Transportation Research
The Department of Transportation Has Made Progress in Coordinating and Reviewing Its Research Activities Gao ID: GAO-09-361T February 12, 2009Research, development, and technology (RD&T) activities are vital to meeting the Department of Transportation's (DOT) priorities, such as increasing safety, enhancing mobility, and supporting the nation's economic growth. In fiscal year 2008, the department's RD&T budget totaled over $1.1 billion, primarily for highway and aviation projects. Over the years, concerns have been raised about DOT's capabilities to improve RD&T coordination and evaluation efforts across the agency. In 2004, Congress created DOT's Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) to coordinate and review the department's RD&T programs and activities for the purposes of reducing research duplication, enhancing opportunities for joint efforts, and ensuring RD&T activities are meeting goals. In 2006 GAO reported that RITA had made progress toward these ends, but needed to do more. GAO's testimony focuses on (1) the importance of coordinating and evaluating RD&T activities and (2) RITA's progress in implementing GAO's 2006 recommendations. GAO's statement is based on its 2006 report, a review of best practices for coordination and evaluation, and follow-up discussions with RITA officials on actions to implement GAO's recommendations. GAO did not assess whether RITA's actions have improved the effectiveness of the department's RD&T investment.
Coordinating and evaluating research are important elements in ensuring that federal dollars are used efficiently and effectively. Coordinating research enhances collaboration, ensures that questions are explored, and reduces inefficiencies, such as from duplication of research. Evaluating research activities entails comparing research with established performance measures in agency strategic plans and using expert reviews to assess the quality of the research. With DOT's large RD&T budget--over $1.1 billion--coordination and evaluation are critical to making cost-effective investment choices in today's climate of expected trillion-dollar deficits. RITA has fully implemented five recommendations that GAO made in 2006 aimed at enhancing RITA's ability to manage and determine the effectiveness of RD&T activities, and partially implemented the remaining two. (See table below.) Regarding implemented recommendations, most notably, RITA has implemented a strategy to coordinate RD&T activities and look for areas where joint efforts would be appropriate. Results of its coordination efforts have identified a number of areas for cross-modal collaboration, including the areas of climate change and freight capacity. RITA has also developed a strategy to ensure that the results of DOT's research activities are evaluated against best practices, using governmentwide guidance and external stakeholder reviews. Regarding partially implemented recommendations, RITA has not yet developed an overall strategy, evaluation plan, or performance measures that delineate how its activities ensure the effectiveness of the department's RD&T investment. However, it has developed a process for doing so. In this regard, RITA plans to use an existing departmentwide strategic planning and budget process and collaborative meetings to develop an overall strategy and performance measures. RITA officials expect that it will fully implement activities related to this recommendation by 2012. GAO will continue to monitor RITA's activities.
GAO-09-361T, Transportation Research: The Department of Transportation Has Made Progress in Coordinating and Reviewing Its Research Activities
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-09-361T
entitled 'Transportation Research: The Department of Transportation Has
Made Progress in Coordinating and Reviewing Its Research Activities'
which was released on February 12, 2009.
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.
Testimony:
Before the Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation, Committee on
Science and Technology, House of Representatives:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
For Release on Delivery:
Expected at time 10 a.m. EST:
Thursday, February 12, 2009:
Transportation Research:
The Department of Transportation Has Made Progress in Coordinating and
Reviewing Its Research Activities:
Statement of David J. Wise, Acting Director: Physical Infrastructure
Issues:
GAO-09-361T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-09-361T, a testimony before the Subcommittee on
Technology and Innovation, Committee on Science and Technology, House
of Representatives.
Why GAO Did This Study:
Research, development, and technology (RD&T) activities are vital to
meeting the Department of Transportation‘s (DOT) priorities, such as
increasing safety, enhancing mobility, and supporting the nation‘s
economic growth. In fiscal year 2008, the department‘s RD&T budget
totaled over $1.1 billion, primarily for highway and aviation projects.
