CAP Evaluation Report - 1 Jun 2000

7/29/2019 CAP Evaluation Report - 1 Jun 2000

1/38

GAOUnited State s Gene ral Accounting Office

Report to Congressional Requeste rs

June 2000 CIVIL AIR PATROL

Proposed Agreements

With the Air Force AreIntended to AddressIdentified Problems

GAO/NSIAD-00-136


2/38


3/38

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-00-136 Civil Air Pat ro

Contents

Letter

Appendixes Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology 2Appendix II: Comments From the Department of the Air Force 2

Appendix III: Comments From the Civil Air Patrol 3

Ap pen dix IV: GAO Co nt ac ts a nd St aff Ac kn ow le dgm en ts 3

TablesTable 1: Exp ecte d Civil Air Patr ol and Civil Air Patr ol-U.S. Air Forc e

Employment by Location of Assignment 2

Figures Figure 1: Civil Air Patr ol and Civil Air Patr ol-U.S. Air Forc eOrganization and Relationship

Figure 2: Prop ose d Civil Air Patro l and Civil Air Patro l-U.S. Air Force

Organization and Relationship 2


4/38



5/38


United State s Gene ral Accounting OfficeWashingto n, D.C. 20 548


National Security andInternational Affairs Division

B-285116

June 5, 2000

Congressional Requesters

The Civil Air Pat rol is a congressionally charte red, pr ivate, no nprofitcorporation that uses about 61,000 dues-paying volunteers to perform itsmissions. The missions are to provide (1) emergency servicesincludingcounternarcotics, disaster relief, and search and resc ue missions usingsmall aircraft; (2) aerospace education; and (3) cadet training. Congress

has designated the Civil Air Patrol the civilian auxiliary of the Air Force andprovided about $26.6 million in fiscal year 2000 for the Patrol in the Air

Force appropriation. The Air Force is responsible for providing advice andassistanc e to the Patr ols managemen t and oversee ing its operations.

A series of Air Force and Department of Defense audits and inspectionssince 1998 have ra ised co nce rns a bou t Civil Air Patr ols financialmanagement and inventory control practices as well as Air Force oversight

of the Patrol. Consequently, you asked us to review Air Force proposals toreor ganize the Patr ols ma nagement . In addition, section 934 of theNationa l Defense Autho rization Act for F iscal Year 20001 required us and

the Department of Defense Inspector General to independently reviewpotential improvements to Patrol management. During our review, weassessed (1) the nature of the relationship between the Air Force and CivilAir Pa trol, (2) t he Air For ces o versight of the Patro l, (3) the Patro lsmanagement and oversight of its own activities, and (4) plans to resolveidentified problems.

Results in Brief The Air For ce and Civil Air Patr ol relationship is us ually cooperative. TheAir Force includes the Patrol in its internal budget process to determinewhat the Patrol needs and how much money will be available to supportthe Patrol. The Air Force also provides technical advice to ensure flying

safety. For its part, the Civil Air Patrol performs search and rescue andother flying missions for the Air Force, and the Air Force reimburses thePatr ol for this service. The Air Force oversees the Civil Air Patro l to ensu re

that federal funds provided are used appropriately. At times, the

1P.L. 106-65, Oct obe r 5, 1999.


6/38

B-285116


relations hip involves co nflict. The Air For ce a nd Civil Air Pat rol initially

disagreed o ver plans to r eorganize the Patrols boar d and could not even

agree on a means for th e Air Force to exp lain its position to the P atrols

volunteers. Conflict in the financial relationship includes the Civil Air

Patr ols prac tice of lobbying Congres s for more fun ding if the P atro l

disagrees with th e amou nt supp orted by the Air Force. Nonetheless, the Ai

Force and Civil Air Patrol b elieve each get bene fits from the relationship

and want to continue it.

The Air Force monitors activities of the Civil Air Patrol by reviewing its

flight, financial, and logistics ope rations. However, most of the personnel

who mon itor th e Pat rols act ivities for th e Air For ce ar e Civil Air Patro lemployees who a re at the Pa trols operat ing locations and receive their

annual performance appraisals from the commanders whose operations

they monitor. This raises questions abo ut th e independ ence of the officers

Moreover, even when p roblems are b rought to t he atten tion of the Air

Force, it has not always been able to enforce co rrective action. Air Force

officials believe that they have limited authority over Civil Air Patrol

because it is a private corpo ration, although the y can refuse to reimburse

the Patrol for certain missions and restrict the purchase of new equipmen

or parts when the Patrol has not corrected problems. Nonetheless, Air

Force action to date has not been sufficient to resolve problems.

Civil Air Patrol commande rs d o no t have much incentive t o a ggressively

enforce the regulations, and they have not exercised their authority

sufficiently to ensure that all units follow regulations intended to e nsure

flying safety and accounta bility for assets. As a result, the Patrol lacks

assurance that all assets have been used safely and appropr iately. Civil Ai

Patrol leaders recognized the need to maintain adequate accountability

over assets but are concerned that if the accountability requirements

became t oo bur densome, some volunteers might quit, since most joined to

participate in aviation-related or youth d evelopment-related activities, not

to d o the paperwor k somet imes necessary to m anage assets. The Civil Air

Patrol needs a sufficient numb er of aircraft and vehicles to perform its

mission bu t has no t adequately determined how many aircraft and vehicleit needs. When the Air Force tried to study aircraft requirements, it relied

on som etimes inaccurate data, raising questions abou t th e studys

conclusions. When t he Air Forc e tried to p erform a s imilar study on vehicl

requirements, the Civil Air Patrol did not provide sufficient information fo

the Air Force to complete the study. The Civil Air Patrol is planning to

conduct another vehicle requirements study and hopes to complete it by

February 2001.


