ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES NEWSLETTER OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM Vol. 19, no. 11 GP 3.16/3-2:19/11 September 15, 1998 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS PROGRAMS REMARKS BY FRANCIS J. BUCKLEY, JR. SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS Before the Federal Documents Task Force Government Documents Round Table American Library Association Saturday, June 27, 1998 Washington, DC Good morning. I appreciate the opportunity to talk with you again. This is a time of change and transition in the world of information from the ways we create, store, disseminate and use information, including government information. New buzz words like knowledge management, and the philosophy behind them, are capturing our attention. How our programs for the dissemination of government information fit into the evolving situations is what we are all trying to manage. I find myself addressing large policy issues, such as Title 44 revision, etc., issues of relations with other agencies over new and inventive proposals for information publishing and dissemination that would chart new ground, set precedents and create new models, as well as dealing with the myriad operational issues for running a large and complex operation within the Federal bureaucracy. In terms of the operations of the programs I oversee, I feel that the staff is doing a very good job. What I would like to cover this morning are three topics affecting the Superintendent of Documents Program: * appropriations * the Booz-Allen management audit * the Document Sales program Appropriations for FY '99 The appropriations process for the Depository Library Program Salaries and Expenses has not been confrontational as in other years. The Senate Appropriations Committee is recommending $29.6 million, about 1/2 million above GPO's current funding but about $600,000 below our request, and a reduction in the GPO staffing level by 200 employees. The House Legislative Branch Appropriations has recommended $29,234,000, an increase of only $187,000 and have approved an FTE ceiling of 3,416 or a cut of 134 positions. The Senate Report asks GPO to provide the appropriations committee with quarterly reports on action taken to implement to Booz-Allen management audit recommendations, which I will discuss shortly; the House asked for an annual report on this activity. Management Audit A management audit studying various GPO functions was recently concluded by Booz-Allen & Hamilton, a consulting firm, on behalf of the General Accounting Office (GAO). It was requested by the Appropriations Committee last year and GPO was directed to provide $1.5 million out of the revolving fund to GAO to perform this audit. The theme or perspective that Booz-Allen indicated they would take in their evaluation of GPO was competitiveness and utilization of business practices, rather than evaluating us as a service. We were not sure what to expect, but as it turns out there were many positive comments in their report about GPO's printing and procurement service, the depository program and GPO Access. However, they questioned whether a Government organization should operate a retail sales activity and whether it is an inherently governmental function. I would like to discuss this later. In responding to the management audit, the Public Printer noted that he was "pleased that the independent review performed by Booz-Allen & Hamilton affirms a continued positive role for GPO in the Federal Government in the production, procurement, and dissemination of Government information products." The report says that GPO's Federal Depository Library Program "is well managed, provides a valuable public service, and is respected by the library community." It also indicated strong support for GPO to make an increasing amount of Government information available electronically, free of charge, over the Internet and praised the success of GPO Access. The report says GPO Access "is one of the Federal Government's largest and most active Web sites" and suggests that GPO seek additional funds from Congress to expand this program. Among the specific recommendations for the FDLP are suggestions that are not all new. They suggested that we refine the goals of the program to include target dates for completing the transition to a more electronic program; to develop additional depository partnerships; to expand marketing efforts to all potential stakeholders; to pursue changes to Title 44 that would require agencies to provide all documents, especially those in electronic format, to the FDLP; and to hold an information campaign to make agencies aware of their compliance responsibilities. Booz-Allen had only four months to perform the audit. I think that the recommendations were based on a cursory analysis of GPO's operations and incomplete information, since there was so little time to do an in-depth analysis. Sales Program The management audit asserts that "disseminating government information to the public is an inherent government responsibility. We found no evidence that people believe otherwise." In the opinion of GPO, these statements apply equally to the Sales Program and the FDLP. Historically these two programs have been viewed as complementary and not, as noted in the report, conflicting. The FDLP provides no-fee access to government publications/information products as defined in section 1902, Title 44. The Sales Program offers the public the opportunity to obtain, at a reasonable price, personal copies of a broad spectrum of government publications on a cost-recovery basis. Booz-Allen suggested that the sales program could be outsourced, privatized, or remain with GPO. They based this