Reports & Testimonies

  • GAO’s recommendations database contains report recommendations that still need to be addressed.

    GAO’s recommendations help congressional and agency leaders prepare for appropriations and oversight activities, as well as help improve government operations. Recommendations remain open until they are designated as Closed-implemented or Closed-not implemented. You can explore open recommendations by searching or browsing.

    GAO's priority recommendations are those that we believe warrant priority attention. We sent letters to the heads of key departments and agencies, urging them to continue focusing on these issues. These recommendations are labeled as such. You can find priority recommendations by searching or browsing our open recommendations below, or through our mobile app.

  • Browse Open Recommendations

    Explore priority recommendations by subject terms or browse by federal agency

    Search Open Recommendations

    Search for a specific priority recommendation by word or phrase



  • Governing on the go?

    Our Priorities for Policy Makers app makes it easier for leaders to search our recommendations on the go.

    See the November 10th Press Release


  • Have a Question about a Recommendation?

    • For questions about a specific recommendation, contact the person or office listed with the recommendation.
    • For general information about recommendations, contact GAO's Audit Policy and Quality Assurance office at (202) 512-6100 or apqa@gao.gov.
  • « Back to Results List Sort by   

    Results:

    Subject Term: "Acquisition costs"

    9 publications with a total of 14 open recommendations including 1 priority recommendation
    Director: Michael J. Sullivan
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance program oversight and provide more robust input to budget deliberations, Congress should consider requiring DOD to report on each major acquisition program's systems engineering status in the department's annual budget request, beginning with the budget requesting funds to start development. The information could be presented on a simple timeline--as done for the case studies in this report--and at a minimum should reflect the status of a program's functional and allocated baselines as contained in the most current version of the program's systems engineering plan.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: Congress has not yet taken action on the matter for consideration. GAO will continue to monitor.
    Director: Cary B. Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to better integrate virtual training devices into operational training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to specify in Army guidance for developing virtual training device requirements that training developers consider and document the time available to train with the devices and intended usage rates to achieve training tasks and proficiency goals during operational training.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2017, the Army reported taking limited steps to address this recommendation. Army officials stated that the Army has established target usage rates for existing virtual training devices, and has promulgated guidance and tracking tools for recording usage. However, the Army has not modified its guidance for developing new virtual training devices to reflect consideration of time available to train with a new device or expected usage rates to achieve training tasks and proficiency goals during operational training, as GAO recommended in August 2016.
    Recommendation: In order to better integrate virtual training devices into operational training, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to provide additional guidance on how to use virtual non-system training devices in operational training and explore opportunities to incorporate virtual training devices more fully into training strategies.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2017, the Army has taken steps towards addressing it. Specifically, during the period May to November 2017, Headquarters, Department of the Army is leading an in-depth analysis of regular Army formations' readiness training models in support of operational demand. The outcome of this analysis will be viable and executable training models which will also inform future budget requests. According to Army officials, key stakeholders and relevant subject matter experts will identify and update unit training models to reflect training events and tasks to achieve training proficiency, to include key virtual training capabilities that enable specified training events. Key virtual training capabilities will be reflected for each collective and individual training event/task, which will better incorporate virtual training devices into training strategies, as GAO recommended in August 2016.
    Director: Michele Mackin
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance DHS leadership's ongoing efforts to improve the affordability of the department's major acquisition portfolio, and to ensure adequate communication with Congress, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should ensure that the fiscal year 2017 Future Years Homeland Security Program report, which DHS must submit to Congress at or about the same time as the President's fiscal year 2018 budget request, reflects the results of any tradeoffs stemming from the acquisition affordability reviews recommended above.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with this recommendation, and stated that the fiscal year 2017 Future Years Homeland Security Program (FYHSP) report would reflect decisions made in response to our second recommendation. DHS expected to release the FYHSP report shortly after the President's fiscal year 2018 budget request in May 2017. However, the transition to a new administration delayed the release of the FYHSP report. Once available, GAO will evaluate the FYHSP report to determine whether DHS has met the intent of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To enhance DHS leadership's ongoing efforts to improve the affordability of the department's major acquisition portfolio, and to help ensure programs secure stable funding that matches resources to requirements, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security should require components to establish formal, repeatable processes for addressing major acquisition affordability issues, similar to the process the Transportation Security Administration has established.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) concurred with this recommendation, and stated that DHS headquarters would ensure all components are updating their cost estimates each year to inform the annual resource allocation process by March 31, 2017. However, DHS did not establish a requirement that components do so through formal, repeatable processes for addressing major acquisition affordability issues, similar to the process the Transportation Security Administration has established. As of August 2017, seven of DHS's components were in the process of establishing formal, repeatable processes for addressing affordability issues, but had not completed these efforts. GAO will continue to review the components' progress to determine whether the components' actions meet the intent of this recommendation.