7/38

B-285116


To impro ve acco untability and oversight, the Air F orce and Civil Air Patr olhave prop osed legislation to estab lish a ne w governing board for th e Patr ol

The proposed legislation would also allow the Air Force to use personalservice contra ctors t o monitor the P atrols opera tions at its variousoperating locations and to end reliance on Civil Air Patrol employees formonitoring. The Air Force and the Patrol also plan to implement acooperative agreement to comply with the requirements of the Grant andCooperat ive Agreem ent Act o f 1977, which re quires the use of a forma lfunding agreement. The agreement would also implement a statement ofwork that provides new flying safety and asset accountabilityrequirements . However, a consu ltant to Civil Air Patro l has estimate d that i

will need to hire abou t 60 new emp loyees a t a cost of about $6.4 million peryear to implement some of the proposed cha nges, and the Air Force andthe Patrol have yet to agree on the expected implementation costs or whowill pay. The Air F orce believes that the Civil Air Patr ol can implement theagreeme nt for as little as $1.8 million.

Background Pres ident Fr anklin D. Roosevelt es tablished th e Office of Civilian Defensein the Office o f Emergency Management in 1941 to enc ourage c oordinationand cooperation between the federal and state or local governments andensure civilian participation in defense during World War II. The office

formed the Civil Air Patrol.

In 1943, the Civil Air Patr ol was trans ferred to t he War Departme nt. ThePatr ols war time missions included doing coast al patrols, sear ching forenemy submarines, doing search a nd re scue missions, towing aerialgunnery tar gets, and runn ing courier flights. In 1946, Congress e stablishedthe Civil Air Patrol as a federally chartered corporation to (1) encourageand aid American citizens in contributing their efforts, services, andresources in developing aviation and maintaining air supremacy;(2) encourage and develop contributions of private citizens to the publicwelfare; (3) provide aviation education and training to Patrol members;

(4) encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities; and

(5) provide an organization of pr ivate citizens w ith adequate facilities t oassist in responding to local and national emergencies. When the Air Forcewas estab lished in 1948, Congress de signated the Civil Air Patr ol as thecivilian auxiliary of the Air Force.


8/38

B-285116


Today, the Civil Air Patrol has three primary missions.

Flying missions include (1) search and rescue, (2) reconnaissance of

illegal narcotics prod uction or d istribution, and ( 3) assistance to federa

or stat e emergency management and disaster relief agencies using

aircraft and vehicles.

The Civil Air Patrols aerospace edu cation program promotes basic

aerospace knowledge and provides instruction on advances in

aerospac e te chnology by providing aviation-related mat erials t o m iddle

and high school teach ers to relay to their students . In 1999, the Patr ol

reported that it distributed ab out 30,000 free aeros pace edu cation

products to teachers, sponsored the annual National Congress onAviation and Space E ducation (a program that trained about

800 teachers), and h eld 100 workshops in 36 states to develop the

educational sk ills of over 200 participating teachers.

The Civil Air Patrols cadet pro gram provides instruction on leadership

skills, aerospace education, and physical training to peop le aged 20 and

younger. According to Patrol o fficials, the program also introdu ces

cadets to certa in aspects o f military life and gives some an op portun ity

to learn how to fly.

Organization andAdministrativeStructure

To acc omplish its assistance and oversight respons ibilities, the Air Fo rcerelies on the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force, a unit of the Air Education and

Training Command, the Air Force command that operates the Air

University and recruits and trains new people in the Air Force. Figure 1

displays the currentCivil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force and Civil Air Patrol

structure and relationship.


9/38

B-285116


Figure 1: Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Organization and

Relationship

Source: Our analysis of Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force documents.

According to the Air Force, until 1995, the Air Force ran the day-to-day

affairs of Civil Air Pat rol th rough Civil Air Pa trol-U.S. Air Fo rce by mu tua l

agreement between the two organizations. At the time, Civil Air Patrol-U.S

Air Force had a full-time staff of about 250, comprised of active duty

servicemembers a nd federal civilian employees, and the part-time servicesof abo ut 450 rese rvists. In a 1995 reorgan ization, t he Civil Air Pat rol-U.S.

Air Force reduced its full-time staff from 250 to 73 and t urned over to the

Civil Air Patrol the responsibility for its own day-to-day management. The

downsized Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force continued to have a role in

overseeing the Patrol; providing financial, material, technical, and other

assistance; and providing access to bas es for certain cade t activities.


10/38

B-285116


A volunteer na tional commander and n ational vice-commande r, who are

assisted by four ot her volunteer national officers, head the Civil Air Patrol

The national commander appoints eight volunteer regional commanders,

who lead operat ions in eight Patrol-designated geographic regions. The

regional commanders appoint wing commandersone in each state, the

District o f Columbia, and Puerto Rico.2 These officials, along with the

active du ty colone l who c omma nds Civil Air Patr ol-U.S. Air Forc e, make up

a 67-member national board that governs the Civil Air Patrol.

A paid execu tive director manages th e Patr ols he adquarters at Maxwell Ai

Force Base, Montgomery, Alabama. However, the executive director has no

command authority over the mor e than 61,000 volunteers ass igned to the52 wings and over 1,600 units thr oughout t he United States.3 The Civil Air

Patrol has a paid adm inistrative staff of about 100 persons primarily

assigned to headquarters. The h eadquarters staff provides day-to-day

administrative services such as financial management, legal services,

planning, marketing and public relations, information management, and

other s ervices. The Patrol also has 42 employees ass igned to its bookst ore

in Alabama and its parts depot in Texas. Finally, the Civil Air Patrol

employs the 89 liaison officers assigned to wings around t he cou ntry who

monitor and assist the P atrol for the Air Force. The Patrol pays the liaison

officers their salaries, benefits, and operating expens es, using a portion of

the Air Force appropriation designated for the Patrol.

The Civil Air Patrol agreed to limit itself to 530 powered aircraft at the

suggestion o f the Air For ce. These aircraft are mostly Cessna (172 and

182 models) light a ircraft. Similarly, the Civil Air Pat rol a lso volun tarily

limited itself to 950 vehicles. These assets were purchase d mo stly with

federal funds. In addition, the Civil Air Patrol owns land, buildings,

comput ers, office equipment, and ot her items. Most o f these asset s are

corporate property and are assigned to wings and squadrons. Patrol

volunteers also own or lease another 4,700 aircraft that can be used on

missions when needed.

