Detailed Information on the
General Services Administration - Real Property Disposal Assessment

Develop better partner commitment to program goals by: 1) review all existing agreements with partners and contractors to ensure they meet annual goals of the program. Revise, as appropriate to include accountability clause; 2) continue to review future agreements to ensure they meet annual goals of the program and include accountability clause.

Improve methods to hold partners accountable for cost, schedule and performance results by continuing to hold quarterly program reviews to monitor partner performance in FY09 and beyond.

Measure: Percent of disposal customers who have graded the program at a 4 or 5 on a scale of 1 to 5 with 3 being neutral.

Explanation:The Disposal Transaction surveys are designed to allow customers to rate GSA's ability to enhance the asset management of other federal agencies and supports its goal of disposing of excess real property. By receiving a score of 4 or 5 on a scale of 1 to 5 means that by utilizing GSA's services, other programs and agencies are able to meet their program's asset management needs. These needs include disposing of properties in a short amount of time as well as generating revenue through disposal (and allowing the agency to retain its proceeds when allowed). This measure reflects how GSA is able to determine if the asset management needs of the customer agencies are being met, while also meeting the overall goal of obtaining the maximum value for unneeded real property assets in the shortest amount of time. The target set for FY 2009 is 95%. Since the number of surveys conducted in any given year is dependent on the activity of the program, there can be volatility in the actual measures with few neutral ratings. Therefore, a target of 95% is ambitious.

Measure: Percent of U&D property awarded within 240 days.

Explanation:This measure is calculated by the number of Utilization and Disposal (U&D) properties awarded through U&D methods within 240 days divided by the total number of U&D awards. The U&D methods include Federal Transfers, Public Benefit Conveyances (PBCs), and Negotiated Sales. The term "awarded" refers to: 1). The acceptance of the offer to purchase on a negotiated sale, 2). The assignment date on PBCs where the sponsoring agency deeds the property, 3). The deed date on those PBCs where GSA deeds the property, and 4). The date of the assignment letter for Federal Transfers. The U&D maximum theoretical time line of 240 days is comprised of: 30 days for federal screenings, 60 days for homeless screenings, 90 days for homeless applications and approval process, and 60 days for negotiated sales with congressional approval. The average number of U&D properties awarded within 240 days for the period FY 2001 to FY 2007 was 71%. The actual percentages are influenced by the number of properties that go through the disposal process in any given year. Based on the trend since 2002, 95% is an ambitious goal and will drive speedier dispositions. This measure attributes to the outcome of the Government's success in meeting the provisions of Executive Order 13327 "Federal Real Property Asset Management," of 2004. The goal of Executive Order 13327 is to promote efficient and economical use of America's real property assets and to assure management accountability for implementing federal real property management reforms. This focus on right sizing the federal portfolio through the FRPC is also demonstrated through FRPC's goal of disposing of $15 Billion in excess real property by FY 2015. GSA has assisted its Office of Real Property Asset Management through its restructuring initiative to improve their asset management process as a result of EO 13327. As a result of the restructuring, it has enabled them to redirect funds more quickly to projects more worthy of reinvestment. The fewer amount of days that are part of the disposal process, the quicker GSA can achieve its own goals as well as those goals of OMB and GSA's customer agencies.

Measure: Percent of public sale properties awarded within 170 days.

Explanation:The number of Public Sales awarded within 170 days divided by the number of all public sales. The term "awarded" refers to the date the offer to purchase is completed by GSA and the purchaser. Based on data obtained from the COSTAR Group, the commercial sales sector averages 170 days to complete its sales. Real Property Disposal has set targets to meet or beat the 170 commercial average 90% of the time in FY 2006 and 100% of the time in FY 2007. The actual percentages are influenced by the volume of sales in a given year, therefore, 100%, is an ambitious goal. This measure attributes to the outcome of the Government's success in meeting the provisions of Executive Order 13327 "Federal Real Property Asset Management," of 2004. The goal of Executive Order 13327 is to promote efficient and economical use of America's real property assets and to assure management accountability for implementing federal real property management reforms. This focus on right sizing the federal portfolio through the FRPC is also demonstrated through the FRPC's goal of disposing of $15 Billion in excess real property by FY 2015. GSA has assisted its Office of Real Property Asset Management through its restructuring initiative to improve their asset management process as a result of EO 13327. As a result of the restructuring, it has enabled them to redirect funds more quickly to projects more worthy of reinvestment. The fewer amount of days that are part of the disposal process, the quicker GSA can achieve its own goals as well as those goals of OMB and GSA's customer agencies.

