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: "Defense procurement"

    69 publications with a total of 187 open recommendations including 8 priority recommendations
    Director: Zina D. Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in conjunction with the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and the military departments, should assess whether risk mitigation actions have been identified in the event of a loss of each task critical assets (TCA) facility in the defense industrial base and, based on this assessment, develop risk mitigation actions with associated implementation plans and time lines, and provide this information to congressional and DOD decision makers. (Recommendation 1)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in conjunction with DCMA and the military departments, should provide congressional and DOD decision makers with information on potential effects on defense capabilities in the event of a loss of each TCA facility in the defense industrial base. (Recommendation 2)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in conjunction with DCMA and the military departments, should provide congressional and DOD decision makers with information on DOD organic facilities that have been identified as TCAs, similar to the information provided previously on commercial facilities. This information also should include (1) the potential effects on defense capabilities in the event of a loss of the facility and (2) risk mitigation actions and associated implementation plans with time lines. (Recommendation 3)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in conjunction with DCMA and the military departments, should take steps to share information on risks identified through the annual Critical Asset Identification Process with relevant program managers or other designated service or program officials. At a minimum, relevant officials should receive information on the most critical facilities (such as TCAs) that produce parts supporting their programs. This information-sharing could occur through service-specific channels of communication or another method of internal communication deemed appropriate by DOD. (Recommendation 4)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in conjunction with the military departments, should develop a mechanism to ensure that program offices obtain information from contractors on single source of supply risks. (Recommendation 5)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in conjunction with the military departments, should issue department-wide DMSMS policy, such as an instruction, that clearly defines requirements of DMSMS management and details responsibilities and procedures to be followed by program offices to implement the policy. (Recommendation 6)

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Andrew Von Ah
    Phone: (213) 830-1011

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The DOD's Deputy Chief Management Officer should strengthen its approach to track DOD Executive Agents to ensure that its list and contact information are current and complete.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD's Deputy Chief Management Officer should verify that the OSD Principal Staff Assistants for all DOD Executive Agents have completed their required assessments every 3 years.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: The DOD's Deputy Chief Management Officer should issue implementing guidance that OSD Principal Staff Assistants should document the assessments of DOD Executive Agents, including documenting how the assessments address the DOD Executive Agents' continued need, currency, and effectiveness and efficiency in meeting end-user needs.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Deputy Chief Management Officer
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Timothy J. DiNapoli
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help foster strategic decision making and improvements in the acquisition of services, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics should, as part of its effort to update the January 2016 instruction, reassess the roles, responsibilities, authorities, and organizational placement of key leadership positions, including functional domain experts, senior services managers, and component level leads.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help foster strategic decision making and improvements in the acquisition of services, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics should, as part of its effort to update the January 2016 instruction, clarify the purpose and timing of the Services Requirements Review Board process to better align it with DOD's programming and budgeting processes.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Marie A. Mak
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help increase efficiency when defining FMS requirements to be placed on contract, the Secretary of Defense should issue department-wide guidance for the military departments and DOD components to expand the use of requirements checklists to develop more comprehensive letters of request for FMS cases.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Merritt, Zina Dache
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that DLA has a plan that can effectively guide corrective actions relating to identified deficiencies in its defective spare parts restitution and removal process, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Director of DLA to strengthen its plan to fully address all four of the mandated elements. These include: (1) coordination to pursue restitution, (2) inventory search, (3) return of defective parts, and (4) restitution in appropriate form.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Joseph W. Kirschbaum
    Phone: (202) 512-9971

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD implements the tasks and objectives of key cybersecurity guidance to strengthen its cybersecurity posture, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Principal Cyber Advisor to modify the criteria for closing tasks from The DOD Cyber Strategy to reflect whether tasks have been implemented, and to re-evaluate tasks that have been previously determined to be completed to ensure that they meet the modified criteria.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD implements the tasks and objectives of key cybersecurity guidance to strengthen its cybersecurity posture, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Commander of CYBERCOM, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and DOD Chief Information Officer, to establish a timeframe and monitor implementation of the DOD Cybersecurity Campaign objective to develop cybersecurity readiness assessments to help ensure accountability.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: John H. Pendleton
    Phone: (202) 512-3489

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: As the department seeks to report on and achieve required cost savings, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer to develop reliable cost savings estimates that include detailed information and documentation to allow for clear tracking of cost savings by DOD and Congress.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Zina Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance the department's transfer of its excess controlled property, and to strengthen LESO program internal controls for the application and enrollment of federal agencies, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should direct the Director of DLA to review and revise policy or procedures for verifying and approving federal agency applications and enrollment. For example, such steps could include LESO supervisory approval for all federal agency applications; confirmation of the application with designated points of contact at the headquarters of participating federal agencies; or visiting the location of the applying federal law enforcement agency.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To enhance the department's transfer of its excess controlled property, and to help ensure controlled property is picked up by authorized individuals, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should direct the Director of DLA to ensure compliance that on-site officials responsible for the transfer of items at Disposition Services' sites request and verify valid identification of the individual(s) authorized to pick up allocated property from the LESO program.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To enhance the department's transfer of its excess controlled property, and to help ensure the accurate quantity of approved items is transferred, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should direct the Director of DLA to issue guidance that requires DLA Disposition Services on-site officials to verify the type and quantity of approved items against the actual items being transferred prior to removal from the sites.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To enhance the department's transfer of its excess controlled property, and to strengthen LESO program internal controls, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics should direct the Director of DLA to conduct a fraud risk assessment to design and implement a strategy with specific internal control activities to mitigate assessed fraud risks for all stages relating to LESO's transfer of excess controlled property to law enforcement agencies, consistent with leading practices provided in GAO's Fraud Risk Framework.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Timothy J. DiNapoli
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should identify the specific types of information that would best meet the department's needs and, based on that determination, collect and analyze relevant data after contract performance is sufficiently complete to determine the extent to which contracts with incentives achieved their desired outcomes.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Asif A. Khan
    Phone: (202) 512-9869

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to provide guidance in the DOD Financial Management Regulation on the timing of when DOD managers should use available tools to help ensure that monthly cash balances are within the upper and lower cash requirements.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that it plans to update the DOD Financial Management Regulation as we recommended to provide additional guidance on the timing of when DOD managers should use available tools to help ensure that monthly cash balances are within the upper and lower cash requirements. DOD also stated that this change will be incorporated for the fiscal year 2019 President's Budget submission and subsequent budgets.
    Director: Mike Sullivan
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to counter both near and far term threats, consistent with its S&T framework, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to annually define the mix of incremental and disruptive innovation investments for each military department.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to counter both near and far term threats, consistent with its S&T framework, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to annually assess whether that mix is achieved.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to more comprehensively implement leading practices for managing science and technology programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to define, in policy or guidance, an S&T management framework that includes emphasizing greater use of existing flexibilities to more quickly initiate and discontinue projects to respond to the rapid pace of innovation.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to more comprehensively implement leading practices for managing science and technology programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to define, in policy or guidance, an S&T management framework that includes incorporating acquisition stakeholders into technology development programs to ensure they are relevant to customers.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD is positioned to more comprehensively implement leading practices for managing science and technology programs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the new Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to define, in policy or guidance, an S&T management framework that includes promoting advanced prototyping of disruptive technologies within the labs so the S&T community can prove these technologies work to generate demand from future acquisition programs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Marie A. Mak
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    8 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure the ASA(ALT) and Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Procurement) (DASA(P)) establish and implement Contracting Enterprise Review (CER) metrics to evaluate the timeliness of contract awards, cost savings attributable to contracting activities, and the quality of contractors' products and services.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure the ASA(ALT) and DASA(P) formally establish May 2018 as the required deadline for DASA(P) representatives to establish department-wide Procurement Action Lead Time (PALT) guidelines.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure the ASA(ALT) and DASA(P) establish a standard methodology for Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting (PARCs) to calculate the cost savings they report in CER briefings; and ensure PARCs from he Guard Bureau, U.S. Army Medical Command, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers use the methodology to report their respective cost savings.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure the ASA(ALT) and DASA(P) identify an effective means to collect and report contractor performance data.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure the ASA(ALT) accurately determines the department's contracting workforce requirements in accordance with the Army's needs.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure the future ASA(ALT)s document their reasons for not implementing their predecessors' contracting policies, as applicable.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure the ASA(ALT)s consistently chair or otherwise provide feedback on quarterly CERs in order to demonstrate commitment to improving contracting operations.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help Army leadership obtain the information needed to evaluate and improve contracting operations, the Secretary of the Army should ensure that Army leaders establish measurable objectives for organizational changes, such as (a) the February 2016 Army Materiel Command Operation Order, and (b) the December 2016 Head of Contracting Activity delegations.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Marie A. Mak
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that ACPV armoring and quality standards are met, that evolving department and component policies are consistent, and that they are consistently applied, the Secretary of Defense should, until the department approves and implements the updated armoring and inspection standards, direct the Secretary of the Army to conduct in-progress inspections at the armoring vendor's facility for each procurement.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken any actions necessary to implement it.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that ACPV armoring and quality standards are met, that evolving department and component policies are consistent, and that they are consistently applied, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to designate a central point of contact for collecting and reporting ACPV information to facilitate Defense Intelligence Agency's oversight of armoring and inspection standards in these contracts.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken any actions necessary to implement it.
    Director: Marie A. Mak
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Navy to adjust the number of AAVs used in calculating AAV operations and support costs in the SAR to reflect a more realistic comparison to the 204 ACV 1.1s being procured.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation to update this assumption, and made a partial update to the December 2016 ACV SAR in an effort to address it. In the updated SAR, DOD changed the number of AAVs being replaced from 204 to 180 as we recommended, but did not fully update the total AAV O&S cost figure based on that updated number. Therefore, this recommendation remains open.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Navy to postpone the ACV 1.1 program's production decision until early fiscal year 2019 to reduce concurrency between testing and production.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its written comments, DOD contended that delaying the production decision could delay the ACV fielding schedule and impact the affordability and sequencing of the Marine Corps' overarching Vehicle Replacement Strategy. Although DOD does not plan to take action on our recommendation, Congress has yet to fund the start of ACV production in fiscal year 2018. Therefore, this recommendation remains open.
    Director: Brian Lepore
    Phone: (202) 512-4523

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide Congress with better visibility over the costs for the environmental cleanup of properties from all Base Realignment and Closure rounds to inform future funding decisions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the military departments to include in future annual reports to Congress that environmental cleanup costs will increase due to the cleanup of perfluorinated compounds and other emerging contaminants, and to include best estimates of these costs as additional information becomes available.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that information on cleanup of perfluorinated compounds would be included in the fiscal year 2017 annual report to Congress.
    Recommendation: To help the services more effectively share information and address environmental cleanups and transfers, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the military departments to create a repository or method to record and share lessons learned about how various locations have successfully addressed cleanup challenges.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD stated that it will develop a process to record and share lessons learned in conjunction with its fiscal year 2017 annual report to Congress.
    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: Michele Mackin
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure a more accurate estimate of the expected cost savings under the fiscal year 2013-2017 multiyear procurement, Congress should consider requiring the Navy to update its estimate of savings, which currently reflects only Flight IIA ships, to increase transparency for costs and savings for Congress and the taxpayers, as well as provide improved information to support future multiyear procurement savings estimates.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: To ensure a more accurate estimate of the expected cost savings under the fiscal year 2013-2017 multiyear procurement, we asked Congress to consider requiring the Navy to update its estimate of savings, which currently reflects only Flight IIA ships, to increase transparency for costs and savings for Congress and the taxpayers, as well as provide improved information to support future multi-year procurement savings estimates. Neither the Senate nor House National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) reports for fiscal year 2018 direct the Navy to update its savings and both reports include language authorizing the Navy to pursue a DDG 51 Flight III multi-year procurement contract for fiscal years 2018-2022. We will continue to monitor the status of this matter at least until the NDAA for fiscal year 2018 is enacted, at which time we will close the matter as not implemented if the multi-year procurement is authorized and no savings update requirement is included.
    Recommendation: To better support DDG 51 Flight III oversight, the Secretary of Defense should designate the Flight III configuration as a major subprogram of the DDG 51 program in order to increase the transparency, via Selected Acquisition Reports, of Flight III cost, schedule, and performance baselines within the broader context of the DDG 51 program.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD agreed that visibility into DDG 51 Flight III cost, schedule, and performance is important for oversight, but does not plan to designate Flight III as a major subprogram. No further DOD action has been taken on this recommendation and congressional reports supporting the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018--yet to be finalized and enacted--do not include any direction for the department to do so. Nevertheless, with construction of the lead Flight III ship only recently awarded (June 2017), we will continue to monitor any action taken to designate Flight III as a major subprogram.
    Director: Carol C. Harris
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    9 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD Chief Information Officer (CIO), and other entities, as appropriate, to develop a detailed JIE scope statement that is verified by stakeholders and approved by the Executive Committee.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Department of Defense had made progress in implementing the recommendation. Specifically, the department developed a draft Joint Information Environment (JIE) scope statement that can provide the context and framework for reporting, tracking, and controlling JIE activities. According to written comments on the status of the recommendation provided by the department in July 2017, this scope statement will be presented to the JIE Executive Committee in August 2017 for approval. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to establish a plan for managing, documenting, and communicating scope.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Department of Defense had made progress in implementing the recommendation. Specifically, the department developed a draft JIE scope statement, which documents the scope of JIE and describes how updates to its scope will be periodically reviewed and approved. According to written comments on the status of the recommendation provided by the department in July 2017, the draft will be presented to the JIE Executive Committee in August 2017 for approval. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to implement the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to develop a reliable JIE cost estimate and baseline, consistent with the best practices described in this report.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Department of Defense had not implemented the recommendation. According to written comments on the status of the recommendation provided by the department, it developed cost baselines for two components of JIE. However, it did not develop cost estimates for the other JIE components. Specifically, the JIE Executive Committee approved the cost estimate for the Joint Regional Security Stacks in April 2017. In addition, the department's comments stated that the cost baseline for the Mission Partner Environment-Information System (MPE-IS) was included in the MPE-IS Business Case Analysis and presented to the department's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation in July 2016. We are in the process of reviewing the cost estimates for these components. The department further stated that as solutions for other JIE efforts are established, their cost baselines will be added as appropriate.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to develop a JIE schedule management plan and reliable schedule, consistent with practices described in this report.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the department had not implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address this recommendation by periodically requesting and evaluating updated information.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to develop a JRSS schedule management plan and reliable JRSS schedule and schedule baseline, consistent with practices described in this report.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Department of Defense had not fully implemented this recommendation. In March 2017, the JIE Executive Committee approved a schedule baseline for the Non-secure Internet Protocol Router network component of JRSS. In addition, the Executive Committee memo approving this schedule baseline indicated that the Executive Committee planned to review and approve a schedule baseline for the Secure Internet Protocol Router network component of JRSS by the end of fiscal year 2017. However, the department has not demonstrated that it has a schedule management plan or that its schedule was developed consistent with the practices described in our report.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to complete an assessment to determine the number of staff and the specific skills and abilities needed to effectively achieve JIE, consistent with the workforce planning practices described in this report.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Department of Defense had not implemented the recommendation. In its June 2016 written comments on a draft of our report, the department stated that the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Office of Personnel Management were to publish a coding structure in response to the Federal Cybersecurity Workforce Assessment Act of 2015. DOD stated that this structure would inform steps DOD planned to take to identify the type of personnel and specific skills required to support enterprise operations and services and the government capabilities needed to effectively achieve JIE. However, as of July 2017, the department had not demonstrated that it has taken action to implement our recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to develop a strategy for conducting JIE security assessments that describes the resources needed to execute the strategy, responsible organizations, and a schedule to complete the assessments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Department had not implemented the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the department's efforts to address this recommendation by periodically requesting and evaluating updated information.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to develop a strategy and schedule to transition JRSS to the Risk Management Framework, and develop the security plan required by the new framework.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, the Department of Defense had not implemented this recommendation. In January 2017, the Joint Regional Security Stacks (JRSS) program received a six-month provisional Risk Management Framework Authority to Operate. According to a July 2017 update from the department on the status of this recommendation, the JRSS program management office was in the process of requesting another six-month provisional authority to operate. However, the department has not developed a strategy and schedule to complete transition of JRSS to the Risk Management Framework or developed the security plan required by the framework.
    Recommendation: To help the department achieve the benefits anticipated from JIE, the Secretary should direct the DOD CIO and other entities, as appropriate, to develop a reliable Joint Regional Security Stacks (JRSS) cost estimate and baseline, consistent with practices described in this report.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense had taken steps to address the recommendation and we are in the process of reviewing documentation the department provided in July 2017 to determine if it sufficiently addresses the recommendation. Specifically, in April 2017, the JRSS program office documented the methodology, ground rules, and assumptions, among other things, used to develop the cost estimate we reviewed in our report, and the JIE Executive Committee established the estimate as its JRSS cost baseline. We are in the process of reviewing the cost estimate documentation and will update this status after completing the review.
    Director: John H. Pendleton
    Phone: (202) 512-3489

    2 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To further DOD's efforts to identify opportunities for more efficient use of headquarters-related resources, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretaries of the military departments, and the heads of the defense agencies and DOD field activities, to align DOD's data on department-wide military and civilian positions that have headquarters-related DOD function codes with the revised definition of major DOD headquarters activities in order to provide the department with reliable data to accurately assess headquarters functions and identify opportunities for streamlining or further analysis.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: On August 16, 2016, DOD stated that it confirms the written comments it had provided in the report. In its response, DOD stated that it is currently updating civilian and military manpower and total obligation authority baselines for major DOD headquarters activities to align with the new headquarters-related definition and framework. The department stated that this effort includes updating data architecture for coding major DOD headquarters activities, by program element code, in the Future Years Defense Program, and noted that this data architecture will serve as the authoritative methodology to account for headquarters manpower and resources in the future. Further, DOD stated that, once those efforts are complete and the new framework is codified in an update to DOD Instruction 5100.73, the department will determine how best to align the function code taxonomy, which is the source of data for the IGCA Inventory, with the revised framework and definitions. We agree that determining how to align the data set from the IGCA Inventory with the revised framework and definitions is an important first step and, if implemented, would address the intent of our first recommendation.
    Recommendation: To further DOD's efforts to identify opportunities for more efficient use of headquarters-related resources, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Chief Management Officer, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretaries of the military departments, and the heads of the defense agencies and DOD field activities, to, once this definition is published in DOD guidance, collect reliable information on the costs associated with functions within headquarters organizations--through revisions to the Inherently Governmental / Commercial Activities Inventory or another method--in order to provide the department with detailed information for use in estimating resources associated with specific headquarters functions, and in making decisions, monitoring performance, and allocating resources.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of June 2017, DOD had not completed action on this recommendation. DOD concurred with our recommendation, stating that once it has completed efforts to update data architecture for coding major DOD headquarters activities in the Future Years Defense Program, and codifies the new framework in an update to DOD Instruction 5100.73, the department will determine how best to align the function code taxonomy, which is the source of data for the Inherently Governmental Commercial Activities Inventory, with the revised framework.
    Director: Zina Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To increase department-wide supply chain efficiencies and effectiveness in support of maintenance at the Army and Marine Corps depots and Navy shipyards, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in conjunction with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency, and the Secretaries of the Army and Navy and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to assess through a comprehensive business case analysis-drawing on lessons learned from previous efforts-the costs and benefits of DLA managing the retail supply, storage, and distribution functions at the Army and Marine Corps depots and Navy shipyards.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DLA is in the process of coordinating "Memorandums of Understanding" with the Army, Marine Corps, and Naval Sea Systems Command in order to establish the parameters for the comprehensive business case analyses that will be conducted on transferring more supply, storage, and distribution functions to DLA. However, DLA and the respective entities have not completed the analyses at this point.
    Recommendation: To increase department-wide supply chain efficiencies and effectiveness in support of maintenance at the Army and Marine Corps depots and Navy shipyards, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in conjunction with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency, and the Secretaries of the Army and Navy and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to use the analysis to make a decision on the degree to which DLA should manage these functions at the Army and Marine Corps depots and Navy shipyards.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DLA is in the process of coordinating "Memorandums of Understanding" with the Army, Marine Corps, and Naval Sea Systems Command in order to establish the parameters for the comprehensive business case analyses that will be conducted on transferring more supply, storage, and distribution functions to DLA. However, DLA and the respective entities have not completed the analyses at this point.
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of supply and maintenance operations, in accordance with DOD guidance, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in conjunction with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency, and the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to develop and implement metrics that measure the accuracy of planning factors, such as the schedule, bill of materials, and replacement factors, used for depot maintenance.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD has begun to develop metrics that measure the accuracy of planning factors used for depot maintenance. However, these metrics are not scheduled to be implemented until October 2018. Thus, no actions have been taken to resolve any identified issues based on the results of the metrics.
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of supply and maintenance operations, in accordance with DOD guidance, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in conjunction with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency, and the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to take action, as appropriate and necessary, to resolve any issues identified through measuring the accuracy of planning inputs in an effort to improve supply and depot maintenance operations.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD has begun to develop metrics that measure the accuracy of planning factors used for depot maintenance. However, these metrics are not scheduled to be implemented until October 2018. Thus, no actions have been taken to resolve any identified issues based on the results of the metrics.
    Recommendation: To be able to assess the cost-effectiveness of supply and depot maintenance operations, in accordance with DOD supply chain management guidance, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in conjunction with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency, the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and the Air Force, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to take steps to develop and implement metrics, to the extent feasible, to measure and track disruption costs created by the lack of parts at depot maintenance industrial sites by, for example, establishing a team of supply and depot maintenance experts from DLA and the services to assess potential data sources, approaches, and methods.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD has begun to develop metrics that measure and track disruption costs created by the lack of parts at depot maintenance industrial sites. However, these metrics are not scheduled to be implemented until October 2018. Thus, no actions have been taken to resolve any identified issues based on the results of the metrics.
    Recommendation: To be able to assess the cost-effectiveness of supply and depot maintenance operations, in accordance with DOD supply chain management guidance, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in conjunction with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency, the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and the Air Force, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to take action, as appropriate, to address any inefficiencies identified by the disruption cost metrics in supply and depot maintenance operations.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD has begun to develop metrics that measure and track disruption costs created by the lack of parts at depot maintenance industrial sites. However, these metrics are not scheduled to be implemented until October 2018. Thus, no actions have been taken to resolve any identified issues based on the results of the metrics.
    Director: Michael J. Sullivan
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to ensure that proper statutory and regulatory oversight mechanisms are in place and to increase transparency into a major new investment in the F-35 program, the Secretary of Defense should hold a Milestone B review and manage F-35 Block 4 as a separate and distinct Major Defense Acquisition Program with its own acquisition program baseline and regular cost, schedule, and performance reports to the Congress.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD did not concur with GAO's recommendation and the agency has not taken any action to implement this recommendation. However, Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 which mandated that the Secretary of Defense may not award any follow-on modernization development contracts for the F-35 until the Secretary has submitted a report that contains the basic elements of an acquisition program baseline for Block 4 modernization. This report should include elements such as cost estimates, schedule estimates, technical performance parameters and technology readiness levels that are typical of an acquisition program baseline. The Secretary is also required to update this report annually for the congressional defense committees. DOD currently plans to issue the Block 4 modernization report in late calendar year 2017.
    Director: Cary Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that risks associated with ALIS are addressed expediently and holistically, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer to improve the reliability of its cost estimates, conduct uncertainty and sensitivity analyses consistent with cost-estimating best practices identified in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD officials, the F-35 Program regularly performs sensitivity analysis in its cost estimates. The F-35 Cost Team runs drills throughout the year on varying ground rules and assumptions for all elements of the sustainment Annual Cost Estimate (ACE), including ALIS cost elements. These drills are used to assess cost impacts of various proposed requirements changes from the F-35 Program Office and the Services. The cost models capture the sensitivity of those technical baseline changes and the F-35 Program Office and Services use those results to inform the final technical baseline definition that becomes the basis of the annual estimate update. Although these measures are regularly performed, they do not constitute a direct uncertainty or sensitivity analysis on ALIS itself. For that reason, as of September 2017, this recommendation remains open.
    Recommendation: To ensure that risks associated with ALIS are addressed expediently and holistically, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer to improve the reliability of its cost estimates, ensure that future estimates of ALIS costs use historical data as available and reflect significant program changes consistent with cost-estimating best practices identified in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD officials, as part of the cost estimating processes in the F-35 Program Office, the sustainment Annual Cost Estimate does incorporate the latest available historical cost data and reflects the latest approved technical baseline. For example, the latest hardware procurement costs from the most recent annual contracts for the F-35 were incorporated into the 2016 Annual Cost Estimate update as were the manpower assembly installation costs based on final delivered item prices. Although these are positive measures for the program and the cost estimate, the program has not incorporated a range of potential future costs that may better reflect actual ALIS costs. Until this step is taken, the recommendation will remain open.
    Director: David A. Powner
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that agencies are provided with more complete guidance for contracts for cloud computing services, the Director of OMB should include all ten key practices in future guidance to agencies.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are following up with OMB on its service level agreement (SLA) guidance to agencies.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of effective cloud computing SLAs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the appropriate officials to ensure key practices are fully incorporated for cloud services as the contracts and associated SLAs expire. These efforts should include updating the Department of Defense memorandum on acquiring cloud services and current Defense Acquisition Regulations System to more completely include the key practices.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are following up with DOD on updating their service level agreement (SLA) guidance.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of effective cloud computing SLAs, the Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs should direct appropriate officials to develop SLA guidance and ensure key practices are fully incorporated as the contract and associated SLAs expire.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are following up with DHS on the finalization of its service level agreement (SLA) guidance.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of effective cloud computing SLAs, the Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs should direct appropriate officials to develop SLA guidance and ensure key practices are fully incorporated as the contract and associated SLAs expire.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are following up with HHS on their service level agreement (SLA) guidance.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of effective cloud computing SLAs, the Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs should direct appropriate officials to develop SLA guidance and ensure key practices are fully incorporated as the contract and associated SLAs expire.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are following up with Treasury on their service level agreement (SLA) guidance.
    Recommendation: To help ensure continued progress in the implementation of effective cloud computing SLAs, the Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs should direct appropriate officials to develop SLA guidance and ensure key practices are fully incorporated as the contract and associated SLAs expire.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: We are following up with VA on their service level agreement (SLA) guidance.
    Director: Brian Lepore
    Phone: (202) 512-4523

    4 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to oversee its inventory of leased real property, aimed at improving the accuracy and completeness of data in RPAD, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to enforce DOD's Real Property Inventory (RPI) Reporting Guidance, which states that for multiple assets associated with a single lease, the military departments and WHS must provide a breakout of the annual rent plus other costs for each asset on the same lease, to avoid overstating costs associated with such leases.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation that Secretary of the Army enforce DOD's Real Property Inventory (RPI) Reporting Guidance to break out the annual rent plus other costs for each asset on the same lease to avoid overstating the costs associated with such leases. As of October 2016, DOD has not completed any actions to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help reduce facility costs and reliance on leased space, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the military departments to require that their departments look for opportunities to relocate DOD organizations in leased space to installations that may have underutilized space due to force structure reductions or other indicators of potentially available space, where such relocation is cost-effective and does not interfere with the installation's ongoing military mission.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOD did not concur with our recommendation that the military departments look for opportunities to relocate DOD organizations in leased space onto installations that may have underutilized space. As of October 2016, DOD has not completed any actions to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to ensure that its leased facilities are secure, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Intelligence) to request reports from the Federal Protective Service for all leased facilities on a periodic basis as determined necessary for oversight. At a minimum, the Under Secretary should request (1) the results of the assessments, (2) the date on which the last assessment was completed for each facility and the date for which the next scheduled assessment is planned, and (3) information on whether these dates meet the time frames established by Interagency Security Committee standards.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation that DOD improve its ability to ensure that its leased facilities are secure and stated that it would collaborate with the Federal Protective Service to obtain the listing of the leased facilities the agency supports, monitor and provide oversight of the scheduling of the assessments, and review the results of the assessments. As of October 2016, DOD has not completed any actions to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to oversee its inventory of leased real property, aimed at improving the accuracy and completeness of data in RPAD, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations and Environment) to modify the office's Real Property Information Model to include a data element to capture the square footage for each lease of space in a single building and also make a corresponding change to its Real Property Inventory (RPI) Reporting Guidance to require that the square footage for each individual lease be reported when multiple leases exist for a single building, to avoid overstating the total square footage assigned to each lease in RPAD.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD did not concur with our recommendation that the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Energy, Installations and Environment) modify the office's Real Property Information Model to include a new data element to capture the total square footage assigned to each individual lease when multiple leases exist for a single building and make a corresponding change to its guidance to avoid overstating the total square footage assigned to each lease in RPAD. As of October 2016, DOD has not completed any actions to implement this recommendation.
    Director: Timothy J. DiNapoli
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    4 open recommendations
    including 3 priority recommendations
    Recommendation: Given that the intent of section 235 of Title 10 United States Code was to provide both DOD and Congress with increased oversight of the procurement of services, Congress should consider revising the section to require that DOD report on its projected spending beyond the budget year and consistent with the time period covered by the future year defense program.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: Congress has not revised section 235 of Title 10 United States Code. GAO will continue to monitor this matter for Congressional consideration.
    Recommendation: To ensure that senior leadership within the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments are better positioned to make informed decisions regarding the volume and type of services that should be acquired over the future year defense program, the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should revise their programming guidance to collect information on how contracted services will be used to meet requirements beyond the budget year.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD staff from the programming and budgeting communities have initiated discussions on how to improve consideration of services beyond the budget year. The Air Force, however, has not identified any specific steps to modify their programming guidance.
    Recommendation: To ensure that senior leadership within the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments are better positioned to make informed decisions regarding the volume and type of services that should be acquired over the future year defense program, the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force should revise their programming guidance to collect information on how contracted services will be used to meet requirements beyond the budget year.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD staff from the programming and budgeting communities have initiated discussions on how to improve consideration of services beyond the budget year. The Air Force, however, has not identified any specific steps to modify their programming guidance.
    Recommendation: To ensure the military departments' efforts to integrate services into the programming process and senior service managers efforts to develop forecasts on service contract spending provide the department with consistent data, the Secretary of Defense should establish a mechanism, such as a working group of key stakeholders--which could include officials from the programming, budgeting and requirements communities as well as the senior services managers--to coordinate these efforts.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD has not taken specific action(s) to address the recommendation. We will continue to monitor this recommendation.
    Director: Marie A. Mak
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide greater compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement among the DOD components and their defense supplier-base, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should establish mechanisms for department-wide oversight of defense agencies' compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD stated that it will issue new DOD Instruction covering the use of GIDEP, as well as a companion DOD manual, to include identification of roles and responsibilities for submission of reports and oversight of such submission. Both documents are expected to be completed by the end of the second quarter fiscal year 2018.
    Recommendation: To provide greater compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement among the DOD components and their defense supplier-base, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should develop a standardized process for determining the level of evidence needed to report a part as suspect counterfeit in GIDEP, such as a tiered reporting structure in GIDEP that provides an indication of where the suspect part is in the process of being assessed.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD stated that it will issue new DOD Instruction covering the use of GIDEP, as well as a companion DOD manual, to include identification of roles and responsibilities for submission of reports and oversight of such submission. Both documents are expected to be completed by the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 2018.
    Recommendation: To provide greater compliance with the GIDEP reporting requirement among the DOD components and their defense supplier-base, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should develop guidance for when access to GIDEP reports should be limited to only government users or made available to industry.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments to this report DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions to implement it. DOD stated that it will issue new DOD Instruction covering the use of GIDEP, as well as a companion DOD manual, to include identification of roles and responsibilities for submission of reports and oversight of such submission. Both documents are expected to be completed by the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 2018.
    Director: Brian J. Lepore
    Phone: (202) 512-4523

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help improve DOD's ability to report on and measure anticipated and actual savings from ECIP projects, and to provide guidance to inform further project selection, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (AT&L) to develop and implement guidance requiring that statutory notifications to congressional committees include (1) the anticipated return on investment for all projects, including new projects added to replace canceled projects and existing projects for which there is a significant change to the cost or scope of the project; and (2) information on the estimated energy or water savings, or renewable energy production, anticipated from proposed ECIP projects.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help improve DOD's ability to report on and measure anticipated and actual savings from ECIP projects, and to provide guidance to inform further project selection the Secretary of Defense should also direct the Under Secretary of Defense for AT&L to direct the components to include projected measurement and verification (M&V) costs--in the military construction proposal or another appropriate document--as they develop projects; in so doing, the Under Secretary might build on existing Navy guidance, as appropriate.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help improve DOD's ability to report on and measure anticipated and actual savings from ECIP projects, and to provide guidance to inform further project selection, the Secretary of Defense should provide the components with additional guidance on the range of options available when developing M&V plans that are appropriate for different project sizes and types; and how to scope ECIP projects to conform to available funding.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help improve DOD's ability to report on and measure anticipated and actual savings from ECIP projects, and to provide guidance to inform further project selection, the Secretary of Defense should review the strategic goals for the ECIP program and make any needed adjustments to reflect current DOD priorities.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To help improve DOD's ability to report on and measure anticipated and actual savings from ECIP projects, and to provide guidance to inform further project selection, the Secretary of Defense should, after reviewing strategic goals and adjusting as needed, update installation energy management guidance and, as appropriate, annual ECIP guidance, to clarify (1) how the components-military services and defense agencies-should balance their ECIP portfolios among what DOD describes as traditional and game-changing projects to best achieve DOD's strategic vision for ECIP, (2) what constitutes a higher-return project that should be propose under alternative financing rather than ECIP, and (3) that managers proposing repair and minor construction projects should seek operation and maintenance rather than ECIP funds..

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Brenda S. Farrell
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that Congress has the necessary information to provide effective oversight over DOD's workforces, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, in collaboration with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, to address ongoing requirements in section 955 and include this information in status reports that accompany the President's budget request for fiscal years 2017 and 2018. The information to be included in future status reports includes (1) a comprehensive description of a plan to achieve savings for the civilian workforce and contractor workforce for fiscal year 2012 through fiscal year 2017; (2) a description demonstrating that the plan is consistent with policies and procedures implementing workforce-management laws and steps the department is taking to ensure that no unjustified transfers between workforces take place as part of the implementing plan; (3) status reports to be included in the President's budget request for fiscal years 2017 and 2018 describing the implementation of the plan in the prior year; (4) the cost of covered civilian personnel and military basic pay for fiscal years 2012 through 2017, and an assessment of these costs in regard to their compliance with the statutory requirements set forth in section 955; and (5) an explanation for any shortfall in its reductions for the civilian and contractor workforces, and a description of actions DOD is taking to achieve the required savings.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: Update September 2016: In DOD's most recent status report issued in February 2016, DOD did not fully address our recommendations.
    Director: Cristina Chaplain
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better position DOD as it continues pursuing GPS modernization, to have the information necessary to make decisions on how best to improve that modernization, and to mitigate risks to sustaining the GPS constellation, the Secretary of Defense should convene an independent task force comprising experts from other military services and defense agencies with substantial knowledge and expertise to provide an assessment to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics of the OCX program and concrete guidance for addressing the OCX program's underlying problems, particularly including: (1) A detailed engineering assessment of OCX defects to determine the systemic root causes of the defects; (2) Whether the contractor's software development procedures and practices match the levels described in the OCX systems engineering and software development plans; and (3) Whether the contractor is capable of executing the program as currently resourced and structured.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. Prior to the program declaring a Nunn-McCurdy breach on June 30, 2016, the only independent assessment was conducted by Defense Digital Services and was limited in focus to software development. Air Force notes a completion date of independent assessment on Sept 29, 2017. Once received, we will evaluate whether that meets the intent of the recommendation.
    Recommendation: To better position DOD as it continues pursuing GPS modernization, to have the information necessary to make decisions on how best to improve that modernization, and to mitigate risks to sustaining the GPS constellation, the Secretary of Defense should develop high confidence OCX cost and schedule estimates based on actual track record for productivity and learning curves.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. Prior to the program declaring a Nunn-McCurdy breach on June 30, 2016, no high confidence cost assessment was completed. The Air Force and contractor provided schedule assessments that were not evaluated and considered low-risk, but were directed to execute a 24 month schedule extension with no assessment of its feasibility and that did not take into account past contractor performance. Pending Nunn-McCurdy documentation and repeat of Milestone B, there is no evidence a high confidence cost or schedule has been put in place. Once we receive documentation on approval of Milestone B, we will reevaluate.
    Recommendation: To better position DOD as it continues pursuing GPS modernization, to have the information necessary to make decisions on how best to improve that modernization, and to mitigate risks to sustaining the GPS constellation, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Air Force to retain experts from the independent task force as a management advisory team to assist the OCX program office in conducting regular systemic analysis of defects and to help ensure OCX corrective measures are implemented successfully and sustained.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. Prior to the program declaring a Nunn-McCurdy breach on June 30, 2016, Defense Digital Services were initially retained for a month and subsequently remain embedded with contractor software developers to provide advice on development and process improvements. Upon completion of the Nunn-McCurdy review and continued involvement of Defense Digital Services, we will examine the extent to which the program has met this recommendation if the program is recertified to determine if this recommendation was met. Air Force did not provide an update to this recommendation in 2017, but program still has not had Milestone B approved and the Defense Digital Services group is no longer engaged on OCX.
    Recommendation: To better position DOD as it continues pursuing GPS modernization, to have the information necessary to make decisions on how best to improve that modernization, and to mitigate risks to sustaining the GPS constellation, the Secretary of Defense should put in place a mechanism for ensuring that the knowledge gained from the OCX assessment is used to determine whether further programmatic changes are needed to strengthen oversight.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. Senior quarterly reviews continue of the OCX program and have been in place since December 2015. Documentation still pending on Milestone B to see if these reviews have informed programmatic changes that better position DOD to complete this acquisition.
    Director: Joe Kirschbaum
    Phone: (202) 512-9971

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with better insight and additional context to identify any significant changes to the estimates in the joint report from the prior year and understand the reasons for such changes, and to improve the completeness and transparency of the budget estimates in the report, we recommend that, for future joint reports, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Department of Defense Chief Information Officer (DOD CIO), and the Secretary of Energy direct the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to provide more thorough documentation in the joint report on the methodologies used to develop the budget estimates, including information that may be available in related planning documents, and ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information included.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In commenting on this report, DOD and DOE concurred with our recommendation to provide more thorough documentation in the joint report on the methodologies used to develop the budget estimates and ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information included. DOD stated that it added information on the methodologies used to develop the estimates in the April 2015 joint report and would consider including further information in subsequent reports. However, neither department provided information on the specific steps it would take to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information included in future joint reports. We continue to believe that the joint reports should include accurate and complete budget estimates.
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with better insight and additional context to identify any significant changes to the estimates in the joint report from the prior year and understand the reasons for such changes, and to improve the completeness and transparency of the budget estimates in the report, we recommend that, for future joint reports, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Navy, and the DOD CIO, and the Secretary of Energy direct the Administrator of NNSA to provide comparative information on changes in the budget estimates from the prior year and explain the reasons for those changes.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In commenting on this report, DOE concurred and DOD partially concurred with our recommendation to provide comparative information on changes in the budget estimates from the prior year and explain the reasons for those changes. DOD noted that Section 1043 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, which required the joint report, does not require a comparative year-to-year analysis, and recommended that Congress amend the existing language to require that the joint report include an additional subsection providing a quantitative comparison of current budget estimates with the previous year's data. While Section 1043 does not require a comparative year-to-year analysis, the departments are not restricted from including such information and we continue to believe that providing comparative information on changes in the budget estimates from year-to-year and explanations for the changes would be beneficial to congressional decision makers.
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with better insight and additional context to identify any significant changes to the estimates in the joint report from the prior year and understand the reasons for such changes, and to improve the completeness and transparency of the budget estimates in the report, we recommend that, for future joint reports, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Department of Defense Chief Information Officer (DOD CIO), and the Secretary of Energy direct the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to provide more thorough documentation in the joint report on the methodologies used to develop the budget estimates, including information that may be available in related planning documents, and ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information included.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: To provide decision makers with better insight and additional context to identify any significant changes to the estimates in the joint report from the prior year and understand the reasons for such changes, and to improve the completeness and transparency of the budget estimates in the report, we recommend that, for future joint reports, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the Navy, and the DOD CIO, and the Secretary of Energy direct the Administrator of NNSA to provide comparative information on changes in the budget estimates from the prior year and explain the reasons for those changes.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Director: Zina Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency of DOD's conventional demilitarization efforts, including systematically collecting and maintaining key information about the items in its CAD stockpile and sharing information on excess items with other government agencies, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to improve the completeness and accuracy of information on the weight of items in the CAD stockpile--the key measure used by DOD to manage the conventional ammunition demilitarization operation--establish a plan to (1) identify and record, to the extent possible, the missing or inaccurate weight information for existing ammunition records in the CAD stockpile and (2) ensure that all items transferred to the CAD stockpile, including for example components removed from larger weapons and nonstandard ammunition, have the appropriate weight data.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: Officials with the Joint Munitions Command stated that they continually monitor the inventory and correct any erroneous or missing data, which includes weight data. However, they had not yet developed a plan specifically focused on correcting weight data for ammunition in the Conventional Ammunition Demilitarization (CAD) stockpile.
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency of DOD's conventional demilitarization efforts, including systematically collecting and maintaining key information about the items in its CAD stockpile and sharing information on excess items with other government agencies, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to improve the visibility and awareness of serviceable excess ammunition in the CAD stockpile that could potentially be transferred to other government agencies, develop a systematic means to make information available to other government agencies on excess ammunition that could be used to meet their needs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, according to Department of Defense (DOD) officials, the department has made progress in developing a systematic process for sharing information on excess serviceable ammunition and plans, as GAO recommended in July 2015, but has not fully implemented that process. Specifically, the Army?s Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics signed a memorandum of understanding with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Disposition Services that established a process where DLA will assist the Army in transferring some excess DOD ammunition to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Annually, the Army will provide DLA with a list of available types and quantities of excess ammunition that is 7.62 millimeters and smaller. DLA Disposition Services will inform participating law enforcement agencies of the ammunition available, screen all requests received from law enforcement agencies, and forward all approved law enforcement agency requests to the Army. The Army will prepare all necessary issue documents; pack and ship, on a reimbursable basis, ammunition to law enforcement agencies identified by DLA; and notify DLA and law enforcement agencies of any changes in condition of the ammunition. DOD and DLA conducted a pilot of this process from November 2016 to June 2017 in which DOD, through DLA, shared information on excess small arms ammunition with federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. As a result, DOD transferred 1,209,095 rounds of 5.56-millimeter ammunition and 200,000 rounds of 9-millimeter ammunition to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Since DOD was able to transfer this ammunition to another government agency, it does not have to pay to demilitarize (i.e. dispose of) the ammunition, which saved DOD about $60,000 in demilitarization costs. DOD officials stated that they are currently updating the Joint Conventional Ammunition Policies and Procedures (JCAPP) to formalize the procedures to accurately identify, execute, and track future transfers of excess small arms ammunition to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Once JCAPP is updated, this recommendation would be considered fully implemented.
    Director: Cristina Chaplain
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: In order to improve DOD's procurement of SATCOM, to address DOD's fragmented procurement of commercial SATCOM, to better position DOD to identify needs, manage and acquire commercial SATCOM, and to address the incomplete data on commercial SATCOM spending and demand, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Joint Chiefs, U.S. Strategic Command, combatant commands, military services, and DISA, should enforce current policy requiring DISA to acquire all commercial SATCOM for DOD.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has reiterated, but not yet enforced, its policy requiring the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) to procure all commercial satellite communications (SATCOM). DOD published Instruction 8420.02, titled DOD Satellite Communications (SATCOM), in September 2016. This instruction prescribes the actions DOD component heads should follow in requesting commercial SATCOM capability through DISA, as required by the 2013 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 6250.01E, "Satellite Communications". It also outlines methods by which DISA can obtain and the DOD Chief Information Officer can analyze data that could inform commercial SATCOM resource usage, allocation, and requirements. While establishing a new policy to emphasize and assign SATCOM procurement responsibilities is a step in the right direction, policy requiring that DISA acquire all commercial SATCOM for DOD already existed at the time of GAO's report. Further, DOD Commercial Satellite Communications (COMSATCOM) users may still be out of compliance with the CJCSI, according to an October 2016 U.S. Strategic Command report on COMSATCOM usage which states that "DoD COMSATCOM users should compete their services through DISA, as outlined in CJCSI 6250.01E, as soon as practicable."
    Recommendation: In order to improve DOD's procurement of SATCOM, to better leverage DOD's buying power and help DOD understand its military and commercial SATCOM spending, and enable DOD to reform its commercial SATCOM acquisition and management processes, the Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with the Air Force and DISA, should complement the pathfinder efforts by conducting an assessment of whether further centralization of military and commercial SATCOM procurement, such as the identification of a single focal point within DOD to decide how to meet the overall demand or a central procurement knowledge focal point, could further save money and improve performance.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: Although we reported in 2016 that the Joint Requirements Oversight Council approved a commercial satellite communications "Centralized Management Concept of Operations, which intends to implement a three-phased approach to centralize management of military and commercial wideband SATCOM," we have yet to obtain a copy of the Concept of Operations and assess the extent to which DOD conducted an assessment of whether further centralization of commercial and military procurement of satellite communications would save money and improve performance.
    Director: Johana R. Ayers
    Phone: (202) 512-5741

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To obtain information useful to DLA's decision making regarding MRE inventory levels, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness should direct the Director, DLA, to request that the military services, as part of existing coordination efforts, share information on potential changes to MRE consumption and disposals that could affect future demand.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Logistics and Materiel Readiness
    Status: Open

    Comments: In a June 2015 report to Congress, DLA stated that the agency and the services were sharing information on MRE demand and usage patterns. DOD officials stated in August 2016 that DLA is requesting more detailed information regarding MRE consumption and disposal data from the services for fiscal year 2016. As of September 2017, DLA had not provided documentation of information-sharing incorporating consumption and disposal data. We will continue to monitor DLA's actions on this recommendation.
    Director: Zina Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the Air Force is properly retaining items and accurately reporting its amount of retention stock and excess inventory in accordance with DOD guidance, and not spending resources to store unneeded inventory, the Secretary of the Air Force should direct the Commander, Air Force Materiel Command, to begin performing contingency retention reviews for those items, valued at about $2.6 billion, that it already knows should not be retained as economic retention stock so that it can identify and promptly dispose of inventory that is not needed.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Air Force has not completed the review of all of the necessary items to address the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the Air Force's actions to fully address this implementation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure that the Navy has adequate oversight of on-order excess inventory termination decisions and necessary performance measures consistent with DOD guidance, the Secretary of the Navy should direct the Commander, Naval Supply Systems Command, to incorporate the graduated management reviews and the ability to track and review the reasons for not canceling and modifying on-order excess items into its automated termination module that is under development.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Navy
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, Naval Supply Systems Command plans to incorporate graduated management reviews and the ability to track and review the reason for not canceling and modifying on-order excess items into its automated termination module that is under development and being implemented. However, fiscal year 2019 is the best estimate for full implementation of such capabilities into the automated termination module, according to Naval Supply Systems Command officials.
    Director: David Powner
    Phone: (202) 512-9286

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to ensure that its reports to Congress about the results of IT reform efforts accurately reflect savings generated from all PortfolioStat initiatives, including those associated with FDCCI.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to track agencies' planned savings and use them as a baseline for measuring reported actual savings.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to require agencies to document specifically how the cost savings achieved from PortfolioStat have been reinvested.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: To better ensure that the PortfolioStat initiative improves governmental efficiency and achieves cost savings, the Director of OMB should direct the Federal CIO to establish time frames for completing assigned PortfolioStat action items and hold agencies accountable for meeting those time frames.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2016, we followed up with OMB on its efforts to address this recommendation. As of September 1, 2016, we were still waiting for the agency's response.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Chief Information Officer to revisit the 25 cost initiatives GAO reported in GAO-14-65 to identify those that have achieved savings and cost avoidances and report those savings and avoidances to OMB.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In March 2016, during our review of federal agencies' efforts to rationalize their portfolio of software applications, the department reported that it does not collect data specifically on savings and cost avoidance associated with the business and enterprise IT applications that comprise most of the 25 cost initiatives reported in GAO-14-65. We will continue to follow up with the department on this recommendation.
    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 T. Chaplain
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve technology planning and ensure planning efforts are clearly aligned with the SBIRS follow-on, the Secretary of the Air Force should establish a technology insertion plan as part of the SBIRS follow-on acquisition strategy that identifies obsolescence needs as well as specific potential technologies and insertion points.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation. DOD's planned action on the scope and focus of technology insertion will be based on the direction provided in the Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) Follow-on Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) and will be executed through the SBIRS Space Modernization Initiative (SMI). The SBIRS AoA was completed in March 2016; however, as of June 2017, the SMI schedule has yet to show how technology will be inserted into the follow-on system.
    Director: Mike Sullivan
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to collect and maintain reliable data on its acquisitions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in consultation with DOD components, to establish guidelines on what constitutes a "current" ACAT II or III program for reporting purposes; the types of programs, if any, that do not require ACAT designations; and whether the rules for identifying current MDAPs would be appropriate for ACAT II and III programs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2015, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition requested that DOD components review existing policies and determine whether they needed to be altered or supplemented to facilitate data collection and reporting on ACAT II and III programs. In November 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics stated that, based on the results of these reviews, it does not plans to take any action to implement this recommendation. However, a planned DOD IG review in fiscal year 2018 could lead to further action on this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to collect and maintain reliable data on its acquisitions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in consultation with DOD components, to determine what metrics should be used and what data should be collected on ACAT II and III programs to measure cost and schedule performance; and whether the use of DAMIR and the MDAP selected acquisition report format may be appropriate for collecting data on ACAT II and III programs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In November 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics reviewed information on DOD component efforts to collect data on the cost and schedule performance of ACAT II and III programs and stated that it does not plan to take any action to implement this recommendation. However, a planned DOD IG review in fiscal year 2018 could lead to further action on this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to collect and maintain reliable data on its acquisitions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Air Force, Army, and Navy and the Commander of SOCOM to assess the reliability of data collected on ACAT II and III programs and work with PEOs to develop a strategy to improve procedures for the entry and maintenance of data.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2015, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition requested that DOD components evaluate the data they collect on ACAT II and III programs, report on their assessment of the data's reliability, and provide an update on their plans to improve the availability and quality of the data. In November 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics stated that it does not plan to take any additional action to implement this recommendation. However, a planned DOD IG review in fiscal year 2018 could lead to further action on this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to collect and maintain reliable data on its acquisitions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Air Force, Army, and Navy and the Commander of SOCOM to develop implementation plans to coordinate and execute component initiatives to improve data on ACAT II and III programs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, but the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics stated that it does not plan to take any additional action to implement this recommendation. However, we are keeping this recommendation open at this time.
    Recommendation: To help ensure compliance with relevant provisions of DOD acquisition policy with the purpose of improving DOD's ability to provide oversight for ACAT II and III programs, including those programs that may become MDAPs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force and Commander of SOCOM to establish a mechanism to ensure compliance with APB requirements in DOD policy.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2015, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition requested that DOD components review their mechanisms for establishing and enforcing the APB requirements for all ACAT II and III programs. In November 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics stated that, based on the results of these reviews, it does not plans to take any action to implement this recommendation. However, we are keeping this recommendation open at this time.
    Recommendation: To help ensure compliance with relevant provisions of DOD acquisition policy with the purpose of improving DOD's ability to provide oversight for ACAT II and III programs, including those programs that may become MDAPs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of the Air Force, Army, and Navy to improve component procedures for notifying the Defense Acquisition Executive of programs with a cost estimate within 10 percent of ACAT I cost thresholds.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency partially concurred with this recommendation. The Army and Navy have reiterated existing guidance and the Air Force is evaluating additional actions it might take to improve its notification procedures.
    Director: Carol R.Cha
    Phone: (202) 512-4456

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to require MAIS programs to establish their first acquisition program baseline within 2 years of beginning work on the programs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department developed a draft process document that states that business system (e.g. financial management, logistics management) programs should start development on at least one release within 24 months after programs have identified the needed capabilities and received approval to conduct further analysis into the potential delivery of the capabilities. We will follow-up with the Department for the final process document and guidance, when available.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to direct the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller) to complete a plan for conducting auditability testing of LMP Increment 2 functionality to ensure that such testing occurs prior to the LMP program management office deploying future functionality.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD officials, in response to our recommendation, the department developed a plan to conduct system testing on LMP Increment 2 in accordance with the Federal Information System Controls Audit Manual. The officials stated that the department's plan was to conduct this testing both prior to and after the deployment of new functionality to users. We have requested additional information and documentation from DOD regarding these LMP Increment 2 test plans in order to determine whether the testing associated with auditability of the system was to be conducted before deployment to users.
    Director: Sullivan, Michael J
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help improve DOD's milestone decision process, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics in collaboration with the military service acquisition executives, program executive officers, and program managers to, as a longer-term effort, select several current or new major defense acquisition programs to pilot, on a broader scale, different approaches for streamlining the entire milestone decision process, with the results evaluated and reported for potential wider use. The pilot programs should consider the following: (1) Defining the appropriate information needed to support milestone decisions while still ensuring program accountability and oversight. The information should be based on the business case principles needed for well-informed milestone decisions including well defined requirements, reasonable life-cycle cost estimates, and a knowledge-based acquisition plan. (2) Developing an efficient process for providing this information to the milestone decision authority by (a) minimizing any reviews between the program office and the different functional staff offices within each chain of command level and (b) establishing frequent, regular interaction between the program office and milestone decision makers, in lieu of documentation reviews, to help expedite the process.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Office of the Secretary of Defense issued a policy directive called Better Buying Power 3.0 in April 2015, which addresses this recommendation to pilot acquisition programs for streamlining. In September 2015, DOD designated one Navy program, the Next Generation Jammer, as a pilot program with streamlined oversight, processes, and documentation. The program manager believes that implementation of this model has allowed for more focus on improving program execution by significantly shortening decision cycle time and appropriately tailoring acquisition requirements. The Air Force and Army have not designated pilot programs at this time.
    Director: Timothy J. DiNapoli
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To maximize the potential value of the MPNDI pilot program, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics should identify whether there are opportunities to test flexibilities or streamlined procedures that are not otherwise available under existing authorities.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: Congress expanded the applicability of the pilot program in Section 892 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016. DOD has not yet identified if opportunities exist to test flexibilities or streamlined procedures that are not otherwise available under existing authorities, including under the expanded pilot program.
    Director: Chaplain, Cristina T
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that satellites storage is fully considered at the beginning of the acquisition process for all satellite programs and sufficient detailed cost data are maintained, the Secretary of Defense should provide guidance regarding when and how to use storage in the acquisition process, and establish mechanisms so that more detailed data are maintained for use in evaluating the reasonableness of contractors' storage cost proposals and for informing DOD's oversight of satellite acquisitions.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its response to the report, DOD concurred with the recommendation and noted that it is important to develop guidance regarding the use of satellite storage in the acquisition process. In addition, DOD agreed that it is important to establish mechanisms such that more detailed data are available to evaluate storage cost proposals and inform the oversight of satellite acquisitions. In October 2015, DOD provided GAO with draft language that it planned to include in the Space Systems chapter of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) when the final chapter was to be published. In an August 24, 2016, response to a GAO inquiry regarding the language not appearing in the on-line version of the DAG, the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD/AT&L) explained that the Space Systems chapter of the DAG had been deleted. USD/AT&L stated it was working to incorporate the proposed language in the next revision of the DAG, scheduled to be completed in December 2016. A September 12, 2017, search of DOD's on-line guidance did not locate any guidance related to satellite storage. DOD liaison was contacted, but no information has been provided yet as of September 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: Cary Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    6 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To help DOD develop an affordable sustainment strategy for the F-35, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisitions, Technology and Logistics to direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer to establish affordability constraints linked to, and informed by, military service budgets that will help guide sustainment decisions, prioritize requirements, and identify additional areas for savings by March 2015, at which point the Future Support Construct decision will be approved.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and stated in April 2017 that the F-35 Program Executive Officer and the F-35 enterprise have expanded their collaborative effort to reduce F-35 operating and support (O&S) costs to ensure that they deliver affordable readiness for the F-35 fleet. In an effort to reduce overall O&S costs, the department has undertaken several initiatives. For example, according to DOD, as of January 2017, a program office "cost war room" initiative had reduced the 2012 F-35 annual cost estimate by $60.7 billion. Additionally, according to DOD, a Reliability and Maintainability Improvement Program has resulted in a $1.7 billion O&S cost avoidance through the program's life cycle. Other efforts are also under way that aim to help reduce O&S costs by better informing sustainment decision-making. While the department is taking steps to try to reduce overall O&S costs, the program has yet to develop affordability constraints linked to the military services' budgets. Without affordability constraints that are linked to military service budgets, it remains unclear the extent to which the military services can afford to operate and sustain the F-35 throughout its life cycle as currently planned.
    Recommendation: To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to enable DOD to better identify, address, and mitigate performance issues with the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) that could have an effect on affordability, as well as readiness, to establish a performance-measurement process for ALIS that includes, but is not limited to, performance metrics and targets that (1) are based on intended behavior of the system in actual operations and (2) tie system performance to user requirements.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD officials, the ALIS Integrated Product Team (IPT) is continuing to work with the Joint Program Office's Performance Based Logistics (PBL) team to further develop and refine appropriate metrics for inclusion into future sustainment contracts. Although DOD has made progress in developing performance metrics for ALIS, as of September 2017, DOD has yet to develop metrics that are based on intended behavior of the system and tie system performance to user requirements. Until this progression is made, this recommendation will remain open.
    Recommendation: To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to develop a high level of confidence that the aircraft will achieve its R+M goals, to develop a software reliability and maintainability (R+M) assessment process, with metrics, by which the program can monitor and determine the effect that software issues may have on overall F-35 R+M issues.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has an R&M assessment process in place, but as of September 2017, had not developed a process that would focus directly on software reliability and maintainability. Until DOD develops a process more focused on software and its effects on overall R&M issues, this recommendation will remain open.
    Recommendation: To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to promote competition, address affordability, and inform its overarching sustainment strategy, to develop a long-term Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy to include, but not be limited to, the identification of (1) current levels of technical data rights ownership by the federal government and (2) all critical technical data needs and their associated costs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has still not developed an overall strategy that would identify data rights ownership, needs, and costs. As of September 2017, the program had taken some steps to develop an Intellectual Property Strategy, but has not identified all critical needs and their associated costs. Program office officials said that they are currently working with the prime contractor to develop a list of technical data requirements. Until this strategy is developed, this recommendation will remain open.
    Recommendation: To help DOD address key risks to F-35 affordability and operational readiness, and to improve the reliability of its O&S cost estimates for the life cycle of the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the F-35 Program Executive Officer, to understand the potential range of costs associated with the JPO F-35 O&S cost estimate, to conduct uncertainty analyses on future JPO estimates.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, DOD had not applied risk/uncertainty analyses to its cost estimates. Until it does so, this recommendation will remain open.
    Recommendation: To improve the reliability of the CAPE F-35 O&S cost estimate, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Director of CAPE, for future F-35 O&S cost estimates, to conduct uncertainty analyses to understand the potential range of costs associated with its estimates to reflect the most likely costs associated with the program.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD officials, the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) has not updated its F-35 estimate subsequent to the release of GAO-14-778. Pending a major program change, CAPE will update the F-35 O&S estimate for the full-rate production decision point in the second quarter of fiscal year 2019. Until CAPE updates its F-35 estimate, we will not be able to determine if they will perform any uncertainty analyses on its cost estimate; therefore, this recommendation will remain open as of September 1, 2017.
    Director: Brenda S. Farrell
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that DOD has the necessary information to determine the extent to which cost savings result from any future consolidation of training within METC or the Education and Training Directorate, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs should direct the Director of the DHA to develop baseline cost information as part of its metrics to assess achievement of cost savings.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs)
    Status: Open

    Comments: The House Report Accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, citing our work on this subject, required DOD to submit a report by January 31, 2015 detailing, among other things, an explanation of the purpose and goals of the medical education and training shared service with regard to its role in improving the cost efficiency of delivering training, including the challenges it will address, the practices it will put in place to address these challenges, and the resulting cost savings. However, as of September 2015, DOD has not submitted this report. Until DOD develops baseline cost information as part of its metrics to assess achievement of cost savings, this recommendation should remain open.
    Recommendation: To help realize the reform effort's goal of achieving cost savings, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs should direct the Director of the DHA to conduct a fully developed business case analysis for the Education and Training Directorate's reform effort. In this analysis the Director should (1) identify the cost-related problem that it seeks to address by establishing the Education and Training Directorate, (2) explain how the processes it has identified will address the costrelated problem, and (3) conduct and document an analysis of benefits, costs, and risks.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs)
    Status: Open

    Comments: The House Report Accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, citing our work on this subject, required DOD to submit a report by January 31, 2015 detailing, among other things, an explanation of the purpose and goals of the medical education and training shared service with regard to its role in improving the cost efficiency of delivering training, including the challenges it will address, the practices it will put in place to address these challenges, and the resulting cost savings. However, as of September 2015, DOD has not submitted this report. We reported in September 2015 that DOD has not yet presented a fully developed business case for its Medical Education and Training shared service. Until DOD addresses these concerns, this recommendation should remain open.
    Director: John Pendleton
    Phone: (202) 512-3489

    3 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: In order to improve the management of DOD's headquarters-reduction efforts, the Secretary of Defense should reevaluate the decision to focus reductions on management headquarters to ensure the department's efforts ultimately result in meaningful savings.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation, stating that this department-wide recommendation would garner greater savings but did not provide plans on how it planned to implement the recommendation. As of March 2017, DOD was more broadly defining management headquarters and applying headquarters reductions to a wider range of organizations, but the department has not fully taken steps to re-evaluate the decision to focus reductions on management headquarters, as GAO recommended in June 2014. In an August 2015 memorandum, the Deputy Secretary of Defense noted that a comprehensive definition of major headquarters activities had been established, and he directed DOD to update the department's guiding instruction on management headquarters and databases in an effort to more broadly account for headquarters resources. The memorandum also directed a 25 percent reduction across all appropriations funding from fiscal years 2017 through 2020 for these headquarters activities in lieu of the 20 percent requirement previously established by the department. As of September 2016, a DOD official stated the department had not completed efforts to rebaseline all of its components according to the comprehensive definition of major headquarters activities, which is needed to determine what elements of the components are considered headquarters so the department can apply relevant reductions to its budget submission. In addition, Section 346 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 requires that the Secretary of Defense implement a plan to ensure the department achieves not less than $10 billion in cost savings from the headquarters, administrative, and support activities of the department by fiscal year 2019. The legislation also directed the Secretary of Defense to modify DOD's headquarters reduction plans to ensure that it achieves savings in total funding for major headquarters activities of not less than 25 percent of the baseline amount in fiscal year 2016 by fiscal year 2020. In a March 2016 letter to the Armed Services Committee, DOD stated that it is focusing on broad efficiency initiatives beyond reductions in management headquarters. While DOD has taken some steps to achieve greater savings by applying additional headquarters reductions to more organizations, an official stated DOD will not document these actions until it submits its budget request for fiscal year 2018 in the spring of 2017. Until DOD documents the reductions based on its broader efficiency initiatives, GAO cannot determine if DOD has fully implemented this action. We will continue to monitor actions DOD takes in response to this recommendation and will provide updated information as appropriate.
    Recommendation: In order to improve the management of DOD's headquarters-reduction efforts, the Secretary of Defense should set a clearly defined and consistently applied starting point as a baseline for the reductions.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with our recommendation to set clearly defined and consistently applied starting point as a baseline for the reductions. As of March 2017, DOD had taken some steps to set a clearly defined and consistently applied starting point as a baseline for headquarters reductions, but its efforts are not yet complete. In its response to GAO's recommendation, DOD recommended the use of the Future Years Defense Program data to set the baseline going forward. It stated that it was enhancing the data elements within DOD's Resource Data Warehouse to better identify management headquarters resources to facilitate tracking and reporting across the department. A December 2014 Resource Management Decision directed DOD components to identify and correct inconsistencies in major headquarters activities in authoritative DOD systems, and reflect those changes in the fiscal year 2017 program objective memorandums or submit them into the manpower management system. As of November 2016, a DOD official stated that the department had taken steps to use this definition as a baseline for headquarters reductions. However, according to this official, the department will not identify the baseline until it submits its budget request for fiscal year 2018 in the spring of 2017. Until DOD completes its efforts, savings to management headquarters will likely be difficult to track, and the department may not be assured that the reductions are achieved as intended. We will continue to monitor actions DOD takes in response to this recommendation and will provide updated information as appropriate.
    Recommendation: In order to improve the management of DOD's headquarters-reduction efforts, the Secretary of Defense should track reductions against the baselines in order to provide reliable accounting of savings and reporting to Congress.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with our recommendation to set clearly defined and consistently applied starting point as a baseline for the reductions. As of March 2017, DOD had taken steps to track its headquarters reductions efforts, but it continues to rely on self-reported baselines to account for headquarters savings and report to Congress. In its response to GAO's June 2014 report, DOD noted that by using the Future Years Defense Program data to set the baseline, it would be able to track and report changes to Congress. DOD further stated that it was enhancing data elements within DOD's Resource Data Warehouse to better identify management headquarters resources across the department. GAO agreed that these enhancements to data elements would increase DOD's capability to track and report management headquarters across the department, and thus, the Future Years Defense Program could be used to set baselines and track future reductions. In a December 2014 Resource Management Decision, DOD components were directed to identify and correct inconsistencies in major headquarters activities in authoritative DOD systems, to include the Future Years Defense Program and related databases, and reflect those changes when programming their fiscal year 2017-2021 resource allocations. In an August 2015 memorandum, the Deputy Secretary of Defense noted that a comprehensive definition of major headquarters activities had been established. As of November 2016, a DOD official stated that the department had taken steps to use this definition as a baseline for headquarters reductions. However, according to this official, the department will not identify the baseline until it submits its budget request for fiscal year 2018 in the spring of 2017. Until DOD completes its efforts, savings to management headquarters will likely be difficult to track, and the department may not be assured that the reductions are achieved as intended. We will continue to monitor actions DOD takes in response to this recommendation and will provide updated information as appropriate.
    Director: Zina Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure DLA is improving its collaborative forecasting effort, in accordance with DOD guidance that emphasizes monitoring the efficient use of resources and leading practices for results-oriented management, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Director, DLA, in collaboration with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness and the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, to develop and implement the necessary corrective actions to improve the results of collaborative forecasting across DOD.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2016, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is in the process of developing an additional metric that will measure whether collaborative forecasting on a customer-by-customer basis is beneficial (i.e., the collaborative forecast added-value versus using a statistical forecast). DLA plans to work on the implementation of the metric for the remainder of 2016 and early 2017 with full implementation planned for July 2017. DLA, in collaboration with its customers (e.g., the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force) have taken steps, such as developing more extensive metrics and improving the collaboration process, to enhance its collaborative forecasting programs, as we reported in GAO-16-450. We will continue to monitor DLA's progress in implementing the new metric as well as its efforts to monitor collaborative forecasting outcomes with the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.
    Director: John Pendleton
    Phone: (202) 512-3489

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation to develop guidance on transitioning enduring activities that have been funded with overseas contingency operations appropriations to DOD's base budget, including a time frame for this transition.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) partially concurred with our recommendation. In fiscal year 2016, the President's budget acknowledged that it was time to reconsider the appropriate financing mechanism for costs of overseas operations that are enduring and that beyond 2016 some costs would endure. It included a commitment for the Administration to propose a plan to transition all enduring costs currently funded in the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) budget to the base budget with the transition beginning in 2017 and ending by 2020. However, the budget also noted this transition will not be possible if the sequester level discretionary spending caps remain in place. According to DOD officials, the plan envisioned by the Administration was not submitted since the fiscal year 2017 budget was developed consistent with the Bipartisan Budget Act, which increased the amount of enduring costs funded in the OCO budget. Furthermore, DOD officials stated that the current discretionary spending caps limit their ability to transition enduring costs currently funded in the OCO budget to the base budget.
    Director: Michele Mackin
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that it receives accurate information on the full effect of funding decisions on acquisition programs, Congress should consider amending the law that governs the 5-year Capital Investment Plan to require the Coast Guard to submit cost and schedule information that reflects the impact of the annual President's budget request on each acquisition across the portfolio--in addition to the current practice of reporting the cost and schedule estimates in current program baselines.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: Thus far no congressional action has been taken on this Matter. We will continue to follow up with relevant congressional committees.
    Recommendation: To help the Coast Guard improve the long-term outlook of its portfolio, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop a 20-year fleet modernization plan that identifies all acquisitions needed to maintain the current level of service and the fiscal resources necessary to build the identified assets. The plan should also consider trade-offs if the fiscal resources needed to execute the plan are not consistent with annual budgets.

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

    Comments: Based on this recommendation, Congress has requested that the Coast Guard develop a 20-year plan that identifies all acquisitions needed to maintain the Coast Guard's current level of service and the financial commitment necessary to achieve this plan. As a part of a series of testimonies in June and July 2017, we found that Coast Guard officials stated they are developing a 20-year Capital Investment Plan (CIP), but the timeframe for completion is unknown. The Coast Guard does, however, submit a 5-year CIP annually to Congress that projects acquisition funding needs for the upcoming 5 years. GAO found the CIPs do not match budget realities in that tradeoffs are not included. In the 20-year CIP, GAO would expect to see all acquisitions needed to maintain current service levels and the fiscal resources to build the identified assets as well as tradeoffs in light of funding constraints.
    Director: Joseph Kirschbaum
    Phone: (202) 512-9971

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that DOD's investments are being applied toward developing medical countermeasures to respond to the most serious and likely biological threat agents, the Secretary of Defense should direct the appropriate DOD officials to develop and implement a process to update and validate DOD's list of biological threats, as required by DOD Directives 5160.05E and 6205.3, or implement a process that aligns with the department's current policies, practices, and priorities as reflected in the 2001 and 2010 Quadrennial Defense Reviews .

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation. DOD has been reviewing directives addressing biological warfare threats and is in the process of revising DOD Directive 5160.05E to ensure that the directive appropriately captures and institutionalizes the use of risk assessments to support research, development, and acquisition of chemical and biological defense capabilities. The Chemical and Biological Defense Program (CBDP) piloted the risk assessment process in 2014 and will continue to conduct annual risk assessments to support portfolio planning and guidance. In addition to this revision, the CBDP continues to improve stakeholder awareness and discussions on threats through the utilization of an annual threat day review and on-going Joint Service discussions on chemical and biological threats and capabilities to address those threats. Alignment of the threat information and medical countermeasure capabilities are discussed through the CBDP Medical Prime/Non-Prime Working Group, which was established in February 2015 to ensure the CBDP medical portfolio is addressing the highest priority threats considering available candidates and resources. The group meets quarterly to address key programmatic changes, discuss program strategic guidance, and to address information presented and discussed at the annual threat review sessions. In total, these efforts have improved the Department's ability to ensure biological threats are aligned and considered through holistic, threat-informed, risk-based assessments. DOD is also taking actions to improve the development of medical countermeasures against priority threats through a number of actions such as developing a process guide, holding threat days, and performing in-depth analyses on medical science and technology solutions. Once DOD completes and issues Directive 5160.05E, we will assess the extent to which DOD's combined actions address the recommendation.
    Director: John Pendleton
    Phone: (404) 679-1816

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to ensure that BMD capabilities can be used as intended when they are delivered, the Secretary of Defense should, in coordination with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, direct U.S. Strategic Command to identify and develop a plan to resolve implementation issues prior to deploying and operating future BMD capabilities in Europe. U.S. Strategic Command should work in consultation with U.S. European Command and the services to resolve implementation issues such as infrastructure, resolving policies and procedures to address potential overlapping operational priorities if radars are integrated across geographic combatant commands, completing host-nation implementing arrangements, and any other key implementation issues.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation stating that U.S. Strategic Command does not have the authority or mission to resolve implementation issues, but the services and MDA will work to identify and resolve implementation issues for future BMD capabilities in Europe. DOD stated in July 2015 that, due to the ongoing BMDS development, MDA continues to engage on materiel, logistics, and operational support even beyond the fielding and capability delivery phase. Also, DOD stated that U.S. Strategic Command continues to advise cross-Geographic Combatant Command capability optimization/sharing through several venues. Finally, DOD indicated that U.S. European Command may have developed operational criteria for EPAA Phase 2. In December 2015, DOD reached Technical Capability Declaration (TCD) based, in part, on meeting specified operational criteria. We will continue to follow up with DOD to identify and assess what additional steps, if any, have been taken to support a US European Command/US Strategic Command warfighter acceptance of EPAA Phase 2 which may complete implementation of this recommendation
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to identify resources needed to support its plans for providing BMD capabilities in Europe and to support budget development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to require and set a deadline for completing a business-case analysis for the forward-based radar to support a decision on the long-term support strategy, and updating the joint MDA and Army estimate for long-term operating and support costs after a decision on the support strategy is made.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. MDA contracted with the Army and Missile Command Logistic Center to conduct a business case analysis (BCA) to identify the most cost effective long term support strategy. As of July 2015, DOD stated that the BCA has been completed and is being reviewed by MDA with an estimated completion in the 4th quarter of fiscal year 2015. As of March 2016, DOD stated that, as the BCA was going through review, it was determined that additional efforts were required. The [revised] BCA completion date is now the first quarter fiscal year 2017. After the projected completion date, we will follow up with DOD and assess whether the Army and DOD have updated the joint cost estimate for long-term operating and support costs based on the results of the BCA and whether their actions meet the intent of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to identify resources needed to support its plans for providing BMD capabilities in Europe and to support budget development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to require and set a deadline for completing a business-case analysis for Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) to support a decision on the long-term support strategy, and updating the joint MDA and Army long-term operating and support cost estimate after this and other key program decisions, such as where the THAAD batteries are likely to be forward-stationed, are made.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of July 2015, DOD stated that the Army and MDA will initiate an independent business case analysis (BCA) to explore the transfer of THAAD from MDA to the Army. DOD also stated that the BCA is expected to be completed in the 2nd quarter of fiscal year 2016. As of March 2016, DOD stated that the Army and MDA initiated an independent BCA joint study in July 2015 to be completed in March 2016 by RAND Corporation. The study was expanded to include transfer of the AN/TPY-2 radar. The study is now tentatively scheduled to end with a final review between the MDA and the Army Acquisition Executive in late first quarter fiscal year 2017. After the projected completion date, we will follow up with DOD and assess whether the Army and MDA have updated the joint cost estimate for long-term operating and support costs based on the results of the BCA and whether their actions meet the intent of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to identify and resolve implementation issues, to improve budgeting for long-term operating and support costs of BMD elements in Europe, and to identify resources needed to support its plans for providing BMD capabilities in Europe and to support budget development, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to require and set a deadline for completing a joint MDA and Navy estimate of the long-term operating and support costs for the Aegis Ashore two sites, and updating the estimates after key program decisions are made.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of July 2015, DOD stated that MDA and the Navy have developed a joint operating and support cost estimate for the Aegis Ashore operational sites which is awaiting Navy approval. In January 2016, the Navy and MDA approved a joint cost estimate for the long-term operating and support costs for the first Aegis Ashore site in Romania. The completion of this estimate partially meets the intent of this recommendation. We will keep this recommendation open until we obtain documentation that DOD has taken action to complete a joint cost estimate of the long-term operating and support costs of the second Aegis Ashore site in Poland. A completed cost estimate for both sites would meet the intent of this recommendation.
    Director: Zina D.Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency of data exchanges between LMP and other service ammunition systems, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, should direct the Secretary of the Navy to (1) take steps to incorporate Defense Logistics Management Standards (DLMS) into the Ordnance Information System and (2) direct the Commandant of the Marine Corps to take similar steps with regard to the Ordnance Information System-Marine Corps.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Navy and Marine Corps have taken steps to incorporate Defense Logistics Management Standards into their ammunition information systems -- Ordnance Information System and Ordnance Information System-Marine Corps, respectively. The Navy has provided some documentation, and the Marine Corps has stated that it would provide documentation in the near future as well.
    Director: Thomas Melito
    Phone: (202) 512-9601

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and accountability of the emergency food aid procurement process, the Secretary of Agriculture and Administrator of USAID should direct their staffs to work together to take steps to improve USDA's ability to account for U.S. government funds by ensuring that USAID provides USDA with accurate prepositioned commodity inventory data that USDA can independently verify.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, according to USDA officials, they are aware that USAID is working on a Statement of Work for a system to track prepositioned commodity inventory data.
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and accountability of the emergency food aid procurement process, the Secretary of Agriculture and Administrator of USAID should direct their staffs to work together to take steps to improve USDA's ability to account for U.S. government funds by ensuring that USAID provides USDA with accurate prepositioned commodity inventory data that USDA can independently verify.

    Agency: United States Agency for International Development
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, USAID plans to have a contract to develop a system to track prepositioned commodity inventory data, by the end of fiscal year 2017.
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and accountability of the emergency food aid procurement process, the Secretary of Agriculture and Administrator of USAID should direct their staffs to work together to take steps to assess WBSCM's functionality by testing the international procurement functions that have been modified since April 2011 and documenting the results.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, USDA has held multiple meetings with USAID as part of its Business Management Improvement initiative, to assess Web Based Supply Chain Management's (WBSCM) functionality and test the international procurement functions, and have documented some of the results of some of those meetings.
    Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and accountability of the emergency food aid procurement process, the Secretary of Agriculture and Administrator of USAID should direct their staffs to work together to take steps to assess WBSCM's functionality by testing the international procurement functions that have been modified since April 2011 and documenting the results.

    Agency: United States Agency for International Development
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, USAID has participated in multiple meetings with USDA to assess Web Based Supply Chain Management's (WBSCM) functionality and test the international procurement functions, and are gathering documentation from this process. According to USAID officials, they plan to submit documentation to GAO to close this recommendation by the end of fiscal year 2017.
    Director: Shear, William B
    Phone: (202) 512-8678

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help ensure that agencies are tracking the effect of strategic sourcing on small businesses, OMB's Administrator for Federal Procurement Policys should monitor agencies' compliance with the requirement to maintain baseline data and performance measures on small business participation in strategic sourcing initiatives.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of Federal Procurement Policy
    Status: Open

    Comments: OMB officials have stated that they are in the process of addressing this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: Consistent with OMB guidance and to track the effect of strategic sourcing on small businesses, the Secretaries of DOD, DHS, HUD, and the Interior, and the Administrator of NASA should collect baseline data and establish performance measures on the inclusion of small businesses in strategic sourcing initiatives.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD officials have stated that they are in the process of addressing this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: Consistent with OMB guidance and to track the effect of strategic sourcing on small businesses, the Secretaries of DOD, DHS, HUD, and the Interior, and the Administrator of NASA should collect baseline data and establish performance measures on the inclusion of small businesses in strategic sourcing initiatives.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: Interior officials have stated that they are in the process of addressing this recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
    Recommendation: Consistent with OMB guidance and to track the effect of strategic sourcing on small businesses, the Secretaries of DOD, DHS, HUD, and the Interior, and the Administrator of NASA should collect baseline data and establish performance measures on the inclusion of small businesses in strategic sourcing initiatives.

    Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: NASA officials provided an update in March 2017. They stated that they consider the inclusion of small businesses and small disadvantaged businesses throughout the strategic sourcing process and that they track performance on their small business goals at the agency and buying office level. However, they stated they had no plans to track baseline data and performance measures on small business inclusion for individual strategic sourcing efforts or strategic sourcing efforts grouped by categories because they did not see the benefit of doing so. As we stated in our report, OMB memorandums require baseline data and a measure of the change in small business spending for each individual initiative. Therefore, we continue to believe this recommendation has merit and should be fully implemented.
    Director: Farrell, Brenda S
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's estimates and comparisons of the full cost of its military, civilian, and contractor workforces and to improve DOD's methodology for estimating and comparing the full cost of its various workforces, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation to further develop guidance for cost elements that users have identified as challenging to calculate, such as general and administrative, overhead, advertising and recruiting, and training.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD's April 2017 report on Comparing the Cost of Civilians and Contractors, DOD's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) office is updating fiscal year 2017 estimates in its Full Cost of Manpower (FCoM) system to reflect separate officer and enlisted training costs. If more specific cost estimates are required, users of FCoM are directed to cost estimating tools operated by the military departments.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's estimates and comparisons of the full cost of its military, civilian, and contractor workforces and to improve DOD's methodology for estimating and comparing the full cost of its various workforces, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation to develop business rules for estimating the full cost of National Guard and Reserve personnel.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD's April 2017 report in Comparing the Cost of Civilians and Contractors, a cost estimating function for Reserve Component personnel far exceeds the combination of variables for developing active component and DOD civilian cost estimates. Due to the scope of the Full Cost of Manpower (FCoM) contract, OSD(CAPE) has not adopted this recommendation in terms of a web-based application. However, OSD(CAPE) intends to address general business rules for Reserve Component cost estimates in the next DoDI revision.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's estimates and comparisons of the full cost of its military, civilian, and contractor workforces and to improve DOD's methodology for estimating and comparing the full cost of its various workforces, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, in coordination with the department's Office of the Actuary and appropriate federal actuarial offices, to reevaluate the inclusion and quantification of pension, retiree health care costs, and other relevant costs of an actuarial nature and make revisions as appropriate.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD's April 2017 report on Comparing the Cost of Civilians and Contractors, OSD(CAPE) has reviewed the inclusion of payments that the government makes to retirement and health benefits. All identified costs that are attributable to current retirees and past service of active civilian and military personnel, such as unfunded liabilities, are being revised in the cost estimating guidelines. OSD(CAPE) intends to incorporate these changes in the next DoDI revision and coordinate a review with the Office of the DoD Actuaty.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's estimates and comparisons of the full cost of its military, civilian, and contractor workforces and to improve DOD's ability to estimate contractor support costs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, consistent with established practices for developing credible cost estimates, to research the data sources it is currently using and reassess its contractor support data sources for use when determining contractor support costs.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to DOD's April 2017 report on Comparing the Cost of Civilian and Contractors, the department's efforts to improve data sources are ongoing.
    Director: Khan, Asif A
    Phone: (202) 512-9869

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense, in his capacity as the Chief Management Officer and in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), to design and implement department-level policies and detailed procedures for FIAR Plan risk management that incorporate the five guiding principles for effective risk management. The following are examples of key features of each of the guiding principles that DOD should, at a minimum, address in its policies and procedures. (1) Identify risks. Generate a comprehensive and continuously updated list of risks that includes the root cause of each risk, audit area(s) each risk will affect, and the potential consequences if a risk is not effectively mitigated. (2) Analyze risks. Consult with key stakeholders, including program managers; use analytical techniques, such as risk categorization, risk urgency assessment, or sensitivity analysis; and determine the impact of the identified risks on individual DOD components' abilities to achieve audit readiness. (3) Plan for risk mitigation. Assign responsibility or ownership of the risk mitigation actions, define roles and responsibilities in executing mitigation plans, establish deadlines or milestones for individual mitigation actions, and estimate resource needs. (4) Implement risk mitigation plan. Document the implementation of mitigation actions, develop appropriate metrics that allow for tracking of progress, and validate reported metrics. (5) Monitor risks. Track identified risks and assess the effectiveness of implemented mitigation actions on a continuous basis, including identifying and planning for new risks.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with our recommendation. While DOD did concur with our assessment that they did not have a risk management policy and procedures related to implementing the FIAR guidance. They did not concur with our assessment of the overall environment of DOD's risk management of the FIAR initiative. DOD has taken steps to address our recommendation including implementing an NFR tracker and standard operating procedures designed to track DOD component material weaknesses. DOD has also documented a critical path and milestones in Appendix F of their FIAR Guidance; military component tasks and milestones in appendix G of the FIAR Guidance; and audit readiness deal breakers, now referred to as critical capabilities. However, while these are positive actions, they do not address our recommendation for DOD to implement risk management policies and procedures for FIAR implementation. Further, DOD has not provided GAO with evidence of planned actions it summarized in its agency comments. Specifically, DOD has not provided documentation related to (1) improving risk management documentation, (2) reinstating the DOD probability and impact matrix, and (3) re-evaluation of metrics to monitor progress and risk of audit readiness. Lastly, DOD's tracking of military component material weaknesses does not identify risks to audit readiness, or the agencies capabilities to manage risks to audit readiness. According to the May 2017 FIAR Status Update for the HASC Panel Recommendations, DOD has reinforced the importance of internal controls over areas of significant risk by updating the FIAR Guidance with a new chapter dedicated to internal controls. DOD has also changed how they respond to recommendation follow-up by way of the Washington Headquarters Service (WHS). We are currently waiting for a POC to be assigned. We will continue to evaluate the status of actions to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense, in his capacity as the Chief Management Officer and in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), to consider and incorporate, as appropriate, the Navy's and DLA's risk management practices in department-level policies and procedures.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has changed how they respond to recommendation follow-up by way of the Washington Headquarters Service (WHS). We are currently waiting for a POC to be assigned. We will continue to evaluate the status of actions to address this recommendation.
    Director: Farrell, Brenda S
    Phone: (202) 512-3604

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance DOD's capability and capacity to accomplish the missing persons accounting mission, and to clarify the specific roles and responsibilities of the accounting community members to help minimize unnecessary overlap and disagreement among community members, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force and direct the Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, or the appropriate departmental entity in light of any reorganization, to negotiate a new memorandum of agreement between the Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory and Joint Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Accounting Command (JPAC). The memorandum should specify which conflicts' artifacts JPAC should send to the Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory for analysis, the type of artifacts sent, and the priorities according to which the Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory should analyze resolved cases.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: Officials from the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) stated that the Life Sciences Equipment Laboratory (LSEL) and the former JPAC Central Identification Laboratory (CIL) have both been absorbed into DPAA, so there is no need for a separate memorandum between the two entities. We believe that DPAA should take actions that would meet the intent of our recommendation by delineating the roles and responsibilities within DPAA of the former LSEL and CIL laboratories. As of September 2017, DPAA has taken some actions to clarify which conflicts and types of artifacts the different laboratories are responsible for working on. For example, according to DPAA officials, DPAA has made progress in bringing the former LSEL up to the standard of the other DPAA laboratories by developing an evidence control system and a formal inventory. In addition, the DPAA laboratories have updated their standard operating procedures to specify the format and procedures for writing life science equipment material evidence reports, which should address the concerns identified in our report related to the length and utility of these reports prepared by one of the laboratories. However, a DPAA official stated that DPAA is rethinking how different laboratory functions should be performed and where those capabilities should reside, and that a decision about the future course of action would likely be made in fiscal year 2018. Until the responsibilities of the different DPAA laboratories are clarified with regard to which conflicts and types of artifacts the different laboratories are responsible for working on, the potential for inefficient and ineffective interactions between the different laboratories that we identified in our 2013 report may continue.
    Recommendation: To enhance DOD's capability and capacity to accomplish the missing persons accounting mission, and to more efficiently and effectively develop the capability and capacity to account for missing persons, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Policy), or the appropriate departmental entity in light of any reorganization, to ensure that the Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO), in coordination with all members of the accounting community, develop personnel files for all unaccounted for persons as required by statute, in order to help avoid potential overlap or unnecessary duplication of effort and to ensure better communication among community members with respect to missing persons cases.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of September 2017, this recommendation has not been implemented and remains open. The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) is taking actions to develop case files for all persons who are unaccounted for. As of May 2017, DPAA officials said that DPAA had completed the case files for all individuals from the Vietnam War; about 80 percent of the files for individuals from the Korean War; and about 60 percent of the files for individuals from World War II. The officials said that DPAA has an ongoing effort to develop a case management system and scanning project that will serve as the basis for the required personnel or case files, but they have faced funding challenges that have hindered their ability to finish this project. They said that if DPAA can get the necessary funding, they will be able to complete development of all of the files in about 2 years. They said that with a lower level of funding, it will take more time than that 2 year estimate, and potentially could cost more money over time. Until personnel files for all unaccounted-for missing persons are developed and made readily accessible, as required by law, the community?s efforts to collaborate on cases will be hindered by a lack of information visibility among community members.
    Director: Dinapoli, Timothy J
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better position DOD to determine whether its actions have improved service acquisition, the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in consultation with the military departments' senior services managers, should identify baseline data on the status of service acquisition, in part, by using budget and spending data and leveraging its ongoing efforts to gauge the effects of its actions to improve service acquisition.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and is in the process of developing baseline data on the current status of its service acquisitions. In July 2014, DOD issued its annual Performance of the Defense Acquisition report. For the first time, this report included information on its contracted services, such obligations for each service portfolio group, competition rates, and small business participation information. DOD expects to develop service acquisition related goals and metrics in 2017 from which it can develop additional baseline data.
    Recommendation: To better position DOD to determine whether its actions have improved service acquisition, the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in consultation with the military departments' senior services managers, should develop specific goals associated with their actions to improve service acquisition.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and is in the process of developing service acquisition goals and metrics as well as an action plan for improving service acquisition. As of February 2017, DOD began a review of internal guidance that will include an analysis of the roles, responsibilities, authorities, goals, metrics, and structure associated with managing service acquisitions.
    Recommendation: To better position DOD to determine whether its actions have improved service acquisition, the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, in consultation with the military departments' senior services managers, should establish metrics to assess progress in meeting these goals.

    Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation and is in the process of developing service acquisition goals and metrics as well as an action plan for improving service acquisition. As of February 2017, DOD began a review of internal guidance that will include an analysis of the roles, responsibilities, authorities, goals, metrics, and structure associated with managing service acquisitions.
    Director: Merritt, Zina Dache
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that Congress has visibility over the status of DOD's core depot-level maintenance and repair capability, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Maintenance, Policy, and Programs) to include in the Biennial Core Report to Congress detailed explanations for why services do not have the workload to meet core maintenance requirements for each shortfall identified in the report.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2016, recent GAO work on this issue shows that DOD has not fully implemented this recommendation. In DOD's 2016 Biennial Core Report, DOD did not provide detailed explanations for all of the services shortfalls identified in its report. We are waiting until DOD's 2018 Biennial Core Report to further update the status of this recommendation.
    Director: Lepore, Brian J
    Phone: (202)512-4523

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enable DOD to achieve cost savings and efficiencies and to track its progress toward achieving these goals, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) to develop and implement a plan that provides measurable goals linked to achieving savings and efficiencies at the joint bases and provide guidance to the joint bases that directs them to identify opportunities for cost savings and efficiencies. DOD should at a minimum consider the items identified in its recommendation to the 2005 BRAC Commission as areas for possible savings and efficiencies, including (1) paring unnecessary management personnel, (2) consolidating and optimizing contract requirements, (3) establishing a single space management authority to achieve greater utilization of facilities, and (4) reducing the number of base support vehicles and equipment.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD did not concur with this recommendation. The department stated that its "patient" approach to cost savings is working, and that the senior joint base working group decided against savings targets because of the complexity involved in setting up the bases. As of October 2017, there had been no further action on this recommendation, according to an official of the Office of the Secretary of Defense's joint basing office.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to provide a common framework for the management and planning of support services at the joint bases, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) to direct the joint bases to compile a list of those common standards in all functional areas needing clarification and the reasons why they need to be clarified, including those standards still being provided or reported on according to service-specific standards rather than the common standard.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with this recommendation. It stated that the department already has a quarterly process to review its joint base common standards, and that reviewing all the standards simultaneously does not allow for the depth of analysis required to make sound decisions. An official from the joint basing office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense stated that DOD believes its current review and update process for the joint base common standards is effective and does not need to be changed. As of October 2017, there had been no further action on this recommendation, according to an official of the joint basing office.
    Recommendation: To improve DOD's ability to provide a common framework for the management and planning of support services at the joint bases, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) to amend the OSD joint standards review process to prioritize review and revision of those standards most in need of clarification within this list.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD partially concurred with his recommendation. The department stated that it already has a quarterly joint base common standards review process, and that reviewing all the standards simultaneously does not allow for the depth of analysis required to make sound decisions. In addition, it noted that the current process incorporates input from the Joint Base commanders, Intermediate Command Summit, and service headquarters. An official from the joint basing office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense stated that DOD believes its current review and update process for the joint base common standards is effective and does not need to be changed. As of October 2017, there had been no further action on this recommendation, according to an official of the Office of the Secretary of Defense's joint basing office.
    Director: Draper, Debra A
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To facilitate the departments' current collaboration efforts, VA and DOD should systematically identify areas where department-level actions could help address significant barriers that hinder collaboration. Specifically, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should expedite and communicate a plan with time frames for when iEHR solutions will be made available to joint ventures and other collaboration sites.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information
    Recommendation: To facilitate the departments' current collaboration efforts, VA and DOD should systematically identify areas where department-level actions could help address significant barriers that hinder collaboration. Specifically, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should expedite and communicate a plan with time frames for when iEHR solutions will be made available to joint ventures and other collaboration sites.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information
    Recommendation: To facilitate the departments' current collaboration efforts, VA and DOD should systematically identify areas where department-level actions could help address significant barriers that hinder collaboration. Specifically, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should take steps to resolve problems with collaboration sites' incompatible business and administrative processes, including reimbursement for services, collection of workload information, dual credentialing, and computer security training.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information
    Recommendation: To facilitate the departments' current collaboration efforts, VA and DOD should systematically identify areas where department-level actions could help address significant barriers that hinder collaboration. Specifically, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should take steps to resolve problems with collaboration sites' incompatible business and administrative processes, including reimbursement for services, collection of workload information, dual credentialing, and computer security training.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information
    Recommendation: To facilitate the departments' current collaboration efforts, VA and DOD should systematically identify areas where department-level actions could help address significant barriers that hinder collaboration. Specifically, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should clarify, as part of the newly initiated joint efforts to address base access, departmental guidance regarding collaboration to include a discussion of base access issues that local officials should consider when discussing and planning collaboration efforts; this could include a discussion of successful approaches that current collaboration sites have adopted to facilitate base access for veterans and their escorts.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information
    Recommendation: To facilitate the departments' current collaboration efforts, VA and DOD should systematically identify areas where department-level actions could help address significant barriers that hinder collaboration. Specifically, the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Defense should clarify, as part of the newly initiated joint efforts to address base access, departmental guidance regarding collaboration to include a discussion of base access issues that local officials should consider when discussing and planning collaboration efforts; this could include a discussion of successful approaches that current collaboration sites have adopted to facilitate base access for veterans and their escorts.

