is 
the square footage of the customer office space. Similarly, when 
determining rates for human resource management services, the number of 
full-time equivalents is an important variable. This rate-setting 
process, including the method for setting and distributing charges 
among users, is clearly explained in the Commerce Departmental WCF 
handbook. Moreover, Commerce customers said they understood how rates 
were determined and were satisfied with the amount of input they had in 
the process. Managers of the Commerce Departmental WCF said that their 
goal each year is to set rates that cover annual WCF costs and maintain 
at least the same level of services as the prior year. OEB officials 
said that the WCF has a limited number of significant cost increases, 
so a large carryover balance is not needed to sustain the fund. 

Census' Process to Recover Actual Costs Could Be More Transparent: 

The Census WCF is also designed to recover actual costs and bases its 
M&A service rates on algorithms linked to expected service usage. In 
contrast to the Commerce Departmental WCF, managers of the Census WCF 
maintain an operating reserve to help keep rates stable throughout the 
decennial census cycle. The Census WCF charges rates that are higher 
than needed earlier in the decennial cycle to break even later in the 
decennial cycle. Information about how rates are charged and costs 
distributed is incomplete and dispersed across three documents. Census 
customers we spoke with had mixed responses about how M&A costs are 
determined. For example, five of the seven customers we spoke with said 
Census informed them of the charges in general terms but did not 
describe how the individual costs that make up the total M&A costs are 
determined. However, the customers provided no detail about their 
efforts to obtain such information from Census. Nonetheless, the lack 
of clarity in how M&A costs are determined makes it difficult for 
customers to challenge rates or suggest improvements. A recent Census 
task force report[Footnote 17] on cost-saving opportunities related to 
survey work performed for other federal agencies found that no one 
Census division had authority to oversee and manage the allocation of 
resources or the timing of delivering services to any one customer. 
This report recommended that Census provide greater details on survey 
costs and establish a "single point of authority" for communicating 
with customers. 

Both Commerce and Census Have a Management Review Process, but Census' 
Process Could Be Improved: 

Both Commerce and Census WCFs have a management review process that 
examines how rates are set. However, the level of transparency differs 
between the two organizations. For example, each month OEB creates and 
updates a "status of funds" document that tracks available funding in 
the Commerce Departmental WCF throughout the fiscal year. Commerce 
officials said OEB uses this document to regularly monitor the WCF and 
the document is shared with the Commerce CFO each month. In addition, 
OEB reconciles actual obligations with estimates to identify and 
investigate variances of 10 percent or more. The service providers meet 
quarterly with OEB to review budget status and any changes in customer 
service needs. This process is also documented in the Commerce WCF 
handbook and helps ensure that rates recover the agency's actual costs. 

In contrast, Census' WCF reconciliation and review process lacks 
transparency. Census provides a fragmented and limited description of 
how it sets rates and there is no formal process to communicate with 
customers. According to Census officials, the rates for the M&A 
services are reviewed annually and the costs of the survey services are 
reconciled when a project concludes. However, two of the three Census 
WCF internal customers said they have limited discussions and input 
with Census WCF managers about how rates were determined. Moreover, it 
is unclear what information is provided, or when, to senior Census 
management (e.g., Census' CFO). Documentation provided by Census 
officials did not show what assumptions were used to set rates, whether 
they were applied consistently, and if actual costs are fully 
recovered. Although the Census WCF is subject to periodic reviews 
conducted by the Budget Division to compare revenues generated with the 
costs captured, it does not include further details on how this is done 
or with whom the information is shared. Census officials said the WCF 
is discussed during quarterly budget review meetings with senior 
management. However, the document that Census officials shared with us, 
which is used to explain the components of the WCF balance, includes 
amounts only related to the Cost Allocation component. Without 
transparent processes for reviewing and updating the service rates, 
Census misses the opportunity to assure customers and other 
stakeholders that rates charged are set fairly and to receive 
suggestions from stakeholders on potential improvements.[Footnote 18] 

Principle 3: Measure Performance: 

Both WCFs Could Benefit from Performance Measures to Assess Operational 
Effectiveness: 

OEB has processes in place that help it manage the operations of the 
Commerce Departmental WCF. For example: 

* A "status of funds" report is updated monthly and provided to 
Commerce's CFO. This report helps WCF managers track the remaining 
balance of customers' funds to pay for WCF services. 