Measure: Cost of public sales as a percentage of sales proceeds.

Explanation:This performance measure shows the total costs associated with a sale (direct payroll, direct contract, program overhead and GSA overhead) divided by the sales proceeds. Subsequent to the PART review conducted in FY 2005, GSA has begun to emphasize the use of the labor distribution system (LDS) to better record the actual costs incurred in the disposal of properties. As regional personnel become better acquainted with LDS the costs of disposal will appear to increase, thus it should be noted that in the prior year the goal would not have been achieved with better LDS data. However this is not actually an increase, but rather an increase in data accuracy. Consequently as the data accuracy improves and costs are better aligned the percentage of costs to proceeds will increase. Additionally, the volume of properties going through the process and their respective dollar values will influence the actuals, as many sales expenses are relatively fixed regardless of the value of property sold. Through implementation of the LDS the FY 2008 percentage of sales proceeds is projected at 1.16%. Consequently, the FY 2009 target of 1.08% is an ambitious goal.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: GSA's Real Property Disposal program has a well defined purpose that relates to the GSA's vision and mission statements. Receiving authority from the Property Act of 1949, the program is responsible for developing and applying asset management strategies and tools to ensure that Federal landholding agencies realize maximum utilization and efficiencies from their real property holdings and, when appropriate, redeploy their unneeded properties to benefit the Federal Government and surrounding communities or sell the properties on the open market.

Evidence: The Property Act of 1949 gives GSA its authority to dispose of Federal Real Property. The Economy Act provides a mechanism for other agencies to dispose of properties through GSA on a reimbursable basis. GSA's Mission and Vision Statements can be found in GSA's Strategic Plan on pages 3-5. The Fiscal Year 2007 Strategic Plan can be accessed through the following website: http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/admin/Strategic_Plan_2007.pdf. GSA's Public Buildings Service's (PBS) Mission Statement can be found on page 5 of the Fiscal Year 2007/2008 PBS Strategic Business Plan. Real Property Disposal has defined its Program Goals & Desired Outcomes as part of the new National Program Management initiative in PBS.

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

Explanation: The Federal government owns millions of acres of land and thousands of facilities with millions of square feet of space. Some of these properties are underutilized and should be redeployed within the Federal government or publicly disposed of to the benefit of taxpayers. Executive Order 13327 created the Federal Real Property Council (FRPC) to establish policies and guidelines to help agencies identify their real property assets; determine the utilization and condition of the asset; and develop acquisition, reinvestment, and disposal proposals consistent with each agency's Asset Management Plan. GSA's Real Property Disposal program assists agencies in right sizing their property portfolios by disposing of excess and underutilized assets.

Evidence: In January 2003, GAO studied high risk federal property. In April 2007, GAO revisited its findings in its report ""Federal Real Property: An Update on High-Risk Issues"". The report can be accessed at www.gao.gov. EO 13327 addresses the importance of promoting the efficient and economical use of Federal Real Property. The need for proper asset management is also highlighted in the President's Management Agenda.

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

Explanation: The Property Act of 1949 initially established the GSA as the primary agency responsible for the disposal of excess and surplus real property. Even though subsequent legislative actions have realigned the authority by giving specific authority to other agencies for the disposal of specific properties, GSA is the only agency authorized to handle transfers of property within the Federal government and donations of real property to state and local governments and non-profit entities. GSA is the only agency with a government-wide mandate for helping agencies improve the management of their real property asset portfolios.

Evidence: The Property Act of 1949 established GSA. EO 13327 further defines GSA's role in the disposal of real property. As a managing partner in the Federal Asset Sales initiative (eFAS), GSA has worked to unify and simplify the citizen's process of buying federal real and personal property assets, as evident in the eFAS Strategic Plan. The Office of Real Property has also been collaborating with the Asset Management Committee of the Federal Real Property Council to create standardized documentation and procedures for all agencies to utilize.

