Detailed Information on the
Forest Service: Land Acquisition Assessment

Establish national priorities as the basis of allocating funds to projects.

Measure Federal administrative efficiencies associated with third parties purchasing non-Federal lands and placing them in trust prior to Federal purchase.

Eliminate those projects that do not contribute towards achieving the goals of the Strategic Plan.

Implement use of efficiency measures that will reduce unit costs and improve timeliness of processing.

Measure: Percentage of acquisition cases completed within 18 months.

Explanation:This measure will provide an indication of program efficiencies in meeting land acquisition timeframes established in advance.

Measure: Percentage of total acquisition cost per acre attributed to third party and private landowner participation

Explanation:This measure indicates program efficiencies through contributions of third party partners and private landowners.

Measure: Dollar cost or expenditure per acre purchased or donated.

Explanation:This measure indicates program efficiency through lower annual costs of each acre acquired.

Measure: Percentage of priority acres acquired or donated that reduce the conversion of forests, grasslands, and aquatic and riparian ecosystems to incompatible uses in order to improve and maintain ecological conditions for federally listed and candidate species, species of concern, and species of interest.

Explanation:Percentage of acres acquired to improve and maintain ecological conditions for federally listed and candidate species, species of concern, and species of interest as identified in the Forest Land Management Plans and where conversion to other uses, including parcelization, is imminent (within 2-3 years).

Measure: Priority acres acquired or donated that reduce the conversion of forests, grasslands, and aquatic and riparian ecosystems to incompatible uses in order to improve and maintain ecological conditions for federally listed and candidate species, species of concern, and species of interest.

Explanation:Acres acquired to improve and maintain ecological conditions for federally listed and candidate species, species of concern, and species of interest as identified in the Forest Land Management Plans and where conversion to other uses, including parcelization, is imminent (within 2-3 years).

Measure: Percentage of priority acres acquired or donated that provide for public access for high quality outdoor recreational opportunities on National Forest System land

Explanation:Percentage of acres acquired to secure or improve public access for seven or more recreational activties listed in FSH 5409.13, Chapter 15, exhibit 04 and must be within 100 miles of a county with a population of a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) or in the top 30 National Forests listed in the National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) report.

Measure: Priority acres acquired or donated that provide for public access for high quality outdoor recreational opportunities on National Forest System land

Explanation:Acres acquired to secure or improve public access for seven or more recreational activties listed in FSH 5409.13, Chapter 15, exhibit 04 and must be within 100 miles of a county with a population of a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) or in the top 30 National Forests listed in the National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) report

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The purpose of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (L&WCF) Land Acquisition program is to assist the agency in improving recreational opportunties and public access and protecting habitat for priority species identified in the land management plans.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The Land Acquisition program was established to provide, preserve, develop, and maintain access to NFS lands and waters for the public and provide permanent access to public lands for recreation, commodity production, resource management, public safety, and community economic viability. In addition, the L&WCF statutory authority specifically defines the purpose to also include protecting the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, archeological values as well as food and habitat for fish and wildlife; and managing the public lands for minerals, food, timber and fiber. From these several allowable uses of program funding, the program has chosen to focus on protecting habitat for priority species identifed in the land management plans and to enhance recreational opportunties for areas with high demand for recreation. The program focuses its acqusitions on inholdings and areas adjacent to existing National Forest System lands.

Evidence: There are over 232 million acres of land within the National Forest System, of which 192 million is federally owned and managed by the Forest Service (FY 2002 Report of the Forest Service; Land Areas of the National Forest System--2002) The Organic Act, 16 U.S.C. 473. Land & Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (P.L. 88-578, as amended), Wilderness Act of September 3, 1964 (P.L. 88-577), Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of October 2, 1968 (P.L. 90--542), National Trails System Act of October 2, 1968 (P.L. 90-543), the Department of Interior and Other Related Agencies Annual Appropriations Acts, and various Acts designating specific land acquisition authorities (i.e, Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Act, P.L. 95-95).

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: The land acquisition program is the only program that acquires land for the National Forest System. The program utilizes a variety of partners, including state, local, and tribal governments and private entities with whom acquisitions are usually coordinated through statewide planning for development of land-adjustment strategy. The Forest Service also operates the Forest Legacy program which also protects environmnetally sensitive forest lands but such lands are not added to the Forest Service System and are kept in private ownership.

