Detailed Information on the
Department of the Interior - Land and Water Conservation Fund Land Acquisition Assessment

Include land acquisition activities in the PART evaluations for related programs.

Develop performance measures for each relevant program that clearly link land acquisition investments to achievement of DOI goals.

By no later than March 31, 2006, obtain an independent review of current prioritization methodologies to identify potential improvements to ensure the objectivity of the priority assessment and ranking system.

Maximize conservation results across bureaus by better coordinating inter-bureau ranking of conservation opportunities.

Measure: Increase the number and acreage of land exchanges and acquisitions to improve land tenure distribution

Explanation:This measure falls under the DOI Strategic Plan intermediate outcome goal -- Promote respect for private propery

Measure: Number of land exchanges processed

Explanation:

Measure: Between FY 2004-8, NPS will acquire 10% of the lands designated for acquisition and prioritized in NPS management plans that are within the authorized boundaries of the national park system units but not yet protected

Explanation:

Measure: Number of land acquisitions processed through purchase/donation

Explanation:

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: During the PART process, it became apparent that land acquisition is not a true program but rather an activity or tool that serves a variety of disparate programs across multiple DOI bureaus. In the future, land acquisition would be better evaluated in relation to each of these programs. Still, evaluation of each program's use of land acquisition would require clear linkages between the program's purposes and the use of land acquisition. While the related programs have clear purposes that generally fall into 3 categories: 1) protecion of significant biological or cultural resources, 2) enhancement of recreation opportunities on public lands, or 3) improvement of internal operating efficiencies, the linkage of each purpose to land acquisition as an activity is not always clear.

Evidence: BLM: 'The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976; 'Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965; 'Wilderness Act of 1964; Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968; 'National Trails System Act of 1968; 'Special legislation examples: King Range Nat'l Conservation Area Act of 1970, as amended; El Malpais Nat'l Conservation Area Act of 1987 [All Acts above, as amended] FWS: 'Mission Statement 'LWCF 'ESA 'Recreation Act of 1962, as amended 'Policy and Responsibilities (341 FW 1) 'FWS Acquisition Legislation (341 FW 1) 'Director's Order 124 ' Fish and Wildlife Service Land Acquisition Policy NPS: 'LWCF Act, NPS Organic Act, Outdoor Recreation Report, Specific Unit Authorization, Mission Statement, Director's Order 25 Supplementary Evidence: -DOI Strategic Plan for FY 2003-8

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest or need?

Explanation: The Land acquisition activity addresses specific national interests and purposes as identified by statutes establishing the many programs to which this activity contributes. These are illustrated by unique bureau missions: BLM - to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. FWS - to work with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. NPS - to preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education and inspiration of this and future generations. Through a combination of land transactions, land management and grants, agencies pursue the goals of resource protection, sustaining biological communities and enhancing outdoor recreation opportunities. Land transactions are evaluated in the context of other options such as grants to determine the best way of achieving intended outcomes.

Evidence: BLM: 'Public Land Statistics FY 2003 ' Land Exchanges and Acquisitions Table 'BLM National Landscape Conservation System Brochure 'BLM LWCF Program Presentation FWS: 'Article ' 'Taking Critical Looks at the Status of Species Protection' 'Migratory Bird Trends - N.A.Wetlands Conservation Act Progress Report 2002-03 'Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous U.S. 1986 to 1997 'National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan (06/1991 Edition) 'Strategic Growth ' Land Acquisition in Fulfilling the Promise ' Visions for Wildlife, Habitat, People, and Leadership, 3/99 'Annual Report of Lands Under Control of the USFWS as of 9/30/02 NPS: 'Acquisition Backlog 'Various periodical articles 'Congressional authorizations of new units 'Congressional authorized acres

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: This activity serves programs in NPS, FWS, and BLM, each of which have specific statutory authorities over lands they manage. Some of the bureaus' activities may overlap with activities and goals of the Forest Service, State and local agencies, and private organizations. It is not clear that there is regional interagency coordination on budget formulation which would be necessary to prevent duplication. We note that the bureaus have unique characteristics (e.g. FWS has broader geographic responsibility for migratory birds than does an individual state). However, there are not sufficient safeguards against duplication. DOI's Land Transaction Principles address a broad spectrum of land management tools, encouraging private stewardship as well as the use of alternatives to full fee title purchases. State, local and private organizations often use these tools to achieve shared goals. When considering potential acquisitions, DOI bureaus cooperate with these organizations to minimize duplication of effort and to make sure that actions complement agency goals.