* Variances of 10 percent or more in the Commerce Departmental WCF's 
estimated and actual obligations are investigated to obtain 
justification. In addition, OEB meets quarterly with the director of 
each office to review the current status of the organization's budget. 

* Customers are surveyed annually about the quality of OEB's assistance 
and written guidance for the services OEB provides. However, this 
survey asks broad questions that are not targeted to a specific 
activity or level of performance. For example, the only references to 
the Commerce Departmental WCF are general questions about customer 
interactions with OEB staff and whether the Commerce WCF handbook is 
useful. 

While OEB finds these processes helpful in day-to-day management of WCF 
activities--such as tracking available balances of customer funds--it 
does not define these processes as measures to assess WCF performance. 
We believe that Commerce could use these processes as a starting point 
to determine what specific measures would be helpful to continuously 
improve WCF management. 

As part of its strategic plan, Commerce outlined departmentwide 
strategic goals and performance measures in its "balanced scorecard 
approach."[Footnote 19] The offices that provide services supported 
through the Commerce Departmental and Census WCFs are assessed as part 
of this approach, but currently this does not include measures to 
assess how the WCFs are operating or if they could each function better 
as an entity. 

Measures that are specific to WCF activities allow fund managers to 
assess the fund's operational effectiveness. However, Census lacks 
operational performance measures to show how it is managing the WCF. 
This is important for program efficiency and effectiveness and to 
pinpoint improvement opportunities. The departmental strategic plan may 
not necessarily need to specify the Census WCF; however, all operations 
should have some type of performance measures. While the Budget 
Division solicited performance feedback through periodic customer 
satisfaction surveys,[Footnote 20] the survey does not include a 
reference to the Census WCF. For example, the survey posed a number of 
questions about the work performance of budget staff but did not ask 
specific questions about the budget services provided through the 
Census WCF. This raises concern because the Budget Division has the 
sole responsibility of determining Census WCF spending allocations for 
all participating divisions. Further, Census WCF managers could not 
provide any examples of fund-specific performance measures. 

Opportunities Exist for Management to Potentially Consolidate WCF 
Services: 

Although the Commerce Departmental and Census WCFs are intended to 
achieve economies of scale by supporting services and projects that are 
performed more advantageously when centralized, both WCFs support 
similar M&A services that could potentially be supported by one WCF. 
Officials at Commerce and Census were unable to clearly explain why 
each WCF provides the same or similar services, or why these services 
could not be consolidated. For example, both the Commerce Departmental 
and Census WCFs support a range of space management, travel, and 
training services for staff, as well as other personnel-related 
activities. These are potential areas that could be consolidated. In 
addition, by establishing WCF-specific performance measures, fund 
managers could benchmark or compare fund performance, which would be 
useful in identifying improvement opportunities and deciding whether or 
not to consolidate services. 

Principle 4: Build in Flexibility to Obtain Customer Input and Meet 
Customer Needs: 

Both WCFs Regularly Obtain Customer Input and Allow Some Flexibility to 
Adjust to Customer Needs, but Challenges Exist: 

In general, customers we interviewed said they had regular and ongoing 
interactions with fund managers or service providers. Commerce 
Departmental customers said they communicate regularly about the type 
and amount of services received and rates charged. Census customer 
concerns about overhead costs initiated the recent Census task force 
report previously described. As a result of the report findings, Census 
made several rate changes. Also in response to customer input, the 
Census Bureau recently decided to close six field offices. 

The Commerce CFO Council actively seeks WCF managers' involvement in 
setting customer priorities and addressing customer needs. The council 
meets to discuss individual bureau requests and recommends final 
allocations to Commerce's CFO, including identifying any potential need 
to shift funds across programs. When prioritizing customer demand, 
Commerce Departmental WCF managers also have to incorporate the 
statutory cap that limits the amount NOAA pays into the Commerce 
Departmental WCF.[Footnote 21] Because fund managers strive to ensure 
self-sufficiency of the WCF and equitably distribute costs across 
customers, this cap limits the amount other bureaus pay into the 
Commerce Departmental WCF and thus the level of services that can be 
supported for all customers. As a result, Commerce Departmental WCF 
managers in the past have had to propose reductions to services to 
compensate for the NOAA cap and still provide needed services. When the 
needs of customers exceed the capacity of the Commerce Departmental 
WCF, the department and the customer enter into a memorandum of 
understanding (MOU), outside of the standard suite of services offered 
through the WCF. However, this additional process somewhat works 
against the efficiencies that WCFs are intended to provide as WCF 
managers must rely on a separate mechanism to provide the same type, 
but a higher level, of service to customers. 