Evidence: The Forest Service Manual (FSM) 5421.34 sets forth minimum criteria to be considered for land acquisition. Additional guidance is provided in the Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 5409.13 (Land Acquisition Handbook) and "Guidelines for Transactions Between Nonprofit Conservation Organizations and Federal Agencies" published in the Federal Register, volume 48, no. 155, Wednesday, August 10, 1983. See also agency Strategic Plan and FY 2003 and FY 2004 Budget Justifications. In FY 2002, a total of 84,723 acres were added to the National Forest System (FY 2002 Report of the Forest Service; Land Areas of the National Forest System--2002)

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: Numerous reviews of the program have indicated that program does not experience major flaws in acquisition projects and in collaboration with partners. The program leverages federal funds by expanding partnerships with private organizations. The program helps improve the operation of the National Forest Service by acquiring private inholdings and contigious land that is at a high risk for conversion thereby decreasing fragmentation and improving ecosystem health.

Evidence: Survey and Investigation Arm of the House Appropriations Committee Report on Forest Service Relations with 3rd Parties; OIG Report No. 08801-7-SF, "Evaluation of the Forest Service Report to the Secretary of Agriculture on the Land Exchange Program Washington, D.C."; The Appraisal Foundations Report "Evaluation of the Appraisal Organization of the USDA, Forest Service" dated March 28, 2000.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: The Forest Service recently amended the Land Acquisition Priority System (LAPS) to tie the project selection process more directly to strategic plan goals and objectives. However, the Forest Service still has a total of 22 criteria it uses to determine project priority, some of which do not support the Strategic Plan goals.

Evidence: Forest Service Handbook 5409.13 - Land Acquisition Handbook; FY 2005 and FY 2006 Forest Service Budget Justification, Land Acqusition program; FY 2004 Forest Service Performance and Accountability Report; National Land Acquisition Plan for USDA and DOI, February 2005; FY 2006 L&WCF Call letter to Regional Foresters.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The Land Acquisition program has developed two long-term measures that focus on providing outdoor recreation opportunities and public access and conserving habitat for at-risk species. The program is tracking the percentage of acres acquired that provide for those outcomes and has clearly identifed how recreational opportunities and habitat protection would be defined.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008, goal 6, measure 6.3a; National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005; Land Acquisition Family of Measures.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The long term measures targets are established at a level that will lead to increased focus on acquiring land that support two key outcomes for the program. The targets are initially set above the baseline levels and are increased each year.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008, National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005; Land Acquisition Family of Measures.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: The L&WCF program has refined its annual output measures to track the number of acres acquired that support the agency's long-term goals. The program has also established efficiency measures relating to direct program costs, timeliness, and third party costs all of which will be fully implemented by FY 2007 and documented in the Agency's Performance and Accountability System (PAS). These measures will integrate program performance with cost per acre of acquisition accomplishments, timeliness of completing cases (18 months or less), and administrative efficiencies associated with third party and private landowner acquisitions.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008, goal 6, measure 6.3a; National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005; Land Acquisition Family of Measures.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The Land Acquisition program has established baselines and annual targets through FY 2008 for all of its annual measures. These annual measures integrate program performance, timeliness and administrative efficiencies associated with third party and private landowner acquisitions. The output measures with accomplishments are displayed in the Congressional Budget Justifications each year and actual accomplishments are also reported in the Agency's Annual Performance and Accountability Report.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008, goal 6, measure 6.3a; FY 2004, FY 2005, FY 2006 Budget Justifications; Performance and Accountability Reports; Land Acquisition Family of Measures.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: The Forest Service works with partners to protect important lands, conserve open space, and preserve forested and coastal areas, primarily through land acquisitions. Third party partners, such as the Trust for Public Land (TPL) and the Nature Conservancy support the agency's annual and long-term goals. State, county and other locally based delegations work with the Forest Service to ensure public benefits are being served.

Evidence: Acquisition projects are coordinated and directed with 3rd parties and delegations; Letters of Intent are submitted to nonprofit organizations outlining acquisition proposals (FSM 5400, Zero Code): GAO Report RCED-94-149, "Land Acquisitions Involving Nonprofit Conservation Organizations. 3rd parties secure properties through financial obligations and actively testify in favor of the Forest Service L&WCF program."

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Since FY 2002 the program has undegone multiple OIG and GAO reviews of program performance and management. The Appraisal Foundation audited the agency appraisal process in FY 2000 and the agency plans follow-up independent appraisal process audits at least every five years with the Appraisal Foundation, with the next audit proposed for FY 2006. These audits are specifically focused on the appraisal aspect of the program, and while this is an important aspect, the program has not provided evidence to suggest that it has undergone an independent comprehensive evaluation that covers all aspects of program effectiveness and relevance, such as evaluating the agency's timeliness in completing acquisition cases or the effectiveness of third party involvement.