Over the years, concerns have been raised about DOT‘s capabilities to
improve RD&T coordination and evaluation efforts across the agency. In
2004, Congress created DOT‘s Research and Innovative Technology
Administration (RITA) to coordinate and review the department‘s RD&T
programs and activities for the purposes of reducing research
duplication, enhancing opportunities for joint efforts, and ensuring
RD&T activities are meeting goals. In 2006 GAO reported that RITA had
made progress toward these ends, but needed to do more.
GAO‘s testimony focuses on (1) the importance of coordinating and
evaluating RD&T activities and (2) RITA‘s progress in implementing
GAO‘s 2006 recommendations. GAO‘s statement is based on its 2006
report, a review of best practices for coordination and evaluation, and
follow-up discussions with RITA officials on actions to implement GAO‘s
recommendations. GAO did not assess whether RITA‘s actions have
improved the effectiveness of the department‘s RD&T investment.
What GAO Found:
Coordinating and evaluating research are important elements in ensuring
that federal dollars are used efficiently and effectively. Coordinating
research enhances collaboration, ensures that questions are explored,
and reduces inefficiencies, such as from duplication of research.
Evaluating research activities entails comparing research with
established performance measures in agency strategic plans and using
expert reviews to assess the quality of the research. With DOT‘s large
RD&T budget”over $1.1 billion”coordination and evaluation are critical
to making cost-effective investment choices in today‘s climate of
expected trillion-dollar deficits.
RITA has fully implemented five recommendations that GAO made in 2006
aimed at enhancing RITA‘s ability to manage and determine the
effectiveness of RD&T activities, and partially implemented the
remaining two. (See table below.) Regarding implemented
recommendations, most notably, RITA has implemented a strategy to
coordinate RD&T activities and look for areas where joint efforts would
be appropriate. Results of its coordination efforts have identified a
number of areas for cross-modal collaboration, including the areas of
climate change and freight capacity. RITA has also developed a strategy
to ensure that the results of DOT‘s research activities are evaluated
against best practices, using governmentwide guidance and external
stakeholder reviews. Regarding partially implemented recommendations,
RITA has not yet developed an overall strategy, evaluation plan, or
performance measures that delineate how its activities ensure the
effectiveness of the department‘s RD&T investment. However, it has
developed a process for doing so. In this regard, RITA plans to use an
existing departmentwide strategic planning and budget process and
collaborative meetings to develop an overall strategy and performance
measures. RITA officials expect that it will fully implement activities
related to this recommendation by 2012. GAO will continue to monitor
RITA‘s activities.
Table: Status of RITA‘s Implementation of GAO‘s 2006 Recommendations:
Recommendation: Develop a strategy for identifying and reviewing all of
DOT‘s RD&T projects to determine areas of unnecessary duplication,
overlap, and opportunities for joint efforts; Status: Implemented.
Recommendation: Develop a strategy to ensure that the results of all of
DOT‘s RD&T activities are evaluated according to established best
practices; Status: Implemented.
Recommendation: Develop a DOT-wide database of all of DOT‘s RD&T
projects; Status: Implemented.
Recommendation: Develop a summary of all of DOT‘s RD&T program
evaluations; Status: Implemented.
Recommendation: Develop a description of RITA‘s process for
systematically evaluating the results of its own multimodal research
programs and how this process will be applied to future multimodal
research programs that RITA conducts; Status: Implemented.
Recommendation: Develop performance goals, an overall implementing
strategy, and an evaluation plan that delineate how the activities and
results of its coordination, facilitation, and review practices will
further DOT‘s mission and ensure the effectiveness of the department‘s
RD&T investment; Status: Partially implemented.
Recommendation: Develop common performance measures related to DOT‘s
RD&T activities in consultation with the operating administrations;
Status: Partially implemented.
Source: GAO analysis of RITA information.