Although the Commerce Departmental WCF carries over some balances, the 
NOAA cap's effective limit on revenues hinders the ability to build a 
reserve. During fiscal years 2001 through 2010, the Commerce 
Departmental WCF carryover balance ranged from $3 million to $13 
million. Census uses its operating reserve to maintain price stability 
for customers throughout the decennial cycle. During fiscal years 2001 
through 2010, the Census WCF carryover balance ranged from $21 million 
to $430 million as reported in the President's budget. According to 
Census officials, the operating reserve is a portion of the Census WCF 
carryover balance. In fiscal year 2010, they estimated the amount of 
the operating reserve ranged from $45 million to $75 million. However, 
they did not provide documentation to support this range. 

In certain cases, Census also provides separate services to customers 
outside the WCF's standard offerings. Census' process to meet changes 
in customer demand is designed to address the fluctuating costs of 
providing services to internal customers during the decennial cycle 
while equitably distributing costs among all internal customers. For 
example, in the peak years of the decennial cycle, the decennial 
program requires such an increased level of M&A services to support 
temporary staff that not all of those costs can be supported by the WCF 
reserve without undermining the goal of equitable cost distribution 
among customers. Therefore, Census directly bills these additional 
costs to the decennial program. 

Conclusions: 

WCFs provide agencies with an opportunity to operate more efficiently 
by consolidating services and creating incentives for customers and 
managers to exercise cost control and economic restraint. Given the 
fiscal pressures facing the federal government, consolidating 
operations could potentially achieve cost savings and help agencies 
provide more efficient and effective services. Agencies can maximize 
the potential of these opportunities by following four key WCF 
operating principles. Incorporating these principles in written 
guidance could promote consistent application, provide a baseline for 
officials to assess and improve management processes, and serve as an 
information tool for customers, program managers, stakeholders, and 
reviewers. 

Clear guidance on the roles and responsibilities of key personnel for 
managing the WCF promotes understanding of who will be held 
accountable, helps ensure that related responsibilities are 
coordinated, and reduces the risk that funds will be mismanaged. While 
the roles and responsibilities of the Commerce Departmental WCF's 
management are well understood by customers, the guidance does not 
include complete information about all key participants. Because Census 
WCF guidance is fragmented and incomplete, it lacks clarity and is of 
limited use for employees and customers. Additionally, Census does not 
have a process to facilitate coordination among key WCF personnel to 
ensure appropriate tracking of funds. 

To appropriately manage the use of funds advanced from customers for 
projects spanning multiple fiscal years, performing agencies need a way 
to track whether funds advanced remain available to bill against. Both 
Commerce and Census use the Commerce Business System (CBS) to manage 
funds, but the system does not track a key element to confirm that 
funds advanced in support of an interagency agreement are available to 
cover the costs of performance. Modifying CBS would help ensure that 
customer funds are legally available and avoid potential Anti-
Deficiency Act violations for the customer agencies. A transparent rate-
setting process helps assure that customers are being charged 
accurately and fairly for services supported through the WCF. Commerce 
clearly explains its rate-setting process and customers feel they have 
sufficient input on the process. Census' rate-setting process is less 
transparent, which limits the ability of fund managers to confirm that 
the WCF is self-sufficient and makes it difficult for customers to make 
appeals. 

WCF managers can better foster a results-oriented environment focused 
on continuous improvement by establishing performance measures and 
goals for WCF operations, ensuring those performance measures and goals 
align with the agency's strategic goals, and by establishing a 
management review process to track WCF performance. The purpose of the 
WCFs is to achieve economies of scale through shared services. However, 
the lack of performance measures makes it difficult to know whether 
these economies are being achieved. Moreover, WCF-specific performance 
information and a corresponding management review process could be used 
to hold fund managers accountable for achieving the efficiencies that 
WCFs were designed to produce. Furthermore, the two WCFs may provide 
services in overlapping areas, which warrants further examination. 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

We make seven recommendations to the Secretary of Commerce. 