Evidence: BLM: 'FY01 - FY03 Table of Lands Acquired 'BLM Instruction Memo 2004-094 'BLM Project Examples: El Malpais National Conservation Area; California Wilderness; Sandy River/Oregon National Historic Trail 'BLM National Landscape Conservation System Brochure (See Q.1.2) 'BLM LWCF Program PowerPoint Presentation/Workshop (See Q.1.2) FWS: 'America's National Wildlife Refuge System ' Celebrating a Century of Conservation 'North American Wetland Conservation Fund Budget Justification FY 2005 'Migratory Bird Conservation Account Budget Justification FY 2005 NPS: 'Unit Authorization 'NPS guidelines for creating a unit of the National Park System 'Management of Land Resources offices (Land Acquisition Procedures)

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: While the Departmetn has made progress on some problems, a strong means of coordinating land transaction decisions across different program and funding sources (e.g. LWCF, MESCF, Migratory Birds, etc.) is still lacking. The Department has recently remedied a longstanding major flaw in the conduct of this activity by reforming the appraisal system through consolidations of these functions in the Department's National Business Center under a Chief Appraiser. In addition, the interagency Land Transaction Working Group has developed common priority-selection principles and project criteria.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM Manual H-2100-1 - Acquisition Handbook, Chapter IV. FWS: 'KPMG Service Audit NPS: 'Appropriations language and authorizing language for specific units Supplementary Evidence: - Appraisal reform documentation

Is the program effectively targeted, so that resources will reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program's purpose directly?

Explanation: Since land acquisition is an activity rather than a program, this question would be easier to apply to PARTs of the programs using land acquisition as a tool. Still, each of the relevant programs should have adequate means for prioritizing land acquisition efforts and evaluating the effectiveness of those expenditures. In addition, effectively targeting funds across different programs would require the ability to coordinate and prioritize projects across programs and bureaus. Although the land management bureaus within the Department of the Interior have systems for prioritizing land acquisition projects, in some instances these systems generally fail to adequately target acquisitions. For example, the Fish and Wildlife Service's Land Acquisition Priority System ranks projects based on resource values of the entire refuge where the project is located rather than on the values of the specific land parcel to be acquired for that project.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM Annual Work Plan FY 2003 & 2004 ' Land Acquisition FWS: 'Land Acquisition Priority System List FY 2005 'Annual Report of Lands as of 6/30/66 'Land Acquisition Budget Justification FY 2005 'Obligation Tables LWCF PART Performance FY 2003 NPS: 'Specific Appropriation Acts, 'Conference Report (U.S. Congress) 'Land Acquisition Ranking System 'General Management Plan 'Land Protection Plan 'Visitation data Supplementary Evidence: -National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act (1997) - Comprehensive Conservation Plan

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: Since land acquisition is an activity rather than a program, this question is somewhat difficult to apply. As a tool, land acquisition contributes to a number of long term and intermediate outcome measures pertaining to many programs. However, evaluating the effectiveness of each program's use of land acquisition as a tool would require performance measures linking land acquisition to the specific programs. DOI's Strategic Plan identifies end outcome goals and measures for resource protection and recreation, but BLM, NPS, and FWS lack salient, meaningful performance measures that capture land acquisition outcomes. Greater efforts should be made to link DOI's broader outcome goals to specific land acquisition goals and a land acquisition strategy. For example, a recovery outcome measure (e.g. % of threatened and endangered species that are self sustaining) would be consistent with the Department's end outcome goal of "sustaining biological communities." Greater emphasis should also be placed on a "landscape" or "ecosystem" approach to land acquisition, rather than a parcel by parcel approach. The FWS Strategic Growth Team has developed a promising strategy to prioritize lands for FWS acquisition.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM H-1601-1 - Land Use Planning Handbook 'BLM FY 2004 Annual Work Plan ' Resource Management Planning 'BLM FY 2005 Budget Justification ' Land Acquisition 'BLM Instruction Memo 2004-094 FWS: 'FY 2006 Land Acquis. List & 5-Yr Plan 'LWCF 15-Year Plan NPS: 'FY2003 to 2005 President's Budget Requests/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Documents Supplementary Evidence: - Conservation in Action Summit documentation - S. Nevada Pub. Lands Mgmt. Act 1998 - Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (2000)