The majority of th e Civil Air Patr ols op erat ing revenue c omes from fundsincluded in the Air Forces ap propriation and designated by Congress for

2A wing is the b asic oper ational unit of the Civil Air Patrol.

3Most wings are subdivided into squadrons. Most aircraft, vehicles, and other assets areassigned to squadrons and the squadrons perform most of the missions.


11/38

B-285116


the Patrol. In fiscal year 2000, this amounted to $26.6 million. Civil AirPatr ol also received appr opriations of abo ut $2.9 million from 36 states and

memb er d ues totaling $2.1 million. The states usually designate their fundsfor their local wing. Certain wings raise additional revenue throughfund-raising or rece iving private donations. Also, the Civil Air Pa trol h asabout $20 million in investments in equities and other financial instrume ntsthat have generated revenue. In addition, the Air Force has budgeted$5.8 million in appro priated funds in fiscal year 2000 to cover the opera tingcosts of Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force.

Relationship BetweenAir Force and Civil AirPatrol Is UsuallyCooperative

The relationship be tween the Air Forc e an d Civil Air Patro l is usu allycooperative but is sometimes marked by conflict. The Air Force cooperateswith Civil Air Pat rol by per mitting it to pa rticipa te in th e Air For cesinternal budget process and providing other assistance, including technicaadvice to promote safe operations. This arrangement establishes a financiaand op erational re lationship between the Air For ce a nd Civil Air Patrol. Forits part, Civil Air Patro l cooperat es with the Air Force by conduct ing sear ch

and rescue missions for the Air Force and is reimbursed for the expensesassociated with those missions. The Air Force conducts oversight of thePatr ols activities to ensur e tha t public funds ar e use d pro perly. By thesame token, the Civil Air Patrol is a private, nonprofit corporation that is

generally independe nt from the Air Force. This situation som etimes cr eatestension between the two organizations and has led to some public

disagreements. For example, the Air Force and the Patrol initiallydisagreed over h ow to reorganize the P atrols governing board.Nonetheless, each recognizes benefits stemming from the relationship.

The Relationship Is UsuallyCooperative

The Air For ce routinely assists the Civil Air Patr ol in many w ays spec ifiedin law (10 U.S.C. 9441), including (1) giving, lending, or selling to the Patro

surplus Air Force equipment such as spare parts and vehicles;(2) det ailing Air Forc e pe rsonne l to t he Civil Air Patr ol; (3) p ermitting the

use of Air Forc e se rvices and facilities; (4) providing funds for the

opera tional expense s of the Pa trols national hea dquarters ; (5) autho rizingpayment of expenses related to operational, testing, and training missions;and (6) reimbursing the Patrol for the cost of major equipment purch ases.The law also allows the Air Force to reimburse Patrol members forexpenses incurred in carrying out Air Force missions during a war or

national eme rgency. In a 1980 amend ment to t he law, Congress d esignatedthe Civil Air Patr ol and its individual membe rs a s instrum entalities of theUnited States, making the United States liable under the Federal Tort


12/38

B-285116


Claims Act for negligent acts or omissions of Civil Air Patrol or its memberswhile they are engaged in an Air Forc e-assigned mission. The Air Forc e

pays for liability insura nce for Civil Air Pat rols no n-Air For ce missions . Inaddition, under 5 U.S.C. 8141, Patrol mem bers (exc ept ca dets under age 18)are eligible for Federal Employees Compensation Act benefits if injured orkilled while serving on noncombat missions for the Air Force.

The Air Forc e also c ooper ates with the Civil Air Patro l by permitting it topart icipate in the Air Forc es annua l intern al budget proces s to dete rminethe amount of funds needed for Patrol activities. For fiscal year 2000,Congress d esignated $26.6 million of the Air For ces appro priation for the

Civil Air Patrol. The funds are used to reimburse the Civil Air Patrol for AirForce-assigned missions; headquarters operations; asset procurement; andsalaries, benefits, and operational expenses of the 89 liaison officers. Foracco untability purpose s, the liaison officers review th e Civil Air Pa trolsflight, financial, and logistics opera tions an d pr ovide t echnical as sistance inthose and other areas, including flying safety at the wing level and below.

The Civil Air Patr ol works with the Air Forc e on an o ngoing basis byperforming search and rescue missions and searching for the production ordistribution of illegal narcotics. The Civil Air Patro l reporte d tha t it hadsaved 275 lives during 1997-99 in about 30,000 hours of flying time. TheCivil Air Patrol also reported that law enforcement authorities interdictedmillions of do llars of illegal narcotics as a r esult of Patro l flights totalingover 100,000 hours. The Civil Air Patr ol also c ooper ates with the Air Forc eby giving inspectors from the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force access to

Patrol wing and squadron facilities and records and trying to implementrecommendations stemm ing from these inspections.

The Relationship IsSometimes Marked byConflict

The Air Force and Civil Air Patrol have not always cooperated with eachother and sometimes engaged in public disputes. For example, in 1999, theAir Force and th e Pat rol disagreed about plans to re organize the Patr olsgoverning board. The Air Force wanted to contact Patrol members by letter

to exp lain the Air For ces position on the m atter and as ked the P atrol for itsmailing list. The Civil Air Patrol refused to provide the mailing list andoffered to publish the Air For ces letter in the Civil Air Patr ol nationalnewspaper, but the Air Force refused that offer. Later, in a letter to the Air

Force General Counsel, the Patrol accused the Air Force of stealing the listThe Air Force denied the allegation and did not send letters to Patrolmemb ers. At times, the Air F orce or Civil Air Patro l have mad e the irdisagreements public. For example, in May 1999, the Civil Air Patrol posted


13/38

B-285116


items on its internet home page to r espond to Air Force allegations directed

at th e Patro l about financial irregularities, safety concerns, and other

issues.

There are also problems with the financial relationship. While the Air Force

includes the Civil Air Patro l in the Air Force s intern al budget p roce ss, the

Patrol h as n ot always agreed w ith the Air Forces funding levels or

restrictions. At su ch t imes, the Civil Air Patrol has contact ed Congress

directly to seek mo re funding than th e Air Force has s upporte d. The Air

Force believes that this can end up forcing the Air Force a nd the Civil Air

Patrol to compete for resources and has strained the relationship at times.

