Transportation Research
Actions Needed to Improve Coordination and Evaluation of Research
Gao ID: GAO-03-500 May 1, 2003
The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) within the Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for coordinating and ensuring the evaluation of DOT research programs to promote the efficient use of departmental research funds, which in fiscal year 2002 totaled over $1 billion. RSPA is also responsible for conducting multimodal research that cuts across different modes of transportation. The House Committee on Appropriations directed GAO to examine RSPA's coordination and evaluation of research within DOT and the status of its own multimodal research.
RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements pertaining to the coordination of departmental research efforts. For example, while RSPA develops an annual plan and meets monthly with other DOT research officials, RSPA does not review the status of all DOT research activities. Thus, it cannot determine whether duplication of research efforts within DOT does or does not occur. Additionally, RSPA has not developed standards against which to measure its performance in coordinating research within DOT. Moreover, RSPA has not fully met all legislative and DOT requirements to measure research results and oversee research evaluations across DOT. RSPA officials cited a lack of ready information on DOT research activities budget constraints and a lack of authority over other DOT agencies as reasons why they served primarily an information-sharing role, rather than as an overseer and manager of the coordination and evaluation processes. Since 1999, RSPA has budgeted $37 million to conduct four major research programs with applicability to more than one mode of transportation--for example, using technology to improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions and transportation dependence on petroleum. According to the Associate Administrator for Innovation, Research, and Education, RSPA's current multimodal research programs are scheduled for completion by the end of fiscal year 2004 and have had a variety of positive results. However, RSPA does not have an evaluation process to systematically evaluate the results of its multimodal research programs.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:
Team:
Phone:
GAO-03-500, Transportation Research: Actions Needed to Improve Coordination and Evaluation of Research
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-500
entitled 'Transportation Research: Actions Needed to Improve
Coordination and Evaluation of Research' which was released on May 01,
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.
Report to the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives:
May 2003:
Transportation Research:
Actions Needed to Improve Coordination and Evaluation of Research:
GAO-03-500:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-03-500, a report to the Committee on Appropriations,
House of Representatives
Why GAO Did This Study:
The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) within the
Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for strategically
planning, coordinating and ensuring the evaluation of DOT research
programs to promote the efficient use of departmental research funds,
which in fiscal year 2002 totaled over $1 billion. RSPA is also
responsible for conducting multimodal research that cuts across
different modes of transportation. The House Committee on
Appropriations directed GAO to examine RSPA‘s coordination and
evaluation of research within DOT and the status of its own multimodal
research.
What GAO Found:
RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements
pertaining to the coordination of departmental research efforts. For
example, while RSPA develops an annual plan and meets monthly with
other DOT research officials, RSPA does not review the status of all
DOT research activities. Thus, it cannot determine whether duplication
of research efforts within DOT does or does not occur. Additionally,
RSPA has not developed standards against which to measure its
performance in coordinating research within DOT. Moreover, RSPA has
not fully met all legislative and DOT requirements to measure research
results and oversee research evaluations across DOT. RSPA officials
cited a lack of ready information on DOT research activities budget
constraints and a lack of authority over other DOT agencies as reasons
why they served primarily an information-sharing role, rather than as
an overseer and manager of the coordination and evaluation processes.
Extent to Which RSPA Meets Coordination and Evaluation Requirements:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Since 1999, RSPA has budgeted $37 million to conduct four major
research programs with applicability to more than one mode of
transportation”for example, using technology to improve energy
efficiency and reduce emissions and transportation dependence on
petroleum. According to the Associate Administrator for Innovation,
Research, and Education, RSPA‘s current multimodal research programs
are scheduled for completion by the end of fiscal year 2004 and have
had a variety of positive results. However, RSPA does not have an
evaluation process to systematically evaluate the results of its
multimodal research programs.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO is recommending that DOT and RSPA develop strategies to identify
potential research duplication and ensure that the results of all DOT
transportation research activities”including those conducted by RSPA”
are evaluated. Further, GAO recommended that RSPA assess the
effectiveness of its research coordination efforts by developing
appropriate performance measures.
DOT reviewed a draft of this report and generally agreed with its
contents but did not comment on the report‘s recommendations.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-500
To view the full report, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.
For more information, contact Kate Siggerud at (202) 512-2834 or
siggerudk@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All, Legislative or DOT Requirements for
Coordinating DOT Research Efforts:
RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All, Legislative or DOT Requirements to
Evaluate DOT Research:
RSPA Has Conducted Multimodal Research in Four Areas but Does Not Have
a Process to Systematically Evaluate Program
Results:
Conclusions:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four
Multimodal Programs Conducted by RSPA:
Tables:
Table 1: Information on and Status of Multimodal Research Programs
Conducted by RSPA from Fiscal Years 1999 to 2003:
Table 2: Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program:
Table 3: Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies
Program:
Table 4: Human-Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program:
Table 5: Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program:
Figures:
Figure 1: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT
Requirements for Coordinating DOT Research Efforts:
Figure 2: RSPA Funding Dedicated to Research and Development Planning
and Management Activities (Fiscal Years 1999-2003):
Figure 3: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT
Responsibilities for Evaluating DOT Research Efforts:
Figure 4: Electric Vehicle at a Recharging Station:
Figure 5: Satellite-based Photographic Image of U.S. Interstates 25 and
40 in Albuquerque, New Mexico:
Figure 6: Airline Pilots Participating in Fatigue Research:
Figure 7: Global Positioning Satellite:
Figure 8: RSPA's Multimodal Research Funding (Fiscal Years 1999-2003):
Abbreviations:
DOT : Department of Transportation:
FAA: Federal Aviation Administration:
FHWA: Federal Highway Administration:
FMCSA: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration :
FRA : Federal Railroad Administration:
FTA : Federal Transit Administration:
GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act of 1993:
MARAD: Maritime Administration:
NASA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration:
RSPA: Research and Special Programs Administration:
TEA-21: Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century:
TRB: Transportation Research Board:
TSA: Transportation Security Administration:
USCG: United States Coast Guard:
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. It may contain
copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. Permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce
copyrighted materials separately from GAO‘s product.
Letter May 1, 2003:
The Honorable C.W. Bill Young
Chairman
The Honorable David R. Obey
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Appropriations
House of Representatives:
In fiscal year 2002, the Department of Transportation's (DOT) research
and development budget totaled more than $1 billion. This sum supported
the many individual projects undertaken by the Federal Highway
Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the other
operating administrations that constitute DOT. This research is vital
to meeting the department's key transportation priorities, such as
increasing transportation safety, enhancing mobility for all Americans,
supporting the nation's economic growth, and protecting the
environment. The Congress has recognized the importance of coordinating
and evaluating research throughout DOT and established requirements in
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21ST Century to ensure that those
tasks are accomplished. In turn, the department has given
responsibility to the Research and Special Programs Administration's
Office of Innovation, Research, and Education (hereafter referred to as
RSPA) for coordinating, and ensuring the evaluation of, DOT research
programs to promote the efficient use of research funds. RSPA is
additionally responsible for conducting multimodal research--research
that applies to more than one mode of transportation--for the
department that contributes to the safe, effective, and efficient
transportation of people and goods.
In House Report 107-722, accompanying the DOT and Related Agencies
Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2003, the House Committee on
Appropriations, directed us to examine RSPA's role in coordinating
research activities and conducting multimodal research throughout the
department. Specifically, in subsequent discussions with Committee
staff, we agreed to address the following questions: (1) To what extent
has RSPA fulfilled requirements for coordinating DOT research efforts?
(2) To what extent has RSPA fulfilled requirements for evaluating
research within DOT? and (3) What types of multimodal research has RSPA
conducted since 1999, and what have been the results?