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: Without long-term measures (see 2.1), there can be no targets and timeframes for those measures. We do note that there are ambitious targets and timeframes for many long-term measures for programs to which land acquisition contributes (resource protection, recreation, and creation of manageable land units) but those targets and long-term measures are not specific to land acquisition and are not effectively linked to the land acquisition activity.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM Instruction Memo 2004-094 (Evidence at 2.1) 'BLM FY2003 & 2004 LWCF Acquisition Priorities by State 'BLM LWCF FY2003 & 2004 National Project Priorities FWS: 'Draft FY 2006 Land Acquis. List & 5-Yr Plan NPS: 'FY2003-2005 President's Budget Requests/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Documents 'General Management Plan criteria 'Land Protection Plan criteria ' 'Backlog' list of lands identified for acquisition 'Congressional unit authorization history

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: Since land acquisition is an activity, not a program, this question would be easier to apply to the different programs using land acquisition as a tool. Although land acquisition does contribute to a number of long-term outcome measures and intermediate outcome measures pertaining to many diverse programs, as with the long-term goals and measures (see 2.1 and 2.2), BLM, NPS, and FWS lack salient, meaningful performance measures that capture land acquisition goals. Land acquisition related measures in prior DOI performance plans were more output oriented and tracked "number of acres" or "easements" acquired, reflecting the transactional nature of land acquisition rather than measuring the ways in which land acquisition is used to achieve end oucome conservation and recreation goals.

Evidence: BLM: 'DOI Strategic Plan FY 2003-2008: DOI Mission Areas and Outcome Goals 'BLM 2005 Budget Justifications ' Land Acquisition -LWCF Budget Sheets, pgs. VII -14 ' VII - 41, and Land Acquisition Performance Summary, pg. VII-13 (Evidence at 2.1) FWS: 'FWS Strategic Plan Land Acquisition Goals FY 2005 'FWS FY 2003 Annual Perf. Plan 'FY 2003 Performance Accountability Report ' Perf. Meas. 2.1.2 (3) NPS: 'FY2003-2005 President's Budget Request/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Document 'Management Information System data 'Listing of indefinite quantity contracts and description of savings

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: Without annual goals and measures linked specifically to land acquisition, there can be no baselines or targets. The new FY 2003-8 Departmental Strategic Plan does contain a substantial number of new outcome-oriented performance measures for programs, which replace output measures in prior plans. These measures must have baselines established, most of which are being addressed in FY 2004. Progress toward annual achievement of targets will follow. In order to capture land acquisiton as a tool, DOI will need to link outcome-oriented measures for each program to the land acquisition activity. We do note that DOI has ambitious goals for better managing the use of this tool. These management goals include requirements for rigorous appraisals that all conform to Unified Federal appraisal Standards; inclusion only of acquisition projects that rank as high-priority using specific ranking criteria within bureaus.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM 2005 Budget Justifications - Land Acquisition - Land Acquisition Performance Summary, pg. VII-13 (Evidence at 2.1) FWS: 'FY 2003 Performance Accountability Report ' Performance Measure 2.1.2 (3) 'FY 2006 Land Acquis. List & 5-Yr Plan NPS: 'FY2003-2005 President's Budget Requests/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Documents 'Management Information System data 'Master Deed Listing data Supplementary Evidence: Summary table of status of GPRA targets and baselines