The vehicle through which the Air Force funds th e Patrol has also beenquestioned. In a 1998 report,4 the Air Force Audit Agency con cluded th at

the Air Force had not complied with the Fede ral Grant and Cooperative

Agreemen t Act of 1977 (31 USC 6301-6308). That law r equires federal

agencies to use contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements to acquire

propert y or services for the government or to transfer money, property,

services, or anything of value to recipients to ac complish a federal purpos e

Initially, the Civil Air Patrol resisted using a cooperative agreement

suggested by the Air Force bu t in Janu ary 2000 tentatively agreed t o the

arrangement. In February 2000, the Civil Air Patrol National Board

overwhelmingly approved the draft coopera tive agreement and statement

of wor k. However, as of May 2000, the Air Force and Civil Air Patr ol had ye

to sign the cooperative agreement and an associated statement of work

that s pecifies new safety and asse t accou ntability requirements.

Benefits F rom theRelationship

Despite some problems in t he re lationship, both the Air For ce and Civil Air

Patrol be lieve the relationship benefits both parties. The Air For ce be lieves

it benefits from the re lationship beca use th e Patr ol provides highly trained

and mot ivated n ew recru its and saves the Air Force from using its

resource s on the wa r on drugs. The Civil Air Patrol also provides some

recruiting benefit because Patro l cadets have a lower attrition rate from the

Air Force Academy tha n t hose without Civil Air Patrol e xperience,

according to Academy data. Also, the Civil Air Patrol believes it gets somerecruiting benefit from the as sociation with the Air Force because Patrol

officials believe some cade ts are attracted to the organization by the

4Installation Report of Audit: Air For ce Oversight of FY 1996 Civil Air Patr ol Corpor ationActivities , CAP-USAF, Maxwell AFB AL (E B098013, May 13, 1998).


14/38

B-285116


opport unity to participate in flying missions, wear an Air Force-style

uniform, and participate in military-style activities.

Limited Air ForceAuthority Over CivilAir Patro l Hinde rsOversight

Through the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force, the Air Force provides advice,

assistance, and oversight t o th e Civil Air Patrol b ut b elieves it has a limited

ability to effect ch ange in the Pat rol because it is an independ ent, private

corporat ion not controlled by the Air Force. While the Air Force can use

and has used cer tain sanctions w hen the Civil Air Patrol has no t complied

with requirements, problems remain.

Internal control standards that we issued in accordance with the Federal

Managers Financial Inte grity Act o f 1982 (31 USC 3512) require tha t

organizations estab lish ph ysical control procedu res to provide reasonable

assurance that assets are not lost or used without authorization.5 The Air

Force conduc ts o versight to identify problems in Civil Air Patrol w ings a nd

squadrons, recommending improvements when appropriate. For example,

the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force inspects every wing once every 3 years,

and its regional officials inspect wings or squadron s in t heir regions

routinely and also make recommendations to correct identified

shortco mings. Since 1997, the Air For ce has found nu merous inventory

control prob lems during inspections at w ings and squadrons. The problems

ranged from wingsor squadrons inability to locate all of the items forwhich they were accountable to a lack of records needed to determine the

inventory. For examp le, one wing had inventory problems in 77 percent of

the squadrons inspected from September 1998 through Fe bruary 2000. A

Civil Air Pa tro l-U.S. Air Fo rce Regiona l Office foun d similar pro blems at

wings it inspected in 1998 and 1999.

Other Air Force audits and reviews have also found problems with Civil Air

Patrol or Air Force oversight.

5Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1,

Nov. 1999).
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1


15/38

B-285116


In a 1998 review of Air Force oversight of Civil Air Patrol, the Air ForceAudit Agency found n umero us problems , including ineffective

mana gement con trols by the Air Force over the Patro ls use of about$23 million in appropriated funds and the failure to enter into a grant orcooperative agreement.6 The Air Forc e an d Civil Air Patr ol plan to enterinto such an agreement to address the problems.

In July 1999, the Air Force Office of Special Investigations and th eFede ral Bureau of Investigation seized re cord s at Civil Air Patr ol andCivil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force headquarters in Alabama and locations inKentucky, Texas, West Virginia, Florida, and Puerto Rico. According toofficials in the Air For ce Office of Special Investigations, the seizures

were in response to the problems identified by Air Force studies,informants repor ts, and an a llegation of dou ble-billing for a flyingmission. The Office of Special Investigations indicated that it waspursuing a criminal investigation in the matter of the alleged double-billing.

The Air Force believes it has limited authority to enforce theimplementation of recommendations it makes because the Civil Air Patrolis an independent corporation. However, it does have some leverage inpromoting corrective actions. For example, the Air Force can deny wingsfederal funds to purch ase new equipment and spare parts or deny thetransfer of surplus parts from the Department of Defense. The Air Forcehas occasionally exercised this authority when it finds inadequate controlsover resources in the wings. During our review, eight wings were deniedsuch funds. The Air Force may also withdraw approval for Air Force

missions, denying reimbursement to the wing for the missions. The CivilAir Patr ol-U.S. Air Forc e h as used its available a uthor ity sparingly becau seof the importance of continued availability of aircraft for search and rescuemissions. Air Force officials told us that withdrawa l of mission st atus c ouldleave some states without search and rescue coverage. Thus, problemshave continued in the areas of compliance with safety and asset

mana gement regulations by Civil Air Patr ol units.

6We did not verify the results of the Air Force Audit Agency review.


16/38

B-285116


Management andOversight of WingActivities Have BeenWeak

The Civil Air Patro l National Commander leads t he organization but relies

on th e region and w ing commanders t o manage th e day-to-day affairs of

their respe ctive areas in performing assigned m issions and m anaging

assets. However, some wings did not always follow Patro l policies and

regulations regarding flying safety and asset management. Furth ermore,

the Civil Air Patrol has not determined how many aircraft and vehicles it

needs to accomplish its missions. This raises questions about whether it

has too few or too many aircraft or vehicles and whether they are located

where needed most.

