Jump to main content.

Review of ORD's Extramural Management Specialist Position

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

PURPOSE

In 1995, we conducted a survey of the timeliness of the pre-award procurement process at the Cincinnati Contracts Management Division. We learned, among other things, that the Office of Research and Development (ORD) established a position--the Extramural Management Specialist (EMS)--in 1993 to help ORD correct some of its contracting deficiencies. According to Office of Acquisition Management (OAM) officials, the EMS position resulted in mixed outcomes--some benefits and some impediments. As a result, we reviewed various aspects of the EMS position and its implementation by ORD. In March 1996, we decided to examine the EMS position to determine its effectiveness in correcting ORD's extramural weakness.

The objectives of this audit were to determine:

BACKGROUND

ORD provides EPA with an integrated research and development program. In addition to conducting research and development projects, ORD partners with the academic scientific community through extramural assistance agreements. ORD was officially reorganized as of October 1, 1995. ORD consists of three Headquarters offices, three national Labs and two national Centers. The Labs and Centers are the: (1) National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL); (2) National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL); (3) National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (NHEERL); (4) National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA); and (5) National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance (NCERQA). Various divisions and offices comprise each Lab/Center.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) identified Agency weaknesses with extramural management, particularly in the contracts area. In 1990, the Agency declared ORD's management of extramural resources as a Presidential-level material weakness under the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA). To address this weakness, ORD, among other things, created a network of acquisition specialists in 1993 to advise top management on appropriate procurement practices.

In 1993, the Agency provided funding to ORD for seven full-time equivalent positions to be used solely for acquisition management. ORD was required to match that amount and, therefore, dedicated a total of 14 positions for acquisition management. ORD created the EMS position as one step, among several, to help correct the FMFIA weakness identified in 1990. The fourteen EMSs are located throughout the country, with at least one at each of the Labs/Centers' geographical sites. ORD filled most EMS positions in 1994. EMSs report to Lab/Center Deputy Directors, unless located at a remote division, in which case the EMSs report to Division Directors.

EMSs provide on-site expertise and guidance on extramural management and coordinate all extramural management activities for their respective offices, laboratories, or divisions. EMSs: (1) advise ORD management and staff on all extramural management issues, policies, and procedures; (2) perform management studies; (3) develop high-level professional relationships; and (4) coordinate staff development.

Under ORD policy, EMSs are not permitted to manage individual extramural instruments, such as a project officer (PO) does. EMSs must have procurement expertise commensurate with a contracting officer or contract specialist. EMSs must also be knowledgeable about other extramural instruments, such as assistance agreements and interagency agreements.

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

We focused our review on the EMS position rather than on any specific EMSs or locations. Our review was based on the newly reorganized ORD structure, although most EMSs were hired prior to that event.

Using a structured questionnaire, we interviewed each of ORD's 14 EMSs. We interviewed nine of the EMSs face-to-face, and the other five via telephone. Within ORD, we also interviewed:

We also interviewed the following within the Office of Administration and Resources Management:

We participated in four of ORD's monthly Extramural Management Network teleconferences.(1)

We reviewed files for 21 judgmentally selected procurements to determine EMS input. We reviewed 6 contracts, 8 cooperative agreements, 3 grants, and 4 interagency agreements. We also read sections of ORD's management review reports that pertained to extramural management. These reports included reviews of extramural management at Narragansett, RI; Gulf Breeze, FL; Ada, OK; and Athens, GA(2). We also reviewed position descriptions and performance agreements for EMSs and other ORD employees who performed EMS-related functions.

To assess the effectiveness of EMSs' teaching of the Project Officer (PO) Assistance Course, we reviewed the 34 course evaluations that ORD provided to us. Participants, who took the course in 1996, gave scores for overall course quality and the effectiveness of the instructor, among other things. According to ORD officials, over 500 staff took the PO course.

We reviewed ORD's Policies and Procedures Manual and ORD's fiscal 1995 and 1996 FMFIA reports. We visited ORD offices in Washington, D.C.; Cincinnati, OH; RTP, NC; Athens, GA; and Las Vegas, NV. We also visited OAM offices in Washington, D.C., Cincinnati, and RTP. We visited GAD's Headquarters in Washington D.C.

We performed our audit in accordance with the 1994 Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General. We conducted fieldwork from April 1996 to December 1996. This report also includes preliminary information we gathered during a survey prior to the audit.