    Director: Michele Mackin
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that actions taken to improve the test and evaluation process address identified challenges, the Administrator of TSA should finalize all aspects of the third party testing strategy before implementing further third party testing requirements for vendors to enter testing.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: Transportation Security Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its response to this recommendation, the Department of Homeland Security concurred and identified initial planned actions to implement the finalize third party strategy. Subsequently, in the Spring of 2016, the TSA Office of Security Capabilities finalized its third party tester application and approval process; established quality conformance standards for potential third party testers; and gathered and considered industry feedback on potential third party test strategy consequences among other actions. Collectively, TSA established and published program requirements and procedures for the third party test strategy. In late 2016, TSA formally delayed its planned implementation of the third-party testing program by a calendar year to now be completed by December 31, 2017. TSA cited a need to conduct additional assessments, coordination challenges, and larger TSA security equipment related initiatives as the reasons for the delay. As part of its regular recommendation status reporting to GAO, TSA in the Spring 2017, noted that it is on track to meet the intent of the recommendation by the later revised date. TSA noted it had recently updated its qualification process by which qualified product lists will be populated and has already incorporated various aspects of third party testing for legacy security equipment qualification.
    Director: Michael J. Sullivan
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's use of portfolio management for its weapon system investments and ensure that its investment plans are affordable, strategy-driven, balance near- and long-term needs, and leverage efforts across the military services, as well as to provide a solid foundation for future portfolio management efforts at the enterprise-level, the Secretary of Defense should revise DOD Directive 7045.2 on Capability Portfolio Management in accordance with best practices and promote the development of better tools to enable more integrated portfolio reviews and analyses of weapon system investments. Key elements of this recommendation would include (1) designating the Deputy Secretary of Defense or some appropriate delegate responsibility for implementing the policy and overseeing portfolio management in DOD; (2) requiring annual enterprise-level portfolio reviews that incorporate key portfolio review elements, including information from the requirements, acquisition, and budget processes; (3) directing the Joint Staff, AT&L, and CAPE to collaborate on their data needs and develop a formal implementation plan for meeting those needs either by building on the database the Joint Staff is developing for its analysis or investing in new analytical tools; and (4) incorporating lessons learned from military service portfolio reviews and portfolio management activities, such as using multiple risk and funding scenarios to assess needs and re-evaluate priorities.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the Department of Defense partially concurred with this recommendation and has taken steps to implement one part of it. In October 2016, the Joint Staff informed GAO that it was updating two of its databases on military capabilities and capability requirements to provide DOD with better analytical tools to support portfolio management. The Department of Defense has not taken any other actions to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's use of portfolio management for its weapon system investments and ensure that its investment plans are affordable, strategy-driven, balance near- and long-term needs, and leverage efforts across the military services, and to help ensure the military services' portfolio reviews are conducted regularly and effectively integrate information from the requirements, acquisition, and budget communities, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force to update or develop policies that require them to conduct annual portfolio reviews that incorporate key portfolio review elements, including information from the requirements, acquisition, and budget processes.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the Department of Defense partially concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken any actions necessary to implement it.
    Director: Michael J. Sullivan
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: As DOD plans to significantly increase F-35 procurement funding over the next 5 years, the Secretary of Defense should conduct an affordability analysis of the program's current procurement plan that reflects various assumptions about future technical progress and funding availability.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: In October 2016, DOD had undertaken multiple efforts to re-evaluate the F-35 warfighting requirements. The Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a memo in May 2016 to the congressional defense committees that revalidated the program's current procurement profile. However, the memo noted that there were a number of factors that will need to be analyzed to fully re-evaluate the F-35 warfighting requirements including production and sustainment costs, force structure, and DOD's ability to achieve strategic and operational objectives under its current plans. As of May 2017, the Department was in the process of conducting an affordability analysis and preparing a final response. The final response is expected to be completed in the summer of 2017.
    Director: Cristina Chaplain
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: Before making decisions on whether to disaggregate DOD's protected satellite communications, SBIRS, or environmental monitoring satellite systems, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to develop common measures for resilience.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has not yet developed common measures for resilience, but has stated standard metrics are under development. Results from a recent study by the National Security Space Enterprise Vision Tiger Team are expected to develop resilience requirements and options for attaining resiliency. DOD plans to use the Space Based Infrared System Follow-on as a test case for describing resilience as a system requirement. The Air Force approved a draft capability development document in February 2017, and a full capability development document is under development. In addition, DOD has identified mission assurance and resiliency as priorities for the next Space Strategic Portfolio Review. GAO's ongoing review of hosted payloads, to be conducted over the next year, will likely review issues related to this area.