To address questions regarding RSPA's efforts to coordinate and
evaluate the department's research efforts, we examined pertinent
legislation, DOT policy guidance, and DOT performance reports and plans
as well as reports and documents provided by RSPA, including the
department's Research, Development, and Technology Plan. Although we
did not review the individual research programs and agendas of each DOT
modal administration, we reviewed external assessments conducted by us
and the National Research Council's Transportation Research Board
regarding RSPA's role and efforts in coordinating DOT
research.[Footnote 1] Further, we interviewed RSPA officials, including
RSPA's Associate Administrator for Innovation, Research, and Education
(hereafter Associate Administrator); officials from the Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts; and all of
the members of the department's Research and Technology Coordinating
Council (hereafter Coordinating Council), to discuss research
coordination efforts and identify potential improvements. At the time
of our review, the council was made up of 15 members representing the
department's Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation
Policy, Office of Intelligence and Security, Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Budget, Office of Intermodalism, United States Coast
Guard, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Transit Administration,
Maritime Administration, RSPA, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and Transportation
Security Administration.[Footnote 2] In addition, to determine the
types and status of multimodal research that RSPA conducted, we (1)
reviewed and analyzed RSPA budget data from fiscal years 1999 through
2003 and (2) reviewed RSPA's multimodal project plans agreements and
published project results for the same period. (One of RSPA's
multimodal research programs--the Transportation Infrastructure
Assurance Program--is also the subject of a separate GAO
review.)[Footnote 3]
We conducted our review from September 2002 through February 2003 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Results in Brief:
RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements for
coordinating departmental research efforts. To meet the requirements of
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21ST Century, RSPA developed an
annual surface transportation research and development plan and holds
monthly meetings of the department's Research and Technology
Coordinating Council to coordinate surface transportation research and
technology development activities. The council also provides a venue
for discussing research processes, procedures, and policies as well as
a forum for networking among the department's researchers to meet DOT
requirements for routinely sharing research information. However, RSPA
has not met all of its legislative and DOT requirements for
coordinating ongoing research efforts to avoid unnecessary duplication
of effort because it does not review all DOT research projects.
According to RSPA's Associate Administrator, RSPA has not reviewed all
DOT research projects to identify unnecessary duplication because (1)
RSPA does not have ready access to information on all research
activities across the department because efforts to implement a DOT-
wide computer-based research tracking system have stalled and (2) staff
and resources dedicated to research coordination activities have
declined. The Associate Administrator said that he did not believe that
unnecessary duplication of research projects occurred, and that even if
such duplication were identified, RSPA's limited authority within DOT
would hinder efforts to eliminate that duplication.
RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements for
evaluating research within DOT. The Secretary of Transportation
delegated responsibility to RSPA for measuring the results of federal
surface transportation research--a legislative requirement--and
overseeing and developing ways to improve research evaluations
throughout the department, which is a DOT requirement. Of these
requirements, RSPA partially meets one: it oversees research evaluation
by discussing the issue at Coordinating Council meetings. According to
RSPA officials, they do not measure the results of surface
transportation research throughout DOT because the operating
administrations perform their own evaluations and RSPA lacks the
resources needed to review the individual research evaluation efforts
of each of the operating administrations. Because RSPA does not oversee
specific research evaluation efforts, it cannot ensure that evaluations
are being conducted or assess the quality of DOT's operating
administrations' evaluations. Neither RSPA nor DOT has developed a
strategy to address the resource limitations cited by RSPA officials,
and our previous work indicates that more specific oversight is
warranted. For example, we have previously reported that the Federal
Highway Administration does not have an agencywide systematic process
to evaluate whether its research projects are achieving intended
results and does not generally use a peer review approach,[Footnote 4]
consistent with federal research best practices.[Footnote 5]
Since 1999, RSPA has conducted multimodal research in the following
four areas: using technology to improve energy efficiency, reduce
emissions, and reduce transportation dependence on petroleum; using
satellite images to improve transportation safety and disaster
planning; developing more effective means to reduce the fatigue of
drivers and pilots; and assessing key transportation systems'
vulnerabilities to damage from disasters or terrorist threats. RSPA
budgeted about $37 million to conduct these four multimodal research
programs from fiscal years 1999 through 2003. According to RSPA's
Associate Administrator, all four programs have resulted or will result
in significant contributions and improvements to the transportation
industry. For example, he said that research aimed at advanced vehicle
technologies has resulted in the testing and development of components
currently used in the production of commercially available hybrid
electrical vehicles. RSPA officials said they use expert or peer review
to assess their multimodal research process and status of their
research programs, an approach that is widely recognized as a research
evaluation best practice. However, we found that RSPA has not
established a systematic approach for using peer or expert review to
evaluate the results of all of its multimodal research programs. For
example, RSPA has no plans to evaluate the results of its
Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program. As a result, RSPA is
limited in its ability to determine the extent to which these programs
are achieving their intended goals.
This report contains recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation
and the Administrator of RSPA for actions to improve RSPA's ability to
meet its legislative and DOT requirements pertaining to research
coordination and evaluation. In commenting on this draft, DOT officials
generally agreed with our findings and provided technical comments that
we incorporated, as appropriate. They did not comment on the report's
recommendations.
Background:
RSPA has both legislative and departmental responsibilities for
coordinating and evaluating DOT's research and development programs,
which, in fiscal year 2002, amounted to about $1 billion. The
Transportation Equity Act for the 21ST Century (TEA-21)[Footnote 6]
made DOT responsible for establishing a strategic plan for surface
transportation research. The plan is to include a discussion of efforts
to coordinate federal surface transportation research and technology
development activities to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. It
also is to contain a description of program evaluations and a schedule
for future evaluations of DOT research projects, among other things.
DOT policy delegates the responsibility for meeting this and other
legislative mandates related to research and development activities to
RSPA's Associate Administrator as chair of the department's
Coordinating Council. Moreover, DOT policy requires RSPA's Associate
Administrator, through the Coordinating Council, to coordinate all
research activities by developing processes for sharing information
about research and technology and reviewing the status of all research
and technology projects throughout DOT.
RSPA's Office of Innovation, Research, and Education had nine full-time
employees and a budget of about $560,000 for fiscal year 2003. In
addition to coordination and evaluation duties, RSPA manages and
supports a variety of other programs for the department, including its
Technology Transfer and Technology Sharing Programs, Small Business
Innovation Research Program, and University Transportation Centers
Program.[Footnote 7] RSPA also conducts research on multimodal issues
that affect the U.S. transportation system as a whole in contrast to
the other operating administrations within DOT that focus on specific
sectors of the U.S. transportation system.[Footnote 8] In fiscal year
2003, RSPA conducted and managed four major multimodal research
programs. Participants in RSPA's multimodal research programs include
stakeholders from the departments' operating administrations; other
federal departments and agencies; state departments of transportation;
private and state universities; private-sector partners; and various
consortia.[Footnote 9] (See app. I for a listing of project
stakeholders and researchers involved in RSPA's multimodal research
programs.):
RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All, Legislative or DOT Requirements for
Coordinating DOT Research Efforts:
Although RSPA has developed an annual plan and taken other steps to
facilitate research coordination, it has not fully met legislative and
DOT requirements for coordinating departmental research. Figure 1
summarizes these requirements and the extent to which RSPA has met
them.
Figure 1: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT
Requirements for Coordinating DOT Research Efforts:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
RSPA Facilitates Research Coordination by Developing an Annual Plan and
Conducting Monthly Meetings:
RSPA has met its legislative requirement under TEA-21 to develop an
annual surface transportation research and technology development plan
to coordinate and document research efforts. The plan covers not only
surface transportation but also air and maritime. Now in its fourth
edition, the plan discusses state and local transportation research
activities; describes each operating administration's mission; and
conveys priorities for the department's research activities, including
identifying examples of research programs that are necessary to achieve
the department's strategic goals. According to the Associate
Administrator, the plan is an important resource for the department's
budget and program deployment processes and helps to avoid unnecessary
duplication of research among the operating administrations. In March
2000, the National Research Council, acting through the Transportation
Research Board (TRB), assessed DOT's strategic planning process,
including the first edition of its research plan, and generally
commended RSPA's efforts in coordinating the department's
research activities.[Footnote 10] In September 2001, we reported that
the department's research plan achieved a number of important strategic
functions, including supporting the department's budget and program
development process, conveying priorities, linking research and
development initiatives occurring throughout the department to specific
strategic goals, and focusing on research and technology needs that
concern the department as a whole.[Footnote 11] However, upon reviewing
the fiscal year 2003 research plan, we found that it does not summarize
results of the previous year's surface transportation research
programs. Such a summary is also absent from the department's overall
performance plan and reports, where it is required by TEA-21.[Footnote
12] Since the explicit intent of the research plan is to focus the
department's research efforts, and the department is required to gather
summary information on the previous years' research results, this
information could provide continuity and context for observations about
planned research for future years.