To improve the management of the Commerce Departmental Working Capital 
Fund, we recommend that the Secretary of Commerce take the following 
actions: 

5. Update the Commerce Departmental WCF handbook to include a 
description of the Commerce CFO Council and its roles and 
responsibilities. 

6. To meet its responsibilities in ensuring the proper use of federal 
funds and to help guard against the use of canceled appropriations, 
revise its financial systems to electronically record and monitor the 
period of availability of appropriations advanced to Commerce and its 
bureaus from client agencies. 

7. Establish performance measures to assess performance of WCF 
operations, such as billing error rates, and determine what additional 
measures would be helpful to improve WCF management. 

8. Coordinate with the Census Bureau to examine the M&A services 
provided through both WCFs to determine what services might be 
consolidated. 

To improve the management of the Census Bureau Working Capital Fund, we 
recommend that the Secretary of Commerce require the Under Secretary 
for Economic Affairs as well as the Census Director to take the 
following actions: 

9. Develop guidance that clarifies and consolidates existing WCF 
policies to include: a.roles and responsibilities of key personnel 
responsible for WCF management, and: 

b.a process to coordinate information managed by disparate divisions to 
provide an overarching view of the WCF and ensure the appropriate 
tracking of funds. 

10. Include a more detailed explanation in WCF guidance on the rate-
setting process for all components of the fund, such as an explanation 
of how rates are determined and costs distributed, and establish a 
formal process similar to the Departmental WCF's process to communicate 
with customers. 

11. Establish performance measures to assess performance of WCF 
operations and determine what would be helpful to improve WCF 
management. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

We provided a draft of this report to the Secretary of the Department 
of Commerce for official review and comment. In his letter that is 
reprinted in appendix II, the Secretary agreed with our findings and 
recommendations and has directed the managers of both the Commerce 
Departmental WCF and the Census Bureau WCF to begin implementing our 
recommendations. Commerce and Census provided technical comments that 
were incorporated into the report as appropriate. We also provided 
portions of the report to the customer agencies with which we met. None 
of these customer agencies offered any technical comments. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Commerce, the 
Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, and the Director of the Census 
Bureau. We are also sending copies to the appropriate congressional 
Committees. In addition, the report is available at no charge on GAO's 
website at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact Denise M. Fantone at (202) 512-6806 or fantoned@gao.gov. 
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public 
Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who 
made major contributions to this report are listed in appendix III. 

Signed by: 

Denise M. Fantone Director, Strategic Issues: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Expanded Version of WCF Key Operating Principles: 

Table 2: WCF Key Operating Principles: 

Principle: Clearly delineate roles and responsibilities: Appropriate 
delineation of roles and responsibilities promotes a clear 
understanding of who will be held accountable for specific tasks or 
duties, such as authorizing and reviewing transactions, implementing 
controls over WCF management, and helping ensure that related 
responsibilities are coordinated. In addition, this reduces the risk of 
mismanaged funds and tasks or functions "falling through the cracks." 
Moreover, it helps customers know who to contact in the event they have 
questions; 
Components of principle: Segregate duties to reduce error or fraud; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Written roles and 
responsibilities specify how key duties and responsibilities are 
divided across multiple individuals/offices and are subject to a 
process of checks and balances. This should include separating 
responsibilities for authorizing transactions, processing and recording 
them, and reviewing the transactions. 

Principle: Clearly delineate roles and responsibilities: Appropriate 
delineation of roles and responsibilities promotes a clear 
understanding of who will be held accountable for specific tasks or 
duties, such as authorizing and reviewing transactions, implementing 
controls over WCF management, and helping ensure that related 
responsibilities are coordinated. In addition, this reduces the risk of 
mismanaged funds and tasks or functions "falling through the cracks." 
Moreover, it helps customers know who to contact in the event they have 
questions; 
Components of principle: Define key areas of authority and 
responsibility; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Written description of all 
WCF roles and responsibilities in an accessible format such as a fund 
manual. Discussions with providers and clients confirm a clear 
understanding. 