PRIOR AUDIT COVERAGE

Various OIG audits from 1983 through 1994 identified ORD extramural management problems. Audits in the 1990s focused on specific ORD laboratories in Duluth, MN; Athens, GA; Narragansett, RI; Corvallis, OR; and Gulf Breeze, FL. The General Accounting Office also issued several audit reports and testified before Congress during the 1980s and 1990s on EPA-wide extramural management problems. See exhibit 1 for a list of prior OIG and GAO audit reports and testimony.

In the OIG's November 1996 Semiannual Report to Congress, we stated that EPA made positive changes in its contract management practices, and that EPA should improve assistance agreement management practices.

CHAPTER 2

EMS Position Helped to Improve ORD's

Extramural Management

EMSs, via the functions they performed and their on-site availability, helped ORD remove its six-year FMFIA material weakness pertaining to extramural resource management. ORD did five other things--in addition to creation of the EMS positions--which also contributed to the removal of the FMFIA weakness. ORD:

1. Appointed an SES-level Acquisition Executive to oversee the resolution of the weakness.

2. Developed and conducted comprehensive extramural training courses.

3. Developed and implemented new policies and procedures.

4. Conducted comprehensive management reviews.

5. Converted contractor positions to in-house positions.

ORD's Policies and Procedures Manual (Manual), Chapter 4, outlined the functions EMSs should perform, and stated EMSs should provide on-site expertise and guidance on extramural management and coordinate such activities. According to the Manual, EMSs (sometimes referred to as Acquisition Specialists or Acquisition Managers) coordinate all extramural management activities for their respective offices, laboratories, or divisions. Among EMS duties are:

1. Advising ORD management and staff on all extramural management issues, policies, and procedures (including reviewing Lab/Center, or office extramural packages that require higher level approval within ORD).

2. Performing management studies.

3. Developing high-level professional relationships.

4. Coordinating staff development.

According to the Manual, EMSs are not permitted to manage individual extramural instruments, such as a project officer does. EMSs must have procurement expertise commensurate with a contracting officer or contract specialist. Also, EMSs must be knowledgeable about other extramural instruments, such as assistance agreements and interagency agreements. ORD's Senior Resource Official (SRO)(3) can waive these requirements. For instance, according to the Manual, the SRO might place greater weight on assistance experience for locations that primarily use assistance agreements. EMSs hired with waivers should take appropriate training within one year.

ADVISING ORD MANAGEMENT AND STAFF

EMSs advised top-level managers, as well as technical staff, their locations on extramural matters. All EMSs reported to the appropriate level--the Deputy Lab/Center Director, or Division Director. In general, they strove to identify potential concerns early and notify management of such concerns. Because EMSs were on-site, they also had direct access to POs. EMSs counseled POs on proper procurement practices.

EMSs significantly contributed to ORD management and staff's understanding of extramural management. Lab/Center Deputy Directors generally said they valued EMSs' expertise and their accessibility. POs also generally said EMSs added value. Some POs, varied, however, on how much input they solicited from EMSs. Some said they did not seek EMS input because of prior PO experience; other POs went to another source of information.(4) Some POs noted that although they did not frequently seek EMS assistance, the POs valued the EMSs' availability.

REVIEWING EXTRAMURAL PROCUREMENT PACKAGES

According to ORD statistics, since fiscal 1994--the year EMSs were hired--ORMA's approval of procurement packages increased significantly. These packages were first reviewed by an EMS before submission to ORMA.

Fiscal Year Packages Reviewed by ORMA Approved Percent Approved
1994 532 391 73
1995 220 198 90
1996 136 124 91

ORMA, as shown above, reviewed far fewer packages in fiscal 1995 and 1996 than in fiscal 1994. This occurred primarily because ORD increased its thresholds for package approvals at the Lab/Center Director level. The Federal budget impasse in early fiscal 1996 also resulted in fewer packages needing ORMA's review. ORMA typically reviews only those packages that require ORD AA approval or SRO concurrence.

OAM's opinion on ORD package quality was mixed. Some officials stated that the packages were better due to the EMSs. Several contracting officers and contract specialists, however, said they still had to spend substantial time with POs to improve procurement packages. According to some OAM officials, lower level ORD packages (which do not require ORMA review) often need substantial improvements after ORD initially submits them to OAM's contracts management divisions. A GAD Award Official said ORD's package quality was generally good. We did not perform work in this area and, therefore, cannot make a determination regarding these statements.

PERFORMING MANAGEMENT STUDIES

EMSs worked on ORD Management Review teams, with ORMA officials, and helped conduct reviews at ten locations since 1994. The review teams were effective in identifying weaknesses and areas of concern within the Labs/Centers. The reviews were comprehensive, and identified significant concerns. For instance, at Gulf Breeze, an EMS was functioning as a PO on two contracts. This was against ORD policy. The EMS's PO duties have since been properly transferred to other staff. Eleven of 14 EMSs (78 percent) stated they believed ORD Management Reviews were a key element in educating staff and ensuring that correct extramural instruments are used. Only the EMS position, ORD policies, and OIG reports were cited more often by EMSs as having contributed to the use of correct instruments.