Civil Air Patrol Wings HaveNot Always Followed AllPatrol Regulations

GAO-issued int erna l contro l standa rds re quire an organizations

management to establish an internal control system that provides

reasonable assurance that organizational components comply with

applicable regulations. The Civil Air Patrol has written various regulations

and issued policy manuals that provide guidance on s afe and effective air

operations and asset management and accountability. For example, Patrol

safety regulations require that designated flight release officers auth orize

flying missions in writing. Before authorizing the flight, these officers are

supposed to ensure that pilots have a current license and medical

certificate an d are qualified in th e aircraft they intend t o oper ate, among

other t hings. In some cases , missions were not p roperly authorized. One

wing we visited lacked as surance that a ll flights were properly authorized

because authorization documents on file lacked the officerssignatures,

raising questions about whether the officers had authorized the flights.

Based on our inquiry, the wing staff contacted the flying squadrons, which

had kept a second set of records that ultimately documented proper

authorization on most but no t all of the missions in question. Nonetheless,

without c ontacting the s quadrons first, the wings head quarters cou ld not

answer our questions about whether the flights were properly authorized.

Wing officials lacked assurance that about 170 flights had been

approp riately auth orized. In addition, flight release o fficers so metimes

authorized flights and then flew as passengers, in violation of th e

regulations.

Such problems existed at oth er wings as well. To deter mine the exte nt to

which th e w ings follow Patro l safety, asset, and financial management

regulations, we ask ed each of the 52 wings to provide us with e vidence o f

compliance with selected regulations; 49 wings resp onded to our request.

Our analysis sh owed that in fiscal year 1999 many of the wings that


17/38

B-285116


responde d did not follow all regulations, as indicated by t he following

examples.

Fifty-five percent of the w ings could no t demo nstrate that they did all the

annual no-notice inspections required by Civil Air Patrol regulation to

ensure co mpliance with safety regulations, and another 14 percent did no

provide sufficient records for analysis. Among other things, wing-level

inspect ors a re re quired to review th e (1) flying units safety pro gram; flyin

records, including pilots records; flight auth orization pro cedures; and

condition and maintenance of Civil Air Patrol aircraft assigned to the unit

The inspectors ar e also required to p rovide an overall evaluation of the

units co mpliance with Patro l flight safety and o ther operationalrequirements. Two w ing commanders told us t hat n o-notice inspections ar

difficult to conduc t in an organization run by volunteers. Since the

regulations re quire inspector s to visit squadrons without notice, there is

little assurance that any of the squadrons volunteers will be present to

provide access to the necessary records when the inspectors arrive. When

no-notice inspections were do ne, inspectors found problems. For example

numerou s wings found noncompliance with aspect s of the flight

authorization regulations. A key Civil Air Patrol official told us that the

Patrol plans to c hange the regulation to pe rmit short-notice inspections in

the future.

Twenty percen t of the wings did no t separat ely account for adm inistrative

fees related to counter narcotics missions, as required by Civil Air Patrol

financial management regulations, and ano ther 8 percen t did not provide

sufficient r ecords for an alysis. The fees are an add-on t o reimbursemen ts

for flights related to cou nternarc otics missions. These fees must be

account ed for se parately. Patrol regulations specify that the wings may us

these fees only for expenses directly attributable to t he w ings

counternarcotics program.

Thirty-seven percent of the wings did not have annual bu dgets, as require

by Civil Air Patrol regulation, and anot her 12 percent did not provide

sufficient records for analysis. Civil Air Patrol regulations require eachwing to have an annual budget approved prior to the start of each fiscal

year and to monitor expenditures during the year.


18/38

B-285116


Civil Air Patrol Has NotDetermined Aircraft andVehicle Requirem ents

Each Civil Air Patrol wing needs a sufficient number of aircraft, vehicles,

and other assets to complete their assigned missions, but the Patrol has no

determined how many aircraft and vehicles are needed. In 1998, the Air

Force Audit Agency found t hat the Air Force had purchas ed aircraft and

ground vehicles without appropr iately determining aircraft and vehicle

requirements. As a result, the Air Force studied Civil Air Patrol aircraft

requirements to try to determine whether the curren tly authorized powered

aircraft fleet size of 530 was the number needed for the Patrols missions.

The stud y concluded the Civil Air Patrol may need 648 aircraft for its

missions . Howe ver, the Air Force did no t verify the a ccur acy of the Pat rols

flying-hour data and sometimes r elied o n inaccura te d ata, raising questionsabout the studys co nclusions.

Moreo ver, Civil Air Patr ol officials cou ld not exp lain the b asis for a ssigning

aircraft to the wings, and they used no systemic proce ss to periodically

revalidate their bas ing decisions. However, in 1997, the Patr ol attempt ed t o

address aircraft use, which can be used to determine basing requirements,

and es tablished an average of 200 hours per year per a ircraft as t he target

flying rate for Civil Air Pat rol a ircraft. In 1998, the wings h ad widely varying

aircraft use rates, raising questions about whether some wings had more

aircraft than they needed and some had too few. For example, three wings

reported that they flew an average of over 460 hours per aircraft in 1998,

whereas a nother three wings reported they flew abou t 160 hours or less. Athe s ame time, the Civil Air Patrol wing with one o f the lowest usage rates

had one of the highest rates of use of membersaircraft, raising questions

about the extent to which the wing tried to fully use Civil Air Patrol aircraft

which cost less to fly than member-owned aircraft. Another wing had a

relatively high rate of use of member aircraft in fiscal year 1998 and this

wings officials believe they could re duc e memb er aircr aft usage if they had

more Civil Air Patrol aircraft.

Civil Air Patrol recognizes the need to analyze the use and assignment of its

aircraft, and it developed a flying-hour database in 1998 to suppo rt su ch

analysis. However, the dat abase, managed at Patrol head quarters, is not

always accurate.