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

Explanation: Since the first assessment in 2003, GSA has taken steps to better distinguish the operational role of the Real Property Disposal program and the policy role of the Office of Governmentwide Policy. Additionally, GSA has restructured the Office of Real Property Asset Management to now include the Real Property Disposal program. The Real Property Disposal program is consistently meets its performance targets. Currently, there is no evidence that a more efficient model exists to dispose of real property.

Evidence: GSA has worked with other agencies to streamline procedures through the Federal Asset Sales Initiative (eFAS) and by establishing uniform screening processes. The Real Property Disposal program consistently meets its performance targets and consistently receives the highest rating in the Administrator's Quarterly Performance Reviews.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: Although the Real Property Disposal program is closely aligned with Real Property Asset Management (RPAM), the funding for the program is specifically appropriated for disposal activities. The program is managed separately by an Assistant Deputy Commissioner devoted solely to the Real Property Disposal program. Resources are focused directly on the disposal program and are not crossed with other business lines. Since the last assesment, the National Customer Development Team (NCDT) was created to better focus its resources and ensure customers' needs and requirements are met.

Evidence: The FY09 Congressional Budget Justification depicts how funding is tied directly to disposal activities. The Real Property Disposal FY 2008 Operating Expenses Budget Justification illustrates how resources are appropriated solely for the Disposal Program. The National Customer Development Team Charter was created to show how best to use resources to build the Property Disposal business case and reach out to potential customers.

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: The program has a long term outcome goal that meaningfully reflects the purpose of the program, and that is supported by two annual goals and an efficiency measure. Together, these measures support Real Property Disposal's goal of obtaining the maximum value for unneeded real property assets in the shortest possible time. The outcome measure was approved for the FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification. The measures, targets, and explanations can be viewed in the measures section of PART.

Evidence: The FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification outlines the performance measures that will help the Real Property Disposal program goal of obtaining the maximum value for unneded property assets in the shortest time possible. The Real Property Disposal Program utilizes a Monthly Performance Measures Report to track its progress on meeting its measures. After Central Office analyzes the findings to ensure data accuracy, it directs any questions regarding why the program is falling short of its measures or why there are discrepancies in reporting to the regional reality specialists. The Monthly Performance Measures Report is the basis for the Quarterly Performance Report sent to the Administrator of GSA for the Quarterly Performance Review. These measures, targets, and explanations can be viewed in the Measures Section of the PART.

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

Explanation: The program has targets established for each performance measure based on actual historical data to ensure the objectives promoted improvements in efficiency and effectiveness. Real Property Disposal has developed specific quantifiable targets relative to its long-term performance measures with ambitious targets and timeframes to promote continual improvement. In our continued efforts to improve the program performance measures are constantly reviewed to ensure they meet the program's goals and reflect sound asset management and business decisions. OMB approved these targets as part of GSA's FY 2009 Congressional Budget.

Evidence: The FY 2008 Congressional Budget Justification shows Real Property Disposal's measures and current and future targets. They can also be viewed in the Measures Section of the PART.

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: The Program has annual performance measures as well as long-range outcome measures to demonstrate progress on speeding the disposal of unneeded real property, minimizing disposal costs, and satisfying customer expectations.

Evidence: There are two measures directed at the time it takes to move an asset through the disposal process. GSA has continually improved in finding efficient processes to show progress in both of these measures. Another measure tracks whether GSA is meeting the expectations of its customers. The results indicate GSA has improved its ability to provide customers the assistance in their asset management as needed. GSA has continually met the objective under the cost efficiency measure. GSA's annual performance measures can be found in the FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification. This document provides the program's measures, descriptions of the measures, prior year performance, and future year targets. Annual targets for Real Property Disposal's measures are listed in the Measures section of the PART. GSA's Quarterly Performance Report also contains the actual results of the existing measures.