EMSs also are responsible for identifying various extramural management areas requiring improvement, or that might have the potential for waste, fraud, or abuse.

DEVELOPING PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS

EMSs participated in ORD's Extramural Management Network.

Network members included various ORMA staff members, as well as the EMSs. ORMA's Policy Review and Evaluation Staff Chief chaired the Network. The Network met monthly through teleconferences. ORD established this Network to assist ORMA with extramural management matters, such as policy and procedure development and communication of guidance.

EMSs shared their ideas and experiences to address issues and implement improvements during the Network's monthly teleconferences. EMS participation in these teleconferences helped ORMA officials determine if policies were being implemented consistently in the field. The Network Chair often asked EMSs to assist ORMA in developing extramural policies or researching extramural issues. EMSs noted generally that the teleconferences were useful in conveying information. In January 1997, Extramural Management Network officials met for a 3-day conference to discuss the future role of the EMS position, as well as other emerging issues.

EMSs contacted OAM staff regarding both general interpretations and clarifications of regulations and guidance, as well as individual procurement package issues. EMSs' knowledge of their organizations' needs combined with extramural expertise and on-site locations provided EMSs with unique insight into extramural needs. EMSs drew on their extramural backgrounds to help them understand how general regulations and guidance pertained to specific extramural package issues. EMSs acted as "interpreters" between OAM and ORD staff.

Despite some concerns, OAM officials generally stated EMSs added value or had the potential to add value because: (1) EMSs were on-site, which enhanced communication with POs; (2) EMSs helped POs learn PO functions; (3) ORD submitted higher quality packages than some other EPA offices that did not have a similar position(5); and (4) EMSs were central points of contact to resolve contract issues.

Some OAM officials noted, however, that the value added depended on whether EMSs assumed proactive and collaborative roles. These officials recognized the potential value EMSs can add because some EMSs understand both program and extramural needs. However, OAM officials stressed that EMSs must remain objective and work with, rather than against, OAM. OAM officials also voiced other concerns: (1) EMSs sometimes do not seem aware of regulation and policy changes and need to be in an information dissemination loop; (2) EMSs seem more oriented toward procedures for level-of-effort contracts than for fixed price contracts, which OAM is encouraging the use of; and, (3) contracting officers and contract specialists still need to spend a lot of time with POs on packages.

A GAD Award Official said the EMS position has the potential to add value because it can provide GAD with central points of contact. The Award Official added, however, that EMSs could generally use more assistance training and experience.(6)

COORDINATING STAFF DEVELOPMENT

EMSs improved ORD's understanding of extramural management by providing various training courses to ORD staff. EMSs taught: (1) an ORD PO course for assistance management, (2) work assignment manager training, (3) an Interagency Agreement supplemental course, (4) invoice processing training, (5) a one-day seminar on assistance management, and (6) cost administration management training. According to the PO Assistance Course evaluations we reviewed, participants gave average scores of 4.4, 4.4, and 4.3, for "overall quality", "effectiveness of instructor", and "relevance to job responsibilities", respectively. The scores were out of a possible score of "5."

The NERL-Cincinnati EMS and the NRMRL-Cincinnati EMS coordinated and assisted with, respectively, monthly meetings between ORD and OAM personnel from January 1995 to May 1996. The NERL-Cincinnati EMS held another acquisition forum in January 1997. The forums provided an excellent opportunity for information exchange and improvement of working relations.

CHAPTER 3

Implementation of EMS Role Needs Clarification

The EMS role was not well-defined. As a result, EMSs performed duties that were not permitted under ORD policy. Also, staff within OAM and GAD did not fully understand the benefits of working with EMSs. These conditions occurred because: (1) ORD's policy is not sufficiently clear, (2) ORD communication with OAM and GAD regarding the EMS role needs improvement, and (3) some EMS position descriptions (PDs) need revision.

EMSs PERFORMED PO DUTIES

Some EMSs performed PO duties, which was not allowed under ORD policy. ORD's Manual, Chapter 4, states, ". . . because of their role as consultants and advisors to ORD line managers, EMSs are prohibited from serving as Project Officers or Work Assignment Managers." According to ORD's Deputy AA, EMSs should neither formally be POs, nor informally perform PO duties. Although ORD's policy states that an EMS cannot formally hold the title of PO, it should be clarified that EMSs should also not perform PO duties informally.