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: Until DOI establishes annual and long-term performance goals for land acquisition (or directly linking land acquisition to the goals of the programs to which it contributes), one cannot determine whether efforts carried out by partners support the performance goals of the program. Most partners participate through public comment on bureau specific planning proposals for land acquisition and land management planning, pooling of financial resources, and leveraging of grant funds and nonfederal funds. However, private organizations do not always follow Federal priorities and undertake expensive acquisitions which may be offered to a Federal agency for administration. The actions of third-party organizations outside of the control of the agencies have the potential to shift and impede DOI's priority land acquisition objectives. Clear performance goals may help reduce the risk of non-federal organizations circumventing the DOI agencies' priorization processes.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM Manual H-2100-1 - Acquisition Handbook, Chapter IV (See Q. 1.4) 'Various News Articles 'Sample Letters from Partners FWS: 'Partner Transactions FY 2002-2003 'Articles: "324 Acres Added to San Diego NWR (CA)"; "Land Added to Bird Haven (TX)" "Glacial Ridge Preserve, MN"; "Blackfoot River, MT"; "Baca Ranch, CO" ' The Nature Conserv. Ann. Rept. 2002 'Letter of Intent ' The Conservation Fund ' Trinity River Nat'l Wildlife Refuge, TX 'Donation ' Richard King Mellon Foundation Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge, AK 'Follow-up Letter Conservation Forum NPS: 'Memoranda Of Agreement and Memoranda of Understanding 'Third Party Acquisitions 'Letters of intent 'Inspector General's Report 'Land Acquisition Ranking System criteria 'Title/Appraisal/ESA/ contracts

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Several independent evaluations related to land acquisition can be cited; however, none is on a recurring basis. Because land acquisition is a tool rather than a program, it may be more appropriate to evaluate land acquisition efforts in the context of independent reviews of the relevant programs. The Department's appraisal reform initiative is DOI's response to an independent (GAO) evaluation that concluded that agency appraisers must operate in a more independent environment so as to ensure objectivity.

Evidence: BLM: 'Realty Specialist GS-1170-13 Position Description 'BLM Annual Work Plan FY 2004 - Land Acquisition, pg. 8 (See Q.1.5) FWS: 'GAO Report RCED-00-52 'Agency Needs to Inform Congress of Future Costs Associated With Land Acquisition' 'Final Progress Report on GAO Audit 'Approval of Land Acquisition Priority System 'Department of Interior Final Audit Report ' 'Land Acquisition Activities, U.S. FWS ' Memos: Service Response to Audit; Real Property Mgmt. Inform. System Concerns (LRS); Corrective Action Plan ' Land Records System. NPS: 'National Research Council Report 'OIG Report and OIG current review

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: Budget planning cannot be adequately tied to performance planning without outcome-oriented performance measures specifically linked to land acquisition. Currently, for each land transaction, there is an individual write-up in agency budget documents that describes its relevance to Departmental goals and outcomes. However, until better performance measures are developed, DOI cannot link its land acquisition requests to long-term and annual performance goals in a more integrated way. Although operation and maintenance (O&M) costs are now displayed in the budget, DOI needs to make the analysis of these costs more uniform and rigorous so that budget documents clearly indicate the full costs of achieving performance goals.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM FY 2005 Budget Justifications - Land Acquisition - LWCF Budget Sheets, pgs. VII -14 ' 41 (See Q. 2.1) FWS: 'Land Acquisition Budget Justification FY 2004 & 2005 'Budget Justification Project Sheet ' Balcones Canyonlands National Wildlife Refuge, TX FY 2005 NPS: 'FY2003- 2005 President's Budget Requests/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Documents 'Land Acquisition Ranking System 'Mgmt. Information System data

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: Considerable effort has gone into appraisal reform, into developing a National Land Acquisition Plan, Common Principles for land acquisition, a screening matrix, and ongoing activities of the Land Transaction Working Group. In addition, as bureaus migrate to the new DOI GPRA plan, their operational plans are addressing identified gaps in program specific strategies (intermediate outcome goals).

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM H-1601-1 - Land Use Planning Handbook (Evidence at 2.1) 'BLM FY 2005 Budget Justifications - Land Acquisition - Land Acquisition Performance Summary, pg. VII-13 (Evidence at 2.1) FWS: 'The Strategic Growth Team 'Strategic Growth of the National Wildlife Refuge System 'FWS Strategic Plan 2000-2005 'White Paper ' A Process for Integrating Wildlife Population, Biodiversity, and Habitat Goals and Objectives on the National Wildlife Refuge System: Coordinating with Partners at all Landscape Scales' NPS: 'FY2003-2005 President's Budget Requests/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Documents 'Inspector General's Report

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: Performance information related to land acquisition is not collected by all affected bureaus and has tended to be output oriented. Outcome level information is collected under the new DOI strategic plan, but the specific contributions of land acquisition to these outcomes is not easily determined owing to the numerous activities and programs involved in collectively achieving the outcome. Use of performance data to improve land acquisition performance has been limited to date.

