GSA is responsible for identifying, funding, and completing needed repairs and alterations at the federal buildings it manages. In examining the 27 projects, GSA officials used a multifaceted process that relied on empirical data and professional judgment coupled with specific selection criteria and computer analysis that compared each of the competing projects. Our report concluded that inadequate program data on repairs and alterations, the lack of a strategic plan for managing repair and alteration projects, and limited funding were three long- standing obstacles that impeded GSA’s ability to satisfy its repair and alteration needs. Conclusions

GSA’s multifaceted prospectus-level repair and alteration selection process identified needed projects for funding in fiscal year 2001. Therefore, the other 15 projects remain in GSA’s multibillion-dollar repair and alteration inventory. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to (1) examine the General Services Administration’s (GSA) process for assessing and selecting prospectus-level repair and alteration design projects for funding, (2) identify any obstacles that impede GSA from satisfying its repair and alteration requirements, and (3) document consequences associated with deferring needed repairs and alterations at selected buildings. A health and safety risk exists.
Why GAO Did This Study

The General Services Administration (GSA), the federal government's real property manager, it is responsible for identifying, funding, and completing needed repairs and alterations at federal buildings. This report examines (1) GSA's process for assessing and selecting prospectus-level major repair and alteration design projects for funding, (2) the obstacles that impede GSA from satisfying its repair and alteration requirements, and (3) the consequences associated with deferring needed repairs and alterations at selected buildings.

What GAO Found

GAO found that in fiscal year 2001, GSA assessed the merits of 27 prospectus-level repair and alteration design projects and recommended 12 for funding. These projects were selected by a multifaceted process that relied on empirical data and professional judgment coupled with specific selection criteria and computer analysis that compared competing projects. GSA explained its decisions when it recommended lower-ranked projects for repairs. However, because of insufficient funding, those projects were placed on GSA's growing repair and alteration inventory. GSA has faced long-standing obstacles, including inadequate program data, the lack of a multiyear repair and alteration plan, and limited funding, in reducing this multibillion-dollar inventory. In addition, funding limitations remain a major obstacle. Delaying or not performing needed repairs and alterations may have serious consequences, including health and safety problems.