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

Explanation: GSA has established baselines and specific quantified annual targets for its annual measures. Quarterly, actual results are compared against targets to ensure continued improvement through the Quarterly Performance Report. Targets are set to offer balance between ensuring continued improvement and movement toward long-term outcome goals and motivating the program to stretch and achieve efficiencies.

Evidence: The measures and objectives are monitored to ensure they require continued performance improvement. These measures, along with their targets and timeframes, are outlined in the FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification.

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: GSA has taken significant steps to link the performance of program partners to the achievement of the annual and/or long term goals, but has not yet linked all program partners to the achievemnt of the goals.

Evidence: Certain partners, such as GSA's Portfolio Management Division, work towards the Program's goals by striving to improve their asset management and dispose of unneeded assets. In FY 07 Portfolio Management set a goal to dispose of unneeded properties valued at $63M. The Office of Property Disposal assisted them in meeting that goal and the details are contained in the FY 07 Portfolio Deliverables for OMB.

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: Recent independent evaluations of the program include evaluations conducted by the Congressional oversight committees, the Inspector General's (IG) office, the General Accountability Office (GAO), the Public Building Service Office of Budget and Financial Management and the Quarterly Performance Report (QPR). The oversight committees review all aspects of the disposal process for validity and viability through explanatory statements for negotiated sales. The program's financial performance is audited annually under the GSA independent financial audit. In 2006, the GAO completed an extensive audit of the public benefit conveyance program. During the period of August 2007 through April 2008 the GAO conducted a review to determine the progress that has been made in complying with the Federal and District of Columbia Government Real Property Act of 2006 (Public Law No. 109-396). The IG is currently completing a field audit of the Public Building Service real property restructuring and disposal practices, currently managed by the Office of Real Property Disposal. Discussions are also currently being held with the GSA OIG concerning biggest successes during the past year, new initiatives planned for the coming year, and upcoming challenges in FY 2009 as subjects for potential reviews. The program is scheduling an industry round table this year and will host roundtables every 24 months. It also hosted a sponsoring agency roundtable in 2007 and will host another in 2009. Each of these evaluations, being independent of the Office of Real Property Disposal, provides in depth analysis of the various aspects of the program and recommends action where warranted. While each of these reviews is of a particular aspect of the disposal process, taken as a whole, they form a thorough review of the entire disposal process. Further evaluations are obtained through our customer satisfaction transactional surveys.

Evidence: The Quarterly Performance Report is submitted and reviewed as part of the GSA Administrator's quarterly performance review. The GAO Public Benefit Conveyances Report contains the results of an audit conducted by GAO concerning the disposal of properties through the public benefit conveyance program. The GAO has completed a draft summary of its review of Federal Land Transfers, which is not yet approved for release. The GSA IG is currently auditing the long term effect of real property disposal under the asset management portfolio restructuring initiative. Details of the audit are included in IG Audit Notification & Objectives. Customer Satisfaction Transactional Surveys are issued on a regular basis upon the completion of disposal transactions. This program participates in the PBS sponsored annual financial audit. The PricewaterhouseCoopers Financial Management Letter indicates the recent results. The AMRON, Hangar 21 and Knolls explanatory letters show the detailed scope of the Congressional Oversight Committees review of the program. The 1999 Philadelphia Congressional Review shows the level of scrutiny given by the Congressional Oversight Committees prior to approval. The Hangar 21 Congressional Review signed in 2007 shows the improvement the program has instituted for negotiated sales.

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: In the FY09 Congressional Budget Justification, the budget performance goals budget links show the funding and its source for each performance goal and measure. Performance Measure results are used for determining annual performance awards. In the budget request, costs are attributed to the elements associated with the performance measures.

Evidence: The FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification & PVB FY 2008 Operating Expenses Budget Justification outline the linkage between the budget request and the long-term outcome goals by trying specific amount to various measures. However, we are now proposing changes in our performance measures which can be found in the Measures section of the PART.

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

Explanation: Prior to the last assessment, the Real Property Disposal program took adequate steps to correct strategic planning deficiencies. On an annual basis, the program annually engages in a rigorous Performance Management Process which emphasises internal and external environmental scans as a part of a strategic assessment.