Evidence: BLM: 'FY04 Perf. Standards (YTD) example FWS: 'Annual Report of Lands FY 2002 NPS: 'Project Management Reports from Management Information System 'Overview Reports 'Progress Reports (financial) 'Mgmt. Info. System data Supplementary evidence: -DOI Data V&V Criteria - AS/PMB Data V&V implementation memorandum

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: DOI is currently in the process of implementing performance goals throughout the various levels of Federal management with program programs, but does not yet sufficiently hold managers accountable for program results. SES performance standards hold managers and direct reports accountable for ensuring that resources are expended for intended purposes. Although SES level managers in FWS have GPRA annual goals incorporated into their performance plans, Realty Supervisors do not yet have performance standards in their performance plans that link individual performance to the achievement of program goals. Partners are held accountable to tasks and responsibilities through third party letters of intent which include the requirement that all appraisals must be prepared in accordance with The Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions and The Uniform Standards of professional Appraisal Practice.

Evidence: BLM: 'DOI Employee Performance Plan and Results Report (EPPR) format 'BLM FY 2004 Annual Work Plan (Evidence Located at 1.5) 'BLM Manual H-2100-1 - Acquisition Handbook, Chapter XIII - Record Notation '3130 Obligations Annual Work Plan FY 2002 ' 2004 'FY 2005 Project Partner Table 'Sample Letter of Intent FWS: 'Division of Realty FY 2004 Annual Work Plan 'Land Acquisition Management Reform Contract NPS: 'Project Management Reports from Mgmt. Info.System 'Performance standards for Regional Office Chiefs 'Federal Acquisition Regulations 'Contract requirements for title/appraisal/environmental site assessments

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: We did not see sufficient evidence to warrant a "Yes" answer to this question. Since LWCF appropriations are "no-year" money and because of the factors involved in completing a planned acquisition (e.g. availability of a current appraisal, title and environmental issues, and the presence of a willing seller), the question of timeliness can be difficult to determine. Funds are obligated for projects that are specified in budgetary line items, allowing bureau managers to track them individually. However, the timing of obligations depends in large part on the success of negotiations with the landowners. Congressional earmarks lengthen the time required to obligate funds due to a lack of the pre-acquisition planning for such projects. BLM and FWS require project dollars to be used solely for the acquisition of land with associated administrative costs provided only through the acquisition management account (AMA) line item.

Evidence: BLM:-- FWS: 'FY 2003 Obligation Rates 'Report to Congress on Unobligated Balances NPS: 'Progress Reports from FFS 'Statutory Ceiling Report 'Land Acquisition Ranking System (criteria) 'Summary of Appropriation/Allotment Report 'Table of Appropriations and Obligations

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: Bureaus are not consistently able to provide historical, quantitative data to measure efficiencies. We do note that significant improvement is underway. The land acquisition activity takes advantage of cost-effective contracting in such areas as appraisals, land surveys, title and escrow services, closings, and relocation services. Bureaus also buy services from each other to achieve efficiencies. The placement of appraisal functions in a new Departmental office is providing efficiencies. For example, appraisers may complete work on several projects for different client agencies in a single field visit, so that expertise in specialized areas (e.g., rights-of-way or concessions) that was formerly limited to a specific bureau may now be utilized across the Department. Some specific efficiencies expected or already realized as a result of the appraisal initiative include the workload analysis currently underway that will result in improved allocation of staff resources to appraisal assignments by addressing the imbalances which exist between the current staff locations and the actual work assignments. Activity-based costing is also intended to improve cost effectiveness by allowing for the comparison of work activities' costs across organization lines.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM Manual H-2100-1 - Acquisition Handbook, Chapter XIII - Record Notation (Evidence at 3.2) 'BLM Instruction Memorandum 2004-094 (Evidence at 1.3) FWS: 'Inholding and Emergencies and Hardships Appropriations (Guidelines) 'Importance of Timely and Accurate Data Entry (Lands Records System) 'Emergency and Hardships LWCF Allocation (Streamlining) 'LWCF Inholding Line Item (Streamlining) 'Report to Congress (Land Exchange in excess of $500,000) 'Land Acquisition Management Reform Contract NPS: 'Intranet site for Land Resources Program 'Northeast Region Lands Library test program 'Indefinite quantity contracts per previous GPRA goal 'Public Health Service MOA 'National Park Service security enhancements and programs