Several EMSs stated that they met with contractors, usually with POs present, to resolve issues pertaining to specific procurements. One EMS, along with the PO--and with approval from the contracting officer--met with an 8(a) contractor prior to award of a janitorial services contract, valued just over $1 million. The EMS said he discussed technical issues including required experience levels of the boiler maintenance person and the cost of the work uniforms. He said he did not get very involved in the negotiation of pricing because the contractor was "on target with their rates." According to the EMS, he thought his involvement was within his official job classification of "Acquisition Manager". The EMS stated that he gets approval from contracting officers before meeting with contractors. The EMS's PD included the function of negotiating with and debriefing contractors. The EMS also stated that he prepared the procurement package for the PO.

In another case, an EMS exceeded his authority on behalf of his Division. The EMS, rather than the Division Director or PO, sent a memo to the Contracts Management Division in RTP (CMD-RTP) canceling a proposed contract. The EMS also did not advise his Division Director to notify top-level ORD management and GAD officials about a potential organizational conflict of interest (OCI) on a cooperative agreement (CA).

The ORD Division originally planned to award a contract, rather than a CA. CMD-RTP identified an OCI with a potential offeror during the contract pre-award process. According to the EMS, funding available for the project decreased around the same time. This significantly reduced the project's scope. The Division then decided to fund a project, which was for a public purpose, through a CA. Although the scope of the CA was more general than the contract, the potential for the same OCI remained. GAD subsequently approved a sole-source justification from the recipient to use that subcontractor on the CA. Under 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 33, CA recipients must exclude contractors that present OCIs. During our review, ORD staff determined that the EMS should have notified ORD management regarding the potential for an OCI under the CA.

Three EMSs were formally POs. One EMS continued to serve as a PO. However, the EMS recused himself from participation in any EMS duties that would affect the contract for which he served as PO. The EMS took this action to avoid any conflict of interest situation which could have occurred. This EMS is also the Program Operations Staff (POS) Director for the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory's division in Corvallis. As a result, he performed two roles in addition to his EMS role. The second EMS was a PO for two contracts, and an alternate PO for two other contracts. His PO duties were properly transferred to other staff, as a result of a May 1995 ORD Management Review. The third EMS obtained a waiver memo from the Deputy AA, allowing him to function as a PO.

POSITION DESCRIPTIONS NEEDED REVISION

In 7 of 14 cases (50 percent), EMSs' PDs needed updating. Also, 6 of the 14 PDs (43 percent) contained duties typically performed by POs. For example, one EMS's PD stated that he "personally, or through project officers, guides contractors on technical, legal, policy and administrative aspects of the projects for which they provide support"; and (b) provides "performance feedback to contractor/recipient senior management . . ." The EMS agreed these are PO functions. He stated that he performs those functions only in a general capacity.

In other cases, EMSs had either assumed new roles which were not addressed in their PDs, or the EMSs no longer performed certain functions, which had yet to be deleted from the PDs. ORD's Deputy AA, and ORMA's Associate Director, stated that EMSs should have accurate PDs. According to the Deputy AA, the PDs for all EMSs should contain a consistent core of duties. He stated that ORD should review each EMS PD and revise the PDs accordingly to ensure EMSs understand the functions they should be performing. The official position classification on 7 (50 percent) of the 14 EMSs' PDs was either Acquisition Manager or Acquisition Program Manager.(7)

OAM AND GAD UNCLEAR ABOUT EMS ROLE

Both GAD and OAM officials--including grants specialists and contracting officers--stated that they did not fully understand the role of the EMS. For example, five of six GAD Grant Specialists that we interviewed dealt primarily with someone other than the EMS to resolve assistance package issues. Usually, they interacted with a division or laboratory level "assistance coordinator". One GAD Branch Chief stated she did not know whether these assistance coordinators performed the same functions as EMSs. Another GAD Branch Chief stated he was confused about whether to contact the PO or the EMS to resolve issues and when.

Some GAD staff were not aware of who the EMSs were. A GAD Branch Chief gave us a list of the people his staff typically dealt with to resolve assistance issues. Only one EMS appeared on the list; instead, most were administrative or clerical employees within ORD. As a result, GAD staff might not have been working with the most knowledgeable ORD official.

OAM officials also expressed concerns about the EMS role, including concerns that some EMSs: (1) performed both acquisition and project officer functions, often without authority or a warrant; (2) performed more functions than intended when the position was established; and (3) have lost their objectivity for implementing correct procedures in favor of carrying out their program offices' needs. ORD officials stated that they were aware of OAM's concerns.