Evidence: Real Property Disposal has developed teams and charters to review specific program functions. The Real Estate Disposal Inventory Network (RediNet) has also been launched to better assist reality specialists in their day to day operations of managing and disposing of properties. The program also evaluates itself internally as evident in the Internal Quarterly Reviews and Property Disposal Director's Calls. Real Property Disposal has implemented a Strategic Action Plan to enable to the program to become more effective and efficient.

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 measures are monitored on a monthly basis. Under the Federal Asset Sales Initiative, measures are reported for all agencies. To gather information from key program partners, transactional surveys are sent to customers and results are reviewed for necessary improvements to procedures and training of real estate specialists. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner of Real Property Disposal attends quarterly conferences with GSA Portfolio Managers to determine if Portfolio and Property Disposal are interfacing in an effective and efficient manner.

Evidence: The monthly performance measures report tracks each of the performance measures for the five regional offices and is maintained internally. The report is reviewed to determine trends or inconsistencies requiring action. The Satisfaction Transactional Surveys are sent to customers upon the completion of disposal transactions to determine their satisfaction pertaining to the work completed by GSA. The Monthly Status of Funds Report is prepared by the office of budget and financial management and provides the status of all funds under the programs purview. The report is reviewed on a consistent basis to monitor the funds allocated to the program.

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: Federal managers are held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results. Measures are reported monthly and are used in determining pay for performance awards under GSA's Associate Performance Plan and Appraisal System (APPAS). APPAS ensures that each employee from the Senior Executive Service (SES) level to program staff has a performance plan that specifically identifies the critical tasks of their job, and how their position relates to organizational and agency goals. Internal quarterly program reviews have been implemented within the Office of Real Property Disposal in FY 08 and are used to determine if managers are meeting milestones and strategic goals. Compliance inspections are conducted to ensure grantees of property through the Public Benefit Conveyance programs use the properties in accordance with the program uses for which they are conveyed. However, the program still needs to make some improvements on its ability to hold contractors accountable for meeting the program's performance goals.

Evidence: The Monthly Performance Measures Report provides each performance measure and indicates the performance of each region. The reports are included in quarterly program reviews conducted within the office of property disposal.

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

Explanation: The PBS Office of Budget and Financial Management tracks the status of funds on a daily basis and reports the status to Real Property Disposal management on a monthly basis. Obligations are tracked constantly to determine whether funds are being obligated in a timely manner. Managers are required to outline their funding requirements for the remainder of the year during the internal quarterly program briefings implemented in FY08.

Evidence: The PBS Monthly Status of Funds Report is used to track and monitor the program's budget execution. The Internal Quarterly Program Review Agenda is used to adjust quarterly spending plans for the remainder of the year.

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: The program re-engineered it's inventory system (RediNet) to provide more insight into the work flow process being followed by realty specialists. The program constantly meets performance measures tracking the effectiveness and efficiency of the program. An active policy calling for performance-based contracts has been established. A Value Added Services BPA was awarded through a competitive bid process to establish a contracting vehicle for agencies to acquire realty services in a timely and efficient manner.

Evidence: The RediNet Goals and Objectives Kickoff presentation describes the system improvements being made to foster efficiencies in program execution. A program memo was established and distributed to the regional offices outlining the requirement for contracts issued under the program to be performance-based.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The program collaborates with other agencies and programs. For the second consecutive year, the program will be instrumental in providing real property disposal and utilization training at the GSA Expo. The Expo primarily focuses on personal property and supplies. However, this training has resulted in the development of successful relationships with other programs. Training is also provided for other agencies by regional personnel. The program recently sent three realty specialists to an Air Force conference to provide training on property disposal. The program also participates as a member of the management team for the Federal Asset Sales (eFAS) Initiative. This Initiative involves all landholding agencies and focuses on consolidating real and personal property available for sale to citizens in a single web portal. The eFAS Initiative is undertaking further efforts to have agencies work together to share real property procedures and policies. The Government Real Property Information Sharing (GRPIS) Program has recently been realigned to the Office of Real Property Disposal. The GRPIS program's main mission is to collaborate with other agencies and programs to provide information concerning management, utilization and disposal of real property. GRPIS also provides a forum for agencies to present their mission via training. GRPIS's format enables agencies to learn the latest in real property regulations and to make better asset management decisions.

