	Overlap and Fragmentation Can Indicate Unnecessary Duplication

We identified 34 areas where agencies, offices, or initiatives may have  similar or overlapping objectives or may provide similar services to the  same populations; or where government missions are fragmented across  multiple agencies or programs (see table 1). Overlap and fragmentation  among government programs or activities can be harbingers of  unnecessary duplication. The areas identified below are not intended to  represent the full universe of duplication, overlap, or fragmentation within  the federal government. Our future work will examine other areas of  government for potential duplication, overlap, and fragmentation. As table 1 shows, many of the issues we identified are focused on activities  that are contained within single departments or agencies. In those cases,  agency officials can generally achieve cost savings or other benefits by  implementing existing GAO recommendations or by undertaking new  actions suggested in our March 1 report. However, a number of issues we  have identified span multiple organizations and therefore may require  higher-level attention by the executive branch or enhanced congressional  oversight or legislative action. With the proliferation  of these contracts, however, there is a risk of unintended duplication and  inefficiency. In addition, options such as consolidating or  eliminating overlapping programs have the potential to reduce  administrative costs but may not reduce spending on benefits unless fewer  individuals are served as a result    Employment and training programs: In fiscal year 2009, 47 federal  employment and training programs spent about $18 billion to provide  services, such as job search and job counseling, to program participants. Opportunities Exist for Other Cost Savings or Revenue Enhancements

Given today’s fiscal environment, our work summarizes 47 additional  areas—beyond those directly related to duplication, overlap, or  fragmentation—describing other opportunities for agencies or Congress to  consider taking action that could either reduce the cost of government  operations or enhance revenue collections for the Treasury. These cost- saving and revenue-enhancing opportunities also span a wide range of  federal government agencies and mission areas (see table 2). The President’s 2011 budget proposal  contains a provision that would address the need for more complete and  accurate information on noncovered state and local pensions, and it  estimates savings of $2.9 billion over 10 years. Although Congress has increased the amount of  some fixed penalties since our report, only two penalties are to be  adjusted for inflation on a periodic basis. In conclusion Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cummings, and Members of  the Committee, given the challenges noted above, careful, thoughtful  actions will be needed to address many of the issues discussed in our  March 1 report, particularly those involving potential duplication, overlap,  and fragmentation among federal programs and activities. These are  difficult issues to address because they may require agencies and Congress  to re-examine within and across various mission areas the fundamental  structure, operation, funding, and performance of a number of long- standing federal programs or activities with entrenched constituencies. As the nation rises to meet the current fiscal challenges, GAO will  continue to assist Congress and federal agencies in identifying actions  needed to reduce duplication, overlap, and fragmentation; achieve cost  savings; and enhance revenues. In our future annual reports, we will look  at additional federal programs and activities to identify further instances  of duplication, overlap, and fragmentation as well as other opportunities  to reduce the cost of government operations and increase revenues to the  government. Specific questions about individual  issues may be directed to the area contact listed at the end of each area  summary in the report.
Why GAO Did This Study

This testimony discusses our first annual report to Congress responding to a new statutory requirement that GAO identify federal programs, agencies, offices, and initiatives--either within departments or governmentwide--that have duplicative goals or activities. This work will inform government policymakers as they address the rapidly building fiscal pressures facing our national government. Our annual simulations of the federal government's fiscal outlook show continually increasing levels of debt that are unsustainable over time, absent changes in the federal government's current fiscal policies. Since the end of the recent recession, the gross domestic product has grown slowly and unemployment has remained at a high leveWhile the economy is still recovering and in need of careful attenwidespread agreement exists on the need to look not only at the near term but also at steps that begin to change the long-term fiscal path as soon as possible without slowing the recovery. With the passage of time, the window to address the fiscal challenge narrows and the magnitude of the required changes grows. This testimony is based on our March 1, 2011, report and addresses two key issues: (1) federal programs or functional areas where unnecessary duplication, overlap, or fragmentation exists, the actions needed to address such conditions, and the potential financial and other benefits of doing so; and (2) other opportunities for potential cost savings or enhanced revenues. The issues raised in the report were drawn from our prior and ongoing work.

What GAO Found

We identified 81 areas for consideration--34 areas of potential duplication, overlap, or fragmentation as well as 47 additional cost-saving and revenue-enhancing areas. The 81 areas span a range of federal government missions such as agriculture, defense, economic development, energy, general government, health, homeland security, international affairs, and social services. Within and across these missions, our report touches on hundreds of federal programs, affecting virtually all major federal departments and agencies. By reducing or eliminating unnecessary duplication, overlap, or fragmentation and by addressing the other cost-saving and revenue-enhancing opportunities contained in the report, the federal government could yield tens of billions of tax dollars annually and help agencies provide more efficient and effective services. However, these actions will require some difficult decisions, and sustained attention by the administration and the Congress. In some cases, there is sufficient information to estimate potential savings or other benefits if actions are taken to address individual issues. In other cases, estimates of cost savings or other benefits would depend upon what congressional and executive branch decisions were made, including how certain of our recommendations are implemented. Nevertheless, considering the amount of program dollars involved in the issues we have identified, even limited adjustments could result in significant savings. Additionally, information on program performance, the level of funding in agency budgets devoted to overlapping or fragmented programs, and the implementation costs that might be associated with program consolidations or terminations, are factors that could impact actions to be taken as well as potential savings. We identified 34 areas where agencies, offices, or initiatives may have similar or overlapping objectives or may provide similar services to the same populations; or where government missions are fragmented across multiple agencies or programs. Overlap and fragmentation among government programs or activities can be harbingers of unnecessary duplication. The areas identified below are not intended to represent the full universe of duplication, overlap, or fragmentation within the federal government. Our future work will examine other areas of government for potential duplication, overlap, and fragmentation. Given today's fiscal environment, our work summarizes 47 additional areas--beyond those directly related to duplication, overlap, or fragmentation--describing other opportunities for agencies or Congress to consider taking action that could either reduce the cost of government operations or enhance revenue collections for the Treasury. These cost-saving and revenue-enhancing opportunities also span a wide range of federal government agencies and mission areas.