Principle: Clearly delineate roles and responsibilities: Appropriate 
delineation of roles and responsibilities promotes a clear 
understanding of who will be held accountable for specific tasks or 
duties, such as authorizing and reviewing transactions, implementing 
controls over WCF management, and helping ensure that related 
responsibilities are coordinated. In addition, this reduces the risk of 
mismanaged funds and tasks or functions "falling through the cracks." 
Moreover, it helps customers know who to contact in the event they have 
questions; 
Components of principle: Establish management review and approval 
process at the functional or activity level that ensures appropriate 
tracking and use of funds; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: A routine review process 
exists to ensure proper execution of transactions and events. 

Principle: Ensure self-sufficiency by recovering the agency's actual 
costs: Transparent and equitable pricing methodologies allow agencies 
to ensure that rates charged recover agencies' actual costs and reflect 
customers' service usage. If customers understand how rates are 
determined or changed including the assumptions used, customers can 
better anticipate potential changes to those assumptions, identify 
their effect on costs, and incorporate that information into budget 
plans. A management review process can help to ensure the methodology 
is applied consistently over time and provides a forum to inform 
customers of decisions and discuss as needed; 
Components of principle: Establish transparent and equitable pricing 
methodology; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Published price sheets for 
services are readily available. Documentation of pricing formulas 
supports equitable distribution of costs. 

Principle: Ensure self-sufficiency by recovering the agency's actual 
costs: Transparent and equitable pricing methodologies allow agencies 
to ensure that rates charged recover agencies' actual costs and reflect 
customers' service usage. If customers understand how rates are 
determined or changed including the assumptions used, customers can 
better anticipate potential changes to those assumptions, identify 
their effect on costs, and incorporate that information into budget 
plans. A management review process can help to ensure the methodology 
is applied consistently over time and provides a forum to inform 
customers of decisions and discuss as needed; 
Components of principle: Set rates to cover agency's actual costs of 
providing service; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Pricing methodology and 
accompanying process ensures that, in aggregate, charges recover the 
actual costs of operations. 

Principle: Ensure self-sufficiency by recovering the agency's actual 
costs: Transparent and equitable pricing methodologies allow agencies 
to ensure that rates charged recover agencies' actual costs and reflect 
customers' service usage. If customers understand how rates are 
determined or changed including the assumptions used, customers can 
better anticipate potential changes to those assumptions, identify 
their effect on costs, and incorporate that information into budget 
plans. A management review process can help to ensure the methodology 
is applied consistently over time and provides a forum to inform 
customers of decisions and discuss as needed; 
Components of principle: Establish management review for rate-setting; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Management review process 
allows fund managers to receive and incorporate feedback from 
customers. Discussions with customers confirm an understanding of the 
charges and that they are viewed as transparent and equitable. 

Principle: Measure performance: Performance goals and measures are 
important management tools applicable to all operations of an agency, 
including the program, project, or activity level. Performance measures 
and goals could include targets that assess fund managers' 
responsiveness to customer inquiries, the consistency in the 
application of the funds' rate-
setting methodology, the reliability of cost information, and the 
billing error rates. Performance measures that are aligned with 
strategic goals can be used to evaluate whether, and if so how, WCF 
activities are contributing to the achievement of agency goals. A 
management review process comparing expected to actual performance 
allows agencies to review progress towards goals and potentially 
identify ways to improve performance; 
Components of principle: Establish performance measures and goals; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Performance indicators and 
metrics for WCF management (not just for the services provided) are 
documented. 

Principle: Measure performance: Performance goals and measures are 
important management tools applicable to all operations of an agency, 
including the program, project, or activity level. Performance measures 
and goals could include targets that assess fund managers' 
responsiveness to customer inquiries, the consistency in the 
application of the funds' rate-
setting methodology, the reliability of cost information, and the 
billing error rates. Performance measures that are aligned with 
strategic goals can be used to evaluate whether, and if so how, WCF 
activities are contributing to the achievement of agency goals. A 
management review process comparing expected to actual performance 
allows agencies to review progress towards goals and potentially 
identify ways to improve performance; 
Components of principle: Align performance measures with strategic 
goals; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Indicators or metrics to 
measure outputs and outcomes are aligned with strategic goals and WCF 
priorities. 

