We targeted four factors in the strategic review exercise: attrition, vacant positions or positions that we were going to eliminate through ongoing initiative reduction, operational efficiencies and budget cuts. The budget cuts were made mainly in areas where we had noted that the budgets allocated to us were not completely used. We therefore proposed cuts to those items.
Then we determined that, based on those options for the House Administration, we would save approximately $13 million over the next three years. For the attrition and vacant positions initiative, we will save approximately $1.7 million this year. By cutting positions already filled as a result of the fact that we are changing the scope of the initiatives, we will save approximately $300,000. As for operational efficiencies, the savings are approximately $600,000. The budget cuts amount to approximately $1 million for this year. That totals approximately $3.7 million for the House Administration.
Attrition and vacant positions are the most significant factor for this year among the initiatives that are part of the strategic review. The department heads really examined their organizations and determined which positions could remain empty and which could be permanently dropped, if you will, in order to achieve the established objectives. That is the most significant item in this element.
The second most significant item is budget cuts. Based on an in-depth budgetary analysis, we really looked at where there was a systematic underutilization of budgets over the years and where we could suggest budget cuts. That is what we did for those budget items.