CONCLUSION

Core EMS responsibilities should be identified. EMSs need to have a clear understanding of what their role is, and have accurate and up-to-date PDs. Half of the EMSs had "manager" in their official job classification. This could cause EMSs to believe they should have an active role in managing procurements. EMSs should neither be POs, nor perform PO duties, but instead be independent reviewers and advisors to ORD management and staff. EMSs are not authorized to legally bind the Federal government concerning procurement decisions. Also, new POs need to have the opportunities to perform the duties they should be learning.

OAM and GAD should also be made aware of the role EMSs play and the value they can add to the procurement process.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for ORD instruct his staff to:

3-1 Develop a standardized EMS position description, with assistance from OAM and GAD, which includes a "core" set of duties and responsibilities to ensure consistent implementation nationwide.

3-2 Revise Chapter 4 of the ORD Policies and Procedures Manual to clarify that EMSs are not permitted to perform PO duties either officially or informally, unless a waiver is granted. ORD needs to delineate under what circumstances a waiver is appropriate.

3-3 Communicate the EMS role to OAM and GAD management and staff, and take steps to improve the communication between them.

ORD COMMENTS AND OIG EVALUATION

ORD agreed with the findings and recommendations. They will submit a corrective action plan with milestone dates in their response to the final report. We will review ORD's submission when received.

CHAPTER 4

Support Staff Performed EMS Duties

And Served As Project Officers

Some ORD support staff, although not EMSs, performed EMS duties. In some cases, the Labs/Centers established these positions to make efficient use of resident expertise and address existing workloads. In other cases, the positions were created to address a lack of EMS knowledge about assistance agreements. The distinction between the roles of the EMS and these support staff is not clear. As a result, support staff--who may not have the training or experience of the EMS-- could provide incorrect advice. Also, EMSs may not gain needed experience if support staff performs those tasks.

ORD did not envision these extramural support positions when it reprogrammed staff years in 1993 to create the EMS positions. ORD's extramural policies are silent on these positions, and the role these individuals should play in the procurement process.

We identified 16 ORD support staff who performed duties such as: (1) helping technical staff prepare Statements of Work, (2) helping technical staff develop Independent Government Cost Estimates, (3) writing extramural training manuals, (4) teaching extramural training courses, and (5) reviewing extramural packages prior to management approval. We identified at least one support staff in each Lab/Center, except NCERQA, who performed at least one of the duties cited above. Most had titles like "Extramural Specialist" or "Extramural Assistant". ORD officials were unaware of the number of support staff acting in this capacity.

EXPERTISE OF SUPPORT STAFF USED TO ADDRESS

In some cases, Labs/Centers used support staff--some of whom had substantial knowledge of extramural policy and procedures--to manage extramural instruments. For example, the National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) recently created a team concept for managing extramural instruments. As part of this concept, the NCEA Deputy Director assigned four people--two in Washington, one in Cincinnati, and one in RTP--the role of, what he called, "junior EMS." Three of the four have contract backgrounds; one has assistance agreement experience.

At NERL-RTP, four "Acquisition Specialists" reviewed extramural packages before the packages were reviewed by the EMS. These support staff were used to ease the large workload the EMS would otherwise have to handle alone. In addition to his local workload, NERL-RTP's EMS also performed special review tasks for ORMA.

SUPPORT STAFF ASSISTED EMSs WHO WERE LESS KNOWLEDGEABLE IN ASSISTANCE AREA

The Labs also used the support staff to help EMSs who were less knowledgeable in the assistance agreement area. At NHEERL-RTP, about 32 percent of its fiscal 1996 extramural budget was for assistance agreements. Three NHEERL-RTP support staff helped the EMS review extramural packages and perform other EMS-related tasks. These staff told us that their positions were created around July 1996. NHEERL's Deputy Director told us in August 1996 that the EMS needed more direct experience in the assistance agreement area.

At NHEERL-Corvallis, the EMS--also the POS Director--relied significantly on an Extramural Projects Coordinator to review assistance agreement packages and coordinate with POs. The EMS relied on the Coordinator for two key reasons: (1) the Coordinator had more assistance agreement experience, and (2) the EMS had limited time to accomplish EMS tasks since he was also the POS Director for the Division. The EMS informed us that the Extramural Projects Coordinator position was created in 1988 to perform extramural review and coordination duties.

At NERL-LV, an Extramural Assistant reviews all assistance agreement packages, before review by the EMS. The EMS was hired in 1994 from the Department of Defense; he had a contracting background. The Extramural Assistant, on the other hand, had EPA experience processing assistance agreements, and NERL-LV valued that expertise. The Extramural Assistant has been detailed to GAD for the past five years, for a two-month period, to process assistance agreements at fiscal year end. According to ORD's Management Review Team Leader, an ORD review team found in 1995 that the EMS was not as knowledgeable as he should be in the assistance agreement field. The EMS stated that he attended three EPA assistance agreement training courses within six months after being hired and now teaches, on occasion, the ORD assistance course for POs.