Evidence: The Office of Property Disposal provides instruction at the GSA Expo illustrating the methods used for the disposal of property and discussing some of the problems landholding agencies may face. The eFAS Strategic Plan was developed through collaboration with other federal landholding agencies participating in the eFAS Executive Steering Committee and reviewed by OMB. The GRPIS flyer is a quarterly newsletter distributed by the program discussing various real property issues and is distributed to over 1,400 subscribers. The Air Force Training was presented at the Air Force's Environmental Safety and Occupational Health Symposium as a means to further collaborate with the Air Force.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: All GSA financial activities are subject to an annual independent audit. The FY07 audit recommended GSA improve controls over monitoring, accounting and reporting of budgetary transactions. This specifically relates to the unliquidated obligations and unfulfilled customer orders. A corrective action plan has been completed by the Public Buildings Service (PBS) Office of Budget and Financial Management to address this recommendation. The core financial management practices are strong. PBS continues to improve its ability to produce credible receipts data on a real-time basis and is able to identify costs associated with its different Property and Economy Act disposal activities. Emphasis has been placed on providing tools to develop more accurate accounting data (i.e. labor distribution). Internal quarterly program reviews have been implemented within the Office of Real Property Disposal in FY 08 and are used to determine if managers are meeting milestones and strategic goals. The program also has monthly budget meetings with the PBS Budget and Financial Management office.

Evidence: The PBS Monthly Status of Funds Report shows the status of funds for each allocation on a quarterly basis. The PricewaterhouseCoopers Financial Management Letter is the result of the annual independent evaluation of GSA's financial matters regarding accounting procedures and internal controls. The Internal Quarterly Review Agenda outlines the subjects reviewed to monitor the execution of funds within the regional offices.

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

Explanation: The program has regular reviews to identify and mitigate management deficiencies. Since the last assessment, the following steps have been taken in response to identified deficiencies: Establishment of National Customer Development Team; Reinstitution of E-Government Team; Implementation and Development of the Real Estate Disposal Inventory Network (RediNet); Auction RP Facelift; establishment of the data accuracy team; and use of business intelligence to run management reports for labor distribution and accounting information. Through GSA's Public Building Service (PBS) National Program Management (NPM) initiative, the program is currently being reviewed to ensure operational excellence by further defining its goals, strategy, vision and management procedures. NPM is simply a disciplined approach to managing PBS's nation-wide programs.

Evidence: The E-Gov Team Charter is directed at improving the usability and credibility of the program's websites. The Data Accuracy Team Charter; was established based on the need to develop better strategies for engaging other agencies. The NCDT Team was established based on the need to develop better strategies for engaging other agencies and will operate under the newly approved Charter. The Internal Quarterly Review Agenda outlines the subjects monitored during quarterly reviews to detect and manage deficiencies. The Property Disposal Directors Call is a means of improving management communication between central office and the regions. Agendas for the calls are developed by the regional offices. The National Program Management Overview is focused on detecting deficiencies within all aspects of the program.

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

Explanation: The Real Property Disposal program is on track to meet its FY 2008 performance targets as reflected in the Quarterly Performance Report, which also indicates continuous progress as the program meets its progressively more ambitious goals each year.

Evidence: The program's FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification demonstrates its progress in achieving its long-term goals. In FY 2007 the real property disposal program achieved all annual targets related to its long-term goals.

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

Explanation: Performance Goals have been met as evident in the Quarterly Performance Reports. The program has recommended four performance measures, one of which is long-term, to demonstrate progress on speeding the disposal of unneeded real property, minimize disposal costs and satisfy customer expectations. The program works with the Federal Asset Sales initiative, Real Property Asset Management and program partners to meet these goals.