[End of table]
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-09-361T]. For more
information, contact David Wise at (202) 512-2834 or wised@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
We appreciate the opportunity to participate in this hearing on the
Department of Transportation's (DOT) research, development, and
technology (RD&T) activities. RD&T activities are vital to meeting
DOT's transportation priorities, such as increasing safety, enhancing
mobility, and supporting the nation's economic growth. In fiscal year
2008, the department's RD&T budget totaled over $1.1 billion, primarily
for projects undertaken by DOT's Federal Highway Administration and
Federal Aviation Administration. Coordinating RD&T throughout DOT and
reviewing it to make sure that it is evaluated is important to ensure
the efficiency and effectiveness of RD&T investment.
Over the years, we and others have raised concerns about DOT's
capabilities for improving RD&T coordination and evaluation across the
agency.[Footnote 1] In part to ameliorate those concerns, in 2004
Congress created the Research and Innovative Technology Administration
(RITA).[Footnote 2] RITA is responsible for coordinating, facilitating,
and reviewing the department's RD&T programs and activities to identify
research duplication and opportunities for joint efforts and to ensure
RD&T activities are meeting intended or other goals. These include
activities conducted by DOT's operating administrations as well as
other RD&T and statistical programs managed by RITA (e.g., the Bureau
of Transportation Statistics and University Transportation Centers).
RITA carries out its responsibilities through multiple groups and
actions, including its two coordinating bodies--the RD&T Planning
Council and Planning Team--and budget reviews. While RITA has DOT-wide
responsibilities, it does not have the authority to direct changes in
the operating administrations' RD&T activities. In 2006, we reported on
RITA's progress in overseeing RD&T activities and made seven
recommendations to enhance RITA's ability to manage and ensure the
effectiveness of these activities.[Footnote 3]
My testimony today addresses the importance of coordinating and
evaluating RD&T so that federal dollars are used efficiently and
effectively, as well as RITA's progress in implementing our 2006
recommendations. It is based primarily on our 2006 report, a review of
best practices for coordination and evaluation, and follow-up
discussions with RITA officials on actions taken on our
recommendations. We have not assessed whether RITA's actions have
improved the effectiveness of the department's RD&T investment since
our 2006 report. We conducted this work in January and February 2009 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.
Coordination and Evaluation of RD&T Activities Help Promote Efficient
and Effective Use of Federal Research Funds:
Coordinating and evaluating research are important elements in ensuring
federal dollars are used efficiently and effectively. RITA is
responsible for coordinating and reviewing the DOT operating
administrations' RD&T activities so that (1) no unnecessary duplication
takes place and (2) the activities have been evaluated in accordance
with best practices. The Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public
Policy--a joint committee of the National Academy of Sciences, the
National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine--has
emphasized the importance of careful coordination and focused
evaluation of federal research and developed principles to help
agencies evaluate their research programs.[Footnote 4] The committee
recommended establishing a formal process to coordinate research across
agencies. While this recommendation is focused on cross-agency
research, the goals--enhancing collaboration, ensuring that questions
are explored, and reducing inefficiencies--are important and applicable
within agencies as well. Coordination of research ensures that
information is shared so that, if necessary, research can be adjusted
to ensure a field is appropriately covered and understood. In addition,
the committee noted that evaluating research against established
performance measures in agency strategic plans, developing measures
that are appropriate for the type of research being developed, and
using expert reviews aid in assessing the quality of the research.
Relatedly, the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA)
requires federal agencies to set performance goals and measure
performance against those goals to ensure the effectiveness of federal
investments. 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.
Making appropriate and cost-effective investment choices is an
essential aspect of responsible fiscal stewardship. Such choices are
even more important in today's climate of expected trillion-dollar
deficits. Careful decisions will need to be made to ensure that RD&T
activities achieve their intended (or other) purposes and do so
efficiently and economically.
RITA Has Made Progress in Improving Its Coordination, Review, and
Performance Measurement of DOT's RD&T Programs:
In 2006, we made seven recommendations to enhance RITA's ability to
manage and ensure the effectiveness of RD&T activities, including
developing strategies for coordinating and reviewing RD&T activities
and developing performance goals and measures. (See table 1.) RITA has
implemented five of our recommendations and is making progress on
implementing the remaining two.