The research plan is the culmination of monthly Coordinating Council
meetings in which the Associate Administrator meets with members from
each of DOT's operating administrations as well as representatives from
DOT's Office of Policy, Office of Budget, Office of Intelligence and
Security, and Office of Intermodalism. These meetings also serve as a
means to fulfill the legislative requirement to coordinate surface
transportation research and technology development and the DOT
requirement to coordinate research across all modes within DOT. Agendas
and minutes from these meetings indicate that the Coordinating
Council's discussions involve research processes, procedures,
policy,[Footnote 13] and presentations from council members and guest
speakers. According to the Associate Administrator, these meetings
further provide a forum for networking among DOT researchers, a venue
for DOT operating administrations to learn about each other's research,
and an opportunity for information sharing and technology transfer. In
addition, in instances where research has multimodal applicability, the
Associate Administrator said RSPA staff and representatives from the
other operating administrations have been active in sharing information
through working groups, such as the Human Factors Coordinating
Committee, which shares information on research conducted by each of
the operating administrations focusing on identifying ways to better
manage human operator fatigue.
RSPA Has Not Reviewed All DOT Research Projects to Identify Unnecessary
Duplication:
RSPA does not fully meet its legislative requirement to coordinate
surface transportation and technology development activities because it
does not review all surface transportation research projects to
determine whether surface transportation researchers within DOT are
unnecessarily duplicating research efforts. A similar DOT requirement
broadens this responsibility to make RSPA responsible for reviewing the
status of all research projects throughout DOT for the same purpose. In
its March 2000 report, TRB reported the absence of information on the
current status of all DOT research programs in the department's annual
research plan.[Footnote 14] We discovered that this information also
remained absent from DOT's fiscal year 2003 research plan. The
Associate Administrator said that RSPA lacked (1) readily accessible
data on the research activities of other parts of DOT and (2) the staff
and resources to review all research projects across the department to,
at a minimum, identify and report on the extent of unnecessary
duplication, if any, across the department. He also said that even if
RSPA reviewed all of the department's research activities and
identified any unnecessary duplication of effort, RSPA does not have
the program and budget authority to direct changes in other operating
administrations' research activities.
RSPA's Associate Administrator explained that RSPA does not have
readily accessible data on the research activities of other parts of
DOT because efforts to develop a computer-based tracking system to
share DOT research program and budget information have stalled. RSPA's
1998 strategic plan discussed the need to create and deploy such a
system to meet its strategic goal for coordinating research and
technology. In fiscal year 1999, RSPA planned to allocate $200,000
annually for 4 years to develop and implement a system. According to
the Associate Administrator, as of January 2003, RSPA had spent about
$500,000 of its allocation and completed development of a prototype
database. He said that implementing the centralized information system
would (1) make basic project information (such as project
methodologies, funding levels and sources, schedules, and planned
products) across the department more accessible; (2) provide greater
levels of organization and clarity on historical research; (3)
facilitate strategic planning and coordination; and (4) improve the
department's annual research plan by providing decision-makers with
more complete, accurate, and timely information on all DOT research
activities. According to the Associate Administrator and Coordinating
Council members, some operating administrations do not support
implementation of the system because they believe that the system would
put additional demands on limited resources and would produce little in
terms of tangible results. Coordinating Council members also said it
would duplicate existing information systems already in place at some
operating administrations and the new system would not be integrated
into their other, modal-unique information systems (such as budget and
accounting information systems). According to the RSPA official in
charge of developing the database, each operating administration would
require up to approximately 2 full-time employees for up to 1 year to
input the historical research project data going back 5 years, and an
additional ½ to 1 full-time employees per year to manage and update the
database.
The Associate Administrator also said that RSPA did not review the
status of all operating administrations' research projects to identify
any unnecessary duplication because his office lacks sufficient staff
and resources to do so. He noted, for example, that RSPA's total
research and technology budget for fiscal year 1999 was about $3.7
million--of which $2.2 million was allocated for research and
development planning and management activities[Footnote 15]--and 13
full-time employees. However, in fiscal year 2003, this decreased to a
total budget of about $2.9 million--of which $560,000 was allocated for
research and development planning and management activities--and 9
full-time employees. The Associate Administrator said that the decline
in RSPA's staff and resources--the only such staff and resources in the
department for conducting long-term transportation research planning
and coordinating research plans and programs--has also severely limited
RSPA's efforts to coordinate with transportation research stakeholders
outside of DOT, such as state, local, and other federal agencies.
Figure 2 shows RSPA's funding levels for its research and development
planning and management activities from fiscal years 1999 through 2003.
Figure 2: RSPA Funding Dedicated to Research and Development Planning
and Management Activities (Fiscal Years 1999-2003):
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
RSPA's Associate Administrator said he believes that little or no
duplication of research activities occurs. He said that, because the
monthly Coordinating Council meetings provided a forum for discussing
ongoing and planned research, unnecessary duplication of research
efforts would be identified. Also, he said that most DOT operating
administrations have discrete research programs and budgets that
support their mode-specific regulatory and safety mandates. For
example, the Federal Highway Administration research focuses on public
roads and highways, and its primary users are state and local
transportation departments that seek better ways to repair the public
infrastructure and find improved materials for pavements. Similarly,
the Federal Railroad Administration focuses on the rail industry's
privately owned infrastructure and these owners--freight railroads,
Amtrak, commuter railroads, and shippers--look to Federal Railroad
Administration to conduct research that will reduce track failure,
equipment failure, and human error.
According to members of the Coordinating Council, apparent duplication
in research programs might reflect a number of conditions--for example,
research that was intended to validate previous research results,
expand research applications, and address different needs (such as
pavement research for airport runways and highways)--or an effort to
explore alternative approaches before selecting one for further
development. None of the council members, however, could provide us
with specific examples of research projects that reflected these
conditions.
Other Coordinating Council members with whom we spoke, however, said
that the council should take further steps to more effectively
coordinate DOT research. For example, one member said the Coordinating
Council should review all of the current projects across the department
to improve the level and quality of the department's research
coordination efforts. Another member said that the primary functions of
the Coordinating Council should be to universally review DOT research
projects to eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort and to provide
opportunities for joint research partnerships on similar work. Such
opportunities might include research focusing on safety, environmental,
training, and human factor issues. However, Coordinating Council
members said that DOT support for the council and research coordination
in general had declined in recent years (e.g., lower ranking members of
the operating administrations attend the meetings, instead of the more
senior personnel that had once attended, and meetings were shortened
from 2 hours to 1 hour per month), and that greater departmental
support for this effort was warranted.
The Associate Administrator said that RSPA did not have the program and
budget authority over the department's operating administrations'
research activities to direct changes in research programs, even if
opportunities for greater joint efforts or elimination of unnecessary
duplicative research were found. In a 1996 report examining the status
of the department's coordination of surface transportation research, we
identified RSPA's lack of internal clout within the department as an
obstacle to its ability to function effectively as its research
strategic planner because it had no direct program or budget authority
over the department's operating administrations' research
activities.[Footnote 16] Although DOT proposed the creation of such an
organization to have budgeting and program authority for DOT research
in its fiscal year 1996 budget submission, the Congress did not approve
the agency's proposal. According to the Associate Administrator, there
are no current legislative or budget initiatives to pursue this
proposal.
Although DOT's earlier effort to overcome RSPA's lack of internal
authority was not implemented, neither the department nor RSPA has
developed alternative approaches to overcome this obstacle as well as
to address the information and resource limitations that continue to
hinder RSPA's efforts to meet legislative and DOT requirements for
coordinating departmental research. Developing a strategy that
incorporates information about the costs involved in reviewing research
projects throughout DOT to ensure that unnecessary duplication does not
occur, and that determines whether finalizing the development and
implementation of the DOT-wide research tracking system database could
serve this purpose, is an important first step for RSPA to meet the
legislative and DOT requirements entrusted to it. A strategy is also
critical for communicating to the Congress and the Secretary of
Transportation the challenges RSPA faces, and the specific actions it
can take, in meeting the requirements with the resources it possesses.
RSPA Has Not Developed Performance Standards Against Which to Measure
Its Coordination Efforts:
RSPA has not established performance measures to systematically
document the results and benefits of coordinating DOT research
activities.[Footnote 17] In the absence of systematically gathered data
on research activities across the department and associated performance
measures, it is difficult to determine RSPA's overall success in
coordinating DOT's billion-dollar research program. Demonstrated
successes could garner greater departmental support for RSPA's research
coordination efforts. In its fiscal year 2003 budget submission, RSPA
cited the difficulty in defining and measuring the effectiveness of
research coordination activities. According to RSPA, it is because of
this difficulty that it relies upon external program assessments to
provide independent evaluation of its research and coordination
activities.[Footnote 18]
Although we support the use of external assessments, we have reported
that quantifiable measures are necessary to assess agency performance
to meet the intent of the Government Performance and Results Act of
1993 (GPRA).[Footnote 19] Among the stated purposes of GPRA is the
improvement of federal program effectiveness and public accountability.