Chapter 4 of the ORD Policies and Procedures Manual requires that EMSs have experience commensurate with that of a contract specialist or contracting officer. The Manual also states that EMSs must be knowledgeable of Federal and EPA directives governing other extramural management activities. ORD's Deputy AA stated that he wanted one person per location to be the expert in all extramural areas. He also stated that contracting experience was the most important factor in hiring EMSs. He said that: (1) contracting is where the Agency had most of its problems in the past, and (2) assistance agreements are not as complex and skills for managing them could be learned easier.

The ORD term "Extramural Management Specialist" infers a knowledge of all extramural instruments, including assistance agreements and IAGs. The official position classification on 9 of the 14 EMSs' Position Descriptions (64 percent), however, was either Acquisition Manager, Acquisition Program Manager, or Acquisition Analyst, which implies a strong contracting ("acquisition") background.(8) Twelve of the 14 EMSs (85 percent) did not have experience processing assistance agreements or IAGs within EPA before becoming EMSs.

ORD has taken steps to ensure EMSs have taken the appropriate assistance agreement training. However, we could not determine, in some cases, whether the EMSs had gained adequate knowledge of the area because some support staff continue to perform substantial reviews of assistance agreement packages prior to the EMSs' reviews.

SUPPORT STAFF ALSO SERVED AS POs

Twelve of the 16 support staff (75 percent) were also POs. The ORD Policies and Procedures Manual, Chapter 4, does not allow EMSs to be POs. In addition, according to ORD's Deputy AA, EMSs should not informally perform PO functions. We question whether support staff performing EMS-related duties should be allowed to be POs for the same reason that EMSs are not. One NCEA support staff stated that if she were an EMS, she could not be a PO due to the ORD restriction. She stated that she liked being able to perform both her PO and EMS roles. The NCEA Deputy Director stated that he contemplated pursuing EMS certification for this one support person but needed her to carry out PO duties and, therefore, did not pursue that certification. If a Lab/Center has a limited number of POs available to manage projects, it might be necessary to permit the performance of both roles. However, if a Lab/Center is using support staff positions to bypass the formal EMS/PO restriction, that is not appropriate.

The range of time spent among support staff on EMS and PO duties varied. The Extramural Projects Coordinator at Corvallis stated she spent about 85 percent of her time performing extramural coordination duties and 15 percent on PO duties. Others spent less time on EMS duties and more time on PO duties. An NCEA support staff person stated he was a PO for seven cooperative agreements and interagency agreements, and a pre-award PO for one contract.

CONCLUSION

ORD should identify all support staff performing EMS-related duties, and determine what roles these staff play and should play in extramural management. If ORD determines that having these staff perform such duties is necessary, ORD should: (1) communicate this role to OAM and GAD, and (2) consider revising its Manual to address the role of such staff and whether they are permitted to be POs.

Management should neither establish nor maintain extramural support staff positions to make up for EMSs who are less knowledgeable of assistance agreements. ORD management expects EMSs to be experts on all extramural topics. Although management may have created support staff positions as a temporary fix to aid EMSs, that practice should not be promoted as a long-term solution. Instead, ORD should identify ways to improve EMSs' knowledge in the assistance agreement area.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for ORD instruct his staff to:

4-1 Identify those support staff performing extramural duties, and develop, clarify, and communicate policies regarding the appropriate role of support staff in extramural matters, including whether support staff can be POs.

4-2 Coordinate with GAD on the feasibility of establishing rotational assignments for EMSs needing more assistance agreement experience.

ORD COMMENTS AND OIG EVALUATION

ORD agreed with the findings and recommendations. ORD will submit a corrective action plan with milestone dates when they respond to the final report. We will review ORD's submission when received.

CHAPTER 5

EMS Resource Planning is Needed

Since ORD created the EMS position, ORD has not performed any extramural workload analyses to determine the best use of its EMS resources. The role of the EMS will continue to evolve due to the implementation of corrective actions and shifts and declines in ORD's extramural budget. Also, most EMSs performed "other" duties because the EMSs did not have a full-time EMS workload. Because ORD officials have not conducted any EMS workload analysis, ORD is not sure how such resources should be spent for maximum effectiveness.
ORD'S IMPLEMENTATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

In its fiscal 1996 FMFIA Assurance Letter, dated October 31, 1996, ORD--with concurrence from OAM and OIG--removed extramural management as a material weakness. In 1990, EPA declared ORD's management of extramural resources as a Presidential-level FMFIA weakness. To correct the weakness, among other things, ORD established on-site EMSs at the laboratories in 1994. EMSs have played a major part in enabling ORD to remove that FMFIA weakness. EMSs have, among other things, trained project officers and management in proper procurement practices, and have reviewed and helped rewrite extramural management policies.