Principle: Measure performance: Performance goals and measures are 
important management tools applicable to all operations of an agency, 
including the program, project, or activity level. Performance measures 
and goals could include targets that assess fund managers' 
responsiveness to customer inquiries, the consistency in the 
application of the funds' rate-
setting methodology, the reliability of cost information, and the 
billing error rates. Performance measures that are aligned with 
strategic goals can be used to evaluate whether, and if so how, WCF 
activities are contributing to the achievement of agency goals. A 
management review process comparing expected to actual performance 
allows agencies to review progress towards goals and potentially 
identify ways to improve performance; 
Components of principle: Establish management review of WCF 
performance; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: WCF managers regularly 
compare actual performance with planned or expected results and make 
improvements as appropriate. In addition, performance results are 
periodically benchmarked against standards or "best in class" in a 
specific activity. 

Principle: Build in flexibility to obtain customer input and meet 
customer needs: Opportunities for customers to provide input about WCF 
services, or voice concerns about needs, in a timely manner enable 
agencies to regularly assess whether customer needs are being met or 
have changed. This also enables agencies to prioritize customer demands 
and use resources most effectively, enabling them to adjust WCF 
capacity up or down as business rises or falls; 
Components of principle: Communicate with customers regularly and 
timely; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Established forum, routine 
meetings, and/or surveys solicit information on customer needs and 
satisfaction with WCF performance. 

Principle: Build in flexibility to obtain customer input and meet 
customer needs: Opportunities for customers to provide input about WCF 
services, or voice concerns about needs, in a timely manner enable 
agencies to regularly assess whether customer needs are being met or 
have changed. This also enables agencies to prioritize customer demands 
and use resources most effectively, enabling them to adjust WCF 
capacity up or down as business rises or falls; 
Components of principle: Develop process to assess resources needed to 
meet changes in customer demand; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Established communication 
channels regularly and actively seek information on changes in customer 
demand and assess the resources needed to accommodate those changes. 

Principle: Build in flexibility to obtain customer input and meet 
customer needs: Opportunities for customers to provide input about WCF 
services, or voice concerns about needs, in a timely manner enable 
agencies to regularly assess whether customer needs are being met or 
have changed. This also enables agencies to prioritize customer demands 
and use resources most effectively, enabling them to adjust WCF 
capacity up or down as business rises or falls; 
Components of principle: Establish process to prioritize requests for 
services; 
Examples of evidence supporting principle: Established management 
review process that allows for trade-off decisions to prioritize and 
shift limited resources needed to accommodate changes in demand across 
the organization. 

Source: GAO analysis. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Commerce: 

United States Department of Commerce: 
The Secretary of Commerce: 
Washington, D.C. 20230: 

November 4, 2011: 

Ms. Denise Fantone: 
Director, Strategic Issues: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Fantone: 

Thank you for providing us with the draft report titled 
"Intragovernmental Revolving Funds: Commerce Departmental and Census 
Working Capital Funds Should Better Reflect Key Operating Principles" 
(GAO-12-56). 

In this report, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reviews 
both the Departmental Management and Bureau of Census Working Capital 
Fund to asses whether these management funds are consistent with key 
operating principles for working capital funds. I agree with the 
overall findings and recommendations of your report. I have directed 
the management of the Departmental Working Capital Fund and the 
management of the Bureau of Census Working Capital Fund to begin 
implementing GAO's recommendation. 

Our specific technical comments relating to the text of the report are 
enclosed. We hope you tale these comments into consideration when 
issuing the final version of this report. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

John E. Byron: 

[End of section] 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO contact: 

Denise M. Fantone, (202) 512-6806 or fantoned@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, Carol M. Henn, Assistant 
Director and Leah Q. Nash, Analyst-in-Charge managed this assignment. 
Anna Chung, Elisabeth Crichton, Wati Kadzai, Margit Myers, and Amrita 
Sen made major contributions to this report. Tom Beall, Robert Gebhart, 
Felicia Lopez, and Jack Warner also made key contributions to this 
report. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] GAO, Intragovernmental Revolving Funds: NIST's Interagency 
Agreements and Workload Require Management Attention, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-41] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 20, 
2010). 

