117 



Cxacadvx SaaaaiT 



Maintenance Funding 

 Levels Have Not Been 

 Conimensurate With 

 Generally Accepted 

 Practices 



GAO estimaces that from 1985 through 1989. the eight nasa centers vis- 

 ited spent about $ 125.8 million annually to maintain their facilities, gao 

 noted a w\de disparity in maintenance funding levels among centers of 

 comparable age and mission because funding is largely left to the discre- 

 tion of center directors, who have different perspectives on the prionty 

 of continued maintenance. Often, the centers have chosen to defer 

 maintenance. 



In most cases maintenance funding levels are lower than what experts 



consider adequate. Specifically, the National Research Council's Buildmg 

 Research Board has recommended that agenaes allocate for mamte- 

 nance a minimum of 2 to 4 percent of their facilities' replacement value. 

 Between 1985 and 1989. vnih the exception of the Jet Propulsion Labo- 

 ratory (which spent 2.3 percent of their facilities' replacement value on 

 maintenance), centers allocated only 0.9 to 1.5 percent of their facilities' 

 replacement value. According to the Chief of nasa's Faality Mamte- 

 nance Msmagement Branch, the correction of deficiencies usually costs 

 much more than a preventive maintenance program would have cost. 



Critical Financial 

 Management Information 

 Is Currently Not Available 



NASA headquarter's lack of guidance concermng the establishment of 

 comprehensive maintenance management systems has contnbuted to 

 facility maintenance problems. Without that guidance, some centers 

 have maintenance management systems that do not provide adequate 

 information to plan, budget, schedule, and report on maintenance acti%i- 

 ties and needs. 



To make informed and reliable maintenance decisions nasa center direc- 

 tors need accurate budgetmg and accounting data. Histoncally, nasa 

 centers have not based their maintenance budgets on actual need. 

 Without a clear understanding of their total maintenance requirements, 

 center directors are unable to determine the total resources that should 

 be allocated to facility mamtenance. None of the centers accurately 

 accounted for their facility maintenance expenditures Center 

 accounting systems did not accurately identify maintenance charged 

 directly to research and development programs or performed under 

 facility operation contracts. Because of these mformation voids, center 

 directors cannot properly oversee maintenance activities. 



Moreover, without knowing its overall facility maintenance require- 

 ments or the resources being used to meet these requirements, nasa 

 cannot make reliable maintenance budget decisions. 