Evidence: The program's FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification demonstrates the programs FY 2007 performance. Partners such as GSA's Portfolio Management Division also accomplished their goal of improving their asset management through the disposal of unneeded assets. In FY 07 Portfolio Management set a goal to dispose of unneeded properties valued at $63M. The Office of Property Disposal assisted them in meeting that goal and the details are contained in the FY 07 Portfolio Deliverables for OMB. The Program's goals are addressed in Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with partner agencies. In the current MOUs with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the U.S. Coast Guard the GSA responsibilities listed on page one are reflective of the Program's goals.

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

Explanation: The program has improved its efficiencies in the disposal of property and has continued to meet its cost effectiveness target. Commercial real estate firms charge commission rates of 4% and upwards to 10% depending on the property and work involved. The programs target of 1.08% was based on historical data comparing annual proceeds to the annual costs associated with the direct sale of assets. The program has been modifying its accounting system to better collect data related to this measure. This includes our labor distribution system, which now allows realty specialists to charge costs to individual projects, including their actual labor hours.

Evidence: The program's FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification demonstrates its success in meeting its goals relating to efficiencies and cost effectiveness. Although the FY 07 results of .53% do not appear to be an improvement over the FY 06 results of .12% the measure's results are misleading. In FY 2006 there was an anomaly in the sales volume. Of the $932M in FY 06 proceeds approx. $799M were the results of a single auction held for the Bureau of Land Management. The related costs of the auction were less than $28K resulting in a distortion of the overall ratio. However, if the anomaly is eliminated the costs/proceeds ratio for the remaining assets shows a FY 06 ratio of .81%. This still meets the target but it also shows the .53% in FY 07 was an improvement over the previous year. To better account for the actual costs involved in the disposal of assets the Program has begun implementing a labor distribution system to enable realty specialists to fully document the labor hours associated with the disposal of each asset. This initiative will result in higher although more accurate labor costs overall. For this reason even though the program has successfully met it's target for the previous two years it is felt the 1.08% is still an aggressive target. Based on the additional requirements for disposing of federal property (i.e. federal and homeless screening) the target is far below the cost of using commercial real estate brokers.

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

Explanation: Under the Federal Asset Sales (eFAS) Initiative participating agencies are required to report on similar performance measures pertaining to sales price and cycle time. Under the eFAS program this program compares favorably amongst agencies actively participating in the Initiative. The closest comparison available to the commercial sector are the reimbursable sales conducted by the Real Property Disposal and the program's reimbursable sales costs are considerably lower than commercial commission rates. The Real Property Disposal program continually does as well, or better than other agencies and the private sector.

Evidence: Based on the statistics shown in the eFAS Performance Measures Presentation (beginning on page 7) the program does compare favorably to other like programs.

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

Explanation: Recent independent evaluations of the program include evaluations conducted by the Congressional oversight committees, the Public Building Service Office of Budget and Financial Management, the General Accountability Office (GAO), the Inspector General's (IG) office, and the GSA Administrator. The oversight committees review all aspects of the disposal process for validity and viability through explanatory statements for negotiated sales. The Congressional reviews of explanatory statements for negotiated sales have been continuously approved indicating methods and procedures performed by GSA are favorable. The annual audit of the program's financial performance indicated core financial management practices were strong. In April of 2007 GAO updated its findings in its report "Federal Real Property: an Update on High Risk Issues" and commended the programs efforts in restructuring its portfolio. The GAO completed an extensive audit of the Public Benefit Conveyance (PBC) program and concluded GSA far exceeds the sponsoring agencies in its ability to provide documentation of transactions conducted. The GAO has only completed a draft summary of its review of Federal Land Transfers, which is not yet approved for release. Quarterly Performance Reviews conducted by GSA's Business Measures Staff are based on the performance measures implemented during the previous PART Review. These measures were developed to assess the effectiveness of the program in achieving results. The program has continually met or surpassed all of the measures. The independent evaluations taken as a whole provide a comprehensive evaluation of the program and show an overall effectiveness. Those evaluations along with the success demonstrated by meeting the specific performance measures indicate the PBS Real Property Disposal program is effective and achieving results.

Evidence: The GAO reports can be accessed at www.gao.gov. The results of the performance measures used to conduct the quarterly performance reviews can be found in the programs FY 2009 Congressional Budget Justification.