Seven Agencies Use Different Methodologies to Estimate How Much of the Budget Supports Combating Terrorism Activities

The seven agencies we contacted use different methods to estimate the  portion of their authorized funding that supports combating terrorism  activities. Because these methodologies involve estimations,  some level of professional judgment is inherent throughout the process. Agencies in our review manage the process of estimating funding levels for  combating terrorism activities through OMB oversight and supervisory  review. OMB staff said that they currently do not review agency estimates of  funding data for overseas combating terrorism activities because OMB is  no longer required to report on overseas combating terrorism funding  data. As a result, Congress  does not receive reports on both the homeland security and overseas  combating terrorism portions of combating terrorism funding. In our 2002 report, we recommended that OMB  require agencies to provide information on obligations in the database  used by OMB to produce the President’s annual budget request—and that  OMB should include obligations as reported in this database in its annual  report on combating terrorism. Without  including obligation data in the Analytical Perspectives, along with funding  levels authorized by Congress for agencies’ homeland security activities, it  is difficult for decision makers to know (1) how much funding from prior  years is still available to potentially reduce new spending requests,   (2) whether the rate of spending for a program is slower than anticipated,  or (3) what the level of effort (i.e., size of the program) is for a particular  year as well as for a program over time. OMB staff  continue to cite the effort required to produce such data. Similarly, implementation of our 2002 recommendation that OMB direct  relevant departments to develop or enhance combating terrorism  performance goals and measures and include such measures in the  governmentwide plan would assist in determining whether funding  increases have improved performance results. Although three of the seven agencies in our review told us that OMB did  not direct them to develop performance measures for combating  terrorism, OMB staff said that they are working with agencies on the  development of combating terrorism performance measures at the agency  level, primarily with DHS. However, OMB staff said that they have  not yet established a timeline for developing such measures. Implementation of our 2002 recommendation to include national-level and  federal governmentwide combating terrorism performance measures as a  supplement to existing strategies and their future revisions would help to  assess and improve preparedness at the federal and national levels. Moreover,  there have been no supplements or revisions to the existing national  strategies that include federal governmentwide or national-level  combating terrorism performance goals and measures. A portion of these activities are considered related to counterterrorism investigations. Appendix VII: Status of 2002 Recommendations Related to Duplication of Effort and Timely Reporting of Funding Data

This appendix discusses the status of recommendations made in our 2002  report for the Office of Management and Budget to (1) include an analysis  of duplication of effort related to combating terrorism activities in its  annual reporting of funding data associated with such activities and   (2) report this information in a timely manner to support congressional  budget decisions. GAO-03-170.
Why GAO Did This Study

The President's annual budget reports on federal funding dedicated to combating terrorism activities. Identification of such funding is inherently difficult because a significant portion of combating terrorism funding is embedded within appropriation accounts that include funding for other activities as well. In 2002, GAO reported on the difficulties that the executive branch faced in reporting funding for combating terrorism to Congress (see GAO-03-170). This report updates the information contained in the 2002 report by providing information on (1) the methods agencies use to determine the portion of their annual appropriations related to combating terrorism, and (2) the status of recommendations from GAO's 2002 report.

What GAO Found

Seven of 34 agencies that reported receiving funding related to combating terrorism activities to OMB used different methodologies to estimate the portion of their authorized funding that supports such activities. These 7 agencies account for about 90 percent of the total fiscal year 2006 budget request that the 34 agencies estimate relate to combating terrorism. All of these methods involve some level of professional judgment. Agencies stated this process is managed through OMB oversight and supervisory review. OMB staff said they do not review the overseas component of combating terrorism funding data since they are no longer required to report it. As a result, Congress does not receive OMB-reviewed data on the entirety of counterterrorism funding. Three recommendations from GAO's 2002 report have not been implemented. The first recommendation requests that OMB include agencies' obligation data in its annual reporting of funding data on combating terrorism. OMB staff continue to cite the effort required to produce such data but said they might consider reporting obligation information for a targeted set of accounts. Without obligation data, it is difficult for Congress to know (1) how much funding from prior years is still available to potentially reduce new spending requests, (2) whether the rate of spending for a program is slower than anticipated, or (3) what the size of the program is for a particular year and over time. The second recommendation was for OMB to direct relevant departments to develop or enhance combating terrorism performance goals and measures and include such measures in the governmentwide plan. Three of the seven agencies told us that OMB had not directed them to develop performance measures or enhance such measures for combating terrorism activities. However, four of the seven agencies had developed such measures. OMB staff said they are working with agencies to improve performance measurement of government programs related to combating terrorism. The development of such measures would assist Congress in determining whether funding increases have improved performance results. The third recommendation calls for the inclusion of national-level and federal governmentwide combating terrorism performance measures in supplements to existing strategies and their future revisions. There have been no supplements or revisions to the existing strategies that include governmentwide or national-level combating terrorism measures.