[2] GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1] 
(Washington, D.C.: November 1999); Federal Accounting Standards 
Advisory Board, Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards 4: 
Managerial Cost Accounting Standards and Concepts (Washington, D.C.: 
July 31, 1995); GAO, Budget Issues: Franchise Fund Pilot Review, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-1069] (Washington, D.C.: 
Aug. 22, 2003) and GAO, Government Performance: GPRA Modernization Act 
Provides Opportunities to Help Address Fiscal, Performance, and 
Management Challenges, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-
466T] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 16, 2011). 

[3] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-1069]. 

[4] The six IRFs are: (1) the Commerce Departmental WCF, (2) the 
Commerce Departmental Franchise Fund, (3) the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration's Damage Assessment and Restoration 
Revolving Fund, (4) the Census Bureau's WCF, (5) the National Technical 
Information Service's Revolving Fund, and (6) the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology's WCF. 

[5] See 15 U.S.C. § 1521 (establishing the U.S. Department of Commerce 
Working Capital Fund); and Pub. L. No.104-208, div. A, title II, § 210 
110 Stat. 3009-41 (Sept. 30, 1996) (establishing the Bureau of the 
Census Working Capital Fund). The Commerce Department advised us that 
both WCFs accept advances or reimbursements. 

[6] Federal customer agencies use Census' nationwide polling structure, 
expertise, and address lists, which would otherwise be uneconomical for 
them to replicate on their own. For example, Census supports HUD's 
American Housing Survey by gathering information on the size and 
composition of the housing inventory in the United States. 

[7] The Current Population Survey is a monthly survey of about 50,000 
households and is the primary source of information on labor force 
characteristics of the U.S. population. 

[8] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-466T]. 

[9] GAO, Managing for Results: Opportunities to Strengthen Agencies' 
Customer Service Efforts, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-
11-44] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 27, 2010). 

[10] An appropriation's period of availability refers to the period of 
time in which those funds are available for new obligations. 
Appropriations may be time-limited and therefore only available for 1, 
2, or more years, or they can be available for obligation without 
fiscal year limitation. Amounts in both funds are available without 
fiscal year limitation once earned. 

[11] Customer agency advances to WCFs cannot be earned until the 
providing agency begins work on the agreement and bills against the 
advance as work progresses. 

[12] Advances made to WCFs become no-year money and are available 
without fiscal year limitation when they enter the fund's corpus after 
being "earned." 

[13] Appropriations available for a definite period are canceled 5 
fiscal years after their period of availability for new obligations 
expires. See 31 U.S.C. 1552. 

[14] The Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. § 1341) prohibits, among other 
things, the making or authorizing of an obligation or expenditure from 
any appropriation in excess of the amount available in the 
appropriation. Obligating parties--in this case federal agency 
customers of the Census WCF--are responsible for complying with this 
act. See B-319349, June 4, 2010. 

[15] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-41]; See also B-
318046, July 7, 2009. 

[16] The TAS is a code assigned by the Department of the Treasury, in 
collaboration with OMB and the owner agency, to an individual 
appropriation, receipt, or other fund account. All financial 
transactions of the federal government are classified by TAS for 
reporting purposes. 

[17] Synthesis Report of the Survey Cost Savings Task Forces: U.S. 
Census Bureau Data Collection Cost Saving Opportunities in Federal 
Agency Sponsored Demographic Surveys (November 2010). 

[18] GAO, Federal User Fees: A Design Guide, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-386SP] (Washington, D.C.: May 29, 
2008). 

[19] The Commerce Secretary initiated the "balance scorecard approach" 
in 2010 to establish and maintain focus on the department's top 
priorities, to support related data-driven reviews to achieve them, and 
to emphasize that customer service, organizational excellence, and 
workforce excellence are prerequisites to the achievement of the 
department's programmatic goals. 

[20] Customers corroborated receiving surveys from other service 
providers, such as the Acquisition and Finance Divisions, but were 
unable to provide copies of these surveys. 

[21] Over the past several years, NOAA's appropriations included a 
statutory cap that has increased from $34 million in fiscal year 2006 
to $41.9 million in fiscal year 2010.

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
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 GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

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

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: