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: "Business process reengineering"

    3 publications with a total of 9 open recommendations
    Director: Carol R. Cha
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the department can better achieve business process reengineering and enterprise architecture outcomes and benefits, the Secretary of Defense should utilize the results of our portfolio manager survey to determine additional actions that can improve the department's management of its business process reengineering and enterprise architecture activities.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD developed a plan, using the results of our survey, to improve the department's management of its business process reengineering and enterprise architecture activities; however, key milestones have not yet been completed. Specifically, in January 2017, the department issued a business enterprise architecture (BEA) improvement plan. The plan was intended to address BEA usability and deficiencies in information supporting the investment management process. As part of the plan, the department identified opportunities to address the results of our survey. For example, according to the plan, our survey results were utilized to identify opportunities for improving management and integration of existing enterprise business processes and investments; assessing duplication early in the analysis phase and finding process and capability reuse across the department; and providing a federated BEA information environment and capabilities to discover and exchange information from other sources. The plan included delivering three major capabilities. As of September 2017, the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated that the delivery dates for the three capabilities were as follows: Business Capability Acquisition Cycle content ingest and investment reviews by June 2018; process and system reviews within and across domains by June 2018; and development and integration of functional strategies by December 2018. Further, the office stated that dates were subject to a contract being awarded. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Director: Farrell, Brenda S
    Phone: (202)512-3604

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with more-complete information on the planned implementation, management, and oversight of DOD's newly created DHA, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to develop and present to Congress a comprehensive timeline that includes interim milestones for all reform goals that could be used to show implementation progress.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2015, DOD has not submitted a comprehensive timeline that includes interim milestones for all reform goals. Further, as we reported in September 2015, DOD's plan for assessing the personnel requirements of the DHA lacks a detailed timeline with milestones and interim steps. Until DOD develops a comprehensive timeline for its reform, this recommendation should remain open. June 2017 Update: The DHA strategic plan/CONOPS showing a comprehensive timeline for all of its reform goals has yet to be released.
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with more-complete information on the planned implementation, management, and oversight of DOD's newly created DHA, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to monitor implementation costs to assess whether the shared-services projects are on track to achieve projected net cost savings or if corrective actions are needed.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As we reported in September 2015, DOD has taken some action on this recommendation for 8 of its 10 shared services. The DHA's internal leadership briefings now identify the major types of implementation costs where relevant, or otherwise address their potential impact. For example, information technology costs are identified as one primary type of costs for the Health Information Technology and Medial Logistics shared services, while contract costs are identified for the Budget and Resource Management, Medical Logistics, and Health Information Technology shared services. By identifying the major types of implementation costs, decision makers are better able to gauge the sensitivity of areas of uncertainty as they make decisions concerning future investments in shared services. MAY 2016 UPDATE: DHA reported and we verified financial savings of $722 million for FY14 and FY15 due to shared services implementation. June 2017 Update: DHA reported and we verified financial savings of $686.6 million for FY 16 due to shared services implementation.
    Director: Melvin, Valerie C
    Phone: (202) 512-6304

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to define by when and how the department plans to develop an architecture that would extend to all defense components and include, among other things, (a) information about the specific business systems that support business enterprise architecture (BEA) business activities and related system functions; (b) business capabilities for the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes; and (c) sufficient information about business activities to allow for more effective identification of potential overlap and duplication.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had taken steps to address the recommendation; however, more steps are needed to meet its intent. For example, as of July 2015, the department had taken steps to improve the integration of business enterprise architecture (BEA) information with other existing information. This integration was intended to allow DOD to identify information such as mapping of existing business systems to individual BEA system functions. In addition, in January 2017, the department issued a plan to improve the usefulness of the architecture by delivering three major capabilities, including the ability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains, which can help better identify potential duplication and overlap, by January 2017. The plan also included other activities that may help support the identification of duplication and overlap, such as developing a federated ontology for BEA data structures, migrating legacy architecture data into the federated ontology, and defining requirements to enable extensible data structures for future updates, by June 2016. However, the department has not developed the ontology or delivered the capability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains. An official from the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated in September 2017 that the BEA ontology work is ongoing and that a plan for moving the existing BEA content to the new framework is in development. The official also stated that delivery of the capability to conduct process and system reviews within and across domains is now planned for June 2018, depending on contract award. However, DOD has not updated its BEA improvement plan to reflect the revised delivery dates. In addition, the department also has not identified the business capabilities associated with the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes. The department continues to update its business architecture, but it has not demonstrated that it has defined by when and how it plans to develop an architecture that would extend to all defense components and include business capabilities for the Hire-to-Retire and Procure-to-Pay business processes.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to ensure that the functional strategies include all of the critical elements identified in DOD investment management guidance, including performance measures to determine progress toward achieving the goals that incorporate all of the attributes called for in the department's guidance.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had taken some steps to address the intent of this recommendation. However, more remains to be done to fully address the intent of the recommendation. For example, we reported in July 2015 that the department established performance measures in its functional strategies that addressed at least some of the five attributes called for in DOD guidance. In particular, all of the fiscal year 2015 functional strategies identified examples of quantitative metrics. However, not all functional strategies identified metrics that addressed the other attributes. As of August 2017, this continues to be the case. For example, the fiscal year 2017 human resources management functional strategy did not address prior year business outcomes and initiatives progress, as required by the February 2015 investment management guidance.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to select and control its mix of investments in a manner that best supports mission needs by (a) documenting a process for evaluating portfolio performance that includes the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds; (b) ensuring that portfolio assessments are conducted in key areas identified in our IT investment management framework: benefits attained; current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated, or accepted to date; and (c) ensuring that the documents provided to the Defense Business Council as part of the investment management process include critical information for conducting all assessments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense had not addressed the recommendation. In February 2017, the department issued DOD Instruction 5000.75, Business Systems Requirements and Acquisition, to assist in managing defense business systems. Further, in April 2017, the department updated its investment management guidance. However, neither the instruction nor the revised guidance call for a process for evaluating portfolio performance that includes the use of actual versus expected performance data and predetermined thresholds. The instruction and the revised guidance also do not specify a process for ensuring that portfolio assessments are conducted in key areas identified in our information technology investment management framework: benefits attained; current schedule; accuracy of project reporting; and risks that have been mitigated, eliminated, or accepted to date. Further, the department has not demonstrated that it has ensured that documents provided to the Defense Business Council (i.e., the investment review board) include critical information for conducting assessments, such as information about system scalability to support additional users or new features in the future and cost in relationship to return on investment.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to implement and use the BEA and business process reengineering compliance assessments more effectively to support organizational transformation efforts by (a) disclosing relevant information about known weaknesses, such as BEA and business process reengineering compliance weaknesses for systems that were not certified or certified with qualifications in annual reports to Congress; (b) establishing milestones by which selected validations of BEA compliance assertions are to be completed; and (c) ensuring that appropriate business process reengineering assertions have been completed on all investments submitted for the fiscal year 2014 certification reviews prior to the certification of funds.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) has taken steps to address the intent of the recommendation; however, more remains to be done. For example, the 2015 Congressional Report on Defense Business Operations included some information consistent with our recommendation. In particular, it contained information about weaknesses for systems that were certified with qualifications. The report stated that the department conditionally approved 29 military department and 30 defense agency requests pending Defense Business Council (DBC) approval of their problem statements. The report also cited the specific systems that were conditionally approved pending approval of their problem statements. In addition, in February 2017, the department issued an instruction (DOD Instruction 5000.75, Business Systems Requirements and Acquisition). The instruction requires that the certifying official verify that a capability is aligned with the business enterprise architecture (BEA) prior to a decision to proceed with a solutions analysis phase. The instruction also requires the certifying official to validate that sufficient business process reengineering (BPR) has been conducted to determine that a business system is required. The Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer (DCMO) explained in August 2017 that the office reviews BEA compliance assertions in BEA compliance reporting tools, and if any issues are found with the assertions they are documented in investment decision memos. In addition, for BPR assertions, the office stated that DCMO portfolio leads review the assertions to determine if a system has required documentation. For those that have no plan of action or BPR assertions, according to the office, the DCMO team works with the domain or portfolio owners to ensure that a plan of action is documented. However, the department did not provide evidence to demonstrate that BEA assertions have been validated for selected investments or that BPR assertions have been validated for all its investments as part of its last annual certification process.
    Recommendation: To effectively implement key components of DOD's business systems modernization program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to develop a skills inventory, needs assessment, gap analysis, and plan to address identified gaps as part of a strategic approach to human capital planning for the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had not addressed this recommendation; and the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer (DCMO) stated that it does not plan to address it. Specifically, it said that the department did not concur with the recommendation, and that, further, it had been overcome by other events. According to DOD officials, the recommendation has been overcome by several reorganizational changes, including one based on reviews of the department's business processes and systems. The Office of the DCMO stated that the department used a skills inventory, needs assessment, and gap analysis to do these reorganizations, and there are no open positions beyond those occurring from normal attrition. However, the Office of the DCMO did not provide evidence of the skills inventory, needs assessment and gap analysis that it said it used in its reorganizations. We still consider the recommendation to be valid and will continue to monitor its implementation as part of our periodic assessments of DOD efforts to manage its defense business systems.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the appropriate authority to ensure that complete documentation, such as root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for reuse opportunities, and performance metrics related to the reengineering efforts, is provided as part of the fiscal year 2014 certification and approval process for the Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Army (IPPS-A), Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Navy (IPPS-N), Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System (AF-IPPS), and Integrated Electronic Health Record (iEHR) investments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) had taken some steps to address the intent of this recommendation, and other aspects of the recommendation have been overcome by events. However, more work is needed to demonstrate that the department has more fully addressed the intent of our recommendation. For example, in July 2015, we reported that the department demonstrated that it had completed documentation, such as root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for reuse opportunities, and performance metrics related to the reengineering efforts, and that the documentation was provided as part of the certification and approval process for the Air Force Integrated Personnel and Pay System investment. However, since we made the recommendation, the department has changed its approach to evaluating business process reengineering for its defense business systems. As a result of this change, the department requires different documentation than the documentation required when we prepared our report. The department now requires business process reengineering to be documented in a problem statement. In particular, the December 2014 DOD problem statement guidance requires a description of and validation that a thorough review of the business process reengineering was conducted, and no longer specifically requires root cause analyses, assessments of existing interfaces for re-use opportunities, or performance metrics related to reengineering efforts. Regarding the Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Army, in September 2017, the department demonstrated that it had completed a March 2016 description of its business process reengineering efforts and provided supporting documentation as part of its review and certification process. However, as of September 2017, the department had not demonstrated that complete documentation related to reengineering efforts has been submitted as part of its annual certification and approval process for the Integrated Personnel and Pay System-Navy (IPPS-N) investment. According to an Official from the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of the Navy (Management), the department expects the IPPS-N problem statement to be complete by the end of September 2017. Regarding the Integrated Electronic Health Record investment, the Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer stated that the department does not plan to conduct business process reengineering because the investment is now in sustainment, and the department does not require business process reengineering for systems in sustainment.