	Performance and Accountability of USDA Programs

USDA must ensure that its programs are being implemented efficiently and  services are being delivered effectively. To do so, USDA must review the  progress it has made in achieving program goals and developing strategies  to address any gaps in performance and accountability. Our work on domestic food  assistance programs—an area where three federal agencies administer  18 programs, consisting of more than $90 billion in spending in fiscal  year 2010—suggests not enough is known about the effectiveness of  these programs. Research we reviewed suggests that participation in  seven of the USDA food assistance programs we examined, including  four of the five largest—Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for  Women, Infants, and Children; the National School Lunch Program; the  School Breakfast Program; and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance  Program—is associated with positive health and nutrition outcomes  consistent with the programs’ goals. These goals include raising the  level of nutrition among low-income households, safeguarding the  health and well-being of the nation’s children, and strengthening the  agriculture economy. However, little is known about the effectiveness  of the remaining 11 programs—9 of which are USDA programs— because they have not been well studied. GAO suggested that USDA  consider which of the lesser-studied programs need further research,  and USDA agreed to consider the value of examining potential  inefficiencies and overlap among smaller programs. Coordination within USDA and between USDA and Other Agencies to Help Minimize Overlap and Duplication

USDA must effectively coordinate with many groups within and outside of  the agency to achieve its missions. Based on our prior work, we have identified the following examples that  illustrate how improving coordination within USDA or across agencies has  contributed or could contribute to the improved performance of USDA  programs. In September 2005, we reported on the need  for improved coordination, including information-sharing and  communication, between the Risk Management Agency (RMA) and  Farm Service Agency (FSA). Under USDA guidance, RMA is to provide  FSA with a list of farmers who have had anomalous crop insurance  losses or who are suspected of poor farming practices. However, we found FSA conducted about 64  percent of the inspections RMA requested, and FSA offices in nine  states did not conduct any of the field inspections RMA requested in 1  or more of the years in our review. We also found that FSA may not be  as effective as possible in conducting field inspections because RMA  does not share with FSA information on the nature of anomalous crop  insurance losses and suspected poor farming practices, or the results  of follow-up inspections. Sufficiency of USDA Management Capacity

USDA must have sufficient internal management capacity to effectively  and efficiently fulfill its multiple missions. The following are examples, drawn from  our work, of USDA programs where improvements are needed in these  areas:    Financial management. For  example, we reported in October 2008 that USDA provided farm  program payments to thousands of individuals with incomes exceeding  income eligibility caps. We recommended that USDA work with the  Internal Revenue Service to develop a system for verifying the income  eligibility for all recipients of farm program payments, which the  agencies subsequently did. Human capital. The OIG identified information technology security as a significant  management challenge for fiscal year 2010. GAO stands ready to help Congress in its application of GPRAMA tools to  its oversight of USDA programs and its deliberations on Farm Bill  reauthorization.
Why GAO Did This Study

The current fiscal environment, ongoing deliberations for the next Farm Bill, and the public's expectations for a high-performing and efficient government underscore the need for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to focus on program results and customer needs, work across organizational lines to help minimize any overlap and duplication, and build its internal capacity. USDA comprises 15 agencies in seven mission areas that are responsible for, among other things, assisting farmers and rural communities, overseeing meat and poultry safety, providing access to nutritious food for low-income families, and protecting the nation's forests. For fiscal year 2010, USDA estimated that its 15 agencies would have total outlays of $129 billion. This statement highlights examples from GAO's previous work that illustrate how USDA can address challenges it faces in three key areas: (1) the performance and accountability of USDA programs, (2) coordination within USDA and between USDA and other agencies to minimize duplication and overlap, and (3) the sufficiency of USDA management capacity. This statement is based on GAO's extensive body of work on USDA programs authorized under the Farm Bill and issued from September 2005 through May 2011.

What GAO Found

USDA must ensure that its programs are being implemented efficiently and services are being delivered effectively, which requires it to review the progress it and its agencies have made in achieving program goals and developing strategies to improve performance and accountability. GAO's work notes cases in which USDA programs have either met or fallen short of meeting program goals. In April 2010, GAO reported on domestic food assistance programs--an area where three federal agencies administered 18 programs consisting of more than $90 billion in spending in fiscal year 2010. GAO suggested that not enough is known about the effectiveness of these programs. Research GAO reviewed suggested that participation in seven USDA food assistance programs it examined, including four of the five largest, is associated with positive health and nutrition outcomes consistent with the programs' goals; these goals include raising the level of nutrition among low-income households, safeguarding the health and well-being of the nation's children, and strengthening the agriculture economy. Little, however, is known about the effectiveness of the remaining 11 programs--9 of which are USDA programs--because they have not been well studied. GAO suggested that USDA consider which of the lesser-studied programs need further research. To achieve its missions, USDA must effectively coordinate with many groups both within and outside the agency. GAO's work provides instances of where improving coordination within USDA or across agencies has contributed or could contribute to improved performance of USDA programs. For example, in September 2005, GAO reported on USDA's need to improve coordination, including information-sharing and communication, between its Risk Management Agency (RMA) and Farm Service Agency (FSA) on potential fraud, waste, and abuse in the federal crop insurance program. For example, FSA offices in nine states did not conduct any of the field inspections RMA requested of farmers' fields in cases of anomalous crop insurance losses or when farmers were suspected of poor farming practices in 1 or more of the years in GAO's review. Also, RMA did not share with FSA information on the nature of the suspected poor farming practices or the results of follow-up inspections. GAO recommended actions to both agencies to more effectively conduct field inspections. USDA must have sufficient internal management capacity in the areas of financial management, human capital management, and information technology to effectively and efficiently fulfill its multiple missions. GAO has reported on USDA programs where improvements are needed in these areas. For example, GAO reported in October 2008 that USDA provided farm program payments to thousands of individuals with incomes exceeding income eligibility caps. GAO recommended that USDA work with the Internal Revenue Service to develop a system for verifying the income eligibility for recipients of all farm program payments, which the agencies subsequently did.