Veterans Affairs: Additional Actions Needed to Increase Veterans' Burial Access

The VA is responsible for ensuring that veterans have reasonable access to burial options in a national or state veterans' cemetery. In fiscal year 2018 VA estimated that about 92 percent of veterans had reasonable access to burial options, which was an increase from 90 percent in fiscal year 2014 but short of its goal of 96 percent by the end of fiscal year 2017.

The House Appropriations Committee has expressed concerns that there are geographic pockets where veterans remain unserved by burial options. House Report 115-188 accompanying a bill for the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018, includes a provision for GAO to examine veterans' access to burial options.

This report (1) describes VA's plan for increasing reasonable access to burial options for veterans and (2) assesses VA's progress in implementing its plan and any challenges experienced. GAO reviewed applicable VA and NCA documents, compared NCA's cost-estimating practices with GAO's cost-estimating 12 steps, and met with cognizant officials regarding NCA's efforts to provide reasonable access to burial options.

Within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the National Cemetery Administration (NCA) has a plan to establish 18 new national cemeteries to increase reasonable access to burial options for veterans. NCA defines reasonable access as a national or state veterans' cemetery being located within 75 miles of veterans' homes. Key parts of NCA's plan include establishing 13 urban and rural initiative national cemeteries and awarding grant funds to state applicants for establishing new state veterans' cemeteries.

NCA has made limited progress in implementing its plan to increase burial access and is years behind its original schedule for opening new cemeteries. For example, NCA has opened only two of its planned urban and rural initiative sites and is behind its original schedule for the other 11 (see fig. below). The primary factor delaying NCA's completion of these cemeteries has been challenges in acquiring suitable land.

NCA has also been challenged in producing accurate estimates of construction costs for most of its rural initiative sites. Cost estimates have increased more than 200 percent (from about $7 million to $24 million) for these sites, and NCA's guidance for developing cost estimates for the cemeteries does not fully incorporate the 12 steps identified in cost-estimating leading practices—such as conducting a risk and uncertainty analysis or a sensitivity analysis. As a result, NCA is not well positioned to provide reliable and valid cost estimates to better inform decisions to enhance veterans' cemetery access.

GAO recommends that NCA fully adopt cost-estimating leading practices into its procedures to assist in improving its cost estimates for establishing cemeteries. NCA concurred with our recommendation.

Since 1973 the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Cemetery  Administration (NCA) has been responsible for the interment of deceased  servicemembers and veterans. As part of these responsibilities, NCA  ensures that veterans have reasonable access to a burial option in a  national, state, or tribal government veterans’ cemetery. NCA defines  reasonable access as a national or state veterans’ cemetery being  located within 75 miles of veterans’ homes. As of September 2019, NCA  maintains approximately 3.8 million gravesites at 137 national cemeteries  and 33 soldiers’ lots and monument sites, located across 40 states and  Puerto Rico. NCA estimated that more than 2.1 million veterans— approximately 10 percent of the veterans in the United States—did not  have reasonable access to burial options at the end of fiscal year 2013.

The Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013,  required that VA submit to Congress a strategy to serve the burial needs  of veterans residing in rural areas. This act also included a provision for  us to review VA’s strategy and determine whether it included specific  elements related to providing veterans residing in rural areas with access  to veterans’ cemeteries. VA submitted a strategy in response to the Act’s  requirement, we reviewed the strategy and, in September 2014, we  reported that the strategy included only four of the eight required  elements. We made a recommendation that VA develop and implement  a plan to fully meet the reporting requirements, including the estimated  number and location of unserved veterans and a national map of  cemeteries. VA subsequently implemented this recommendation.

In June 2017, the House Appropriations Committee expressed concern  that there were geographic pockets in the country where veterans remain  unserved, and that VA had failed to meet its goal of ensuring that  veterans have reasonable access to burial options. House Report 115- 188, to accompany a bill for the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2018, included a provision for  us to examine and provide a report on rural veterans’ access to national  cemeteries. This report (1) describes VA’s plan for increasing reasonable  access to burial options for veterans and (2) assesses VA’s progress in  implementing its plan and any challenges experienced.

For objective one, we reviewed applicable VA and NCA documents  covering fiscal years 2011-2024, such as strategic plans, annual budget  proposals, and press releases on new veterans’ cemeteries, to identify  VA and NCA plans for expanding reasonable access to burial options for  veterans. In addition, we reviewed NCA’s 5-year strategic and long-range  plans and its plans of actions and milestones, as well as VA annual  performance plans. Further, we interviewed knowledgeable NCA officials  to discuss the agency’s strategy for increasing burial access, and whether  NCA has a plan to continually reexamine burial options and implement  necessary changes.

For objective two, we determined the implementation status of VA’s and  NCA’s plans and evaluated whether timelines and goals had been met.  Specifically, we compared historical information on construction and  project timeline changes from fiscal years 2011-2020 with the information  outlined in NCA’s timeline and goals. We interviewed knowledgeable  NCA officials to gather information on the project timelines and status of  NCA’s urban and rural initiative sites, as well as any challenges  confronted in the implementation of the plans. We also gathered and  reviewed project summary and cost-estimate information on NCA’s urban  and rural initiatives from fiscal years 2011-2020. We conducted an in- depth assessment of the cost-estimating policies and practices NCA uses  to calculate estimated costs for its urban and rural initiatives and other  cemetery construction projects. Specifically, we assessed VA’s 2011  Manual for Preparation of Cost Estimates and Related Documents for VA  Facilities (Manual); VA’s 2011 Architect/Engineer (A/E) Submission  Requirements for National Cemetery Projects Program Guide PG 18-15  Volume D (Guide); and NCA’s Construction Program Conceptual  Estimate Worksheet (Worksheet), and we compared them with the 12- step cost-estimating process established in GAO’s Cost Estimating and  Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Developing and Managing Capital  Program Costs (Cost Guide). Because NCA’s Worksheet along with  VA’s Manual and Guide collectively guide NCA’s cemetery project cost  estimating, we refer to these three documents collectively as “NCA’s cost- estimating guidance” throughout the report.

In addition, we reviewed NCA’s methodology for determining the  percentage of the veteran population served by a veterans’ cemetery in  order to understand the basis for its estimate. We compared the number  of unserved veterans by using estimated veteran population data from  NCA as well as data from the U.S. Census Bureau. We estimated the  percentage of veterans served by multiplying the percentage of the area  of each census tract in the United States that falls within the service area  of an open veterans’ cemetery by the estimated number of veterans in  the tract, which we derived from the American Community Survey 5-year  estimates for 2013-2017. We totaled these estimates at the county,  state, and national levels to calculate the estimated percentage of  veterans served in the United States. We determined the numbers of  unserved veterans in the actual and planned service areas of the  initiatives by using both NCA’s county-level population data and census  tract data from 2013-2017 to compare the data from the two sources and  to assess whether access to burial options have been or will be expanded  or increased from the urban initiatives and increased from the rural  initiatives. The estimates of veterans within the service area of an open  cemetery that we derived from American Community Survey 5-year data  are statistical estimates that have sampling error associated with them.  We followed the Census Bureau technical guidance for estimating the standard error of census tract population totals from American  Community Survey 5-year data. We express our confidence in the  precision of our estimate as 90 percent confidence intervals. These are  the intervals that would contain the actual population value for 90 percent  of the American Community Survey samples that the Census Bureau  could have drawn. Estimates of total veterans derived from American  Community Survey data are rounded to the nearest 100 unless otherwise  noted.

We conducted this performance audit from April 2018 to September 2019  in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.

History of the National Cemetery Administration

The National Cemeteries Act of 1973 created the modern veterans’  cemetery system. NCA, within VA, manages a majority of veterans’  cemeteries in the United States. In that role NCA maintains existing  national cemeteries and builds new national cemeteries for the nation’s  veterans and their family members. Since 1978 NCA has also provided  funding through VA’s Veterans Cemetery Grants Program (Grants  Program) to help establish, expand, or improve state and tribal veterans’  cemeteries. States and tribal governments seeking funding from the  Grants Program must apply to the VA. Any cemetery established,  expanded, or improved through funding from VA’s Grants Program must  be maintained and operated in accordance with NCA’s operational  standards. Veterans from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto  Rico, and some U.S. territories are served by national, state, or tribal  cemeteries.