The database reported that one wing averaged about 75 hours of flying

time p er aircr aft in fiscal year 1998, well below t he Pa trols ta rget of

200 hours p er aircraft. However, our review of wing data shows that t he

wing used e ach aircraft on average over 200 hours that year. Moreover,

four of the othe r six wings that we visited also had da ta prob lems. The


19/38

B-285116


Civil Air Patrol believes tha t the errors in the d atabase have since been

corrected.

The database shows tw o aircraft in a wing in fiscal year 1999 that were

not in th e wings inventor y. The dat abas e even sho ws ho urs flown by the

wing on one of the aircraft.

Inaccurate data has hampered decision-making at times. According to a

Patrol official, the re ported low use of aircraft in one w ing during 1998

led to the transfer of one aircraft from the wing to anoth er wing though

to have a greater need. Civil Air Patrol information management officials

at headquarters acknowledged problems in the data and attributed it to

staff turnover and changes in the software used to maintain the

database. Further, they believe that the problem has been compoundedby late submission of wing flying reports and s ome wings reluctance to

enter data d irectly into the compute r, as is no w required. These officials

also told us th ey are trying to improve the ac curacy of the system. In

addition, a key Patrol official told us that the dat abase is no w being

made available to th e wings to permit th em to verify the accu racy of

their aircraft use data.

In addition to quest ions about aircraft fleet size requirements an d use, Civi

Air Patrol has also not d etermined how m any vehicles it needs and wh ether

its 950 vehicles match requirements. The Air Force tried to study Civil Air

Patrol vehicle requirements in Fe bruary 1999 but ab andoned the effort in

August 1999 after some wings did not provide any data, despite re peated

requests b y the Air Force and the Civil Air Patrol over an 8-month period.

Civil Air Patrol officials w ere u nable to explain the reason for the poor

respon se to th e data r equest. Officials at one wing told us they did not s end

in any data because they believed that a response to the request was not

mandato ry. However, without adequate data on the us age and location of

aircraft and vehicles, Patrol management cannot determine whether they

have too few or too many or whether they are located in the places where

most needed. The Civil Air Patrol has begun ano ther s tudy of vehicle

requirements and plans to complete it by Febru ary 2001.

Patrol leaders face a s ignificant challenge in designing and operating anaccounta bility system an d managing assets. They agree that pro per

account ability is necessary bu t said tha t it is some times difficult to get

volunteers to d o th e ne cessary pape rwork. Civil Air Patrol officials to ld us

that they try to a chieve a balancedesigning and implementing

accountability systems that provide reasonable assurance of appropriate

asset use but are not so burdensome that volunteers leave the Patrol.


20/38

B-285116


The Air Force and CivilAir Patrol Plan toAddress IdentifiedProblems

In March 2000, the Air Force and the Civil Air Patrol submitted to Congres

a p rop osed revision of 10 U.S.C. 9441 to reo rganize the Civil Air Pat rol

governance. First, the propo sed legislation wou ld establish a ne w board o

governance for Civil Air Patrol, with some members appointed by the Air

Force, ot hers by Civil Air Patrol, some jointly by the Air Force and the

Patrol from among private organizations intereste d in c ivil aviation and th

missions of the Patrol, and one each by the Speaker of the House and the

President of the Senate. The board would carry out the purposes of the

Civil Air Pat rol a s sp ecified in its 1948 con gressional char ter. The Civil Air

Patrol intends to keep its National Board as currently constituted because

its members are corporat e officers and the Patrol believes wingcommanders need to remain corporate officers to execute certain financia

responsibilities. The proposed legislation would also allow the Air Force to

use pe rsonal service contractor s as liaison officers, thereby addressing

concerns about the indepen dence o f the liaison officers arising from their

current status as Civil Air Patrol employees. The Air Force would pa y the

liaison officers with Air Force funds to oversee the Air Force

reimbursements for Patrol flights and continue to provide the other

oversight and assistance that they do now.

In addition to the proposed legislation, the Patrol has agreed to accept

funding under a co operative agreement beginning October 1, 2000. The

agreeme nt clarifies the re lationship b y specifying the Air Force s and t hePatr ols rights and r espo nsibilities in a ran ge of areas, including

management, asset accounta bility, audits, dispute resolution, financial and

performance rep orting, and pro curement standards. Moreover, a statem en

of work, which spe cifies certain accoun tability and m anagement

requirements under the cooperative agreement, addresses many of the

issues that we raised. For example, the statement of work (1) requires tha

the Civil Air Patrol revalidate its aircraft and vehicle fleet every 2 years,

(2) allows the Air Force to w ithhold funds or take certain other actions if

the Pat rol does not properly account for its resources, (3) requires the Civ

Air Patrol an d th e Air For ce to establish and operate a joint wing-level

inspection program, and (4) requires the Patrol to operate an inspection

program below t he wing level. Moreover, Department of Defense grant

regulations permit the Air Force to terminate the current award

tempora rily, withhold payments, or take other r emedial action if the Patro

is in serious noncompliance with the cooperative agreement or statement

of work.


21/38

B-285116


Implementing the coope rative agreeme nt m ay be costly. A Civil Air Patr olconsultant concluded that to fulfill additional responsibilities, Patrol

headquarters would need to hire about 60 individuals at a cost of about$6.4 million a year. Their responsibilities would include financialmanagement, planning, information technology management,procurement, accounting, inspections, operations, professionaldevelopment, and administrative and operational support; about half wouldbe at headquarters and the other half at the wings. The Air Force and CivilAir Patrol had not agreed on the actual implementation costs and whowould pa y for the se o fficials as of May 2000. The Air F orce believes t hatimplementation could cos t as little as $1.8 million annu ally and require

fewer th an 60 new em ployees. Figure 2 displays the likely organization thawould result from adoption of the proposed legislation and implementationof the cooperative agreement and statement of work by the Civil Air Patroland the Air Force.


22/38

B-285116


Figure 2: Proposed Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Organization and Relationship

Source: Our analysis of Civil Air Patrol and Air Force documents.