Table 1: Status of RITA's Implementation of GAO's 2006 Recommendations:
Recommendations: Develop and incorporate into RITA's annual budget
process and the RD&T strategic plan;
* a strategy for identifying and reviewing all of DOT's RD&T projects
to determine areas of unnecessary duplication, overlap, and
opportunities for joint efforts;
Status: Implemented.
* a strategy to ensure that the results of all of DOT's RD&T activities
are evaluated according to established best practices;
Status: Implemented.
* a DOT-wide database of all of DOT's RD&T projects that will support
RITA's coordination, facilitation, and review efforts and will assist
in the implementation of the strategies discussed above;
Status: Implemented.
* a summary of all of DOT's RD&T program evaluations, including ongoing
and completed evaluations, and a schedule of future evaluations;
Status: Implemented.
* a description of RITA's process for systematically evaluating the
results of its own multimodal research programs and how this process
will be applied to future multimodal research programs that RITA
conducts;
Status: Implemented.
Recommendations: Develop and incorporate the following into RITA's year
annual budget process;
* performance goals, an overall implementing strategy, and an
evaluation plan that delineate how the activities and results of its
coordination, facilitation, and review practices will further DOT's
mission and ensure the effectiveness of the department's RD&T
investment;
Status: Partially implemented.
* common performance measures related to DOT's RD&T activities, which
should be developed in consultation with the operating administrations;
Status: Partially implemented.
Source: GAO analysis of RITA information.
[End of table]
RITA Implemented a Coordination and Review Strategy, Developed a DOT-
wide Database of RD&T Activities, and Communicated Results of
Evaluations:
Preventing duplication of effort. In response to our recommendation,
RITA developed a strategy to ensure that no unnecessary duplication of
research programs occurs within the department, incorporated the
results into various high-level DOT planning documents, and reported
the results in its strategic plan. RITA's strategy consists of ongoing
internal reviews of all of DOT's research programs. These reviews are
conducted by (1) convening meetings in which officials from each of the
operating administrations share information about areas of ongoing and
planned research, seeking opportunities for joint effort, and (2)
conducting annual reviews of each operating administration's research
plans, looking for research duplication, among other things. In
addition, RITA has formed eight working groups, in concert with DOT's
operating administrations, to foster collaboration on cross-modal
issues. According to a RITA official, results of these reviews have
identified several areas for cross-modal collaboration, including
climate change, freight capacity, security, alternative energy
technologies, and advanced materials and sensors. According to RITA
officials, as a result of these actions, RITA is better able to meet
legislative and DOT requirements for coordinating its research,
leverage resources for cross-modal research initiatives, and prevent
unnecessary research duplication.
Following best practices. RITA also developed a strategy to ensure that
the results of all DOT's research activities are evaluated according to
established best practices. The strategy includes three primary
mechanisms: (1) ensuring systematic application of the Office of
Management and Budget's Research and Development Investment Criteria
(relevance, quality, and performance) and the Program Assessment Rating
Tool by the operating administrations;[Footnote 5] (2) annual internal
program reviews with self-reporting by the operating administrations;
and (3) documenting the operating administrations' external stakeholder
coordination and review. According to RITA, reviews conducted in fiscal
years 2007 and 2008 focused on how well the operating administrations
are implementing best practices, including external stakeholder
involvement, merit review of competitive proposals, independent expert
review, research performance measures, and external research
coordination. RITA reports the results of its reviews to the
department's RD&T Planning Council, which consists of administrators
from each of the operating administrations, including RITA, and
officials from DOT's Office of the Secretary. According to RITA
officials, as a result of these efforts, RITA is better able to
determine the quality and effectiveness of its research activities and
investments and determine whether they are achieving their intended (or
other) goals.
