A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In GAO’s audits of the Congressional Award Foundation’s (Foundation) financial statements for fiscal years 2012 and 2011, it found that the Foundation’s financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. GAO also identified no material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting, and no reportable noncompliance with laws and regulations it tested."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins ""

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Effective tax rates (ETR) differ from statutory tax rates in that they attempt to measure taxes paid as a proportion of economic income, while statutory rates indicate the amount of tax liability (before any credits) relative to taxable income, which is defined by tax law and reflects tax benefits and subsidies built into the law. Lacking access to detailed data from tax returns, most researchers have estimated ETRs based on data from financial statements. A common measure of tax liability used in past estimates has been the current tax expense--either federal only or worldwide (which comprises federal, foreign, and U.S. state and local income taxes). The most common measure of income for these estimates has been some variant of pretax net book income. GAO was able to compare book tax expenses to tax liabilities actually reported on corporate income tax returns."

Correspondence issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Nonprofit organizations, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), play an important role in providing a wide range of public services. To provide these services, these organizations rely on funding through federal grants and contracts, among other sources. Just as it is important for federal agencies to be held accountable for the efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars, it is also important for these nonprofit organizations to be held accountable for their use of federal funds. ACORN was established in 1970 as a grassroots organization to advocate for low-income families. By 2009, ACORN reportedly had 500,000 members and had expanded into a national network of organizations involved in the development of affordable housing, foreclosure counseling, voter registration, and political mobilization, among other things. ACORN organizations relied on membership dues and on federal and private foundation funding to support various activities. Voter registration fraud allegations in a number of states and widely distributed videotapes depicting what appeared to be inappropriate behavior by employees of several local ACORN chapters spurred calls to identify federal funding provided to ACORN and ACORN-related organizations and for legislation to …

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Agencies use a risk-based approach, including workload and threat assessment data, to allocate resources, but most do not fully track those used for export control enforcement activities. As their missions are broader than export controls, agencies can use staff resources for other activities based on need, making tracking resources used solely for export control enforcement difficult. Only Commerce’s Office of Export Enforcement allocates its resources exclusively to export control enforcement as that is its primary mission. Other agencies, such as State and the Treasury, have relatively few export control enforcement staff to track. While several agencies acknowledge the need to better track export enforcement resources and have taken steps to do so, they do not know the full extent of their use of these resources and do not use this information in resource allocation decisions. In some cities, agencies are informally leveraging export enforcement resources through voluntarily created local task forces that bring together enforcement resources to work collectively on export control cases."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "Created in 1933 to insure bank deposits and promote sound banking practices, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) plays an important role in maintaining public confidence in the nation's financial system. FDIC administers the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF), which protects bank and savings deposits, and the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) Resolution Fund (FRF), which was created to close out the business of the former FSLIC. Section 17 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as amended, requires GAO to annually audit the financial statements of the DIF and the FRF. GAO is responsible for obtaining reasonable assurance about whether FDIC's financial statements for the DIF and the FRF are presented fairly in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and whether FDIC maintained effective internal control over financial reporting, and for testing FDIC's compliance with selected laws and regulations."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In 2008 and 2009, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) provided emergency assistance that required the Secretary of the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) to make a determination of systemic risk under the systemic risk exception of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act). The FDI Act requires GAO to review each determination made. For the three determinations made to date, this report examines (1) steps taken by FDIC, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve), and Treasury to invoke the exception; (2) the basis of the determination and the purpose of resulting actions; and (3) the likely effects of the determination on the incentives and conduct of insured depository institutions and uninsured depositors. To do this work, GAO reviewed agency documentation, relevant laws, and academic studies; and interviewed regulators and market participants."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "As the number of biological labs increases, so too do the safety risks for lab workers. Data on these risks--collected through a safety reporting system (SRS) from reports of hazards, incidents, and accidents--can support safety efforts. However, no such system exists for all biological labs, and a limited system--managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)--applies to only a subset of these labs. While a national SRS has been proposed, design and implementation are complex. In this context, GAO was asked to identify lessons from (1) the literature and (2) case studies; and to apply those lessons to (3) assess CDC and APHIS's theft, loss, or release (TLR) system for select agents, such as anthrax, and (4) suggest design and implementation considerations for a labwide SRS. To do its work, GAO analyzed SRS literature; conducted case studies of SRSs in aviation, commercial nuclear, and health care industries; and interviewed agency officials and biosafety specialists."