23/38

B-285116


As no ted e arlier, the numb er of per sons employed by the Civil Air Patrol

and the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force is expected to change if the

(1) proposed legislation is passed and implemented as currently written,

(2) cooperative agreement and statement of work are implemented as

currently written, and (3) co nsultants reco mmendation to hire

60 additional Civil Air Patrol employees is implemented. Table 1 displays

Civil Air Pa trol and Civil Air Pat rol-U.S. Air Fo rce employmen t b efore and

after implementation of the propos ed chan ges, by location of assignment.

Table 1: Expected Civil Air Patrol and Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Employment by Location of Assignment

a

Some wings have paid staff positions funded through state appropriations or local wing funds.bExcludes about 450 reservists who augment Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force staff.

Source: Our analysis based on Civil Air Patrol and Air Force documents.

Conclusions Despite recent d isputes b etween the Air Forc e and Civil Air Patrol, bothorganizations have indicated that they value the ir relationship and want t o

cont inue it. Becau se the Air Forces and th e Patr ols prop osed legislation,

cooperative agreement, and statement of work, address many of the

problems th at we an d othe rs have identified, we believe that specific

recommendations to address these problems are unnecessary at this time

The Civil Air Patr ols indep end ence from th e Air For ce, cou pled w ith limits

on t he Air Force s aut hority to pro mote c orrective action in the Patrol, has

created a situation in which there are few serious penalties for

noncomp liance with regulations. That will change if the co operative

agreement and statement of work are approved as written because if the

Civil Air Patrol is unab le to ensure compliance with applicable re gulations

and the terms of the cooperative agreement and statement of work, it risks

unilateral termination of the agreement by the Air Force.

Personnel

Employment prior to implementation of the changes Employment after implementation of the changes

Civil Air PatrolCivil Air Patrol-

U.S. Air Force Civil Air PatrolCivil Air Patro

U.S. Air Forc

Headquarters 101 27 129 2

Bookstore/depot 42 0 42

Liaison officers 89 0 0 8

Regional offices 8 46 16 4

Wings 0a 0 25

Total 240 73b 212 162


24/38

B-285116


Agency Comments andOur Evaluation

The Air Force concurred with our reports findings and conclusions. The

Air Force also believed that cost s associated with implementation of the

cooperative agreement should not prevent the Air Force and the Patrol

from signing the a greemen t. The Air Forc es comm ent s are include d in their

entirety in appen dix II.

The Civil Air Patrol also concurred with our report. The Pa trol felt that if

adequately funded, implementation of the coop erative agreement and

statemen t and propos ed legislation would address identified problems. The

Patrols com ments are included in their ent irety in ap pendix III.

Scope an dMethodology

To cond uct our work, we interviewed officials and obta ined key documents

from the Civil Air Patrol headquarters in Alabama. We also contacted all

52 Civil Air Patrol wings and requested c ertain data and performed m ore

ext ensive fieldwork a t the Delaware, New York, Ohio, Missour i, Nevada,

and Arizona Wings and limited wor k at the Maryland Wing. We a lso

interviewed officials and obtained key docume nts from the Office o f the

Deputy Assist ant Secreta ry of th e Air Fo rce (Reserve Affairs); Civil Air

Patrol-U.S. Air Force; and Patrol employees who monitor Civil Air Patrol

wing activities for t he Air For ce in t he field. We discuss our scope and

methodo logy in detail in append ix I.

We conducted our work from August 1999 through April 2000 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

We are s ending copies of this report to interested co ngressional

committees; the Honorable William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense; the

Honorable F. Whitten Peters, Secretary of t he Air Fo rce; the Honorable

Jacob J. Lew, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; Brigadier

General James C. Bobick, Civil Air Patrol National Commander; and

Colonel Rober t L. Brooks, Civil Air Pat rol Ex ecut ive Direct or. We w ill make

copies available to other interested parties on request.


25/38

B-285116


If you or your staff have any questions abo ut this rep ort, please contac t me

at (202) 512-3610. Key contributors on this assignment are listed in

ap pen dix IV.

Norman J . Rabkin

Director, National Security

Preparedness Issues


26/38

B-285116


List of Congressional Requesters

The Hono rable John W. Warne r

Chairman

The Hono rable Carl Levin

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Armed Services

United States Senate

The Honorable Ted Stevens

Chairman

The Honorable Daniel K. InouyeRanking Minority Member

Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropr iations


The Honorable Tom Harkin


The Honorable Floyd D. Spence

Chairman

The Honorable Ike Skelton


Committee on Armed Services

House of Representa tives

The Honorable Jerry Lewis

Chairman

The Honorable John P. Murtha


Subcommittee on Defense

Committee on Appropr iations

House of Representa tives


27/38



28/38


Appendix I

Objective, Scope, and Methodology

During our re view, we asses sed (1) the nature o f the relationship between

the Air Forc e an d Civil Air Patr ol, (2) the Air Fo rces overs ight of the P atro l

(3) the Patrols man agement and oversight o f its own activities, and

(4) plans to resolve identified pro blems. To co mplete this wor k, we

interviewed the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Commander and the

Comman ders and key st aff of Civil Air Pat rols Middle East 1 and Great

Lakes Liaison Regions. We also interviewed the Civil Air Pat rol Nation al

Commander, Executive Director, and the Wing Commande rs a nd key staff

from t he Maryland, Delawar e, New York, Ohio, Missou ri, Nevada, and

Arizona Wings and the Liaison Officers and Liaison Noncommissioned

Officers assigned to these wings. We selected the w ings exc ept the

Maryland Wing based on certain repo rted extremes in flight dat a, such asunusua lly high or low us age of corporate or member a ircraft.

To unders tand the nature of the relationship between th e Air Force and the

Patrol, we reviewed laws defining the relationship; proposed legislation to

enhance the relationship; memorand ums of underst anding between the Air

Force and the Patrol; the Joint Report: Air Fo rce-Civil Air Pat rol Fu nding

Policies, P rocedures , Relationshipissued to Congress; the coop erative

agreement; the stateme nt of work; Air Force guidance and ma nuals;

briefing slides; and other documen ts. We also reviewed the Department o f

Defense Inspec tor General repor t issued in February 2000,2

correspo ndence, materials suppo rting several draft Civil Air Patrol

governing board reorganization pro posals, and othe r docum ents. In

addition to the officials identified previously, we interviewed an official

from the Air Force Office of the General Counsel and anot her from t he

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Reserve Affairs)

the Civil Air Pa trol-U.S. Air Fo rce Inspec tor General; and oth er Civil Air

Patrol-U.S. Air Force officials, including the Comptroller, the Directors of

Logistics, the Aircraft Branch , the Vehicle Branch , the Directo r of

Operations, and t he Staff Judge Advocate. We also obtained attrition data

from the Air Force Academy in Colorado.

