United States Government Accountability Office
Hi
g
hli
g
ht
s
of GAO-10-22
3
(continued)
For example, GAO’s review of prime recipient reportsidentified the following:GAO will continue to monitor and review the datareporting and quality issues in its bimonthly reviews andfieldwork on the use of funds in the 16 states and theDistrict of Columbia, and in GAO’s analysis of futurequarterly recipient reporting.
Erroneou
s
or que
s
tionable data entrie
s
that meritfurther review:
•
3,978 reports that showed no dollar amountreceived or expended
but included more than50,000 jobs created or retained;Recommendations for Executive ActionTo improve the consistency of FTE data collection andreporting, OMB should (1) clarify the definition andstandardize the period of measurement for FTEs andwork with federal agencies to align this guidance withOMB’s guidance and across agencies; (2) given itsreporting approach, consider being more explicit that“jobs created or retained” are to be reported as hoursworked and paid for with Recovery Act funds; and (3)continue working with federal agencies and encouragethem to provide or improve program-specific guidanceto assist recipients, especially as it applies to the full-time equivalent calculation for individual programs.
•
9,247 reports that showed no jobs but includedexpended amounts approaching $1 billion, and
•
Instances of other reporting anomalies such asdiscrepancies between award amounts and theamounts reported as received which, althoughrelatively small in number, indicate problematicissues in the reporting.
Coverage:
While OMB estimates that more than 90 percent of recipients reported, questions remain aboutthe other 10 percent.
Quality review:
While less than 1 percent were markedas having undergone review by the prime recipient, overthree quarters of the prime reports were marked ashaving undergone review by a federal agency.OMB should also work with the Recovery Accountabilityand Transparency Board and federal agencies to re-examine review and quality assurance processes, procedures, and requirements in light of experiences andidentified issues with this round of recipient reportingand consider whether additional modifications need tobe made and if additional guidance is warranted.
Full-time equivalent (FTE) calculation
s
:
Under OMB guidance, jobs created or retained were tobe expressed as FTEs. GAO found that data werereported inconsistently even though significant guidanceand training was provided by OMB and federal agencies.While FTEs should allow for the aggregation of differenttypes of jobs—part time, full time or temporary—differing interpretations of the FTE guidancecompromise the ability to aggregate the data.Employment Effects Even if the data quality issues are resolved, it isimportant to recognize that the FTEs in recipient reportsalone do not reflect the total employment effects of theRecovery Act. As noted, these reports solely reflectdirect employment arising from the expenditure of lessthan one-third of Recovery Act funds. Therefore, boththe data reported by recipients and othermacroeconomic data and methods are necessary togauge the overall employment effects of the stimulus.The Recovery Act includes entitlements and tax provisions, which also have employment effects. Theemployment effects in any state will vary with labormarket stress and fiscal condition, as discussed in thisreport.To illustrate, in California, two higher education systemscalculated FTE differently. In the case of one, officialschose to use a 2-month period as the basis for the FTE performance period. The other chose to use a year as thebasis for the FTE. The result is almost a three-to-onedifference in the number of FTEs reported for eachuniversity system in the first reporting period. Althoughthe Department of Education provides alternativemethods for calculating an FTE, in neither case does theguidance explicitly state the period of performance of the FTE. Although there were problems of inconsistentinterpretation of the guidance, the reporting processwent relatively well for highway projects. Transportationhad an established procedure for reporting prior toenactment of the Recovery Act. In the cases of Education and Housing, which do not have this priorreporting experience, GAO found more problems. Someof these have been reported in the press. State andfederal officials are examining these problems and havestated their intention to deal with them.
Leave a Comment