Establishing RD&T project databases. RITA created two database systems
to inventory and track all of DOT's research activities and provide
tools for querying and searching individual projects to identify
potential duplication and areas where operating administrations could
collaborate. The first database, the RITA Research Notification System,
captures research investments at the transaction level, allowing users
to search by activity, contracts and grants, and contractor names,
enabling identification of funded programs for coordination,
collaboration and review. The second database is part of the annual
Research Planning and Investment Coordination (RPIC) process, which
captures research at the budget request level, allowing for
departmentwide transparency and coordination of proposed programs and
projects. According to a RITA official, eventual combination of the two
databases will offer a mechanism for measuring and tracking investments
from request through funding and execution.
Communicating evaluation efforts. To communicate its efforts in
evaluating DOT's research to Congress, senior DOT officials, and the
transportation community, RITA and its predecessor organization
published a summary of all research program evaluations for 2004
through 2006 and included that summary in a high-level DOT planning
document and in a report to Congress. First, RITA's predecessor
published what was essentially a summary of all research program
evaluations conducted in fiscal year 2004--in the form of a summary of
the results of its review of the operating administrations' application
of the Office of Management and Budget's Research and Development
Investment Criteria--in its 2005 annual RD&T plan. Secondly, RITA
developed a summary of the results of its fiscal year 2005 and 2006
research program reviews, and a schedule of RITA's planned fiscal year
2007 reviews, and included it in DOT's "Research, Development and
Technology Annual Funding Fiscal Years 2006-2008, A Report to
Congress." This report also includes summaries of research program
evaluations conducted by modal research advisory committees, the
Transportation Research Board, and key modal stakeholders in fiscal
years 2006 and 2007. According to RITA officials, as a result of this
reporting, RITA has provided better continuity and context to Congress
and the transportation community about the results of its research
evaluations.
Documenting processes. RITA has also acted to document its process for
systematically evaluating the results of its own multimodal research
programs, such as the Hydrogen Safety Program and various grant
programs. RITA evaluates the results of its RD&T activities by ensuring
they align with DOT goals, meet the research and development investment
criteria, and are subject to an annual peer review process. RITA has
documented this process in its strategic plan.
RITA Has Not Yet Developed an Overall Implementing Strategy, Evaluation
Plan, or Performance Measures:
Establishing performance goals. In 2006, we found that RITA lacked
performance goals and an implementing strategy and evaluation plan to
delineate how the activities and results of its coordination,
facilitation, and review practices will further DOT's mission and
ensure the effectiveness of the department's RD&T investment. RITA has
partially implemented our recommendation that it develop these
elements. Setting meaningful goals for performance, and using
performance information to measure performance against those goals, is
consistent with requirements in GPRA. Developing an evaluation plan and
analyzing performance information against set goals for its own
coordination, facilitation, and review practices could assist RITA in
identifying any problem areas and taking corrective actions.[Footnote
6] Linking performance goals with the planning and budget process, such
as DOT's annual budget process, can also help RITA determine where to
target its resources to improve performance.[Footnote 7] Guidance
provided by the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy
notes that evaluating the performance of research in the context of the
strategic planning process ensures the research is relevant to the
agency's mission.[Footnote 8] Without such goals and an evaluation
plan, it is difficult for RITA to determine its success in overseeing
the effectiveness of DOT's RD&T activities.
According to RITA officials, while an overall implementing strategy and
evaluation plan has not yet been established, RITA has created
performance goals. A RITA official told us that the RPIC process--a
relatively new process that integrates the budget and strategic
planning processes--will help in creating an implementing strategy. The
RPIC process is meant to provide information to the Planning Council
and Planning Team, which is responsible for defining the department's
overall RD&T strategic objectives. The RPIC process assesses the
department's RD&T activities in terms of the following performance
goals: (1) balanced portfolio (e.g., mix of basic, applied,
developmental, and high risk RD&T), (2) alignment of RD&T programs with
DOT goals and each operating administration's mission, and (3) return
on investment. The RPIC process has been in place only for fiscal year
2009, and as a result, the Planning Council does not yet have the
information needed to make decisions about a strategy. In addition,
RITA does not yet have an evaluation plan to monitor and evaluate
whether it is achieving its goals. A RITA official told us that the
RPIC process needs to be in place for 2 or 3 fiscal years before it can
provide enough information for RITA to establish a strategy or
evaluation plan.
