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. Most of the Highly Visited Park Units Saw a Decline in Allocations for Daily Operations after Adjusting for Inflation

About seventy-four percent of the 83 most highly visited park units—over  one million recreation visits per year—showed an average annual decline  in inflation-adjusted terms in daily operations allocations from fiscal years  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. On an average annual basis, each unit experienced an increase in daily  operations allocations, but most experienced a decline in inflation-adjusted  terms. Increases in Operating Costs and New Park Service Management Requirements May Affect Daily Operations

Despite increases in inflation-adjusted allocations for daily operations at 4  of the 12 park units visited, officials at all 12 park units explained that this  funding did not increase commensurately with increases in operating costs  and new management requirements. While officials stated that these policies were important, implementing  them without additional allocations reduced their management flexibility. 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 alleviate  the pressure on funds for daily operations, we believe it would be  appropriate for the Park Service to follow through with revising this policy. Park Units Used Other Authorized Funding Sources to Support Park Service Operations

When funds allocated for daily operations were not sufficient to pay for  activities that were previously paid with this source, the park units we  visited reported that they deferred activities or relied on other authorized  funding sources such as allocations for projects, visitor fees, donations  from cooperating associations and friends groups, and concessions fees. The Park Service Has Undertaken Three Management Initiatives to Address Fiscal Performance and Accountability of Park Units

The Park Service identified three management initiatives that it 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. Since then, about 25 percent of all park units have participated in the  process. 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. Recommendation for Executive Action

To reduce some of the pressure on funding for daily operations, we are  recommending that the Secretary of the Interior direct the Park Service  Director to follow through in revising Park Service policy to allow park  units to use visitor fee revenues to pay the costs of permanent employees  administering projects funded by visitor fees to the extent authorized by  law. In addition to obtaining  data on allocations for daily operations on a servicewide level, we also  gathered data on the allocations for daily operations for individual park  units to determine how many have received operating increases or  decreases, and how many have remained relatively constant. To identify recent management initiatives the Park Service has under way  to address fiscal performance and accountability for fiscal years 2001 to  2005, we gathered and reviewed documentation on several management  initiatives including the Business Plan Initiative, the Core Operations  Analysis, and the Park Scorecard. 2. National Park Service: Employee Housing Issues.
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. GAO was asked to identify (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.

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 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 that 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 we visited with a business plan, officials stated that the plans, 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.