U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                  Office of Inspector General

                  At   a  Glance
                                                                                      11-P-0333
                                                                                    July 14, 2011
                                                               Catalyst for Improving the Environment
w
hy We Did This Review
We conducted this review to
determine whether the Office
of Research and Development
(ORD) manages its indirect
and overhead costs
appropriately to maximize
available funding for research
and development activities.

Background

The goals of ORD's
Administrative Efficiencies
Project (AEP) and
the Information Technology
Improvement Project (ITIP),
which are two separate
initiatives, include reducing
costs by improving efficiency
and effectiveness. In a 2006
draft report, ORD estimated
that the AEP would save up to
$13 million in administrative
staffing costs annually when
fully  implemented in 2012,
and that the ITIP saved
$2 million in 2007.

For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional, Public Affairs
and Management at
(202)566-2391.

The full report is at:
www.epa.qov/oiq/reports/2011/
20110714-11-P-0333.pdf
Office of Research and Development
Needs to Improve  Its Method of Measuring
Administrative Savings
                             What We Found
                            ORD's efforts to reduce its administrative costs are noteworthy, but ORD needs to
                            improve its measurement mechanism for assessing the effectiveness of its
                            initiatives to reduce administrative costs. ORD used a detailed methodology for
                            the two surveys it conducted during 2005-2010, which provided a manager's
                            perspective of the amount of time staff spent on administrative duties. However,
                            we identified some concerns with ORD's mechanism for assessing its initiatives.
                            Only two surveys have been completed in 5 years, and these surveys only obtained
                            the manager's perspective on administrative costs and did not obtain data directly
                            from individual employees, including staff whose time was spent on
                            administrative activities. Also, the surveys only considered a select number of
                            ORD staff rather than all ORD staff. Further, ORD used more detailed definitions
                            for administrative functions for the second of the two surveys, which may have
                            impacted the comparability of results between the two surveys.

                            More frequent collection of data and additional data collected directly from staff
                            related to what they are working on would better measure the effectiveness of
                            ORD's efforts to reduce costs. Also, by reducing the time elapsed between
                            surveys, ORD could identify and address issues that may impact ORD in meeting
                            its goal of reducing administrative costs and, in turn, maximize available funding
                            for research and development activities.
                               What We Recommend
                            We recommend that ORD establish a more timely and accurate system to measure
                            its effective use of resources and to allow ORD to better manage its initiatives to
                            reduce administrative costs. ORD generally agreed with our recommendation and
                            is taking action to implement the recommendation. ORD's planned actions and
                            timeline meet the intent of our recommendation.

-------