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: Land acquisition is an activity serving a variety of DOI programs. Land acquisition activities are effectively coordinated with the related programs within each bureau. Bureaus do also coordinate with each other and with State and local governments and with non-governmental organizations, and land use plan efforts are done though a formal process of consultation and coordination that involves the general public. Still, collaboration and coordination in a broader sense to establish and achieve strategic goals and targets for land acquisition is lacking and in need of improvement.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM FY 2006 National Review Team 'BLM FY 2005 LWCF Submissions Map 'Sample Letter of Intent (Evidence at 3.2) FWS: 'Leaflet ' The Service Protects and Restores Wetlands 'National Wildlife Refuges established for federally listed T&E species NPS: 'MOA's with Partners 'Third Party Acquisitions 'Letters of intent 'Inspector General's Report 'Land Acquisition Ranking System criteria 'Title/Appraisal/ESA/ contracts 'Example of coord.: Appalachian Trail

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The land acquisition activity has no material weaknesses in financial management practices. BLM periodically reviews and modifies business practices to maintain the performance levels of the acquisition program. FWS has procedures in place to ensure that funds are expended for the purpose they were intended. In the most recent audits by the GAO and KPMG no material weaknesses were found. KPMG did report a non-material management control issue involving the FWS Land Records System for which FWS submitted and is implementing a corrective action plan. NPS has contractual procedures in place to assure proper payments to landowners through independent third party title and closing agents. NPS derives financial reports from FFS assuring accurate and timely information that meets statutory requirements.

Evidence: BLM:-- FWS: 'Independent Auditors' Report on the USFWS Financial Statement for FY 2001 and 2002 'Fiscal Year 2003 General Annual Guidelines for the Mgmt. Control Program NPS: 'Contracts for land purchases 'Claim forms for relocation payments 'Contracting procedures for appraisals, title/closing, ESA's 'FFS Supplementary Evidence: -KPMG and GAO audit documentation

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: DOI has addressed management deficiencies on a limited basis and work remains to successfully address deficiencies. At the urging of Congress, DOI established a joint DOI/USDA working group to deliver a National Land Acquisition Plan to the House Committee on Appropriations by December 15, 2004 to address the Committee's concerns with national conservation objectives, interagency coorperation, public input and monitoring, and to evaluate existing authorities. The agencies expect the Plan to provide a clear understanding of the role of land acquisition, its relationship to broader mission goals, and means by which to achieve program efficiencies and greater effectiveness.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM National Training Center (NTC) Course Outlines 'FY04 Performance Standards (YTD) example (Evidence at 3.1) FWS: 'Remarks of Assistant Secretary Stanley Cain ' September 18, 1965 'Review of Draft Interim Guidance on Strategic Growth of the NWRS 'Agenda ' The Next 100 Years of Conservation, May 2003 (sponsored by Defenders of Wildlife) 'Semi- Annual Audit Follow-up Progress Report - January 31, 2003 'Automated Assessment of Realty Management NPS: 'Individual Office Overviews 'Inspector General's Report

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: While land acquisition is more of an activity serving multiple programs than a program itself, there should be long-term performance goals linking each program to its land acquisition efforts. DOI does not currently have long-term performance goals or measures that link to land acquisition and, therefore, cannot demonstrate progress in achieving long-term performance goals.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM FY 2005 Budget Justification ' Land Acquisition ' Budget Sheets (See Q. 2.1) 'El Malpais National Conservation Area, News Release. FWS: 'FY 2006 Land Acquis. List & 5-Yr Plan '15-Year Land Acquisition Plan NPS: 'FY2005 President's Budget Request/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Document 'Mgmt. Info. System data 'FY 2006 LARS and Budget Request 'GPRA Goal 'Remaining acres to be protected