For agencies to successfully become high-performing organizations,
their leaders need to foster performance-based cultures, find ways to
measure performance, and use performance information to make decisions.
A fundamental element in an organization's efforts to manage for
results is its ability to set meaningful goals for performance and,
using performance information, measure performance against those goals.
High-performing, results-oriented organizations establish a set of
measures to gauge progress over various dimensions of performance.
In crafting GPRA, the Congress expressed its interest in American
taxpayers' getting quality results from the programs they pay for as
well as its concern about waste and inefficiency in federal programs.
The fundamental reason for collecting information on a program's
performance is to take action in managing the program on the basis of
that information. By using performance information to assess the way a
program is conducted, managers can consider alternative approaches and
processes in areas where goals are not being met and enhance the use of
program approaches and processes that are working well. Performance
information also allows program managers to compare their programs'
results with goals and thus determine where to target program resources
to improve performance. When managers are forced to reduce their
resources, the same analysis can help them target the reductions to
minimize the impact on program results.
GPRA's emphasis on results implies that federal programs contributing
to the same or similar outcomes should be closely coordinated to ensure
that goals are consistent and complementary, and that program efforts
are mutually reinforcing. Thus, measuring the effectiveness of RSPA's
coordination of DOT research is a critical element of fulfilling its
legislative and departmental coordination responsibilities--an element
RSPA has not yet addressed.
RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All, Legislative or DOT Requirements to
Evaluate DOT Research:
RSPA has not fully met all legislative and DOT requirements for
evaluating research within the department. RSPA does not meet a
legislative requirement for measuring the results of federal surface
transportation research and partially meets a related DOT policy
requirement to oversee and develop ways to improve research evaluations
throughout the department. Figure 3 summarizes these requirements and
the extent to which RSPA has met them.
Figure 3: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT
Responsibilities for Evaluating DOT Research Efforts:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Although the department has delegated to RSPA the responsibility for
meeting legislative and DOT requirements for evaluating research
projects throughout the department, RSPA's oversight of DOT research
evaluation is limited to facilitating exchange of information on
evaluation approaches. As delegated by the Secretary of Transportation,
RSPA is responsible for measuring the results of federal surface
transportation research activities and how these results impact the
performance of the surface transportation systems of the United States,
as stated in TEA-21.[Footnote 20] Also, TEA-21 calls for a strategic
planning process[Footnote 21] that includes information on research
program evaluations conducted and a schedule of future
evaluations.[Footnote 22] RSPA has not taken steps to meet these
legislative responsibilities for measuring the results of DOT surface
transportation research, describing research program evaluations, and
establishing a schedule for future evaluations.[Footnote 23]
In terms of DOT policy, RSPA is responsible for overseeing and
developing more efficient, effective, and participative ways to
evaluate and measure research program effectiveness and progress across
all operating administrations.[Footnote 24] RSPA has taken steps to
develop and communicate more effective means of evaluation by
discussing this issue at monthly Coordinating Council meetings. For
example, in October 2002, the council provided a forum for discussing
four different agency approaches to research evaluation. In addition,
according to RPSA officials, the council has discussed criteria
established by the Office of Management and Budget for federal
investment in research and how these criteria can have an impact on
performance evaluation. RSPA, however, does not oversee operating
administrations' research evaluation efforts and therefore cannot
ensure that steps are being consistently taken to improve evaluation
approaches.
The Associate Administrator said that RSPA does not measure the results
of federal transportation research activities or provide oversight of
the operating administrations' research program evaluation processes
for the following two reasons: (1) the operating administrations have
responsibility for performing and measuring their own research programs
and (2) the resource constraints that have limited RSPA's ability to
coordinate DOT-wide research also limit the agency's ability to oversee
research program evaluations across the department.
Coordinating Council members said that increased oversight of DOT-wide
research programs would be beneficial. Our previous work examining
DOT's research activities also indicates that such oversight is
warranted. For example, in reviewing the Federal Highway
Administration's research program, which accounts for almost half of
DOT's research budget, we found that the Federal Highway Administration
lacked a systematic process for conducting research evaluations, and
that the processes it used were not always consistent with federal
research best practices because it generally did not use a peer review
approach.[Footnote 25]Thus, without oversight, RSPA and the department
have no assurance that, at a minimum, operating administration research
programs are routinely evaluated or that approaches to evaluations are
consistent with established best practices. :
DOT and RSPA also have not developed a strategy to meet the requirement
to measure the results of federal transportation research activities
and how they impact the performance of the surface transportation
systems of the United States. Developing such a strategy that
incorporates information about the costs involved in ensuring that
evaluations are completed and performed according to best practices is
an important first step for DOT and RSPA to meet the requirement. A
strategy also is critical for communicating to the Congress and the
Secretary of Transportation (1) the challenges that RSPA and the
department face and (2) the specific actions that can be taken to meet
this requirement given available resources. After we raised these
issues to senior RSPA officials as a result of our review, they
developed a proposed model for reorganizing the Coordinating Council to
provide an opportunity for RSPA to meet legislative and departmental
requirements to oversee DOT research evaluation. They said they were
still considering the proposal when we completed our review.
RSPA Has Conducted Multimodal Research in Four Areas but Does Not Have
a Process to Systematically Evaluate Program Results:
Since 1999, RSPA has conducted four multimodal research programs--
advanced vehicle technologies, commercial remote sensing and spatial
information, operator fatigue management, and transportation
infrastructure assurance. According to RSPA's Associate Administrator,
these four programs have resulted or will result in significant
contributions and improvements to the transportation industry. For
example, he said that research aimed at advanced vehicle technologies
has resulted in the testing and development of components currently
used in the production of commercially available hybrid electrical
vehicles. Nonetheless, RSPA does not have a process to systematically
evaluate the results of all its multimodal research programs. In the
absence of such a process, RSPA manages its multimodal research
programs by monitoring research contract agreements and using expert or
peer review panels to assess the quality and relevance of ongoing
research. By not systematically evaluating program results, however,
RSPA is limited in its ability to determine the extent to which its
multimodal research programs are achieving their intended goals.
Status of RSPA's Multimodal Research Programs:
Since 1999, RSPA has conducted four multimodal research programs, of
which two were congressionally mandated. Specifically, TEA-21 required
DOT to conduct research on using (1) technology to improve energy
efficiency, and reduce emissions and transportation dependence on
petroleum, and (2) satellite images to improve transportation safety
and disaster planning. Transportation research experts within DOT
developed a third RSPA research program to develop more effective means
to increase the endurance and reduce fatigue of drivers and pilots.
Finally, the catalyst for research in a fourth area that assesses key
transportation system vulnerabilities to damage from disasters or
terrorist threats came from the National Research Council's
TRB.[Footnote 26]
According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA identified and selected
individual projects for these multimodal research programs by obtaining
input from experts within and outside DOT. For example, RSPA, in
conjunction with other DOT operating administrations, published a plan
in June 1999 to guide the selection of human fatique-related projects.
In addition, in April 2000, RSPA issued a strategic multimodal research
and development program plan to help focus advanced vehicle technology
research. Also, in December 2000, RSPA and TRB held a conference on
remote sensing and spatial information research to, among other things,
discuss and define issues and possible research needs with
representatives from academia, transportation agencies, remote sensing
businesses, consulting firms, and other groups.[Footnote 27] (See app.
I for a list of project stakeholders and researchers involved in RSPA's
multimodal research programs.) Table 1 provides summary data concerning
the scope, funding, and status of RSPA's four multimodal research
programs.
Table 1: Information on and Status of Multimodal Research Programs
Conducted by RSPA from Fiscal Years 1999 to 2003:
[See PDF for image]
[End of table]
* The Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program was mandated in 1998 under
section 5111 of TEA-21. This program combines transportation
technologies and innovative program elements to produce new vehicles,
components, and infrastructure for medium-and heavy-duty
transportation needs. Since 1999, approximately $15 million has been
allocated toward 55 separate research projects, 43 of which have been
completed, with the goal of improving energy efficiency and U.S.
competitiveness while reducing emissions and transportation dependence
on petroleum. According to the Associate Administrator, the program has
resulted in (1) the testing of components that are being used in the
development and production of commercially available hybrid electrical
vehicles and (2) the development and implementation of electric vehicle
recharging stations in Hawaii. A picture of an electric vehicle at a
recharging station is shown in figure 4. RSPA plans to have all of the
projects completed by the end of 2004.