To as ses s th e Air Fo rces overs ight o f Civil Air Patr ol, in addition to

interviewing the officials identified in the first paragraph of this a ppendix,we reviewed Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Inspector General reports; a

1The Middle East region includes the states of Delaware, Maryland, North and SouthCarolina, West Virginia, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.

2Department of Defense Inspector General Administration and Management of the Civil AirPatrol(Repo rt No. D-2000-075, Fe b. 15, 2000).


29/38

Appendix IObjective, Scope , and Methodology


staff assistance visit report from the Civil Air Patrol-U.S. Air Force Great

Lakes Liaison Region; Civil Air Pa trol-U.S. Air Fo rce inspec tion guidance ;

and other documents.

To ass ess Civil Air Patr ols man agemen t and oversight, we r eviewed t he

legislation incorporating the Patrol and defining its mission; Civil Air

Pa tr ols Constitution and Bylaws; manuals; guidance; organization charts;

the meeting minutes from every Civil Air Patrol National Board and

National Executive Committee meeting held from Febru ary 1996 to

Febr uary 2000; Civil Air Patr ols an nua l repor t to Congress for fiscal years

1997, 1998, and 1999; and o ther docume nts. In add ition to the Patrol

officials iden tified previous ly, we also in terviewed Civil Air Pat rols Gen eraCounsel; the directors of Financial Management, Operations, Plans and

Requirements, Cadet Programs, Aerospac e E ducation and Training, and

Mission Support; and the Great Lakes and Middle East Region

Commanders. We also d iscussed mana gement and oversight with the

Liaison Officers or Liaison Noncommissioned Officers from the selected

wings. In addition to the Air Force officials identified above, we discussed

Civil Air Patr ols man agement and o versight with the Deputy Assistant

Secretary of the Air Force (Reserve Affairs).

We also reviewed regulations and guidance applicable to flight operations

and financial management and determined whet her the w ings followed the

requirements by requesting that eac h of the 52 wings provide us

information to assess compliance with Pa trol regulations; 49 wings

responded.

To asses s asset management and related management activities, we

reviewed b udgets, annual audit reports , financial reports, reimburse ment

requests, training guides, recruiting materials, and other document s. To

determine th e need for the nu mber o f aircraft and vehicles in the Patrols

inventor y, we r eviewed the Air For ce Logistics Management Agencys

April 1999 aircraft requirements study,3 flying hour reports , and the

attempte d vehicle requirements a nd interviewed key Civil Air Patrol

officials to de termine how basing decisions were m ade. To det ermine thereliability o f Civil Air Pa tro ls flying hour system , we reviewed wing flight

reports and underlying data and compared them to database reports.

3Air Force Logistics Management Agency Civil Air Patrol (CAP) Aircraft Requirement Study(AFLMA Fin al Rep ort LM199900600, Apr. 1999).


30/38

Appendix IObjective, Scope , and Methodology


To assess planned corrective actions, we reviewed th e propo sed

legislation, the draft coope rative agreement, the draft statement of work,

memorandums, and other documents. We also discussed general

provisions o f grant and cooperat ive agreements with officials from t he

Office of Management and Budget and reviewed Office of Management and

Budget Circulars A-110, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants

and Agreements With Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and

Other Non-Profit Organizations; Circular A-133, Audits of Institutions of

Higher Educ ation and Other Nonprofit Institutions;and Circular A-122,

Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations. We also reviewed the

Department o f Defense grant and co operative agreement regulations.

We did not review safety, pilot qualifications, maintenance, billings and

reimbursements; and accident and incident reporting because the

Department o f Defense Inspector General planned to review those issues

concurre ntly with our review. The Inspector General issued a report o n it

review in Feb ruary 2000 and plans to issue a nother report later in 2000.


31/38


Appen dix II

Comments From the Department of the AirForce


32/38

Appendix IIComments From the Department of the AirForce



33/38


Appendix III

Comments From the Civil Air Patrol


34/38


Appendix IV

GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contacts William E . Beus se (202) 512-3517

Acknowledgments In addition to the co ntact n ame above, Brian J. Lepore,Maewa nda L. Michael-Jack son , Charles O. Burgess,

Katherine H. Woodward , and Ern ie E. Jackson made ke y contributions to

this report.

(702019) Letter


35/38

Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies ofreports are $2 e ach. A check or money order should be made out t othe Superinte ndent o f Documents . VISA and Mast erCard creditcards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies t o be mailed to a single address arediscounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:U.S. Gene ral Accounting OfficeP.O. Box 37050Washington, DC 2001 3

Orders by visiting:Room 1 100700 4th St. NW ( corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)U.S. Gene ral Accounting OfficeWashington, DC

Orders by phone:(202) 512-6000fax: (202) 512-6061TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any listfrom the past 30 days, please call ( 202) 512-6000 using a touchtonephone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtainthese lists.

Orders by Inte rnet:For information o n how to access GAO reports on the Internet,send an e -mail message with info in the body to:

[email protected]

or visit GAOs World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

To Report Fraud,Wast e, or Abus e inFederal Programs

Contact one :

Web s ite : http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet /fraudnet.htm e-mail: fraudnet @gao.gov 1-800-424-5454 ( automated answering syste m)
mailto:[email protected]://www.gao.gov/http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htmhttp://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htmhttp://www.gao.gov/mailto:[email protected]


36/38


37/38


38/38

United StatesGene ral Accounting OfficeWashington, D.C. 2054 8-0001

Official BusinessPenalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requeste d

Bulk RatePostage & Fees Paid

GAOPermit No. GI00