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: The new FY 2003-8 Departmental Strategic Plan contains a substantial number of new outcome-oriented performance measures for programs to which the land acquisition activity contributes. These measures must have baselines established, most of which are being addressed in FY 2004. The Land Transaction Working Group is tracking policy-oriented recommendations for performance improvement, including new DOI-wide appraisal guidelines currently under development and land transaction policies that clarify the need for credible appraisals in exchanges and other transactions. More work is needed to effectively link the bureaus' annual performance measures and goals to the land acquisition activity.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM FY 2005 Budget Justification ' Land Acquisition ' Budget Sheets (See Q.2.1) 'FY 2005 Project Partner Table (See Q.3.2) FWS: 'FY 2003 Performance Accountability Report Performance Information 'Partner Transactions FY 2002 & 2003 NPS: 'FY2003-2005 President's Budget Requests/NPS Strategic Plan and GPRA Documents 'Mtmt. Info. System data 'GPRA Goals

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: DOI does not yet have formal Department-wide efficiency measures with reported data to demonstrate the benefits of these improvements. We note that the Department's appraisal reform should lay the groundwork for notable improvements in efficiency and effectiveness. There is some quantitative evidence of increased efficiency: FWS has managed to maintain a high rate of obligation although FTE levels have been halved between 1995 and 2003; the reduction of 53 FTE's in the Land Acquisition Reform contract with the Regional Directors has resulted in a leaner and more efficient organization. Also, the National Land Acquisition Plan effort proposes to strengthen existing bureau monitoring. However, the evidence does not demonstrate increases in efficiency for DOI land acquisition in general.

Evidence: BLM: 'BLM Instruction Memorandum 2004-094 (Evidence at 1.3) 'BLM FY 2004 Annual Work Plan (Evidence Located at 1.5) 'BLM FY 2005 Budget Justification ' Land Acquisition (Evidence at 2.1) FWS: 'FY 2003 Land Acquisition Obligation Report NPS: 'Indefinite quantity contracts per previous GPRA goal 'Mgmt. Info. System data 'No data available for FY 2005 Plan, plan to meet'FY 2006 LARS process 'Public Health Service MOA

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: Since land acquisition is an activity and not a program, the answer to this question could be in the context of whether Interior handles land acquisition transactions well compared to other parties involved in land acquisitions. Unfortunately, such data is not systematically available. Adequate performance measures linking land acquisition to end outcome goals would allow a comparison of the various DOI programs' land acquisition efforts to each other and to state, local, and private organizations' land acquisition activities. Without such measures, such a comparison is not possible. DOI would compare more favorably to other organizations if it employed a system that analyzes integrated spatial data on land management units, eco-regions, conservation lands, land cover and species and defines gaps and needs. This data could help identify high priority areas for acquisition using more of an integrated, "landscape" approach that would more effectively use the bureaus multi-use objectives and authorities to accomplish the Department's end outcome goals.

Evidence: BLM: -- FWS: 'FY 2003 Land Acquisition Obligation Report NPS: 'See evidence in 4.1 and 4.2

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: Since land acquisition is an activity and not a program, most evaluations have been process-oriented. The evaluations have not had sufficient scope or focus on results to satisfy this question. We do note that IG and GAO have given no indication of serious problems with the program. The KPMG financial audit identified only minimal problems with the FWS land acquisition program. The National Land Acquisition Plan team is assessing potential monitoring and evaluation improvements that might be undertaken within agencies, yet conducted independent of the land acquisition programs. Such efforts could focus more explicitly on substantive concerns as opposed to the more process-oriented focus of the reviews mentioned above.

Evidence: BLM: -- FWS: 'GAO Report GAO/RCED-00-52 'Independent Auditors' Report for FY 2001 and 2000 'Independent Auditors Rept.- FY 2000 'KPMG Audit of Financial Statements for FY 2003 'Corrective Action Memorandum ' Land Records System Data Entry NPS: 'OIG Reports 'National Research Council Report 'Current OIG review