Figure 4: Electric Vehicle at a Recharging Station:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
* The Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies
Program was mandated in 1998 under section 5113 of TEA-21. The joint
program between RSPA and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) began in 1999. This research program focuses in
part on using satellite images to assess transportation hazards and
improve disaster recovery; provide opportunities to monitor and
evaluate regional traffic flow, including the movement of freight; plan
for improvements in the maintenance and security of transportation
infrastructures; and aid in transportation corridor planning. Figure 5
shows an example of satellite-based photography of interstate highways.
According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA has also supported
transportation security technology project activities in the aftermath
of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. For instance, according
to RSPA officials, the Remote Sensing Program reoriented two unmanned
aerial vehicle projects toward monitoring for security as well as
traditional transportation applications. RSPA has allocated $18 million
to this research program since it began in 1999 and has disseminated
program information; results to date have been disseminated through Web
sites, publications,[Footnote 28] workshops, and conferences. Eighteen
separate research projects constitute the program; 4 have been
completed, and RSPA plans to complete the remaining 14 projects by the
end of 2003.
Figure 5: Satellite-based Photographic Image of U.S. Interstates 25 and
40 in Albuquerque, New Mexico:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
* The Human Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program was
conceived by DOT researchers and experts with the primary goal to
develop techniques that transportation operating companies can employ
to ensure endurance and fatigue-free performance of their workforces.
Since fiscal year 1999, approximately $1 million has been allocated to
the Human Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program.
According to the Associate Administrator, this program has resulted in
significant benefit to the varied DOT transportation community
stakeholders. For example, in January 2003, the program resulted in the
production of the Commercial Transportation Operator Alertness
Management Handbook, which describes measures to better manage driver
and pilot fatigue. According to RSPA's Associate Administrator, this
handbook has been in high demand by the U.S. Coast Guard, the Maritime
Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration. Two of the four
projects being conducted are ongoing. RSPA plans to complete the
program by the end of 2004. In figure 6, airline pilots participate in
NASA research in this area.
Figure 6: Airline Pilots Participating in Fatigue Research:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
* The Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program[Footnote 29]
consists of assessments on four separate transportation
vulnerabilities. These include assessing the (1) relationship between
the safety and security of the nation's transportation infrastructure
and some of the nation's other critical infrastructures, such as
energy, e-commerce, banking and finance, and telecommunications; (2)
transportation and logistical requirements for emergency response teams
in response to terrorist attacks using biochemical, nuclear, and
explosive weapons of mass destruction; (3) costs, benefits, and
practicality of alternative backup systems for the global positioning
system; and (4) trade-offs between the different modes of
transportation and security for hazardous materials. Since fiscal year
2001, the Congress has appropriated $3 million to conduct these
assessments. In total, RSPA plans to publish 11 formal reports on the
four vulnerabilities being assessed and develop a series of
presentations and workshops to further disseminate the information.
Figure 7 shows a picture of a global positioning satellite.
Figure 7: Global Positioning Satellite:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
From fiscal years 1999 through 2003, RSPA budgeted about $37 million to
conduct these four major multimodal research programs. Of this $37
million, about 9 percent, or $3.3 million, came to RSPA from direct
congressional appropriations. For example, in fiscal year 2001, the
Congress appropriated $1 million for the Transportation Infrastructure
Assurance Program and $300,000 for the Human Centered Systems: Operator
Fatigue Management Program; in fiscal years 2002 and 2003, RSPA
received an additional $1 million for the Transportation Infrastructure
Assurance Program. The remaining $33.7 million for these programs was
provided through reimbursable funding from other DOT
administrations.[Footnote 30] Figure 8 summarizes RSPA's annual budget
for multimodal research from fiscal years 1999 to 2003.
Figure 8: RSPA's Multimodal Research Funding (Fiscal Years 1999-2003):
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA's current multimodal
research programs are scheduled for completion by the end of fiscal
year 2004. He added that RSPA has made budgetary and legislative
proposals to undertake future multimodal research to, among other
things, further examine applications of unmanned aerial vehicles for
commercial remote sensing or examine infrastructure safety issues in
hydrogen energy systems. He noted, however, that there are no approved
plans for future multimodal research, pending the President's budget
proposal for the department and the reauthorization of TEA-21, which
might affect RSPA's multimodal research roles and responsibilities.
RSPA Oversees Research Contracts and Assesses the Status of Its Ongoing
Research but Lacks a Systematic Process for Evaluating the Results of
Its Multimodal Research:
RSPA oversees its multimodal research programs by monitoring research
contract agreements. Specifically, the Associate Administrator said
that RSPA assesses project progress against contractual milestones to
ensure that the research is being completed on time and within cost,
while meeting research objectives. He added that researchers must meet
or exceed contractual expectations, or corrective actions are taken.
These actions may include project cancellation. RSPA provided a recent
example of the impact of its monitoring efforts that dealt with a
project being conducted under its Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial
Information Technologies Program. The evaluation focused on an unmanned
aerial vehicle application to real-time traffic flow monitoring, a
demonstration project with the Ohio Department of Transportation and
several universities and industry partners. Due to a technical problem,
the scheduled demonstration could not be conducted. The Remote Sensing
Program Manager, working with the Federal Highway Administration
Project Manager assigned to the project, pulled together a technical
team to assess the state of the project. The technical team became
convinced that the contractor could remedy the technical situation,
allowed 3 additional months to make the milestone, and successfully
encouraged the project partners to cover the costs of the delay.
According to the Associate Administrator, these actions resulted in a
demonstration to a state partner with no cost increase to RSPA.
In addition to providing this contractual oversight, RSPA uses the
principles of expert or peer review through the use of multimodal and
multiagency program oversight panels to assess the status, quality, and
relevance of its ongoing multimodal research programs, according to the
Associate Administrator. For example, in December 2000, TRB and RSPA
held a conference on remote sensing and spatial information research
with representatives from academia, transportation agencies, remote
sensing businesses, consulting firms, and other groups. During the
conference, participants met in breakout sessions to discuss and assess
research progress and interim results. As we have reported, expert or
peer review is
a particularly effective means to evaluate federally funded
research.[Footnote 31] The Committee on Science, Engineering, and
Public Policy has also reported that expert review is widely used to
evaluate the quality of current research as compared with other work
being conducted in the field and with the relevance of research to the
agency's goals and mission.[Footnote 32] However, RSPA has not
established a process or policies for systematically using peer or
expert reviews to evaluate the results of all its multimodal research.
For example, RSPA has no plans to evaluate the results of its
Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program.
We, among others, recognize that federal agencies that support research
in science and engineering have been challenged to find the most useful
and effective ways to evaluate the performance and results of the
research programs. For example, since GPRA was passed in 1993, some
questions have been raised about its applicability to the research
activities of government agencies. Because the process required by GPRA
is based on a 5-year strategic planning horizon, concerns exist that
GPRA constrains, and perhaps prohibits, the long-term thinking and
planning that characterize the federal role in research. This concern
is particularly relevant for basic research, but even successes from
highly applied research (the type sponsored by DOT) can require 5 to 10
years before achieving widespread recognition.[Footnote 33]
Nonetheless, as we noted in our report examining DOT highway
research,[Footnote 34] without systematic program evaluation, it is
unclear as to whether research efforts are having the intended results.
Such a systematic approach to evaluation, according to best practices
used in other federal research programs, includes review of all ongoing
and completed research on a regular basis and in accordance with GPRA
principles.
RSPA's Associate Administrator acknowledged that a documented process
for systematically evaluating the results of its multimodal research
programs would be beneficial, but that the process should be tailored
to match the type of research and its objectives. He added that RSPA
had not developed and implemented a process for systematically
evaluating the results of its multimodal research because of a lack of
funding and staffing resources. For example, he estimated that an
external evaluation to assess the results of its multimodal programs
could cost as much as $100,000 for each program. Nonetheless, without
establishing and implementing a process for systematically evaluating
the results of its research, RSPA cannot ensure that its multimodal
research programs are achieving their intended goals.
