ROCKEFELLER COMMISSION REPORT

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 01434861
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 28, 2022
• Document Release Date: August 7, 2017
• Case Number: F-2007-00094
• Publication Date: July 11, 1975

Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01434861
Ofer 1.5.03S.
1- JUL 1975
INSPECTOR GENERAL 75-2601
MEMORANDUM FOR: Inspector General
SUBJECT: Rockefeller Commission Report
1. The Rockefeller Commission Report discusses the Comptroller
and the budget process on page 90 in Section C of Chapter 8. Some
of the statements in that section reflect a lack of complete
understanding of our role.
2, The most glaring factual error is in the statement that "in
reviewing the budget, the Comptroller's staff generally examines
allocation of resources only if they exceed $30 million or employ over
200 persons, More limited activities would not be closely examined in
the budget process at the Comptroller level." There are no such
limitations on the level of examination and review conducted by the
Comptroller.
3, The basic element of our budget is the resource package.
A resource package is defined as a discrete unit of activity to
which resources are assigned for the achievement of a particular
purpose or set of integrally related purposes. It may be an
organizational element, an operational activity, a project, a
function or group of related functions. There are several
hundred resce packages in the Agency Drooram;
fewer than )positions and less than some of them require
Each
resource package is reviewed in detail by the Comptroller, and he
offers his own separate recommendations about the level of
position and dollar resources he believes should be allocated to
each. Resulting from this review there will be identified to
key topics or issues judged by the Comptroller to be worthy of
special attention by the Management Committee and the Director.
These key topics will be highlighted in the Comptroller's
presentation of the Agency program, not as the only issues but
in relation to the rest of the program. The selection of key
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01434861
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01434861
topics is not based primarily on the number of positions and
dollars allocated, although they may be among the criteria for
selection.
4. After the Director has reviewed the program and the
Congress has appropriated the funds, the Comptroller allots the
money and positions to the directorates and the Office of the
Director with general financial guidance and specific limitations
on the freedom of the allottees to reprogram their resources.
Beginning in the second quarter of the fiscal year, the Comptroller
meets monthly with the Deputy Directors to review the status
of their allotments and obligations and to project the resources
needed for the remainder of the fiscal year. If, through this
performance evaluation process, potential savings are identified,
the Comptroller, with authority from the Director, will authorize
resources to be reprogrammed to meet unbudgeted and unfunded
requirements identified as the year progresses. Requirements for
one or two new positions will be considered, for example, as will
the need for funds to supplement the Honor and Merit Awards
Program, There is no firm floor or ceiling on the size of the
requirement; a variety of factors influence the determination
that a problem should be brought to the attention of the
Comptroller--not the least significant.of which is the ability
of the directorate to solve the problem within resources
available to it internally.
5. The brevity of some of the Commission Report statements
and the unqualified language of others may tend to mislead the
uninformed reader. It is possible, for example, to infer from
the language that the budget as compiled by the Comptroller is
approved by the Director, reviewed by OMB, and sent to Congress
without change, and that the Congress appropriates funds as
requested. In fact, however, the budget as compiled by the
Comptroller usually undergoes substantial change as a result
of review by the Management Committee and the Director and must be
revised accordingly before it is sent to OMB, The Director's
budget is then subject to detailed review by the OMB examiner
who will hold hearings with individual program managers, usually
at the office level one echelon below the Deputy Director. These
hearings are as extensive and exhaustive as time will allow
and are not less detailed than those OMB conducts 'th other
Federal agencies. Last year, for example, abou hearings
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01434861
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01434861
were held, and supplementary papers covering 59 separate topics
were furnished. OMB reduced our request substantially in
both positions and dollars, and part of those reductions were
restored upon appeal by the Director to the President. The
request is revised again to incorporate changes necessary to
accommodate OMB and Presidential actions before it is submitted
to the Congress. The Appropriations Committees and their staffs
in both houses of the Congress conduct hearings and request
supplemental information in such detail as they require.
Frequently the amount appropriated is less than the amount
requested. Each directorate is given a single allotment by the
Comptroller with specific restrictions placed upon the authority
of the Deputy Director to reprogram funds for uses other than
those for which the funds were allotted. Additional restrictions
are placed on selected activities identified as being of
particular interest to the Director, and Deputy Directors are
required to notify him of certain kinds of activities before
they are undertaken even though they may have been approved
as a part of the normal program and budget review. In short,
there is a far more exhaustive review of the Agency budget at
every level than might be inferred by the casual reader of the
Rockefeller Commission Report.
6. One further point may be worth mentioning. The
Commission Report makes particular note of the fact that eight
of our staff members are assigned by the four directorates and serve
as advocates for their directorates as well as budget examiners.
These statements are true; individual officers perform a dual
function, but they are expected to perform in much the same
way that OMB examiners do in relation to the departments and
agencies they are charged with examining. Individual
examiners review submissions from their directorates critically
and in depth to ensure that every request allowed is thoroughly
justified and those that are not justified are reduced. Each
examiner is then called upon to defend his allowances and
recommendations under critical questioning by his counterparts
and other members of the staff including the Comptroller and
Deputy Comptroller. Ultimately, individual examiners are
called upon to defend their recommendation to the Director.
We believe that the responsibilities with which each member
of our staff is charged and the process by which he fulfills them
are such that a high degree of objectivity is achieved.
/ //JAMES H. TAYLOR"
// // Deputy Comptroller
3
Approved for Release: 2017/01/18 C01434861