on several findings. First that Title 44 does not mandate the sale of publication documents, rather it authorizes the Superintendent of Documents to do so, therefore there would be no need to amend Title 44 to either outsource or privatize the sales operation. Needless to say, we view the legislative mandate and a century of administrative practice and service to the public as justification for the program. Booz-Allen recommended that Congress reexamine the direction for the sales operation and consider several models: * Outsourcing the entire sales operation to a contractor to manage; * Transferring the sales operation to a private sector wholesaler serving book retailers and publishers; * Privatize the sales operation by transferring the assets to a private company, such as forming an Employee Stock Ownership Plan in which current employees assume the enterprise; * Permit and encourage GPO to enter in inter-service support agreements with other Federal agencies that offer similar services. They based these suggestions on their findings that the prevailing trend in successive democratic and republican administrations has been to seek ways to outsource or privatize government services that are not "inherently governmental." And although Booz-Allen recognized that "disseminating government information to the public is an inherent government responsibility" and "efforts to place government documents in the hands of citizens is a laudable objective," they still felt that "having the government engaged in a retail sales operation to accomplish that objective may run counter to that prevailing trend." I would rebut these findings and recommendations. I think the Sales Program is an essential component of our information dissemination program to provide the public with a reasonably-priced means to obtain personal copies of a broad spectrum of government publications, in the form of the official information issued by the government, on a cost-recovery basis. The value of the Sales Program lies in its being the official source for a broad range of Government titles. Many are limited interest publications that would not meet the qualifications for inclusion in commercial sales programs. If the Sales Program were privatized the public would lose access to these publications. I also take issue with the concerns over competition from the free dissemination of publications to depository libraries or from the increasing amount of information available on the Internet. People who need publications for extensive personal or business use will continue to need a source to procure them. Anyone who needs to read a lengthy item on the Internet will want to buy a copy as an alternative to downloading it. I expect the range of materials in the Sales Program to expand although the quantities sold of individual items may decrease. The mix is changing as items people need to consult for specific pieces of information are used on the Internet more frequently. For a program that is required to cover all of its costs, the bottom line is crucial. I am pleased to report that the Sales Program has shown a great deal of improvement since the losses sustained in Fiscal Year 1996. In FY 1997, we handled over 1 million sales orders for more than 12 million copies of tangible products--that is single orders and subscriptions--for a total revenue of over $70 million. And, although the FY 1997 figures are not yet official because they are still being audited, indications are that Sales will show a surplus of over $1 million, putting us where we've been in all but one of the last 12 years--in the black. In the first half of FY 1998, we are showing a surplus, and right now we're projecting a small surplus for the entire fiscal year. In May, I reintegrated the activities of the Documents Sales Service. As you may know, for the last couple of years, Sales has been working on a new Integrated Processing System (IPS) as a backbone to support the sales function. During the IPS planing process, the responsibility for the new system as well as the Order Division, and the Laurel warehouse, which would be the primary operations using it, was assigned to the Technical Support unit. The Director of the Documents Sales Service, Jay Young, was assigned to cover the vacant directorship of Library Programs Service in addition to his responsibilities for the Field Operations and Sales Management Divisions. With this consolidation, the managers of the Sales divisions have the responsibility for pulling together all the final plans for the implementation of IPS, data conversion, training staff, organizing facilities, managing the cutover we expect to begin August 17, and going live with the new system on September 1. Until a new LPS Director is hired, I have taken the responsibility for acting in that capacity. In Sales, we are thinking about our philosophy and mission--although we have not set up a formal planning process. My concept is that the program actually should broaden the number of titles included and keep some stock longer as a service to those who want to purchase copies of government publications for individual use or for libraries who need multiple copies of items for research (both current and retrospective). The character of the program is changing inevitably as volumes decline due to alternate ways documents are available, such as via the Internet. Conclusion The Superintendent of Documents Progam is busy and evolving to meet the needs of libraries and the public. We are faced with many mandates, a lot of oversight, and the possibility of reform by legislation. Succeeding speakers will address the Title 44 revision process and specific developments in the Federal Depository Library Program operation.