Evidence: Survey and Investigation Arm of the House Appropriations Committee Report on Forest Service Relations with 3rd Parties; OIG Report No. 08801-7-SF, "Evaluation of the Forest Service Report to the Secretary of Agriculture on the Land Exchange Program, Washington, D.C.," The Appraisal Foundations Report "Evaluation of the Appraisal Organization of the USDA, Forest Service" dated March 28, 2000; OIG Report No. 50099-17-AT, "Controls Over Assessing Environmental Liabilities Prior to Acquisition or Disposal of Land" dated March 2005; National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: Although requests for the FS are goal-driven and take into account all direct and indirect costs and progress on important budget and work-plan systems, the Forest Service has not established linkages between these components of a performance accountability system with its strategic goals and performance results. Until this linkage occurs, the agency will be unable to report how its activities were accomplished at a given cost in an integrated, results-oriented manner.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008, goal 6, measure 6.3a; FY 2005 and FY2006 Agency Requests, Department Estimates and Budget Justifications; FY 2007 Agency Formulation Instructions to the Regional Foresters; Land Acquisition Family of Measures.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: The Land Acquisition program has developed long-term measures that focus on assessing the extent to which the program is helping the agency achieve its strategic plans goals through the acquisition of prioritized lands that provide outdoor recreation/public access and wildlife habitat. However, the agency needs to further refine its LAPS to more clearly tie land acquisition priorities to the strategic plan goals by eliminating those priorities that do not contribute towards achieving these goals.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008; National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005, Land Acquisition Family of Measures; Land Acquisition Priority System (LAPS).

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: Annual performance accomplishments are collected to report on annual program direction assigned targets. Project level budget inputs and resource needs to meet local level target accomplishment is completed in the WORKPLAN database. Line offices monitor data to track accomplish status and use of budgetary resources. Resources can then be redirected as needed between units at all levels to enhance accomplishment of output and outcome measures. Accomplishment data are published in the agency performance and accountability report as well as in the annual FS budget justification. The agency is currently only collecting perfromance and cost information from landowners and third parties that contribute funds or waive values on option documents, deeds, bills for collection, and cost-share agreements. The agency expects to begin collecting performance and cost information from landowners that do not contribute funds starting in FY 2006.

Evidence: FY 2002 Agency Consolidated Annual Report; Management Attainment Report (MAR).

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: All agency line officer (Regioanl Foresters, Forest Supervisors and District Rangers) performance standards and evaluation criteria include requirements on support of national performance measures related to agency strategic goals and objectives and assigned annual performance plan targets. Accomplishments are reported and tracked through WORKPLAN and beginning in FY 2006 through the PAS database.

Evidence: Line Officer Annual Evaluations and Performance Standards, Federal Acquisition Regulations, Appraisal Compliance Inspections, and DOJ legal requirements for Line Officers and Directors.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: Funds are obligated according to primary purpose and the annual Program Direction and immediately expended at the time the options have been accepted. Additionally, the Forest Service has required that project dollars are appropriated solely for the acquisition of land and that associated administrative costs are provided to the agency only through the acquisition management line item, consistent with the House and Senate Appropriations bills which state that Congress expects these funds to only be used for land acquisition, not for acquisition management.

Evidence: Annual Program Direction, Primary Purpose Matrix, FFIS, and Fund Control Reports, House and Senate Subcommittee Staff and Appropriation Reports.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The L&WCF program has established efficiency measures relating to direct program costs, timeliness and third party costs all of which will be fully implemented by FY 2007 and tracked in the agency performance and accountability system (PAS). These measures will integrate past performance with cost per acre of accomplishment, timeliness of completing cases (18 months or less) and administrative efficiencies associated with third party and private landowner cost sharing in order to ensure the program is effectively executed. Additionally, past program performance is taken into account in the annual allocation of administrative support funding to each Region. Federal administrative costs and work is being reduced due to more third parties placing non-federal lands in trust while awaiting Federal acquisition funding.

Evidence: Land Acquisition Family of Performance Measures; FY 2005 Program Direction; Third Party Option Documentation; Forest Service Manual 5400-9 on Land Acquisition.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The L&WCF program is commonly implemented through partnerships between the Forest Service and other governments, private landowners and non-governmental organizations. FSM and FSH guidance reflects preference for projects that are characterized by local support and input from other resource areas within the agency.

Evidence: Acquisition projects are coordinated and directed with 3rd parties and delegations; Letters of Intent are submitted to nonprofit organizations outlining acquisition proposals (FSM 5400, Zero Code); GAO Report RCED-94-149, "Land Acquisitions Involving Nonprofit Conservation Organizations".