ORD'S EXTRAMURAL BUDGET SHIFTS AND DECLINES

According to the Chief of ORD's Resources Planning and

Execution Staff (RPES)--who is also ORD's Senior Budget Officer--ORD's extramural budget: (1) has declined and will decline, overall, in the near future; and, (2) has shifted from an emphasis on using contracts to assistance agreements, primarily grants. A significant Agency initiative has been to expand the competitively awarded grants and fellowships program. The Chief stated that ORD's AA wants to "get scientists back to the bench" conducting research, instead of being POs and managing contracts. Because of budgetary shifts and declines, the Chief stated that the workload for EMSs on a dollar level has decreased at the Labs, while it is increasing at NCERQA, since it manages all EPA grants. As a result of the Agency's initiative, proposed funding for the grants and fellowship program reached $115 million in the 1997 President's Budget Request. This represents a significant increase in NCERQA's total extramural budget (from about $33 million in fiscal 1994 to about $121 million in fiscal 1997--a 266 percent increase).

The following table shows ORD's extramural budget obligations, in millions of dollars, by procurement instrument from fiscal 1991 to fiscal 1995.(9)

Instrument 1991 1992 1993 1994
1995
Contracts $190 .5 $192.8 $176.4 $171.6 $152.0
Cooperative

Agreements

83.8

107.9

110.5

108.8

92.9
Grants 29.4 38.7 34.2 39.8 63.4
Interagency

Agreements

(IAGs)



20.3



27.3



40.7



66.0



56.0
TOTAL $324.0 $366.7 $361.8 $386.2 $364.3

Funding for grants rose nearly 60 percent (about $23.6 million) from 1994 to 1995. According to the Chief of RPES, funding for ORD's grants and fellowships program doubled in fiscal 1996 and again in fiscal 1997. Funding for contracts, on the other hand, decreased about 11 percent (nearly $20 million). Funding for cooperative agreements and IAGs also both decreased from 1994 to 1995 about 15 percent.

The RPES Chief stated that it is prudent for ORD to maintain a certain level of resources for EMS positions. However, he was not sure whether they would need one EMS at each location. He said that, given the shifts in the budget, ORD should review the workloads, by location, to determine how best to allocate resources.

Based on data provided by EMSs, the three major labs (NERL, NRMRL, and NHEERL) experienced reductions in overall funding, and significant funding decreases for cooperative agreements and IAGs over the last three fiscal years. Therefore, the extramural workloads may have decreased substantially and should be evaluated.

EMSs PERFORMED "OTHER" DUTIES

ORD has a network of 14 EMSs, along with a group of support staff, who perform extramural-related activities. Nine of the 14 EMSs (64 percent) stated they also performed "other" duties not directly related to extramural management, generally accounting for 10 to 30 percent of their time. One EMS stated he spends between 60 to 70 percent of his time performing other roles. ORD managers assigned EMSs other functions and roles because some did not have a full-time extramural-related workload. The ORD Policies and Procedures Manual is silent on the role EMSs should play in "other" work areas. According to ORD's Deputy AA, Lab/Center managers should have the flexibility to assign duties to their EMSs, but ORMA should be consulted. He also said that now might be a good time for ORD to review EMSs' workloads and the other duties they are performing. Although the performance of other tasks may be necessary, lower grade staff might more efficiently perform some of the administrative duties.

EMSs stated they performed such duties as: (1) serving as FMFIA internal control coordinators, (2) managing property, (3) conducting quality assurance reviews, (4) providing ethics training, (5) maintaining Financial Disclosure reports and recusal statements, and (6) creating and operating Internet web sites(10). In 1993, ORD reprogrammed 14 staff years for the EMS position to:

...create a network of acquisition specialists or managers in Headquarters and the laboratories to advise program managers on appropriate acquisition practices and to identify and resolve emerging problems in ORD acquisition practices.

ORD's PRES Chief stated that the EMS role should evolve into other things, with input from the Labs/Centers and ORD Management Council.(11) He believed that EMSs should always be involved in training the staff. One lead EMS--a GS-14 who also performs higher-level duties for ORMA--also stated that the EMS role is changing, but he suggested that the EMS role in the future should provide less emphasis on training the staff and more on oversight.

