Review of Interagency Task Force on Property Management and the GSA Systems Furniture Program

The Interagency Task Force on Property Management was established to review the extent and means of property disposal, the sufficiency of the Federal Property Management Regulations and agency rules and regulations, and the General Services Administration's (GSA) oversight responsibility. The Task Force was hastily formed with little or no advance planning regarding objectives, scope, staffing needs, or timeframe. GSA served as the coordinator for the Task Force, but no organizational structure and no direct authority or responsibility was established. The informal structure resulted in a lack of direction and control. The level of audit coverage varied greatly among the participating agencies due to the lack of planning by GSA and the Task Force in scoping the audit and a wide variance in the commitment and support given by the agencies involved. There was little contact among the agencies. Coordination and cooperation were loose. A list of potential findings presented at the January 22, 1980, Task Force meeting included unneeded furniture in storage, procurement for innapropriate reasons, poor administrative controls, and improper furniture disposal. In 1978, GSA established the Systems Furniture Test Program to place systems furniture in Government space; maximize the chances of successful installations; minimize problems by use of specific reviews, strict qualifications, and tight process controls; and demonstrate cost-effectiveness over the life of each project. GAO believed that GSA unwisely allowed too many projects into the test program. Agencies participating in the program were not required to submit sufficient data for GSA to adequately judge whether each project would be cost effective. GAO found that the space savings expected by GSA were not as great as anticipated and costs were significantly greater than estimated. GSA should rescind all approvals for systems furniture projects not yet completed until major questions relating to its cost-effectiveness are resolved.