In addition, over time NCA has changed its policies and procedures to  better fulfill its mission to serve and honor veterans and their family  members. For example, in 2011 NCA lowered its policy threshold for  establishing new national cemeteries from an area having at least  170,000 veterans who are unserved by burial options to an area having  80,000 unserved veterans. NCA established this revised policy  threshold in recognition that many highly populated areas still lacked  reasonable access to a burial option, and based on data and analysis  provided by an independent review of VA’s burial benefits program in  2008. This revised minimum veteran population threshold was chosen  based on data showing that state veterans’ cemeteries funded through  VA’s Grants Program were located in areas that typically served a  maximum of 80,000 veterans within a 75-mile service area. According to  VA documentation, moving to this lower threshold has enabled the  agency to establish new national cemeteries in areas where states may  not have been willing to place them because of the size and cost of  operating a larger state veterans’ cemetery.

NCA offers a variety of facilities to meet the burial needs of veterans,  including various cemetery configurations that either provide burial  options to eligible veterans or improve their access to burial options, as  shown in table 1.

NCA’s Methodology for Determining Access to Burial Options

NCA uses county-level population data to determine whether veterans  currently have reasonable access to burial options and uses county-level  population projections to support decisions about future cemetery  locations. NCA makes its decisions regarding whether a veteran is served  or unserved based on the county in which the veteran resided, without  reference to the location of the veteran’s actual residence. NCA’s  methodology uses a veteran’s county of residence as a proxy for being  within 75 miles of a veterans’ cemetery.

NCA Plans to Establish Eighteen New National Cemeteries and Use Its Grants Program for the Creation of State Veterans’ Cemeteries to Increase Access to Burial Options

NCA’s plan entails establishing 18 new national cemeteries—comprised  of five traditional national cemeteries and 13 urban and rural initiative  national cemeteries—and awarding funds for new state veterans’  cemeteries. In 2014, we reported that NCA estimated approximately 90  percent of the veteran population had reasonable access to burial  options, and that it expected to reach its strategic goal of providing  reasonable access to 96 percent of veterans by the end of fiscal year  2017. Since 2014, NCA has revised its strategic goal to provide  reasonable access to 95 percent of the veteran population, and NCA’s  current long-range plan to achieve this goal covers fiscal years 2018- 2022.

NCA’s 2014 plan to increase veterans’ access to burial options included  building 18 new national cemeteries as follows:

Five traditional national cemeteries, to be located in Western New  York; Central East Florida; Southern Colorado; Tallahassee, Florida;  and Omaha, Nebraska. Taken together, according to NCA, these  cemeteries are intended to provide a burial option to an additional  550,000 veterans and their families.

Five urban initiative cemeteries, to be located in Los Angeles,  California; the San Francisco Bay Area, California; Chicago, Illinois;  Indianapolis, Indiana; and New York, New York. Taken together,  according to NCA, the urban initiative is intended to expand burial  options for approximately 2.4 million additional veterans in certain  urban areas. NCA announced this initiative in 2011 with the purpose  of expanding burial options in urban areas through building  columbaria-only (facilities for cremated remains) national cemeteries  close to the urban core.

Eight rural initiative cemeteries, to be located in Idaho, Maine,  Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.  Taken together, according to NCA, the intent of the rural initiative is to  increase the burial options for approximately 106,000 additional  veterans in certain rural areas. NCA announced this initiative in 2012  with the purpose of increasing access by establishing new national  cemeteries for states with no open national cemetery and a population  of 25,000 or fewer veterans.

In addition, since 1978, NCA has used the Grants Program to help  increase veterans’ cemetery access. The Grants Program was  established to complement national cemeteries by assisting state,  territory, and tribal government applicants to establish, expand, or  improve veterans’ cemeteries in order to provide gravesites for veterans  in those areas where NCA cannot fully satisfy their burial needs. As noted  earlier, states and tribal governments seeking grant funding must apply to  the VA. States, funded by the Grants Program, often build in areas with  veteran populations that are too small to qualify for a national cemetery.  NCA prioritizes pending grant applications by giving the highest priority to  cemetery construction projects in geographic locations with the greatest  projected number of veterans who will benefit from the project, as  determined by NCA based on county-level population projections. In  2018, NCA provided funding for a total of 15 grants for the expansion,  improvement, or establishment of state and tribal government veterans’  cemeteries. This includes the establishment of two new state and tribal  government veterans’ cemeteries. In 2019, NCA expects to provide  funding for 17 state and tribal government veterans’ cemetery projects,  three of which would be for new cemeteries.

