	Agencies Assess the Effectiveness of Their Programs in Several Ways but Have Not Consistently Conducted Reviews That Could Improve Responses to Fires

In our September 2015 report, we found that the agencies assess the  effectiveness of their wildland fire management programs in several  ways, including through performance measures, efforts to assess specific  activities, and reviews of specific wildland fire incidents. We also found that the agencies had conducted reviews of  their responses to wildland fires, but that they did not consistently follow  agency policy in doing so or use specific criteria for selecting the fires  they reviewed, limiting their ability to help ensure that their fire reviews  provided useful information and meaningful results. For example, in fiscal year 2014, the Forest Service began  developing a performance measure intended to reflect that, in some  cases, allowing naturally-ignited fires to burn can provide natural resource  benefits at a lower cost and lower risk to personnel than fully suppressing  the fire as quickly as possible. The officials told us  they plan to finalize the measure and use it in 2017. Agencies Have Undertaken Multiple Efforts to Assess Effectiveness of Specific Activities

The agencies have also undertaken multiple efforts to assess the  effectiveness of particular wildland fire management activities, such as  fuel reduction and aerial firefighting. Since the 1960s, multiple reviews of  federal fire aviation programs have called for the Forest Service and  Interior to collect information on the performance of firefighting aircraft. The agencies generally agreed with our  recommendation. The Forest Service and Interior Agencies Have Not Consistently Conducted Reviews of Wildland Fire Incidents to Assess their Effectiveness

As detailed in our September 2015 report, the Forest Service and the  Interior agencies have conducted reviews to assess their effectiveness in  responding to wildland fires, but have not consistently followed agency  policy in doing so and did not always use specific criteria for selecting the  fires they reviewed. Instead, Forest Service officials told us the agency  judgmentally selects incidents to review based on a range of broad  criteria, such as complexity and national significance, taking into account  political, social, natural resource, or policy concerns. Within Interior, Bureau of Land Management officials told us that the  agency completed its last fire review based on significant cost (i.e.,  federal expenditures of $10 million or more) in 2013. These officials told  us that the Bureau of Land Management, similar to the Forest Service,  plans to shift the emphasis of its fire reviews to evaluate management  actions rather than focusing on cost, and that officials are working to  determine criteria for selecting fires for review. As a result, we  recommended in our September 2015 report that the Secretaries of  Agriculture and the Interior direct the Chief of the Forest Service and the  Director of Interior’s Office of Wildland Fire to (1) develop specific criteria  for selecting wildland fires for review and for conducting the reviews as  part of their efforts to improve their approach to reviewing fires and  (2) once such criteria are established, revise agency policies to align with  the specific criteria developed by the agencies. The Forest Service Has Faced Challenges in Its Efforts to Modernize the Large Airtanker Fleet, but Has Increased the Availability of Large Airtankers Since Our 2013 Report

In our August 2013 report, we found that the Forest Service faced  challenges in modernizing the government’s fleet of large airtankers— which had declined from 44 in 2002 to 8 in 2013—but since that report  the agency has increased the availability of such aircraft, with some  challenges remaining. Specifically, we found that the Forest Service  planned to modernize the large airtanker fleet by obtaining large  airtankers from various sources over the near, medium, and long terms,  but that each component of this approach faced challenges that made the  continued availability of such aircraft to meet national fire suppression  needs uncertain. For the medium term, the Forest Service had awarded contracts for  seven “next-generation” large airtankers that were expected to be faster  and more up-to-date than the legacy aircraft. The Forest Service has issued additional  contracts for next-generation aircraft and, as of November 2015, the  agency had a total of 20 privately-owned large airtankers under contract,  according to Forest Service officials. One aircraft,  however, was used by the Forest Service during the 2015 wildland fire  season under an agreement with the Coast Guard, according to Forest  Service officials. However, as we found in our 2013 report,  Forest Service and Interior officials expressed concern that MAFFS  performance can be inadequate in some circumstances.
Why GAO Did This Study

Wildland fires play an important ecological role on the landscape, but they cost billions each year, result in loss of life, and cause damage to homes and other structures. The Forest Service and Interior are responsible for wildland fire management on federal lands, including acquiring firefighting assets such as large airtankers to assist in fire suppression activities. Increased fire intensity has prompted efforts aimed at implementing more effective fire management strategies. Understanding the effectiveness of these efforts takes on heightened importance given that the Forest Service and Interior have obligated $8.3 billion to suppress wildland fires in fiscal years 2009 through 2014.
This testimony is based on GAO reports issued in September 2015 and August 2013. It focuses on (1) how the federal wildland fire agencies assess the effectiveness of their wildland fire management programs and (2) Forest Service efforts to modernize the large airtanker fleet and challenges it faces in doing so. For the 2015 report, GAO reviewed agency performance measures and other ways the agencies assess effectiveness. For the 2013 report, GAO reviewed large airtanker planning and acquisition documents. GAO also conducted selected updates by reviewing documentation and interviewing officials.

What GAO Found

As GAO found in its September 2015 report, the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service and the Department of the Interior assess the effectiveness of their wildland fire management programs in several ways, including through performance measures, evaluations of particular activities, and reviews of specific wildland fires. Forest Service and Interior officials told GAO their performance measures need to be improved and that they are working to do so. For example, in fiscal year 2014, the Forest Service began developing a performance measure intended to reflect that, in some cases, allowing naturallyignited fires to burn can provide natural resource benefits at a lower cost and lower risk to personnel than fully suppressing the fire as quickly as possible. Officials told GAO they plan to finalize the measure and use it in 2017. In addition, Forest Service and Interior have undertaken efforts to evaluate particular wildland fire management activities, such as efforts to reduce potentially hazardous vegetation that can fuel fires, known as fuel reduction, and assess the performance of firefighting aircraft. However, GAO's 2015 report found that the Forest Service and Interior conducted reviews to assess their effectiveness in responding to wildland fire, but did not consistently follow agency policy which generally directs them to review each fire involving federal expenditures of $10 million or more. Forest Service and Interior officials told GAO that this policy overly emphasized the cost of wildland fire suppression rather than the effectiveness of their response to fires. However, the Forest Service and Interior have not established specific criteria for selecting fires for review and conducting the reviews. For example Forest Service officials told GAO the agency judgmentally selects incidents to review based on broad criteria such as complexity and national significance. By developing specific criteria, GAO concluded that the agencies may enhance their ability to help ensure that their fire reviews provide useful information about the effectiveness of their wildland fire activities.
In its August 2013 report, GAO found that the Forest Service faced challenges in modernizing the government's fleet of large airtankers—which had declined from 44 in 2002 to 8 in 2013—but since that report the agency has increased the availability of such aircraft. GAO found in 2013 that the Forest Service, which is responsible for contracting for large airtankers, planned to modernize the fleet by obtaining large airtankers from various sources over the near, medium, and long term, but that each component of that approach faced challenges, making the continued availability of such aircraft to meet fire suppression needs uncertain. For example, for the medium term, the Forest Service had awarded contracts for seven “next-generation” large airtankers, but as of August 2013 only one had completed necessary federal approval and certification processes. Since that report, Forest Service officials told GAO that the agency has increased the availability of large airtankers. Specifically, as of November 2015, the agency had contracted for 20 privately-owned large airtankers, and another 7 large airtankers are to be transferred to Forest Service ownership from the Coast Guard.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommended in September 2015 that the agencies develop specific criteria for reviewing wildland fires. The agencies generally agreed. GAO is not making any new recommendations in this testimony.