CONCLUSION

Because of changes in the role of EMSs and in the types of extramural instruments used by ORD, now is a good time for ORD management to review extramural workloads and functions and determine the best use of its resources.

RECOMMENDATION

We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for ORD instruct his staff to:

5-1 Conduct extramural workload analyses by location to determine the best use of ORD's EMS resources.

CHAPTER 6

EMSs Call For Improvements

Most EMSs believed they had adequate management support to do their job effectively. Although EMSs felt "empowered", they still believed their position could be improved and made suggestions for doing that.
EMS POSITION CAN BE IMPROVED

Ten of the 14 EMSs (71 percent) stated their EMS position could be improved. Of those 10:

EMSs SUGGEST IMPROVEMENTS TO GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS

EMSs called for improvements in Agency guidance documents for assistance agreements and IAGs, particularly in post-award areas:

CONCLUSION

Improvements can, and should, be made which will aid EMSs in carrying out their duties more efficiently and effectively.

RECOMMENDATION

We recommend that the Assistant Administrator for ORD instruct his staff to:

6-1 Initiate discussions with the Director, GAD to consider revising its IAG Compendium and its Assistance Administration Manual, and provide input to GAD on what information needs revision.

Exhibit 1

Page 1 of 2

PRIOR AUDITS OF EXTRAMURAL MANAGEMENT

OIG AUDITS

Year
Report Title Report No. Date Issued
1994 Management of Cooperative Agreements: ORD, Environmental Research Laboratory, Gulf Breeze, FL 4100237 03/31/94
1994 Management of Assistance and Interagency Agreements: ORD, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR 4100214 03/21/94
1993 Management of Extramural Resources: ORD, Environmental Research Laboratory, Narragansett, RI 3100236 06/16/93
1993 Management of Extramural Resources: ORD, Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, GA 3100156 03/31/93
1992 Contracting Activities at Environmental Research Laboratory, Duluth, MN 2100443 07/7/92
1992 EPA's Management of Computer Sciences Corporation Contract Activities 2100295 03/31/92
1986 Contract Management Practices at Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Las Vegas 6000773 03/26/86
1983 Review of the Office of Research and Development's Extramural Activities 30828 03/31/83

Exhibit 1

Page 2 of 2

GAO AUDITS AND TESTIMONY

Year Report Title Report No. Date Issued
1991 Government Contractors: Are Service Contractors Performing Inherently Governmental Functions? GAO/GGD-92-11 11/18/91
1989 GAO Testimony -- "Sound Contract Management Needed at the Environmental Protection Agency" GAO/T-RCED-89-8 02/23/89
1989 GAO Testimony -- "The Environmental Protection Agency's Use of Consultants" GAO/T-GGD-89-5 02/03/89
1987 Status of EPA's Contract Management Improvement Program GAO/RCED-87-68FS Jan. 1987
1985 The Environmental Protection Agency Should Better Manage Its Use of Contractors GAO/RCED-85-12 01/04/85
1982 EPA's Use of Management Support Services GAO/RCED-82-36 03/09/82

Footnotes

1. ORD's Extramural Management Network consists of ORMA officials, all 14 EMSs, and some support staff who perform extramural coordination activities. ORD established the Network to resolve extramural management issues and promote good management practices. Network members participate in monthly teleconferences to convey information, solicit input, and assess issues.

2. The Athens report was a draft report.

3. ORD's Deputy AA for Management.

4. Some POs sought the advice of support staff who had expertise on assistance and IAG packages. Please refer to 5. Two OAM staff members thought it was very likely EMSs had a positive effect on package quality, but did not directly attribute it to them.

6. Most GAD grants specialists we talked to did not know about the EMS position and had not talked with an EMS.

7. According to the PDs, 3 (21 percent) of the 14 were classified as EMSs, 2 (14 percent) were Acquisition Analysts, 1 (7 percent) was a Management Analyst, and 1 (7 percent) was a Supervisory Program Analyst.

8. According to the PDs, 3 (21 percent) of the 14 were classified as EMSs, 1 (7 percent) was a Management Analyst, and 1 (7 percent) was a Supervisory Program Analyst.

9. ORD did not have complete data beyond 1995.

10. Part of operating the Internet sites is extramural-related. Requests For Proposals and other procurement information were put on the Internet to increase competition.

11. The ORD Management Council consists of the Senior Resource Official, the ORMA Director, and the five Lab/Center Deputy Directors for Management.

Go To:
[Table of Contents Icon] Table of Contents [Appendices Icon] Appendices
Created May 5, 1997

Top of page

 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.