Conclusions:
To its credit, RSPA has taken steps in recent years to meet its
legislative and department responsibilities for coordinating and
overseeing the evaluation of the department's transportation research
activities. Nevertheless, ensuring that no unnecessary duplication of
research programs occurs and that research programs--including the ones
that RSPA conducts--are evaluated for results are critical
responsibilities, given the importance of, and amount of money spent
on, DOT research. Without a strategy to meet legislative and DOT
requirements to coordinate and oversee evaluation of departmental
research, RSPA may not be able to meet these responsibilities,
particularly given its lack of authority within the department and
resource limitations. In addition, a lack of performance standards
against which to measure coordination efforts limits RSPA's ability to
identify areas where coordination is working effectively and areas that
could be improved upon. With a strategy and performance measures in
place, however, RSPA and DOT should be in a better position to assure
the Congress that the department is making the most of its significant
research dollars through effective coordination and evaluation of its
research programs.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To better meet legislative and DOT requirements for coordinating and
evaluating transportation research within the department, we recommend
the Secretary, in conjunction with RSPA's Administrator, work with DOT
operating administrations to:
* Develop a strategy for reviewing all DOT research projects to
identify areas of unnecessary research duplication, overlap, and
opportunities for joint efforts. The strategy should address time
frames for implementing this review as well as discuss the extent to
which finalizing the development and implementation of a DOT-wide
research tracking system database could serve to facilitate this
process. Once this strategy has been developed and implemented, the
results of this effort should be incorporated in the department's
annual research plan and reported to the Congress on an annual basis.
* Develop and apply quantifiable performance measures to assess the
effectiveness of research coordination efforts (once a strategy for
review has been developed and implemented), and document the results of
these efforts in the department's annual research plan. These measures
could include the number of research projects identified as possible
candidates for joint effort or elimination and/or the associated
reduction in the department's research spending.
* Develop a strategy to ensure that the results of all DOT's
transportation research activities are evaluated according to
established best practices. This strategy should include estimates of
the costs for ensuring that evaluations are completed. Once the
strategy has been developed and implemented, the results of these
efforts should be incorporated in the department's annual research plan
and reported to the Congress on an annual basis.
* Include in the department's annual research plan a summary of all
research program evaluations conducted and a schedule of future
evaluations.
In addition, we recommend that the Secretary direct RSPA's
Administrator to document RSPA's process for systematically evaluating
the results of its own multimodal research programs, and apply this
process to any future multimodal research programs that RSPA conducts.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We obtained oral comments on a draft of this report from RSPA
officials, including the Associate Administrator for Innovation,
Research, and Education. These officials generally agreed with the
contents of the draft report but did not comment specifically on the
report's recommendations. They also provided technical comments that we
incorporated as appropriate.
Regarding RSPA's evaluation of its own multimodal research, the
officials said that RSPA had conducted evaluation activities--peer and
expert reviews of the progress of three of its four multimodal research
programs and had no plans to evaluate the fourth. We acknowledge that
RSPA has used peer and expert review to evaluate the status of at least
one of its ongoing multimodal research programs--commercial remote
sensing and spatial information technology--and we describe this
example in this report. Nevertheless, we continue to believe that our
recommendation for documenting and applying a process for
systematically evaluating the results of any future multimodal research
programs conducted by RSPA is warranted to ensure that such evaluations
are consistently conducted in accordance with established best
practices.
We are sending copies of this report to congressional committees and
subcommittees with responsibilities for transportation, the Secretary
of Transportation, the Research and Special Programs Administration
Administrator, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
We will make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the
report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://
www.gao.gov.
If you have questions about this report, please contact me at (202)
512-2834 or siggerudk@gao.gov. Other key contributors were Colin
Fallon, Christopher Keisling, Bert Japikse, Steve Morris, and Jason
Schwartz.
Katherine Siggerud
Acting Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues:
Signed by Katherine Siggerud:
[End of section]
Appendixes :
Appendix I: Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
Programs Conducted by RSPA:
Table 2: Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program:
Project title: Model Park; Project performer(s): Northeast Advanced
Vehicle Consortium/Boston Edison; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Hybrid School Bus; Project performer(s): Northeast
Advanced Vehicle Consortium/Solectria; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Extended Hybrid Electric Heavy Duty Vehicle Emission
Test Certification; Project performer(s): Northeast Advanced Vehicle
Consortium/MJ Bradley; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Jet Vapor Deposition for Catalyzing Fuel Cell
Membranes; Project performer(s): Northeast Advanced Vehicle
Consortium/Jet Process Corporation; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: AV 900 Cycler for a 600-900 Volt System for Heavy Duty
Hybrid Electric Vehicles; Project performer(s): Electricore/Allison
Transmission Division of General Motors Corporation; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Installation of Capstone Microturbines into AVS
Passenger Trams; Project performer(s): Electricore/Advanced Vehicle
Systems, Inc.; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Novel Silicon Carbide JFET-Gated Thyristor; Project
performer(s): Electricore/Rutgers University; Project stakeholders:
FTA.
Project title: Electric Vehicle Ready State; Project performer(s):
Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project stakeholders:
FTA.
Project title: Zero Emission 100-Passenger Electric Tram for
Airports; Project performer(s): Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration
Project/U.S. Electricar; Project stakeholders: FTA, FAA.
Project title: Battery Life Cycle Prediction; Project performer(s):
Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project/Hawaii Natural Energy
Institute/University of Hawaii/SOEST; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Extension of the Hybrid Electric HMMWV Power Train
Development Program; Project performer(s): Southern Coalition for
Advanced Transportation/PEI Electronics; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Optimization of Hybrid Electric Vehicles Compression
Ignition Auxiliary Unit Control Strategy for Emissions Reduction and
Improved Fuel Economy; Project performer(s): Mid Atlantic Regional
Consortium for Advanced Vehicles/Navistar International Transportation
Corporation; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Integrated Simulation and Testing System for Electric
Vehicle Batteries; Project performer(s): Mid Atlantic Regional
Consortium for Advanced Vehicles/Pennsylvania Transportation
Institute; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Smaller Better Inverters with Polymer Multi-Layer
Capacitors; Project performer(s): Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium
for Advanced Vehicles/Sigma Technologies International, Inc.; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: NiMH Battery System Development for an Electric
Vehicle Bus; Project performer(s): Sacramento Municipal Utility
District/Ovonic Battery; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Advanced PLI Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery; :
Project performer(s): Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Compact
Power; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Reliable Electric Propulsion System for Medium and
Heavy Duty Vehicles; Project performer(s): CALSTART/Santa Barbara
Electric Bus Works; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: All-Purpose Electric Tractor; Project performer(s):
CALSTART/ISE Research Corporation; Project stakeholders: FTA, FAA.
Project title: Development of Advanced Electrochemical Capacitors
Using Carbon and Lead-Oxide Electrodes for Hybrid Vehicle Applications;
Project performer(s): CALSTART/University of California, Davis;
Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Hybrid Transit Bus with Flywheel; Project
performer(s): CALSTART/Trinity Flywheel Power; Project stakeholders:
FTA.
Project title: Auxiliary Power Unit Project Using Fuel Cell
Technology; Project performer(s): CALSTART/Freightliner Corporation;
Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Caterpillar Heavy Duty Powertrain Applicable to Heavy
Duty Machines; Project performer(s): Northeast Advanced Vehicle
Consortium; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Design/Integrate/Test Auxiliary Power Units/Hybrid
Electric Vehicles for Deployment in Commercial Delivery Fleet; :
Project performer(s): Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Low Cost, Modular, Highly Reliable, Universal
Propulsion Inverter for Heavy-Duty Commercial and Military Hybrid
Vehicles; Project performer(s): Electricore; Project stakeholders:
FTA.
Project title: Design and Fabrication of 4H-SiC Hybrid JBS Diode for
High Temperature and High Efficiency Inverters for Medium and Heavy
Duty Applications; Project performer(s): Electricore/Rutgers
University; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Electric Vehicle Ready State (Phase II); Project
performer(s): Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Hybrid Drive System for Heavy Duty Transit Buses and
Trucks (Phase I); Project performer(s): Hawaii Electric Vehicle
Demonstration Project/Hawaii Technology Development Corporation;
Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Georgia 1 - Design, Manufacture and Test a Low Speed
Industrial Motor System in Heavy-Duty Vehicles; Project performer(s):
Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation; Project stakeholders:
FTA.
Project title: Texas 1 - Enhanced Safety and Risk Reduction for
University of Texas Demonstration Program; Project performer(s):
Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation; Project stakeholders:
FTA.
