NASA OIG on NASA Property Leasing
NASA’s Infrastructure and Facilities: Assessment of Agency’s Real Property Leasing Practices
“Specifically, we found that NASA did not have clear guidance to ensure that property identified for leasing had a current or future mission use; lacked a complete inventory of space available for lease as well as an effective marketing program to attract potential tenants; lacked internal controls to ensure that its leases provide the best value to NASA and are fair to potential partners; and did not have guidance to ensure that in kind consideration that it accepts as part of a leasing arrangement benefits NASA.”
The problem with the IG report is that the IG neither understands federal real property leasing nor public-private partnerships. The IG shows a bias towards excessing property when in fact excessing is one of several mechanisms to handle under-utilized property. In its 2008 Real Property Asset Manangement Plan, NASA itself recognizes its enhanced use leasing authority as a way to reduce its real estate footprint. Other federal agnecies do not have a problem crediting to themselves reductions intheir overall real property footprint through leasing –just the NASA IG.
Unfortunately for NASA, the IG report reflects an old-guard mindset that continues to keep the agency behind the curve when it comes to leveraging its real property assets for both partneships and ongoing revenue generation –somthing the current and last two Presidential administrations have strongly supported!
Startling but not unexpected.This reflects the constant problems agencies continue to face day to day in their operations.Common sense is rarely used, with management continually having their heads in the sands.We need to think better in all operations.