NCA Has Made Limited Progress in Implementing Its Plan for Increasing Burial Access and Faces Continuing Challenges

While NCA has made some progress in implementing its plan to increase  burial access for veterans, that progress has been limited, as it is years  behind its original schedule for opening new cemeteries. In its efforts,  NCA has experienced three key challenges: (1) acquiring suitable land for  new national cemeteries, (2) estimating the costs associated with  establishing new national cemeteries, and (3) using all available data to  inform how its Grants Program targets unserved veteran populations.

NCA Has Opened Six New Cemeteries since 2014 but Is Years Behind Its Original Schedule

In 2014, NCA planned to open 18 new sites by the end of fiscal year 2017  to better serve the burial needs of the veteran population. As of  September 2019, NCA has opened four new traditional national  cemeteries—Tallahassee National Cemetery in Tallahassee, Florida;  Cape Canaveral National Cemetery in Mims, Florida; Omaha National  Cemetery in Omaha, Nebraska; and Pikes Peak National Cemetery in  Colorado Springs, Colorado. NCA also opened two of its eight planned  rural initiative cemeteries—Yellowstone National Cemetery in Laurel,  Montana, and Fargo National Cemetery in Harwood, North Dakota. As a  result, according to NCA, by the end of fiscal year 2018 the percentage of  veterans with reasonable access had increased from 90 percent to about  92 percent. As previously discussed, NCA’s goal is to provide 95 percent  of veterans with reasonable access to burial options.

As we reported in 2014, NCA had initially planned to open all of its 13  urban and rural initiative sites by the end of fiscal year 2017. As shown  in figure 1, NCA had originally estimated completing all five of its urban  initiative sites by the end of fiscal year 2015. However, the completion  dates for all of these sites have slipped multiple times. In July 2019, NCA  officials stated that the planned completion dates for the urban initiative  sites were as follows: October 2019 for Los Angeles, sometime in 2020  for New York and Indianapolis, September 2021 for Chicago, and  sometime in 2027 for San Francisco.

As shown in figure 2, NCA has opened two of its rural initiative sites, in  Laurel, Montana, and Fargo, North Dakota. However, the completion  dates for the other six rural initiative sites have slipped multiple times. In  September 2019, NCA officials stated that the planned completion dates  for the rural initiative sites were currently Fall 2019 for Twin Falls, Idaho,  Machias, Maine, and Rhinelander, Wisconsin; sometime in 2020 for  Cheyenne, Wyoming; and Summer 2021 for Cedar City, Utah. NCA did  not provide a specific estimated completion date for the site in Elko,  Nevada, affirming that it would be completed “in a future year.”

When we asked NCA officials why the rural and urban initiative sites were  currently projected to take years longer to complete than originally  planned, they replied that they might have overstated their 2014  expectations for having all initiative sites completed by the end of fiscal  year 2017. NCA officials also stated that it takes at least 12 months for  the land acquisition phase of cemetery construction projects; 9 to 12  months for the design phase; and 12 to 15 months—sometimes up to  30—for the construction phase. According to NCA officials, as of  September 2019, five of the 11 initiative sites had reached the  construction phase, and one of the sites no longer had an estimated  completion date. There were still some outstanding or unresolved issues  that had complicated NCA’s ability to estimate a completion date for the  site in Elko, Nevada. See figure 3 for a timeline of each of NCA’s urban  and rural initiative sites as of September 2019.

NCA Has Faced Challenges in Implementing Its Efforts to Increase Access to Burial Options for Veterans

In executing its plans to increase access to burial options for veterans,  NCA has experienced three key challenges: (1) acquiring suitable land for  new national cemeteries; (2) estimating the costs associated with  establishing new national cemeteries; and (3) using all available data to  inform how its Grants Program targets unserved veteran populations.

Challenges in Acquiring Land Have Led to Delays in Implementing NCA’s Plan

The primary factor that has led NCA to adjust its timelines for completing  these cemeteries concerns challenges in acquiring suitable land. Such  challenges include difficulty in finding viable land for development, legal  issues related to the acquisitions process, and resistance from the local  community, among others. Four examples are described below, including  two instances in which, as of July 2019, NCA had not yet acquired  suitable land, which may further delay the opening of those specific urban  and rural sites.

Chicago, Illinois. NCA officials stated that they are on their fifth  attempt to acquire land for the urban initiative site in Chicago, Illinois.  In addition, they said that the environmental assessment process for  the Chicago site is currently underway, and that a site viability  decision will not occur until the environmental assessment process is  completed later in 2019. According to NCA documentation we  reviewed, NCA initiated the land acquisition process for the Chicago  site in June 2011 and planned to complete the process by July 2018.  If the fifth attempt to acquire land is not successful, then NCA will  attempt—for the sixth time—to acquire land. According to NCA  officials, this would result in an additional 12 to 18 months to identify  and evaluate new property for potential acquisition, likely further  delaying the opening of this site. See figure 4 for more details on  NCA’s attempts to acquire land for the urban initiative site in Chicago.

Elko, Nevada. NCA officials stated that they have identified a top- rated site for the rural initiative site in Elko, Nevada, on land currently  owned by the Bureau of Land Management. However, according to  NCA officials, Congress would need to enact legislation transferring  this land from the Bureau of Land Management to VA before NCA  could begin construction. As of June 2019, Congress had not done  so. According to NCA officials, VA has opened dialogue with local  officials about drafting a utility agreement for the city to construct  infrastructure needed to supply water to the site. Implementation of a  utility agreement would be dependent upon whether future legislation  may potentially be introduced and subsequently passed authorizing  the Bureau of Land Management to permanently transfer property to  VA for national cemetery use. Also, according to NCA officials, once  legislation has passed to allow the transfer of land from the Bureau of  Land Management to VA, they estimate it will take 12 to 18 months for  the land transfer to be completed.

Indianapolis, Indiana. In a written response, NCA officials stated that  construction for the urban initiative site in Indianapolis, Indiana, has  been delayed by about a year due to a public protest of NCA’s  acquisition of the site because of environmental concerns, which  resulted in a land transfer with the previous landowner in January  2019. In addition, NCA had to conduct a partial project re-design for  the exchanged property. According to NCA’s May 2018 plan of  actions and milestones, it had expected to have acquired the land for  the Indianapolis site by August 2018 and to have completed  construction in December 2019. However, officials told us in  September 2018 that, due to the delays in acquiring the land, NCA  had revised its planned construction completion date to August 2020.

Los Angeles, California. According to officials, NCA is partnering with  the Veterans Health Administration, which transferred property for the  proposed columbarium at the Los Angeles, California, urban initiative  site. Officials stated that this project was delayed initially due to the  need to remove existing encumbrances on the land (for example,  leases with tenants), among other things. In July 2019, officials stated  that the project is scheduled for completion in October 2019.

According to NCA officials, unforeseen site conditions can also contribute  to delays in cemetery construction projects. During the design phase, soil  and geotechnical samples are taken but do not cover the entire site. After  excavation begins, issues such as rock formations or hazardous waste  not identified during the geotechnical investigation may create challenges  to developing land for cemetery use. For example, in July 2019 NCA officials stated that the urban initiative site in San Francisco had  encountered major geotechnical and soil issues, causing the project  completion to slip to 2027. Also, according to NCA’s 2017 annual status  report to Congress on new national cemeteries, the cemetery  construction contract for a new cemetery construction project in Western  New York could not begin solicitation until additional parcels of land had  been acquired. Those parcels of land have a gas well and a gas pipeline  that must be relocated. According to NCA officials, as of September 2019,  six of the 11 urban and rural initiative sites had not yet begun to be  excavated, and any issues that arise during the excavation process at  these sites could pose further scheduling delays.

NCA’s Cost Estimates for Most of Its Rural Initiative Sites Have  Increased Significantly  We found that NCA’s cost estimates for seven rural initiative sites have  increased significantly above what NCA officials had initially estimated.  In its strategy, NCA had estimated that the construction cost estimate for  each of the seven rural initiative sites would be approximately $1 million  (totaling approximately $7 million). However, NCA officials told us in  August 2018 that the construction cost estimates for these sites had  increased to more than $3 million each (totaling almost $24 million). This  amounts to a cost increase of more than 200 percent. Further, the  information they provided was not always consistent. For example, in July  2018 NCA officials provided us the average land acquisition and  construction costs for the urban and rural initiatives. According to the  document they provided, the average construction cost for each urban  initiative cemetery is $7.5 million. However, in August 2018 NCA stated in  a written response that the construction cost estimates for each of the  urban initiatives ranged from approximately $9 million to more than $22  million, reflecting an average cost of $13.6 million.

NCA’s cost-estimating guidance used to prepare construction cost  estimates does not fully incorporate the 12 steps identified in our Cost  Guide that should result in reliable and valid estimates that management  can use to make informed decisions, as shown in table 2. Appendix I  provides a detailed summary of our assessment of NCA’s cost-estimating  guidance.

Specifically, NCA’s cost-estimating guidance fully met one step,  substantially met four steps, partially met four steps, minimally met two  steps, and did not meet one step. For example:

NCA’s cost-estimating guidance fully met the step of “obtaining the  data” in that it requires a market survey that explores all factors that  will affect the bid cost and collects valid and useful historical data to  develop a sound cost estimate.

NCA’s cost-estimating guidance substantially met the step of  “updating the estimate” in that it requires cost estimates to be  regularly updated. For instance, it requires an updated cost-estimating  report at each stage of the design of the construction project.

NCA’s cost-estimating guidance minimally met the step of “conducting  a risk and uncertainty analysis” in that, while it mentions the inclusion  of a risk analysis, it does not describe what a risk analysis is and how  it relates to cost. Additionally, none of the guidance we reviewed  contains any discussion of risk management.

NCA’s cost-estimating guidance did not meet the step of “conducting  a sensitivity analysis.” According to our Cost Guide, a sensitivity  analysis should be included in all cost estimates because it examines  the effects of changing assumptions and ground rules. Because  uncertainty cannot be avoided, it is necessary to identify the cost  elements that represent the most risk, and cost estimators should if  possible quantify the risk.

NCA uses multiple guidance documents on cost estimation and requires  that managers and contractors use all of these documents in  implementing their projects. Specifically, NCA uses VA’s 2011 Manual for  Preparation of Cost Estimates and Related Documents for VA Facilities  (Manual); VA’s 2011 Architect/Engineer (A/E) Submission Requirements  for National Cemetery Projects Program Guide PG 18-15 Volume D  (Guide); and NCA’s Construction Program Conceptual Estimate  Worksheet. We refer to these documents collectively as “NCA’s cost- estimating guidance.”

We previously reported on VA’s management of minor construction  projects and made several recommendations, including that the Veterans  Health Administration revise its cost-estimating guidance to incorporate  the 12 steps presented in the Cost Guide, to help VA have greater  assurance that its cost estimates for minor construction projects are  reliable. VA concurred and stated that it would ensure that the Veterans  Health Administration update its cost-estimating guidance by  incorporating the 12 steps outlined in the Cost Guide, as applicable. As  of August 2019, VA had not taken any action to implement this  recommendation. The guidance document it plans to update, the VA  Manual, is also used by NCA. Further, NCA uses additional guidance documents to develop cost estimates for its cemetery construction  projects—including the urban and rural initiatives—that do not fully  incorporate the 12 steps presented in the Cost Guide. Without NCA’s  revising its cost-estimating guidance to more fully reflect the 12 steps in  the Cost Guide, including “conducting a risk and uncertainty analysis,”  NCA will not be well-positioned to provide reliable cost estimates to VA  and enable it to make informed decisions regarding the management of  cemetery construction projects.

NCA’s Grants Program Does Not Use All Available Data for Targeting Unserved Veteran Population Sites

As noted earlier, the Grants Program is part of NCA’s plan to increase  veterans’ reasonable access to burial options. According to NCA officials,  their plan to meet their strategic goal of 95 percent of veterans being  served by burial options relies, in part, on the state and tribal government  efforts funded by the Grants Program. The Grants Program, in turn, relies  on states and tribal governments applying for funding to build new  cemeteries or expand existing cemeteries. An NCA official told us that  NCA does not have the authority to formally request that a state seek  grant funding to expand access in an unserved area. However, according  to VA officials, the Grants Program has had informal discussions with  states that it believes have larger concentrations of unserved veterans, in  order to encourage grant applications to provide increased burial access  for unserved veteran populations.

When reviewing grant applications, NCA considers a number of factors,  including how the grant would enhance access for unserved veterans.  NCA officials stated that they use the VA’s county-level population data to  identify veteran population areas unserved by national, state, or tribal  government veterans’ cemeteries. This analysis also allows NCA to  project where additional state and tribal government veterans’ cemeteries  may be most needed. Specifically, NCA has ranked what it identified as  the 40 largest currently unserved veteran population areas. NCA  performs this ranking at the county level, not the more precise census  tract level, although as we have previously reported it has the technical  ability to use census tract data.

In September 2014, we reported that NCA was using population data at  the county level to identify veterans not served by burial options, and that  using population data at the census tract level would enhance NCA’s  management of the national cemetery program. Specifically, we  recommended that NCA use its existing capabilities to estimate the  served and unserved veteran populations using census tract data. This  would have allowed them to make better-informed decisions concerning  where to locate new national cemeteries, as well as identify which state  and tribal government cemetery grant applications would provide  reasonable burial access to the greatest number of veterans. However,  VA did not concur with that recommendation. In its comments on our draft  report, VA agreed that census tract data may yield more precise  information than county-level population data, but it disagreed with our  conclusion that the use of census tract data would have helped VA to  make better-informed decisions regarding the location of burial options.

For this review, we performed an analysis using census tract data to  examine the 40 prospective sites that NCA has identified as the currently  largest unserved areas, using current veteran population data. Our  analysis yielded estimates for veterans in the service areas for these  prospective sites that differed substantially in some instances from the  numbers used by NCA (see figure 5). For example, NCA ranked Erie,  Pennsylvania, as 4th on its list of prospective sites, based on its estimate  that an additional 45,154 veterans could be served by a cemetery at this  location. However, using census tract data we estimate that only about  10,000 veterans could be served there, resulting in a lower priority for  Erie, Pennsylvania, on this list of prospective sites. Similarly, the county- based methodology used by NCA ranked Decatur, Alabama, as 25th on  the list of prospective sites, while our methodology based upon nearby  census tracts placed it 2nd on the list by estimated number of veterans in  the service area. Thus, even though it could serve many additional  veterans, Decatur, Alabama, would not be ranked highly on the list for  funding using NCA’s methodology.

By using the more precise census tract data to help inform its grant- making decisions, NCA could enhance its ability to implement its plan to  provide burial options to unserved veterans. Comparing estimates of  unserved veterans based on current census tract data with such  estimates based on current county-level data can be a useful supplement  to NCA’s current reliance on long-term projected county-level population  data. Comparing census tract data with county-level data could also  identify areas where the county-level projections might be overridden or  require additional scrutiny. This could position NCA to better identify  those areas of the country that will have the most significant unserved  veteran populations. Additionally, this could help NCA refine its current  plans or develop new ones, as it deems appropriate. We therefore  continue to maintain the validity of our 2014 recommendation for VA to  use census tract data to estimate the served and unserved veteran  populations to help inform its plans for providing reasonable access to  burial options.

By NCA’s estimates, more than 2.1 million veterans—about 10 percent of  the veterans in the United States—did not have reasonable access to  burial options at the end of fiscal year 2013. According to NCA, its plan  had helped increase the percentage served by burial options to about 92  percent of the veteran population by the end of fiscal year 2018.  However, completion of some of the urban and rural sites that are part of  NCA’s plan is currently estimated to take 5 years or longer than planned  at significantly higher cost, in part because construction cost estimates for  the remaining sites may be unreliable. Without NCA’s revising its cost- estimating guidance to more fully reflect the 12 steps in the Cost Guide,  including “conducting a risk and uncertainty analysis,” NCA will not be  well-positioned to provide reliable cost estimates to VA and enable it to  make informed decisions regarding the funding and oversight of NCA’s  ongoing minor construction projects to enhance veterans’ burial options.

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should ensure that the Under Secretary  for Memorial Affairs update its cost-estimating procedures for cemetery  construction projects to fully incorporate the 12 steps identified in the  GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best Practices for  Developing and Managing Capital Program Costs.

We provided a draft of this report to VA for review and comment. In  written comments, VA concurred with our recommendation. VA also  provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate.  VA’s comments are printed in their entirety in appendix II.

In its technical comments, VA disagreed with our finding that NCA had  made limited progress implementing its plan for increasing burial access  for veterans and stated that NCA had instead made significant progress.  As we note in this report, in 2014, NCA planned to open 18 new sites by  the end of fiscal year 2017 to better serve the burial needs of the veteran  population. However, as of September 2019, only six of the planned sites  were open, with NCA years behind its original schedule. For this reason,  we characterized the progress as “limited.” While the progress has been  limited, it is important to note that the opening of the six sites has  increased accessibility of burial options to veterans.

VA also stated that it continues to disagree with our 2014  recommendation that VA use census tract data to estimate the current  served and unserved veteran populations to inform its plans for providing  reasonable access to burial options. In its written response, VA stated  that we recommended NCA use census tract rather than county-level  data. However, that is not what we recommended. As we stated in this  report, comparing estimates of unserved veterans based on current  census tract data with estimates based on current county-level data  would provide a useful supplement to NCA’s current reliance on long-term  projected county-level population data. Specifically, NCA would be better  positioned to identify those areas of the country that will have the most  significant unserved veteran populations and refine its current plans or  develop new ones, as it deems appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional  committees and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. In addition, the report  is available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on  the last page of this report. GAO staff members who made key  contributions to this report are listed in appendix III.

Appendix I: GAO Assessment of the National Cemetery Administration’s (NCA) Guidance for Developing Cemetery Construction Cost Estimates

We compared NCA’s cost-estimating guidance with the 12 steps  identified in the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best  Practices for Developing and Managing Capital Program Costs (Cost  Guide). We found that NCA’s cost-estimating guidance on preparing cost  estimates for cemetery construction projects—specifically Department of  Veterans Affairs’ (VA) Manual for Preparation of Cost Estimates &  Related Documents for VA Facilities (Manual), VA’s Architect/Engineer  Submission Requirements for National Cemetery Projects, Program  Guide 18-15 Volume D (Guide), and NCA’s Construction Program  Conceptual Estimate Worksheet (Worksheet)—does not fully incorporate  these 12 steps, as shown in table 3. The guidance incorporates some of  the 12 steps to some degree, but not others, raising the possibility of  unreliable cost estimates for NCA’s urban and rural initiatives.  Specifically, NCA’s guidance on preparing cost estimates:  fully or substantially met five of the 12 steps, partially met four of the 12 steps, and minimally met or did not meet three of the 12 steps.

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Veterans Affairs

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

Diana Maurer, (202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov.

In addition to the contact named above, Brian Lepore, Director (Retired);  Maria Storts, Assistant Director; Pamela Nicole Harris, Analyst-in-Charge;  Brian Bothwell, Jennifer Echard, Alexandra Gonzalez, Jason Lee, Amie  Lesser, Serena Lo, John Mingus, Brenda Mittelbuscher, Maria Staunton,  Frank Todisco, Cheryl Weissman, and John Wren made significant  contributions to this report.

The Department of Veterans Affairs is responsible for ensuring that veterans have reasonable access to burial options in a national or state veterans’ cemetery. It defines reasonable access as a cemetery within 75 miles of veterans’ homes. It estimated that about 92% of veterans had reasonable access in fiscal year 2018.

VA’s National Cemetery Administration has a plan to establish 18 new national cemeteries to increase access. However, it is years behind schedule for opening new cemeteries and its cost estimates for some sites have more than doubled.

We recommended the National Cemetery Administration adopt better cost-estimating practices.