    Recommendation: Before making decisions on whether to disaggregate DOD's protected satellite communications, SBIRS, or environmental monitoring satellite systems, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to expand demonstration efforts to examine the operational feasibility of disaggregation by empirically quantifying its benefits and limitations as well as addressing longstanding barriers that could hinder its implementation.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has not yet empirically quantified the benefits and limitations of disaggregation, or addressed longstanding barriers that could hinder its implementation, through a demonstration of operational feasibility. However, DOD stated it has considered the disaggregation of certain capabilities in previous war games, and lessons learned will be carried forward into future war games. For example, the most recent war games focused on ways to increase space system resilience by expanding and integrating international and private sector capabilities, and increasing the number of sensors and associated coverage.
    Recommendation: Before making decisions on whether to disaggregate DOD's protected satellite communications, Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS), or environmental monitoring satellite systems, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to comprehensively examine--either through the Analysis of Alternatives studies or through other assessments--the full range of disaggregation issues, including those that go beyond the satellite systems themselves.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has made progress toward assessing disaggregation through its analysis of alternatives (AOA) efforts for individual satellite programs within three areas: protected satellite communications services (PSCS), space-based environmental monitoring (SBEM), and the Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS). However, DOD has not yet completed a comprehensive examination of the full range of disaggregation issues. DOD completed the SBEM AOA in October 2013, the SBIRS Follow-on AOA in December 2015, and the PSCS AOA in February 2016. These AOAs each included cost, capability, and risk analyses for aggregated and disaggregated alternatives, though each did not assess the full range of disaggregation issues for the subject area. For example, the SBEM AOA evaluated options including placing sensors on host satellites, placing satellites in different orbits, and relying on international and U.S. civil partners to provide some capabilities, but it focused on the space segment and did not analyze alternative ground segment components. The AOA team determined impacts to the ground segment would need to be assessed more thoroughly once DOD decided on a solution. In October 2016, the Air Force approved an acquisition strategy for the planned solution, called the Weather System Follow-on - Microwave. The program has not yet assessed ground segment impacts, but the Air Force stated it will be assessed further once a contract is awarded. For the PSCS and SBIRS areas, the Air Force conducted subsequent studies on resiliency in 2016, which evaluated the benefits of resiliency in future architectures for satellite communications missions and informed resilience requirements for the SBIRS Follow-on. GAO has ongoing work in these areas and plans to complete reviews of the AOAs in the fall of 2017 and a hosted payload review in the next year.
    Director: Dicken, John E
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of HHS should direct the Administrator of CMS to monitor the relationship between PPACA-based FULs and the NADACs on an ongoing basis to help determine whether PPACA-based FULs effectively control federal Medicaid expenditures without reducing beneficiary access to drugs subject to FULs over time.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: As part of the final rule implementing the PPACA-based FUL formula, CMS monitors the relationship between the FUL and the NADAC for individual drugs on an ongoing basis and ensures that the FUL does not fall below the NADAC. CMS, however, does not monitor the relationship between the FUL and NADAC in aggregate. This monitoring would provide CMS information on the extent to which the FUL effectively controls federal Medicaid expenditures, particularly in cases where there may be potential for over-reimbursement. CMS officials expect that, by mid-2017, many states will determine reimbursement using an average acquisition cost based on the NADAC. As a result, any potential variation between the FUL and NADAC would be reduced according to CMS officials. We plan to obtain state plan amendments from CMS to confirm whether states are reimbursing at an average acquisition cost or using some other methodology to control Medicaid expenditures.
    Director: Mackin, Michele
    Phone: (202) 512-3000

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help the Coast Guard create stability in the acquisition process and provide decision makers, including DHS, Office of Management and Budget, and Congress, with current information to make decisions about budgets, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should conduct a comprehensive portfolio review to develop revised baselines that reflect acquisition priorities as well as realistic funding scenarios.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Coast Guard
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation. Since 2014, we found efforts are underway to address this issue, but, so far, these efforts have not led to the significant trade-off decisions needed to improve the affordability of the Coast Guard's portfolio. The Coast Guard is currently conducting a fleet-wide analysis, including surface, aviation, and information technology, intended to be a fundamental reassessment of the capabilities and mix of assets the Coast Guard needs to fulfill its missions. The Coast Guard is undertaking this effort consistent with direction from Congress based upon this and other GAO recommendations. Specifically, the Coast Guard has completed its new mission needs statement and plans to release a fleet-wide concept of operations by the end of fiscal 2016. Then, it will use a complex model to develop the full fleet mix study. Based on this, the Coast Guard plans to recommend a set of assets that best meets these needs in terms of capability and cost. The Coast Guard plans to complete the full study in time to inform the fiscal year 2019 budget, though specific dates for these events have not been set forth.