A recent General Services Administration report says that several of the Reagan administration's initiatives for the agency are falling well behind their goals.

According to the report, produced by GSA associate administrator Charles S. Davis III, none of the GSA's 11 regional offices hit targets in four major areas: surveying fire and safety hazards in government office buildings, reducing the average amount of office space used by government employes, subleasing unneeded office space, and providing space to federal agencies in a more timely fashion.

Davis said that through three quarters of fiscal 1984, GSA had met 63 percent of its goals.

Public buildings commissioner Lester L. Mitchell, said: "Overall, we have a good program and we are making progress." However, he would not offer any details of his division's performance at this time.

The report also shows:

*Only four of the 11 GSA regions were able to hit targets for reducing the amount of office space they control despite large personnel cuts at many agencies.

*Only three GSA regional offices spent their share of the $125 million provided by the 1983 jobs bill on time.

*Only two regions have been able to extend at least 75 percent of their leases for office space before the old lease expired.

*Only one region was able to reduce energy consumption. GSA had set a goal of a 2 percent reduction in energy consumption in the space it controls, but 10 of the regions showed major increases in consumption.

Entitled "How Do You Stack Up?," the report was prepared at the behest of former GSA administrator Gerald P. Carmen. After Carmen left, officials began to complain that the quarterly targets were too ambitious and should be revised down.

That debate was renewed this week among some senior GSA officials.

"They [the charts] don't show the whole story," said Charline Keith, a senior aide to Mitchell. She said the information in the report was accurate but complained that some of the charts were improperly drawn. "They don't clearly show how well we've done compared to last year."

Davis responded that all of the material originated with the Public Buildings Service, "so they're criticizing their own work." But, he said, "some charts aren't valid indicators and should not be equally weighted against others."

Jerald D. Fox, a senior aide to acting GSA administrator Ray Kline, said "it is unfortunate that we are tied, for a year, to indicators that may no longer be valid in some cases. It pains me to see the situation painted as if when Carmen left, there was no longer a concern for the programs that were started. There is."

Davis said the report was developed as "an attempt by GSA to introduce a type of private-sector motivation in monitoring performance through reporting to the agency itself. We wanted to introduce a level of enthusiasm and competition among the regions."

Other sections of the report show mixed performance at GSA's Office of Federal Supply and Services, the primary government procurement arm for civilian agencies. High marks were awarded for contract management, transportation programs and running the personal property program. Low marks were given for the agency's promptness in issuing lists of products that agencies can choose from.