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The audit conducted in November 2004 identified one material weakness (accountability for Undelivered Orders is lacking). The agency has addressed and corrected shortcomings that have been identified in previous associated exchange audits and applied them to the acquisition program.

Evidence: KPMG LLP Independent Auditors' Report, November 10, 2004. Annual Report on Management Accountability and Control; FY 2002 GAO Clean Audit Opinion.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: Annual management reviews of select Regional land acquisition program efforts, appraisal compliance inspections, and monitoring trips are performed to address reviews findings, OIG and GAO audit recommendations, and FS operational manual direction. For example, in FY 2003 the Agency performed an Eastern Region Lands Review where they found the region overall successful in managing its Land Adjustment Program. Several recommendations were made for improvement and the Region continues to take action to implement those. Additionally in response to the OIG Land Exchange Audit and per the Secretary's 10/02/00 memorandum, Forest Service line officers and program managers are required to attend national lands training courses at least every five years in order to improve accountability and consistency in the land programs. The agency also has dedicated program staff to address most immediate management concerns.

Evidence: Monitoring Trip Reports, Management Reviews, and Appraisal Compliance Inspections; OIG Report No. 08801-7-SF; Secretary of Agriculture's Memorandum dated 10/02/00, OIG Report No. 50099-17-AT, "Controls Over Assessing Environmental Liabilities Prior to Acquisition or Disposal of Land" dated March 2005; Eastern Region Lands Review, dated 06/13/03; Eastern Region Land Acquisition Strategy, dated10/28/04.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The program has met the targets for one of its two long term measures for FY 2005.

Evidence: USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2004-2008, National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005, Land Acquisition Family of Measures.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: Annual performance goals are established based on Congressional appropriations with a methodology that projects normally take an average of 12-18 months to complete. Starting in FY 2006 partnership contributions will be quantified and included in the agency's performance goals. The program has not met its targets for any of its annual performance measures.

Evidence: Annual Budget Justifications and Performance and Accountability Reports.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: The agency has undertaken several steps to improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness, such as formally reflecting operation and maintenance costs in the project descriptions of its proposed FY 2006 L&WCF land acquisitions and implementing efficiency measures that will track unit cost comparisons, timeliness of processing cases, and administrative efficiencies associated with third party and private landowner acquisitions of lands prior to federal acquisition. However, the agency has yet to demonstrate improved efficiencies over the prior years as a result of undertaking these steps.

Evidence: FSH 5409.13, National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005, FY 2006 L&WCF Call Memo to Regional Foresters, Land Acquisition performance measures.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: Independent reviews have indicated that the FS program has made improvements in accountability, program consistency, staffing, and appraisal valuations. Additionally the program has taken steps to address some non-strategic planning deficiencies through amended Forest Plans and the Land Acquisition Priority System (LAPS). Consistent approaches and processes in this program are applied to other Forest Service land adjustment programs, including the S&PF Forest Legacy Program. However, unlike other Federal land management agencies, the Forest Service has not developed analyses of integrated spatial data sets on land management units, ecoregions, conservation lands, land cover, and species to identify high priority areas for biodiversity protection.

Evidence: Survey and Investigation Arm of the House Appropriations Committee Report on Forest Service Relations with 3rd Parties; OIG Report No. 08801-7-SF, Evaluation of the Forest Service Report to the Secretary of Agriculture on the Land Exchange Program, Washington, D.C., The Appraisal Foundations Report Evaluation of the Appraisal Organization of the USDA, Forest Service dated March 28, 2000.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: This program has undergone independent evaluations from OIG, GAO, The Appraisal Foundation, and via congressional oversight. These evaluations have indicated that the Forest Service has improved its accountability and consistency and that the program is effective and reflect appropriate values. The OIG audit on Controls Over Assessing Environmental Liabilities found that the Forest Service has adequate internal controls and complies with its policies and procedures for assessing environmental liabilities prior to land transactions. However, these evaluations have not fully addressed the issue of whether the program is effective at achieving its goals.

Evidence: Survey and Investigation Arm of the House Appropriations Committee Report on Forest Service Relations with 3rd Parties; OIG Report No. 08801-7-SF, Evaluation of the Forest Service Report to the Secretary of Agriculture on the Land Exchange Program, Washington, D.C., The Appraisal Foundations Report Evaluation of the Appraisal Organization of the USDA, Forest Service dated March 28, 2000; OIG Report No. 50099-17-AT, Controls Over Assessing Environmental Liabilities Prior to Acquisition or Disposal of Land dated March 2005; National Land Acquisition Plan, February 2005.