tf£D STAf.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency	ii-p-0630
Office of Inspector General	September 14,2011
<

At a Glance
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Why We Did This Review
We sought to determine
whether the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has
collected and used workload
data to determine its workforce
size, and whether there are
workload models that EPA
could use or benefit from when
trying to determine workforce
size.
Background
During the 1980s, EPA
conducted comprehensive
workload analyses to determine
appropriate workforce levels.
Around the early 1990s, EPA
discontinued these analyses
and, since then, it has adjusted
the size of its workforce via
incremental shifts. The U.S.
Government Accountability
Office and the EPA Office of
Inspector General have reported
on the importance of basing
workforce levels on workload.
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/
20110914-11-P-0630.pdf
EPA Needs Workload Data to Better Justify
Future Workforce Levels
What We Found
EPA has not collected comprehensive workload data or conducted workload
analysis in about 20 years. EPA does not require program offices to collect and
maintain workload data, and the programs do not have databases or cost
accounting systems in place to collect data on time spent on specific mission-
related outputs. Federal guidance and standards emphasize the importance of
planning work to determine staffing needs. Office of Management and Budget
guidance states that agencies should identify their workloads to help determine the
proper workforce size, and federal accounting standards require that agencies
establish cost accounting systems to allow them to determine resources consumed
for work performed. Without sufficient workload data, program offices are limited
in their ability to analyze their workloads and justify resource needs, and EPA's
Office of Budget must base budget decisions primarily on subjective justifications
at a time when budgets continue to tighten and data-driven decisions are needed.
Organizations of varying sizes and missions have used workload models for years
to justify resource needs. During our audit, we identified some basic concepts of
workload modeling from which EPA could benefit. EPA would need to tailor such
concepts to its own mission, structure, and culture.
What We Recommend
We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer conduct a pilot project requiring
EPA offices to collect and analyze workload data on key project activities. The
Chief Financial Officer should use information from the pilot project, along with
data from an ongoing contractor study, to issue guidance to EPA program offices
on how to collect and analyze workload data, the benefits of workload analysis,
and how the information should be used to prepare budget requests. EPA partially
concurred with our recommendations in its response to our draft report. EPA
stated that it needs time to collect more data and develop a final corrective action
plan with milestones for completion. Therefore, our report recommendations will
remain unresolved with resolution efforts in progress.

-------