GovernmentExecutive.com

Continuing resolutions, while commonplace, almost uniformly cause inefficiencies at the agency level and limit management options, according to a Government Accountability Office report released on Thursday.

In 27 of the past 30 years, Congress has fallen behind on passing regular appropriations bills and has been forced it to enact stopgap spending measures to keep agencies running after the end of the fiscal year. These continuing resolutions have lasted from one day to 157 days, with the average lasting about three months. Whatever the duration, it is a period marked by uncertainty and stagnation, GAO found.

The watchdog used six agencies as case studies to assess the effects of continuing resolutions: the Administration for Children and Families, Bureau of Prisons, the FBI, Food and Drug Administration, Veterans Benefits Administration and Veterans Health Administration. All reported that operating under stopgap spending measures resulted in inefficiencies, the most common being delays of activities such as hiring. Agencies also reported that continuing resolutions forced employees to engage in repetitive work such as issuing multiple grants or contracts for the same service.

"As this study shows, repeatedly managing by continuing resolution is inherently wasteful and inefficient," said Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, who requested the report. "CRs result in wasteful spending, disruptions and chaos in operational federal programs, and productivity slowdowns."

Each of the agencies studied reported leaving new or existing positions vacant during continuing resolutions because they were not sure how much funding they would have under their regular appropriation or because they had to address more pressing needs during the CR. They also reported contracting delays, which in some cases required them to conduct a second round of bid solicitations, costing them more time and money.

For the Bureau of Prisons, for example, delaying contract awards for building prisons and renovating existing facilities prevented officials from locking in prices and resulted in higher construction costs. A delay in awarding a contract for the McDowell Prison Facility in West Virginia alone resulted in about $5.4 million in additional costs, bureau officials told GAO.

Agencies identified a number of ways Congress and the Office of Management and Budget can ease the burdens caused by continuing resolutions, but they did not necessarily agree on what these measures were. Some agency officials told GAO that a single, long-term CR allowed for better planning, reduced delays and required less repetitive work, while others said that operating under a limited rate for operations for a prolonged period reduced decision-making options.

GAO noted that while continuing resolutions present challenges, they are likely to be part of the life cycle for federal agencies.

"The federal budget is an inherently political process in which Congress annually faces difficult decisions on what to fund among competing priorities and interests," wrote authors Denise Fantone, GAO director of strategic issues, and Susan Poling, managing associate general counsel. "While not ideal, CRs continue to be a common feature of the annual appropriations process...There is no easy way to avoid or completely mitigate the effects of CRs on agency operations."

Voinovich agreed that the continuing resolutions appear to now be part of the annual routine.

"It is time for us to be intellectually honest with the American people," he said. "These are not isolated instances -- in all but three of the past 30 years, Congress has been forced to enact a CR. By failing to do our job, we are starving the executive branch of government and preventing it from doing its job."

Voinovich has, several times, introduced legislation aimed at converting the annual budget process into a two-year cycle. He has argued the Biennial Budgeting and Appropriations Act (S. 169) would save Congress valuable time taken up by annual appropriations debates and allow it to focus on overseeing the programs being funded. Under his plan, the first year in the budgetary cycle would be reserved for the existing budget and appropriations process, and the second would be available for oversight and passing authorizing legislation, allowing Congress the luxury of time to examine programs and determine which should be funded.