For farm programs other than the commodity programs, we found no substantial change in the amount of time farmers spend on paperwork and the number of visits they make to county offices. FSA Could Use Alternative Delivery Methods, but Such Changes Would Require Fundamental Shifts in Its Relationship With Farmers

FSA could use alternative methods—such as mail and telecommunications—to enroll farmers in programs and deliver program benefits more efficiently. We found no statutory or regulatory requirements that direct farmers to visit a county office in order to meet paperwork requirements. Using alternative delivery methods should allow USDA to operate with fewer staff and offices, which could reduce personnel expenses by millions of dollars. FSA county offices have long provided a high level of personal service to farmers. We met with departmental officials, including the Associate Administrator of the Farm Service Agency. In addition, the Department noted that while alternative delivery methods may reduce government expenses, such changes could increase costs and administrative requirements for the farmers themselves. Scope and Methodology

To determine the extent to which the changes in the farm programs resulting from the 1996 act have reduced farmers’ administrative requirements, we discussed the administrative requirements for major farm programs prior to and after the 1996 act with USDA headquarters, state, and county officials. We reviewed the documentation that USDA submitted to the Office of Management and Budget to justify the need for the paperwork requirements for these programs, as well as the time associated with completing the forms.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO examined the administrative requirements placed on farmers participating in the revamped farm programs, as well as the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) efficiency in delivering program services to farmers, focusing on the: (1) extent to which the changes to the farm programs resulting from the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 have reduced farmers' administrative requirements; and (2) possibility of having USDA use alternative delivery methods to more efficiently administer farm programs.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) farmers are now generally spending less time on administrative requirements than they did before the 1996 act; (2) the number of required visits to county offices has declined, as has the amount of time spent completing paperwork for the farm programs; (3) the Farm Service Agency (FSA) could transact more with business farmers through the mail and by telephone and computer, thus increasing the efficiency of its operations; (4) using alternative delivery methods should allow USDA to operate with fewer staff and offices, which could reduce expenses by millions of dollars; (5) while GAO found no statutory or regulatory requirements that direct farmers to visit county offices, changing delivery methods to rely more on such approaches will require fundamental changes in the FSA's long-standing practices and relationships with farmers; and (6) in particular, such methods would reduce farmers' personal contact with county office staff and place greater administrative responsibility on farmers to ensure that required paperwork is completed and submitted in a timely fashion.