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of July 2017, DOD officials have not implemented this recommendation. GAO considers it to be open. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information
    Director: Khan, Asif A
    Phone: (202)512-9869

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the development, implementation, documentation, and oversight of the department's financial management improvement efforts, and to ensure that the Air Force develops and implements its Financial Improvement Plan in accordance with the FIAR Guidance, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to ensure that the Air Force's Financial Improvement Plans include documentation that the Air Force performed a reconciliation of the complete population of transactions for an assessable unit to the relevant general ledger(s) and to the amount(s) reported in the financial statements, including researching and resolving reconciling items.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In November 2015, an independent public accountant (IPA) issued a disclaimer of opinion in connection with its audit of Air Force's fiscal year 2015 General Fund Schedule of Budgetary Activity (SBA) because Air Force was unable to provide sufficient audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion. In addition, the IPA specifically identified Air force's inability to validate the completeness of transactions underlying the SBA as one of three material weaknesses in internal controls over financial reporting. We followed up with DOD officials in August 2017 and have not been able to obtain documentation indicating that actions were taken to address this recommendation. As a result, this recommendation remains open.
    Recommendation: To improve the development, implementation, documentation, and oversight of the department's financial management improvement efforts, and to improve DOD's monitoring and oversight of FIP activities, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Navy to ensure that all responsible parties within the Navy, including the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller), carry out their responsibilities for ensuring that FIP development and implementation complies with the FIAR Guidance and that the FIP contains sufficient information to indicate audit readiness before it is signed.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In February 2016, an independent public accountant (IPA) issued a disclaimer of opinion in connection with its audit of Navy's fiscal year 2015 General Fund Schedule of Budgetary Activity because Navy was unable to provide sufficient audit evidence regarding its completeness and accuracy. In addition, the IPA identified three material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of its financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. Ensuring the completeness and accuracy of financial reports are key elements of the FIAR Guidance. We followed up with DOD officials in August 2017 and have not been able to obtain documentation indicating that actions were taken to address this recommendation. As a result, this recommendation remains open.
    Recommendation: To improve the development, implementation, documentation, and oversight of the department's financial management improvement efforts, and to improve DOD's monitoring and oversight of FIP activities, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Air Force to ensure that all responsible parties within the Air Force, including the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Comptroller) carry out their responsibilities for ensuring that FIP development and implementation complies with the FIAR Guidance and that the FIP contains sufficient information to indicate audit readiness before it is signed.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. In November 2016, an independent public accountant (IPA) issued a disclaimer of opinion in connection with its audit of Air Force's fiscal year 2015 General Fund Schedule of Budgetary Activity (SBA) because Air Force was unable to provide sufficient audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion. In addition, the IPA identified three material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of its financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. Ensuring the completeness and accuracy of financial reports are key elements of the DOD FIAR Guidance. We followed up with DOD officials in August 2017 and have not been able to obtain documentation of actions taken to address this recommendation. As a result, this recommendation remains open.
    Director: Russell, Cary B
    Phone: (202)512-8365

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve oversight and ensure consistency in the reporting of total reset costs, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisitions, Technology and Logistics, the services, and the Joint Staff to act on the tasking in the Resource Management Decision 700 to develop and publish a DOD definition of reset for use in the DOD overseas contingency operations budgeting process.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In August 2011, we recommended that the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisitions, Technology and Logistics, the services, and the Joint Staff to act on the tasking in the Resource Management Decision 700 to develop and publish a DOD definition of reset for use in the DOD overseas contingency operations budgeting process. According to OSD, a definition of reset for use in the overseas contingencies operations budgeting process has been developed and incorporated into a draft update to the DOD Financial Management Regulations. During coordination within the Department, the draft definition went to DOD Office of General Counsel for consultation on the exact wording of the definition of reset. The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) plans to include the definition in the next update to the FMR currently set for January 2016. According to DOD OIG, the reset definition has been added to a draft update to DOD's Financial Management Regulation. The definition was originally submitted for an update to the Financial Management Regulation glossary in November 2012. In 2014, the department reported that the update was still in the Office of General Counsel for final legal review with issuance expected in January 2015. In 2015, the department reported that after consultation with the DOD Office of General Counsel (OGC) on the exact wording of the definition of reset, OUSD Comptroller plans to include the definition in the next update to the FMR currently set for January 2016. As of September 2016, DOD has still not issued its planned update to the FMR. Consequently, this recommendation will remain open.
    Director: Chaplain, Cristina T
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To strengthen its baselines, facilitate external and independent reviews of those baselines, ensure effective oversight of the BMDS, and further improve transparency and accountability of its efforts, and to improve clarity, consistency, and completeness of the baselines reported to Congress, the Secretary of Defense should ensure that MDA, for resource baselines, obtain independent cost estimates for each baseline.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on our report, the agency concurred with this recommendation but has not yet taken all actions necessary to implement it. Although the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has received independent cost estimates from its internal independent cost group for some programs and components that support the baselines provided in MDA's Ballistic Missile Defense System Accountability Report (BAR), MDA officials told us they have not yet completed independent estimates for all the BAR baselines. In addition, the independent estimates will not have full lifecycle costs which will hamper their effectiveness. We will continue to monitor MDA's progress over the course of our next annual review.
    Recommendation: To strengthen its baselines, facilitate external and independent reviews of those baselines, ensure effective oversight of the BMDS, and further improve transparency and accountability of its efforts, and to improve clarity, consistency, and completeness of the baselines reported to Congress, the Secretary of Defense should ensure that MDA, for schedule baselines, in meeting new statutory requirements to report variances between reported acquisition baselines, also report variances between the test plan as presented in the previous acquisition baseline and the test plan as executed that explain the reason for any changes.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the Department of Defense concurred with our recommendation and has taken initial steps to report the test variances, by laying out the dates of the proposed changes. However, the variances do not include all changes to test objectives, detail when tests are deleted, nor when the altered objectives will be satisfied. MDA has initiated an effort with DOT&E and the OTA to track the movement of test objectives, however these changes are not reported and are only used internally. In addition, MDA utilizes a "mid-year" test change memorandum. The change explains the difference from the prior master test plan, but is not reported. Thus, changes that are included in the mid-year memorandum can not be tracked if one only receives the annual test plan. We will continue to monitor MDA's progress in fiscal year 2017 and determine whether MDA lays out the changes in its upcoming integrated master test plan.
    Director: Mackin, Michele
    Phone: (202)512-7773

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy should direct agencies to require their competition advocates to actively involve program offices in highlighting opportunities to increase competition.

    Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget: Office of Federal Procurement Policy
    Status: Open

    Comments: In July 2017, Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) officials confirmed that they do not plan to issue guidance on increasing the role of program officials in promoting competition, but stated that they have engaged with the Chief Acquisition Officers Council regarding the issue, and reminded them of GAO?s 2010 findings. In addition, OMB officials noted that they have developed agency-level benchmarks to better measure competition that are specifically focused on reducing financial risk to the government and on the level of competition where only one offer is received.
    Director: Khan, Asif A
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the military department Chief Management Officers, in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, as appropriate, after defining the cost accounting requirements, to utilize the requirements as input to the ERPs to help ensure that the ERPs will provide the capability to identify and aggregate cost information for the department's assets in accordance with DOD's defined requirements.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD's military departments are in the process of implementing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERPs). At least one of these ERPs does not currently include cost accumulation and reporting for military equipment assets. DOD's FIAR plan efforts, which, according to officials, include systems enhancements are still on-going to address this recommendation. The status of this recommendation is open.
    Director: Khan, Asif A
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    4 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the military service secretaries (as appropriate), to revise the Army procedures to include specific steps required to retain documentation of the activities performed and related results.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation and cited actions in process to revise its Financial Management Regulation (FMR). In 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (OUSD(C)) stated that the Components provided comments and edits to the draft Chapter 23. The comments were more detailed than projected and require extensive research to verify. However, it is not clear whether this action will provide sufficient Army-specific procedural requirements. As of August 2017, we have not been able to obtain supporting documentation to assess whether the recommendation was implemented.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the military service secretaries (as appropriate), to revise the Marine Corps and Air Force procedures to include specific steps required to validate data in the OCO report including reconciliations and retain documentation of the activities performed and related results.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation and cited actions in process to revise its Financial Management Regulation (FMR). In 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (OUSD(C)) stated that the Components provided comments and edits to the draft Chapter 23. The comments were more detailed than projected and require extensive research to verify. However, it is not clear whether this action will provide sufficient Marine Corps and Air Force-specific procedural requirements. As of August 2017, we have not been able to obtain supporting documentation to assess whether the recommendation was implemented.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the military service secretaries (as appropriate), to establish Navy procedures to include specific steps required to validate data in the OCO report including variance analysis and reconciliations, and retain documentation of the activities performed and related results.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation and cited actions in process to revise its Financial Management Regulation (FMR). In 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (OUSD(C)) stated that the Components provided comments and edits to the draft Chapter 23. The comments were more detailed than projected and require extensive research to verify. However, it is not clear whether this action will provide sufficient Navy-specific procedural requirements. As of August 2017, we have not been able to obtain supporting documentation to assess whether the recommendation was implemented.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), in coordination with the military service secretaries (as appropriate), to revise DOD requirements in FMR 7000.14-R, Volume 12, Chapter 23, Contingency Operations, to provide clear, detailed guidance on (1) conducting reconciliations and other validations and (2) documenting military service-level reviews and DOD Comptroller-level reviews.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In commenting on the draft report, DOD concurred with the recommendation and cited actions in process to revise its Financial Management Regulation (FMR). In 2016, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (OUSD(C)) stated that the Components provided comments and edits to the draft Chapter 23. The comments were more detailed than projected and require extensive research to verify. As of August 2017, we have not been able to obtain supporting documentation to assess whether the recommendation was implemented.
    Director: Chaplain, Cristina T
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct MDA to ensure that developmental hardware and software changes are not made to the operational baseline that disrupt the assessments needed to understand the capabilities and limitations of new BMDS developments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation. In the June 2010 Ballistic Missile Defense System Accountability Report (BAR), Missile Defense Agency (MDA) provided some operational baselines and continues to do so annually. Nonetheless, configuration changes continue to pose challenges to a thorough assessment of the BMDS architecture. For example, the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation stated that the many configurations of the fielded ground-based interceptor inhibits a full evaluation of the GMD program. Moreover, some changes to BMDS elements are still delivered while testing of the architecture is already underway. We will continue to assess whether MDA fully adopts an approach allowing time for the warfighter and testers to fully understand hardware and software before placing it in the operational baseline.
    Director: Hutton, John P
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure DOD officials are able to gain insight into the risk assessment that is required to be documented in the contract file and the basis for the government's profit or fee negotiation objective, the Secretary of Defense should redesign the weighted guidelines worksheet to explicitly show the incurred cost calculations and a narrative description of the reason for assigning a specific contract-type risk value.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In providing comments on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation but has not completed actions necessary to implement it. Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy's(DPAP) members have drafted two proposed changes to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplemental (DFARS). The first proposed rule is designed to provide a more transparent means of documenting the impact of costs incurred during the undefinitized period of an undefinitized contract action (UCA) on allowable profit. Proposed changes to the worksheet include more transparency and narrative requirements to detail the rationale for contracting officers' assignments of weighted guideline values. In addition to proposed changes to the weighted guideline worksheet, the proposed DFARS rule also provides new narrative requirements for Price Negotiation Memorandums. The second proposed rule changes the undefinitized period for a UCA from UCA award to the date when the government receives a qualifying proposal from the contractor as opposed to the date when the UCA is definitized. These proposed rules are currently being reviewed and approved by senior DOD officials. DPAP expects to finalize these proposed rules sometime later this year. If one or both are approved, the final rules will be published after a 90 day comment period.