Other written product issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The forum's participants described nanomanufacturing as a future megatrend that will potentially match or surpass the digital revolution's effect on society and the economy. They anticipated further scientific breakthroughs that will fuel new engineering developments; continued movement into the manufacturing sector; and more intense international competition."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins ""

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This is GAO's eighth annual assessment of selected Department of Defense (DOD) weapon programs. The report examines how well DOD is planning and executing its weapon acquisition programs, an area that has been on GAO's high-risk list since 1990. This year's report is in response to the mandate in the joint explanatory statement to the DOD Appropriations Act, 2009. The report includes (1) observations on DOD's efforts to manage its portfolio of major defense acquisition programs; (2) an assessment of the knowledge attained by key junctures in the acquisition process for a subset of 42 weapon programs from the 2009 portfolio; (3) data on other factors that can affect program execution; and (4) examples of how DOD is implementing recent acquisition reforms. To conduct the assessment, GAO analyzed data on the composition of DOD's portfolio of major defense acquisition programs. GAO did not analyze the cost and schedule performance of the portfolio because DOD did not issue timely or complete Selected Acquisition Reports for the second consecutive presidential transition. GAO expects to resume its portfolio analysis in next year's assessment. GAO also collected data from program …

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This is GAO's ninth annual assessment of Department of Defense (DOD) weapon system acquisitions, an area that is on GAO's high-risk list. The report is in response to the mandate in the joint explanatory statement to the DOD Appropriations Act, 2009. It includes observations on the performance of DOD's 2010 portfolio of 98 major defense acquisition programs; data on selected factors that can affect program outcomes; an assessment of the knowledge attained by key junctures in the acquisition process for a subset of 40 programs, which were selected because they were in development or early production; and observations on the implementation of acquisition reforms. To conduct this review, GAO analyzed cost, schedule, and quantity data from DOD's Selected Acquisition Reports and collected data from program offices on performance requirements and software development; technology, design, and manufacturing knowledge; and the implementation of DOD's acquisition policy and acquisition reforms. GAO also compiled one- or two-page assessments of 71 weapon programs. These programs were selected based on their cost, stage in the acquisition process, and congressional interest. DOD disagreed with GAO's use of total program cost growth as a …

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The total estimated cost of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) 2011 portfolio of 96 major defense acquisition programs stands at $1.58 trillion. In the past year, the total acquisition cost of these programs has grown by over $74.4 billion or 5 percent, of which about $31.1 billion can be attributed to factors such as inefficiencies in production, $29.6 billion to quantity changes, and $13.7 billion to research and development cost growth. DOD’s portfolio is dominated by a small number of programs, with the Joint Strike Fighter accounting for the most cost growth in the last year, and the largest projected future funding needs. The majority of the programs in the portfolio have lost buying power in the last year as their program acquisition unit costs have increased. The number of programs in the portfolio has decreased from 98 to 96 in the past year and, looking forward, is projected to decrease again next fiscal year to its lowest level since 2004."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The Department of Defense (DOD) 2012 portfolio of 86 major defense acquisition programs is estimated to cost a total of $1.6 trillion, reflecting decreases in both size and cost from the 2011 portfolio. Those decreases are largely the result of more programs exiting than entering the portfolio, as well as reductions in procurement quantities due to program cancelations and restructurings. Notably a majority of programs in the portfolio gained buying power in the last year as their acquisition unit costs decreased. DOD's 10 costliest programs, excluding the Missile Defense Agency's Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS), drive most of the portfolio's cost performance and funding needs. The majority (65 percent) of the funding that DOD estimates it will need to complete its current programs is associated with those 10 programs, and almost all of that funding is for procurement."

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "A hallmark of efforts to implement the $862 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) is to be transparent and accountable about what the money is being spent on and what is being achieved. To help achieve these goals, recipients are to report every 3 months on their award activities and expected outcomes, among other things. This information is available on Recovery.gov, the government's official Recovery Act Web site. As requested, this report covers 11 federal programs focused on broadband, energy, transportation, federal buildings, and civil works activities, representing $67 billion in Recovery Act funding. Primarily, the report (1) describes how the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and federal agencies implemented the act to report funds' uses and (2) assesses the extent to which descriptions of awards meet GAO's transparency criteria. It also describes reported uses of funds for the 11 programs. GAO reviewed requirements for reporting in the act and OMB's guidance. Based on these requirements, GAO developed a transparency assessment and applied it to a probability sample of descriptions from 14,089 recipient reports. In addition, GAO reviewed 52 projects in …

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) has provided about $6 billion in grants for three Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) programs that fund housing or community development. As of March 31, 2010, HUD's Capital Fund awarded nearly $3 billion in grants to 3,134 public housing agencies, the Community Development Block Grant-Recovery (CDBG-R) awarded about $1 billion to 1,167 recipients, and the Tax Credit Assistance Program (TCAP) awarded $2.25 billion to 52 state housing finance agencies. The act requires recipients to report specific information on fund use. Recipients began reporting in October 2009. This information is publicly available on Recovery.gov, the official Recovery Act Web site. As requested, for these three HUD programs, the report (1) examines what information recipients are required to report as a part of their descriptions of funded projects, and (2) assesses the extent to which descriptions of a representative sample of 219 grants in Recovery.gov are transparent in providing a basic understanding of grant activities and expected outcomes. GAO reviewed requirements for reporting in the act and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and HUD guidance."

Other written product issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "This supplementary report to GAO-10-999 provides individual state appendixes for 16 states and the District of Columbia for GAO's work on the seventh of its bimonthly reviews of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act)."