In addition to daily operations funding, the Park Service also allocates  project-related funding to park units for specific purposes to support its  mission. Since 2002, the Park Service has required park units to spend the  majority of their visitor fees on deferred maintenance projects, such as  road or building repair. Appropriations for the Operation of the National Park System Account Increased Overall from Fiscal Year 2001 to 2005; When Adjusted for Inflation, the Total Allocation for Daily Operations Declined Overall and the Total Allocation for Projects Increased Overall

Overall appropriations for the ONPS account—including the amounts the  Park Service allocated for daily operations and projects—rose in both  nominal and inflation-adjusted dollars overall from fiscal year 2001  through 2005. Increases in the Cyclic Maintenance and Repair and  Rehabilitation programs reflect an emphasis on the effort for the Park  Service to reduce its estimated $5 billion maintenance backlog. Increases  in the Inventory and Monitoring Program reflect an emphasis on  protecting natural resources primarily through an initiative called the  Natural Resource Challenge. Allocation Trends for Projects and Daily Operations at 12 High- Visitation Park Units Varied, but All 12 Parks Reported Reduced Services and an Increasing Reliance on Other Authorized Sources to Supplement Daily Operations Allocations

All 12 park units we visited received allocations for projects from fiscal  years 2001 through 2005 that varied among years and among park units. On an average annual basis, each unit experienced an increase in  daily operations allocations, but most experienced a decline in inflation- adjusted terms. Officials at each park believed that their daily operations  allocations were not sufficient to address increases in operating costs and  new Park Service management requirements. Park Service  officials reported that the Park Service covered these salary increases with  appropriations provided in the ONPS account. While officials stated that these policies were important,  implementing them without additional allocations reduced their  management flexibility. Furthermore, while the Park Service may use visitor fees to pay salaries  for permanent staff that manage and administer projects funded with  visitor fees, it has a policy prohibiting such use. To address differences between allocations for daily operations and  expenses, officials at the park units we visited reported that they reduced  or eliminated some services paid with daily operations allocations— including some that directly affected visitors and park resources. The Park Service Has Undertaken Three Management Initiatives to Address Fiscal Performance and Accountability of Park Units

We identified three management initiatives that the Park Service has  undertaken to address the fiscal performance and accountability of park  units and to better manage within their available resources: the Business  Plan Initiative (BPI), the Core Operations Analysis (COA), and the Park  Scorecard. All 12 of the park units we visited have completed a business  plan. Many officials—both at the unit level and headquarters—stated that  business plans are, among other things, useful in helping them identify  future budget needs. Park unit officials told us that the  preliminary results have helped them determine where efficiencies in  operations might accrue. GAO Recommendation and Agency Response

To reduce some of the pressure on funding for daily operations, we  recommended that the Secretary of the Interior direct the Director of the  Park Service to revise its policy to allow park units to use visitor fee  revenue to pay the cost of permanent employees administering projects  funded by visitor fees to the extent authorized by law. The department  also believes that while employment levels at individual park units may  have fluctuated for many reasons, employment servicewide, including  both seasonal and permanent employees, was stable.
Why GAO Did This Study

In recent years, some reports prepared by advocacy groups have raised issues concerning the adequacy of the Park Service's financial resources needed to effectively operate the park units. This statement addresses (1) funding trends for park service operations and visitor fees for fiscal years 2001-2005; (2) specific funding trends for 12 selected high-visitation park units and how, if at all, the funding trends have affected operations; and (3) recent management initiatives the Park Service has undertaken to address fiscal performance and accountability of park units. This statement is based on GAO's March 2006 report, National Park Service: Major Operations Funding Trends and How Selected Park Units Responded to Those Trends for Fiscal Years 2001 through 2005, GAO-06-431 (Washington, D.C.: March 31, 2006).

What GAO Found

Overall, amounts appropriated to the National Park Service (Park Service) in the Operation of the National Park System account increased from 2001 to 2005. In inflation-adjusted terms, amounts allocated by the Park Service to park units from this appropriation for daily operations declined while project-related allocations increased. Project-related allocations increased primarily in (1) Cyclic Maintenance and Repair and Rehabilitation programs to reflect an emphasis on reducing the estimated $5 billion maintenance backlog and (2) the inventory and monitoring program to protect natural resources through the Natural Resource Challenge initiative. Also, on an average annual basis, visitor fees collected increased about 1 percent--a 2 percent decline when adjusted for inflation. All park units we visited received project-related allocations, but most of the park units experienced declines in inflation-adjusted terms in their allocations for daily operations. Each of the 12 park units reported their daily operations allocations were not sufficient to address increases in operating costs, such as salaries, and new Park Service requirements. In response, officials reported that they either eliminated or reduced some services or relied on other authorized sources to pay operating expenses that have historically been paid with allocations for daily operations. Also, implementing important Park Service policies--without additional allocations--has placed additional demands on the park units and reduced their flexibility. For example, the Park Service has directed its park units to spend most of their visitor fees on deferred maintenance projects. While the Park Service may use visitor fees to pay salaries for permanent staff who administer projects funded with these fees, it has a policy prohibiting such use. To alleviate the pressure on daily operations allocations, we believe it would be appropriate to use visitor fees to pay the salaries of employees working on visitor fee funded projects. Interior believes that, while employment levels at individual park units may have fluctuated for many reasons, employment servicewide was stable, including both seasonal and permanent employees. GAO identified three initiatives--Business Plan, Core Operations Analysis, and Park Scorecard--to address park units' fiscal performance and operational condition. Of the park units with a business plan we visited, officials stated that the plan, among other things, have helped them better identify future budget needs. Due to its early development stage, only a few park units have participated in the Core Operations Analysis; for those we visited who have, officials said that they are better able to determine where operational efficiencies might accrue. Park Service headquarters used the Scorecard to validate and approve increases in funding for daily operations for fiscal year 2005.