Project title: Simulation and Field Test Hybrid Ultra-Capacitor
Battery Energy Storage System for Electric Transit Vehicles; Project
performer(s): Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced Vehicles/
Pennsylvania Transportation Institute; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Development of Scalable Direct-Methanol Fuel Cell
Stacks; Project performer(s): Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for
Advanced Vehicles/GATE Center for Advanced Energy Storage; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Zebra Battery Demonstration in an Electric School Bus;
Project performer(s): Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Santa
Barbara Electric Bus Works; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Fuel Cell Auxiliary Power Unit Demonstration in a
Heavy-Duty Truck; Project performer(s): Sacramento Municipal Utility
District/ISE Research Corporation; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: DOT Center for Climate Change and Environmental
Forecasting Conference Support; Project performer(s): CALSTART/
WestStart Corporation; Project stakeholders: All modes.
Project title: Hybrid Electric Prototype Truck, Phase II Program; :
Project performer(s): CALSTART/ISE Research Corporation; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: 150 kW Traction Drive/Hybrid Auxiliary Power Unit
System for Large Electric or Hybrid Electric Vehicle Applications; :
Project performer(s): CALSTART/Unique Mobility, Inc.; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Hickam Air Force Base Project Development; Project
performer(s): Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project
stakeholders: FTA, Department of the Air Force.
Project title: Rapid Chargers; Project performer(s): Hawaii
Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project stakeholders: FTA,
Department of the Air Force.
Project title: Electric Bus Conversion; Project performer(s):
Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project stakeholders:
FTA, Department of the Air Force.
Project title: U.S.S. Arizona Memorial Tour Boat Study; Project
performer(s): Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project
stakeholders: FTA, Department of the Navy, National Park Service.
Project title: Advanced Vehicles for Great Smoky Mountains National
Park; Project performer(s): Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for
Advanced Vehicles/Electric Power Research Institute; Project
stakeholders: FTA, National Park Service.
Project title: Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles Energy Control System; :
Project performer(s): Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced
Vehicles; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Phase I Fast Track Fuel Cell Bus Project; Project
performer(s): Sacramento Municipal Utility District/Sacramento
Electric Transportation Consortium/CALSTART/WestStart; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Development of NiMH Battery System for Application in
Heavy Duty Hybrid Electric Vehicles; Project performer(s): Sacramento
Municipal Utility District/Sacramento Electric Transportation
Consortium; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Lightweight Hybrid Electric Transit Bus Program; :
Project performer(s): CALSTART/NOVA Bus Incorporated; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Airport Clean Fuel Vehicle Outreach --Targeted Project
Development; Project performer(s): CALSTART/WestStart Corporation;
Project stakeholders: FTA, FAA.
Project title: Phase I, Fast Track Fuel Cell Bus Project; Project
performer(s): CALSTART/WestStart/Sacramento Electric Transportation
Consortium; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: National Conference on Climate Change; Project
performer(s): Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium; Project
stakeholders: All modes.
Project title: Development and Fabrication of a PEM Fuel Cell Power
Plant for Heavy Duty Vehicle Applications; Project performer(s):
Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/University Transportation
Centers Fuel Cells; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Drive Line Development Team and Industry Work Group; :
Project performer(s): Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium; Project
stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Route-Ready Fuel Cell Component Testing; Project
performer(s): Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/Concurrent
Technologies Corporation; Project stakeholders: FTA.
Project title: Hybrid Electric Bus (Phase II); Project
performer(s): Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project
stakeholders: FTA, Department of the Air Force.
Project title: Multi-Vehicle Charging System; Project performer(s):
Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project stakeholders:
FTA, Department of the Air Force.
Project title: Data Acquisition Systems; Project performer(s):
Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project stakeholders:
FTA, Department of the Air Force.
Project title: Aircraft Loader; Project performer(s): Hawaii
Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; Project stakeholders: FTA,
Department of the Air Force.
Source: RSPA.
Legend:
FAA: Federal Aviation Administration
FTA: Federal Transit Administration:
Note: This program is performed in partnership with seven major
consortia consisting of (1) Sacramento Electric Transportation
Consortium; (2) Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium; (3) CALSTART-
WESTSTART; (4) Electricore, Inc.; (5) Mid-Atlantic Regional Consortium
for Advanced Vehicles; (6) Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration
Project; and (7) Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation.
[End of table]:
Table 3: Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies
Program:
Project title: Airborne Sensor Fusion: A Fast-Track Approach to
National Environmental Policy Act Streamlining and Environmental
Assessment; Project performer(s): NCRST-E/Earthdata Int'l of NC;
Project stakeholders: FHWA.
Project title: Remote Sensing of Environmental Parameters for Use in
National Environmental Policy Act Documentation in Support of Highway
Corridor Studies; Project performer(s): NCRST-E/ICF Consulting;
Project stakeholders: FHWA.
Project title: Remote Sensing Applications in Transit; Project
performer(s): NCRST-F/Bridgewater State College; Project stakeholders:
FHWA, FTA.
Project title: Airborne Ground-Penetrating Radar to Support
Monitoring of Pipeline Safety and Performance; Project performer(s):
NCRST-H/Aeris Inc.; Project stakeholders: RSPA/Office of Pipeline
Safety.
Project title: Environmental Impact and Risk Modeling of Petroleum
and Gas Transmission Lines Using Interferometry and High Resolution
Imagery from Satellite and Airborne-based Remote Sensing Systems; :
Project performer(s): NCRST-H/EarthWatch, Inc.; Project stakeholders:
RSPA/Office of Pipeline Safety.
Project title: Facilitating the Operation Efficiency and Growth of
Intermodal Freight Traffic: Application of Remote Sensing Technology to
the Alameda Corridor, Los Angeles, CA; Project performer(s): NCRST-I/
ASL Consulting Engineers (Tetra Tech Corp.); Project stakeholders:
Office of the Secretary of Transportation/; Office of Intermodalism.
Project title: Remote Sensing Applications Supporting Regional
Database for Transportation Planning; Project performer(s): NCRST-F/
Veridian System Division (formerly Veridian ERIM); Project
stakeholders: FHWA, FTA.
Project title: Road Network Planning Tool; Project performer(s):
NCRST-F/Technology Service Corp.; Project stakeholders: FHWA.
Project title: Impact of Instant Imagery Access on a Regional
Database for Transportation Planning; Project performer(s): NCRST-I/
Orbimage; Project stakeholders: FHWA.
Project title: Development of Regional Databases for Transportation
Planning; Project performer(s): NCRST-E/Veridian Systems Division;
Project stakeholders: FHWA, FTA.
Project title: Remote Sensing for Airport Development and
Transportation Planning; Project performer(s): NCRST-F/Grafton
Technologies, Inc.; Project stakeholders: FAA, FHWA.
Project title: Remote Sensing of Invasive Aquatic Plant Obstruction
in Navigable Waterways; Project performer(s): NCRST-F/TerraMetrics,
Inc.; Project stakeholders: MARAD.
Project title: Using an Unmanned Airborne Data Acquisition System
(ADAS) for Traffic Surveillance, Monitoring, and Management; Project
performer(s): NCRST-F/GeoData Systems, Inc.; Project stakeholders:
FHWA.
Project title: The Application of Remote Sensing
Technologies in Post-Disaster Damage
Assessment; Project performer(s): NCRST-H/ImageCat, Inc.; Project
stakeholders: All modes.
Project title: Long-Term Monitoring of Changes in Transportation and
Land Use Associated with the Central Artery/Third Harbor Tunnel in
Boston, MA.; Project performer(s): NCRST-I/University of
Massachusetts; Project stakeholders: FHWA.
Project title: Implementing Remote Sensing Applications to Develop
and Environmental Impact Statement and Decision Options to Relocate the
Current CSX Railroad from Mississippi Gulf Coast townships to the I-10
Right of Way; Project performer(s): NCRST-E/FHWA/Mississippi
Department of Transportation; Project stakeholders: FHWA, FRA.
Project title: Remote Sensing Applications for
Environmental Analysis in Transportation
Planning; Project performer(s): NCRST-E/Washington State Department
of Transportation; Project stakeholders: FHWA.
Project title: Highway Features and Characteristics Database
Development Using Commercial Remote Sensing Technology, Combined with
Mobile Mapping, GIS and GPS.; Project performer(s): NCRST-I/Florida
Department of Transportation; Project stakeholders: FHWA.
Source: RSPA.