Developing performance measures. In 2006, we also found that RITA did
not work with the operating administrations to develop common
performance measures for DOT's RD&T activities. According to RITA
officials, RITA has partially implemented our recommendation that it do
so. Without common performance measures for the RD&T activities of the
operating administrations, RITA and the operating administrations lack
the means to monitor and evaluate the collective results of those
activities and determine that they are achieving their intended (or
other) results and furthering DOT-wide priorities. In response to our
recommendation, RITA officials told us that they are working with the
operating administrations through the RD&T Planning Team--made up of
senior officials in RITA and each of the operating administrations.
During Planning Team meetings, representatives from each of the
operating administrations share information about how RD&T projects are
measured and prioritized. For example, according to a RITA official,
the Federal Railroad Administration measures how frequently its RD&T
projects are used in real-world applications. Once representatives from
each operating administration have had the chance to share information,
RITA officials will then look for commonalities and determine whether
any of the measures could be adopted for the department's RD&T
activities.
In closing, since it became operational in 2005, RITA has taken a
number of positive steps to meet its vision of becoming a DOT-wide
resource for managing and ensuring the effectiveness of RD&T
activities. While we have not assessed the effectiveness of these
efforts since our 2006 report, we believe that RITA has made progress.
We will continue to monitor RITA's performance in implementing our
recommendations. As reauthorization approaches, we look forward to
assisting Congress as it considers RITA's management of DOT's research
program, to better ensure that taxpayers receive the maximum value for
DOT's RD&T investment.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased
to respond to any questions that you or other members of the
subcommittee might have.
Contact and Acknowledgments:
For further information regarding this statement, please contact David
Wise at (202) 512-2834 or wised@gao.gov. Individuals who made key
contributions to this statement are Michelle Everett, Colin Fallon,
Erin Henderson, and James Ratzenberger.
Footnotes:
[1] GAO, Transportation Research: Actions Needed to Improve
Coordination and Evaluation of Research, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-500] (Washington, D.C.: May 1,
2003).
[2] The Norman Y. Mineta Research and Special Programs Improvement Act
of 2004, which also dissolved RITA's predecessor administration, the
Research and Special Programs Administration.
[3] GAO, Transportation Research: Opportunities for Improving the
Oversight of DOT's Research Programs and User Satisfaction with
Transportation Statistics, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-917] (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 15,
2006).
[4] Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Evaluating
Federal Research Programs: Research and the Government Performance and
Results Act (Washington, D.C.: February 1999).
[5] According to the Office of Management and Budget, these criteria
are rooted in best practices and include peer review as a mechanism for
assessing program quality. The Program Assessment Rating Tool was
developed to assess and improve program performance to inform funding
and management decisions. It consists of a series of questions covering
program purpose and design; performance measurement, evaluations, and
strategic planning; program management; and program results.
[6] Use of performance goals can help ensure that programs are meeting
their intended goals, allows programs to assess the efficiency of their
processes, and promotes continuous improvement. Where activities may be
fragmented or overlap, performance information can also help identify
performance variations and redundancies and lay the foundation for
improved coordination, program consolidation, or elimination of
unneeded programs. GAO, Managing for Results: Using the Results Act to
Address Mission Fragmentation and Program Overlap, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/AIMD-97-146] (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 29,
1997).
[7] GAO, Managing for Results: Enhancing Agency Use of Performance
Information for Management Decision Making, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-927] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 9,
2005).
[8] Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Evaluating
Federal Research Programs: Research and the Government Performance and
Results Act (Washington, D.C.: February 1999), 37-38.
[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:
