The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) made a substantial move toward efficient governmental property use in March 2015 with the issuance of its ‘Reduce the Footprint’ policy. Born out of previous efforts to arrest the unchecked expansion of federal office space, this new policy represented a significant shift in real estate management strategy for the federal government. This initiative marked the first attempt at an organized, government-wide strategy to maximize the utility of state-owned property, a crucial goal seeing as the federal government boasts the largest real estate portfolio in the country.
In the context of these large-scale holdings, the General Services Administration (GSA) plays a key role by supervising most federal office spaces. Representing a colossal 360 million square feet of building space, these properties had been primarily focused on growth, with two decades of different administrations striving unavailingly to control the burgeoning federal real estate portfolio and its associated maintenance costs.
A turning point arrived in 2013 when the OMB commenced the active management of real estate expansion by issuing a memo that halted further growth in the federal real estate footprint. Bolstering this initiative further was the ‘Reduce the Footprint’ policy released in 2015. Its primary goal focused on streamlining operations through the disposal of surplus and poorly utilized federal property.
The ‘Reduce the Footprint’ policy laid the foundation for agencies to set targeted annual reductions in their property holdings. This pivotal policy was the first-ever OMB initiative that established government-wide instructions to optimize property use. Embodying a culmination of efforts that spanned decades, it reflected a response to the evolution of technology’s role in the work environment.
The ongoing debate over the optimal use of office space continued into the present. As many federal employees began adopting work flexibility practices such as teleworking, the logistical needs and utilization of office space saw a shift. This dynamic environment created an ever-evolving dialogue on optimizing federal workspace.
Providing additional oversight in this area, the George W. Bush administration instituted the Federal Real Property Council. Comprising senior leadership figures from the OMB, GSA, and other GSA agency senior property officers, this council was tasked with establishing greater discipline in managing federal real estate holdings.
One of the steps taken during the Bush administration to streamline property management was the introduction of the Federal Real Property Profile, a requirement for agencies to maintain a record of their office space. As of 2015, these civilian federal agencies accounted for a staggering 300,000 buildings, necessitating $21 billion annually for operation and maintenance costs and an additional $6.8 billion for lease expenses.
The ‘Reduce the Footprint’ policy proved instrumental in speeding up the disposal of federally-owned buildings. In just the two years following its implementation (2015 and 2016), the federal government successfully discarded nearly 6,000 structures. However, the momentum seemed to wane in the subsequent years.
Concurrent to the ‘Reduce the Footprint’ initiative, the use of mobile technology began to permeate the federal workspace. As employees were furnished with laptops and cell phones, they were no longer confined to their offices to perform their duties. Thus, a push toward downsizing the federal office space was initiated, though with the understanding that such a transformation would not be instantaneous.
Challenges surfaced as agencies sought to consolidate and migrate to smaller spaces. Among these was the need to justify to OMB the upfront costs of relocating to more compact premises. As part of the Obama administration’s space optimization efforts, the GSA established 136 usable square feet as the standard size for individual workspaces.
The decision to uphold a ‘one-size-fits-all’ policy sparked a contentious debate. The validity of this policy was contested, especially considering the extensive diversity of roles across the government. For instance, law enforcement agencies that spend minimal time in the office naturally required different space parameters.
While agencies generally conformed to the policies put in place by the Obama administration, there were some inevitable deviations. At times, rigid adherence to the policies led to some illogical outcomes, an unfortunate consequence of strict policy compliance. Consequently, these experiences have underscored the necessity for flexibility and adaptability within these policies.
Ultimately, the ‘Reduce the Footprint’ policy and the subsequent strategies embodied a greater focus on the efficient use of real estate. This policy marked the beginning of a concerted effort to curb the sprawling real estate footprint of the federal government. Moreover, it serves as a reminder of the importance of an adaptable and strategic approach to policy execution in the federal real estate arena.
The legacy of these reforms continues to shape current practices, reinforcing the value of careful space management and efficient use of resources. As the concept of workspace evolves, driven by innovations in technology and changes in work culture, the government’s approach to managing its real estate portfolio must continue to evolve as well. The journey so far underlines the importance of flexibility, adaptability, and stakeholder engagement in driving efficient and sensible policy outcomes.