Legend:
FAA: Federal Aviation Administration
FHWA: Federal Highway Administration
FRA: Federal Railroad Administration
FTA: Federal Transit Administration
MARAD: Maritime Administration
RSPA: Research and Special Programs Administration:
Note: This program is performed in partnership with four major
consortia consisting of (1) the National Consortia for Remote Sensing
in Transportation - Environmental Assessment/Application (NCRST-E);
(2) the National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation -
Traffic Flow (NCRST-F); (3) the National Consortia for Remote Sensing
in Transportation - Safety, Hazards, and Disasters (NCRST-H); and (4)
the National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation -
Infrastructure Management (NCRST-I).
[End of table]
Table 4: Human-Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program:
Project title: Framework for Multimodal Synthesis and Cost Benefit
Analyses; Project performer(s): ORC Macro; Project stakeholders: All
DOT modes through the Human Factors Coordinating Committee.
Project title: Work Schedule Representation Analysis Software; :
Project performer(s): XIMES GmbH; Project stakeholders: All DOT modes
through the Human Factors Coordinating Committee.
Project title: Development of a Fatigue Management Reference
Handbook; Project performer(s): Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus
Operations; Project stakeholders: All DOT modes through the Human
Factors Coordinating Committee.
Project title: Fatigue Analysis Systems for Transportation
Operations: Railroad Applications; Project performer(s): Science
Applications International Corporation; Project stakeholders: All DOT
modes through the Human Factors Coordinating Committee.
Source: RSPA.
Legend:
DOT: Department of Transportation:
[End of table]
Table 5: Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program:
Project title: Interdependency of the Transportation System with
Other Critical Infrastructures; Project performer(s): Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center; Project stakeholders: Office of
Intelligence and Security, TSA, FAA, Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, TRB..
Project title: Transportation and Logistical Requirements for
Emergency Response Teams in Dealing with Weapons of Mass Destruction; :
Project performer(s): Volpe National Transportation Systems Center;
Project stakeholders: DOT Maritime Academy, FAA, Federal Emergency
Management Adminstration, FHWA, MARAD, RSPA's Office of Emergency
Transportation..
Project title: Feasibility of Alternative Backup Systems for the
Global Positioning System; Project performer(s): Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center; Project stakeholders: Booz-Allen
Hamilton, DOT Office of the Secretary, FAA, FRA, Northrop-Grumman,
USCG..
Project title: Options to Transition Hazardous Materials
Transportation Security Guidelines to Security Requirements; Project
performer(s): Volpe National Transportation Systems Center; Project
stakeholders: TSA, American Association of Railroads, American
Chemistry Council, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, DOT Office of
the Secretary, FMCSA, FRA, GAO, TRB, RSPA's Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety, RSPA's Office of Pipeline Safety, and USCG, American
Institute of Chemical Engineers, the National Transportation Safety
Board, the Inland Rivers, Ports and Waterways Association, the Bureau
of the Census, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Vanderbilt
University..
Source: RSPA.
Legend:
DOT: Department of Transportation
FAA: Federal Aviation Administration
FHWA: Federal Highway Administration
FMCSA: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FRA: Federal Railroad Administration
MARAD: Maritime Administration
RSPA: Research and Special Programs Administration
TRB: Transportation Research Board
TSA: Transportation Security Administration
USCG: United States Coast Guard:
[End of table]
(542013):
:
:
FOOTNOTES
[1] The Transportation Research Board is a unit of the National
Research Council, a private, nonprofit institution that is the
principal operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the
National Academy of Engineering. The board's mission is to promote
innovation and progress in transportation by motivating and conducting
research, facilitating the dissemination of information, and
encouraging the implementation of research results.
[2] The U.S. Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration
were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security in March 2003.
[3] U.S. General Accounting Office, Transportation Security Research:
Coordination Needed in Selecting and Implementing Infrastructure
Vulnerability Assessments, GAO-03-502 (Washington, D.C.: May 1, 2003).
[4] Peer review is a process that includes an independent assessment of
the technical and scientific merit or quality of research by peers with
essential subject area expertise and perspective equal to that of the
researchers.
[5] U.S. General Accounting Office, Highway Research: Systematic
Selection and Evaluation Processes Needed for Research Program, GAO-02-
573 (Washington, D.C.: May 24, 2002).
[6] Section 5108 codified at 23 U.S.C. § 508.
[7] Through the University Transportation Centers Program, DOT supports
33 university-based research centers to advance transportation research
and education. In fiscal year 2003, RSPA received almost $30 million in
reimbursable funds from the Federal Highway Administration and the
Federal Transit Administration to manage the program.
[8] Operating administrations include the Federal Aviation
Administration, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, Federal
Transit Administration, Maritime Administration, and National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration.
[9] A consortium focuses on research and development of products in a
priority area and includes technical application and demonstration
projects carried out in partnership with industries and service
providers.
[10] TRB study conducted by the Committee for Review of the National
Transportation Science and Technology Strategy (Washington D.C.: Mar.
28, 2000) 3.
[11] U.S. General Accounting Office, Combating Terrorism: Selected
Challenges and Related Recommendations, GAO-01-882 (Washington D.C.:
Sept. 20, 2001) 85.
[12] According to the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993,
each federal department is required to submit a performance plan to the
Congress annually. The TEA-21 requirement to include results of the
year's research in the department's annual performance plan is at 23
U.S.C. § 508 (c) (4) (A).
[13] For example, in October 2002, the Coordinating Council was
delegated responsibility for coordination of all actions related to
research misconduct, including providing guidance in research
misconduct policy implementation. The federal policy on research
misconduct was released in December 2000 by the Executive Office of the
President's Office of Science and Technology Policy and directs all
federal agencies that conduct or support research to implement this
policy. In addition, the council is revising DOT Order 1700.18B dealing
with acquisition, publication, and dissemination of DOT scientific and
technical reports.
[14] TRB study, 13.
[15] According to RSPA, research and development planning and
management includes funding for transportation research and development
strategic planning, DOT research facilitation, coordination and
partnerships, DOT technology transfer and technology sharing programs,
National Science and Technology Council activities, Small Business
Innovation Research Program support, and international research and
development activities.
[16] U.S. General Accounting Office, Surface Transportation: Research
Funding, Federal Role, and Emerging Issues, RCED-96-233 (Washington,
D.C.: Sept. 6, 1996).
[17] In RSPA's fiscal year 2003 budget submission to the Congress, it
reported one quantifiable performance measure. This measure is aimed at
gauging RSPA's progress in administrating the University Transportation
Centers Program and focuses on the number of students graduating with
advanced degrees from universities funded under the program. For fiscal
year 2003, RSPA's performance goal is 1,228 students.
[18] TRB conducted such an assessment in March 2000.
[19] GPRA requires federal agencies to set strategic goals and
establish performance measures for management.
[20] 23 U.S.C. § 508 (a) (3) and (b) (3).
[21] As defined at 5 U.S.C. § 306.
[22] 23 U.S.C. § 508 (a) (1).
[23] We noted that the department's performance plan for fiscal year
2003 contained an appendix detailing DOT program evaluation methods,
results, and schedule for future evaluations for programs that
represent significant DOT activities (other than research) that
contribute to its strategic goals.
[24] DOT Order 1120.39.
[25] GAO-02-573.
[26] TRB, Improving Surface Transportation Security, A Research and
Development Strategy (1999).
[27] See GAO-03-502 for a discussion of the coordination issues
involved in developing and implementing RSPA's Transportation
Infrastructure Assurance Program.
[28] In April 2002, DOT and NASA issued Achievements of the DOT-NASA
Joint Program on Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies:
Application to Multimodal Transportation, which presented 3-year
accomplishments from the program.
[29] GAO-03-502.
[30] RSPA conducts and manages its multimodal research programs,
excluding the Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program, almost
exclusively using reimbursable funds provided by the DOT administration
sponsoring the research--that is, the Federal Highway Administration,
Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
[31] U.S. General Accounting Office, Federal ResearchPeer Review
Practices at Federal Science Agencies Vary, GAO/RCED-99-99 (Washington,
D.C.: Mar. 17, 1999) 2.
[32] Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Evaluating
Federal Research Programs: Research and the Government Performance and
Results Act (Washington, D.C.: February 1999) 39. The Committee on
Science, Engineering, and Public Policy is a joint committee of the
National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and
the Institute of Medicine.
[33] Applied research is original work undertaken to develop new
knowledge with a specific, practical application in mind.
[34] GAO-02-573.
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 daily E-mail alert for newly
released products" under the GAO Reports 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: