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: "High-risk issues"

    17 publications with a total of 46 open recommendations including 1 priority recommendation
    Director: Debra A. Draper
    Phone: (202) 512-7114

    6 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should further clarify when and for what purposes each national policy and guidance document type should be used, including whether guidance documents, such as program office memos, should be vetted and recertified. (Recommendation 1)

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
    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 for Health should develop standard processes for consistently maintaining and disseminating guidance documents to each level of the organization. (Recommendation 2)

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
    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 for Health should systematically obtain information on potential implementation challenges from VISNs and VAMCs and take the appropriate actions to address challenges prior to policy issuance. (Recommendation 3)

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
    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 for Health should establish a mechanism by which program offices systematically obtain feedback from VISNs and VAMCs on national policy after implementation and take the appropriate actions. (Recommendation 4)

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
    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 for Health should establish a standard policy exemption waiver process and centrally track and monitor approved waivers. (Recommendation 5)

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
    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 for Health should establish a standard process, including designated oversight roles, to periodically monitor that local policies established by VISNs and VAMCs align with national policies. (Recommendation 6)

    Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Veterans Health Administration
    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: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in collaboration with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency; the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force; the Commandant of the Marine Corps; the Commander of the United States Transportation Command; and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to use the key attributes of successful performance measures--including clarity, measurable target, objectivity, reliability, baseline and trend data, and linkage--in refining the performance measures in subsequent updates to the Strategy to improve DOD's efforts to monitor asset visibility initiatives.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD, in its comments on the draft report, partially concurred. DOD stated that it recognizes the need for performance measures to ensure the success of an asset visibility improvement effort but noted that the level of complexity and granularity of the metrics we suggest may not be suitable for all initiatives. DOD also stated that the purpose of the Strategy is to create a framework whereby the components can work collaboratively to coordinate and integrate department-wide efforts to improve asset visibility, not to provide complete direction on how to define, implement, and oversee these initiatives. Additionally, DOD stated that the next edition of the Strategy will encourage the adoption of our six key attributes for asset visibility initiatives to the extent appropriate, but will not mandate their use. As discussed in our report, use of the key attributes in measuring the performance of asset visibility initiatives would help DOD to better assess department-wide progress against the goals in its Strategy and clarify what additional steps need to be taken to enable decision makers to exercise effective oversight. Encouraging adoption of the key attributes, as DOD plans to do, is a positive step, but we continue to believe that DOD needs to use these key attributes to refine its performance measures to monitor the initiatives in the future.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness, in collaboration with the Director, Defense Logistics Agency; the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force; the Commandant of the Marine Corps; the Commander of the United States Transportation Command; and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to incorporate into after-action reports information relating to performance measures for the asset visibility initiatives when evaluating and closing these initiatives to ensure that implemented initiatives will achieve the goals and objectives in the Strategies.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD, in its comments on the draft report, partially concurred. DOD stated that it is important to capture and review performance data prior to a component closing an asset visibility initiative, but that the Strategy after-action report is not intended to be used to evaluate the success of an asset visibility initiative or to determine if an initiative has met its intended objectives. According to DOD, documentation and information to support the evaluation of initiatives is defined by and executed in accordance with component-level policy and procedures. DOD agreed to update its Strategy to clarify the purpose and use of the after-action reports and to ensure that the Strategy specifies roles and responsibilities for evaluating and closing initiatives. DOD?s response, however, did not state whether and how these updates to the Strategy would result in more consistent incorporation of information relating to performance measures when closing initiatives in the future. As we noted previously in this report, according to the 2015 Strategy, the after-action report for closed initiatives should include information on the objectives met, problems or gaps resolved, and measures of success obtained. We believe our recommendation is consistent with this guidance. Without incorporating this information, DOD does not have assurance that closed initiatives have been fully assessed and have resulted in achieving the goals and objectives of the Strategies. Therefore, we continue to believe that full implementation of our recommendation is needed.
    Director: Zina D. Merritt
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Deputy Secretary of Defense, in his capacity as the CMO and as part of DOD's strategic planning process, should define a role for the military department CMOs or DCMOs in developing department-wide goals and objectives for business transformation.

    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: The Deputy Secretary of Defense, in his capacity as the CMO and as part of DOD's strategic planning process, should coordinate with the military department CMOs or DCMOs to align the military departments' goals and objectives for business transformation with department-wide goals and objectives, including in DOD's Agency Strategic Plan.

    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: The Deputy Secretary of Defense, in his capacity as the CMO and in coordination with the DOD DCMO, should take action, as appropriate and necessary, to improve the monitoring of the military departments' performance on business transformation efforts. This could be done by revising the Defense Business Council's charter to make the council responsible for monitoring such performance to reflect the responsibilities of the DOD DCMO to monitor performance across the entire 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.
    Director: J. Christopher Mihm
    Phone: (202) 512-6806

    13 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of Agriculture should describe the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, milestones and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of USDA's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of Agriculture
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, USDA had not taken any actions to implement our recommendation. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of Commerce should describe the Department of Commerce's major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, milestones and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of the Department of Commerce's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of Commerce
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the Department of Commerce' action plan to address GAO's recommendations, it will begin including a description of the Department's major management challenges, as well as related performance goals, performance milestones and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges, in the Department's annual performance plan reporting, starting with the report to be issued concurrent with final fiscal year 2018 Congressional Budget Justifications (CBJ). As of August 2017, Commerce has not taken action to implement our recommendation. Our review of the Department of Commerce's 2018 CBJ found that it did not include recommended information. When the 2019 CBJ is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of Defense should include planned actions for each of the Department of Defense's (DOD) major management challenges and ensure that required information about its major management challenges, currently in DOD's Agency Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2015-2018, be included in its agency performance plan so that progress toward resolving each of its major management challenges is transparent and reported annually.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Defense had not taken any actions to implement our recommendation. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of Energy should describe the Department of Energy's major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, milestones and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of the Department of Energy's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Energy had not taken any actions to implement our recommendation. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Attorney General should describe the Department of Justice's major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, milestones, planned actions and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of the Department of Justice's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of Justice
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the Department of Justice's action plan to address GAO's recommendations, it will report the Office of Inspector General Top Management Challenges in both the Annual Financial Report (AFR) and the Annual Performance Report(APR)/Annual Performance Plan(APP). For the APR/APP, the Department of Justice will also include the appropriate performance goals, performance measures, milestones, planned actions addressing the challenges and the name(s) of agency official(s) responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges. As of August 2017, however, the Department of Justice had not taken any actions to implement our recommendation. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of Labor should describe the Department of Labor's major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, milestones, planned actions, and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of the Department of Labor's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of Labor
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to the Department of Labor's action plan to address GAO's recommendations, it will comply with the updated Circular A-11 guidance to report on major management challenges in its next Annual Performance Report (APR), published with the FY 2018 Congressional Budget Justification. In its most recent APR, the Department of Labor took steps to implement this recommendation by including planned actions and an agency official responsible for each of the three issues it identified as a major management challenge. Further action is needed to establish performance goals, performance measures, and milestones. When the Fiscal Year 2017 APR is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of Transportation should describe the Department of Transportation's major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, milestones, planned actions and an agency official responsible for resolving major management challenges as part of the Department of Transportation's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of Transportation
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Transportation had not taken any actions to implement our recommendation. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of the Treasury should include performance goals, performance measures, milestones, and an agency official responsible for resolving major management challenges as part of the Department of the Treasury's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of the Treasury
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, Treasury had not taken any actions to implement our recommendation. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should include performance goals, performance measures, milestones, planned actions and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of EPA's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its Fiscal Year 2018 APP, EPA took steps to implement this recommendation by clearly identifying its major management challenges and including planned actions for resolving them. Further action is needed to establish performance goals, performance measures, milestones, and identify an agency official responsible for resolving the challenge. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA) should describe GSA's major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, milestones and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of GSA's agency performance plan.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its Fiscal Year 2018 APP, GSA took steps to implement this recommendation by clearly identifying three major management challenges and including planned actions, performance measures, milestones, and an agency official responsible for resolving them. Further action is needed to establish performance goals. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) should include performance goals, milestones and an agency official responsible for resolving each of HHS's major management challenges as part of HHS's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
    Status: Open

    Comments: According to its website, for fiscal year 2018, HHS is meeting its performance reporting requirements as designated in the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 and OMB Circular A-11 through the program performance information provided in the FY 2018 HHS Budget Justifications to Congress. As of August 2017, however, HHS has not taken action to implement our recommendation. Our review of HHS' 2018 Congressional Budget Justification found that it did not include recommended information. When the 2019 CBJ is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Secretary of the Interior should describe the Department of Interior's major management challenges and include performance goals, performance measures, planned actions, milestones and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of the Department of the Interior's agency performance plan.

    Agency: Department of the Interior
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, the Department of Interior had not taken any actions to implement our recommendation. It is unclear in the APP what Interior considers to be its major management challenges and, if there are such issues, which performance information aligns with resolving those issues. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the public reporting of major management challenges and to ensure performance information is useful, transparent, and complete, the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) should describe NSF's major management challenges and identify performance goals, performance measures, milestones, and an agency official responsible for resolving each of its major management challenges as part of NSF's agency performance plan.

    Agency: National Science Foundation
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its Fiscal Year 2018 APP, NSF took steps to implement this recommendation by clearly identifying its major management challenges and including planned actions for resolving them. Further action is needed to establish performance goals, performance measures, milestones, and identify an agency official responsible for resolving the challenge. When the 2019 annual performance plan is issued, we will update the status of this recommendation.
    Director: Beryl H. Davis
    Phone: (202) 512-2623

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide increased performance audit coverage of Commerce's bureaus and offices, the Commerce IG should augment the OIG's risk-based audit planning process to consider (1) a rotation of performance audit coverage among the smaller bureaus and offices to help ensure that the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of their programs are periodically reviewed and (2) all applicable high-risk areas identified by GAO.

    Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Commerce's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has taken actions to augment its annual risk assessment to consider (I) a rotation of performance audit coverage among the smaller bureaus and offices and (2) all applicable high-risk areas identified by GAO. For example, OIG's fiscal year (FY) 2016 audit plan included performance audits of Bureau of Industry and Security, Economic Development Administration, and Economic Development Administration, which are three of Commerce's smaller bureaus. It also included a performance audit of federal real property, a high-risk area identified by GAO. Further, OIG indicated completion of its FY 2017 risk assessment in June, and will be completing its FY 2017 audit plan in September - which will include performance audits of several of the Commerce's smaller bureaus, as well as consider the following high-risk areas identified by GAO in its 2015 report that could be applicable to Commerce. We believe OIG met the intent of GAO recommendation with regards to augmenting its annual risk assessment to consider (1) a rotation of performance audit coverage among the smaller bureaus and offices and (2) all applicable high-risk areas identified by GAO. We base our conclusion given that OIG has either conducted or scheduled to conduct performance audits to cover smaller bureaus and high-risk areas identified by GAO, which we verified on the OIG's website. However, we believe the intent of GAO's recommendation is for these audits to be performed in subsequent years going forward and not just in FY 2017. OIG was not able to provide us support to show it has formal procedures or policies in place to ensure these performance audits will be performed in future years on a rotational and periodic basis. As a result, we don't believe DOC OIG has fully met the intent of the recommendation. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To provide reasonable assurance that written hotline policies and procedures are consistently followed and complaints are handled effectively, the Commerce IG should enhance the existing internal control activities for the OIG's hotline operations through monitoring, including self-assessment evaluations conducted by the hotline unit of itself, periodic reviews of control design, and direct testing of internal controls.

    Agency: Department of Commerce: Office of the Inspector General
    Status: Open

    Comments: The Department of Commerce's Office of Inspector General (OIG) stated that it conducted a self-assessment of its hotline operations in fiscal year 2016, updated its complaint management policy, and is securing independent quality control reviews. We have reviewed OIG quality assessment memorandum dated 11/3/15 and verified it shows that OIG performed a self-assessment of its hotline operations, which included (1) evaluating proper handling of complaints; (2) assignment of disposition codes; and (3) time frames for processing complaints. In addition, we have reviewed OIG's updated complaint management policy and verified it contains detailed policies and procedures over its hotline operations. Therefore, we believe OIG met the intent of the recommendation with regards to conducting a self-assessment evaluation. However, we did not see where OIG met the intent of GAO recommendation with regards to having in place control activities for conducting periodic reviews of control design and direct testing of internal controls. We will continue to monitor the agency's actions to address this recommendation.
    Director: Cary Russell
    Phone: (202) 512-5431

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To address the limitations of existing distribution performance metrics, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in conjunction with TRANSCOM, to revise guidance to ensure that a customer wait time standard is established and used for the Marine Corps.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2016, the Marine Corps had established a Customer Wait Time (CWT) standard and developed CWT metrics that are in alignment with DOD policy. These changes were to be incorporated into Marine Corps policy through their normal Service procedures. As of September 2017, we are unaware of any actions taken to implement this recommendation.
    Director: Merritt, Zina Dache
    Phone: (202) 512-5257

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To develop and implement a process to monitor performance and independently validate the effectiveness and sustainability of corrective actions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to assess, and refine as appropriate, existing performance measures to ensure the measures assess the implementation of individual initiatives as well as progress towards achievement of the overarching goals and objectives in the Strategy.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2016, DOD has not implemented this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To demonstrate sustained progress in having implemented corrective measures, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, in collaboration with the military services, to continue the implementation of identified initiatives, refining them over time as appropriate, and demonstrate that implementation of initiatives results in measurable outcomes and progress toward achieving improvements in asset visibility.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2016, DOD has not implemented this recommendation.
    Director: David C. Trimble
    Phone: (202) 512-3841

    5 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To help improve its ability to assess the risk of improper payments and make more effective use of DOE and contractor resources, the Secretary of Energy should direct the department's Chief Financial Officer to revise the department's IPERA guidance and direct field office sites with responsibility for non-M&O contractor risk assessments to address risk factors as they relate to those sites and take steps to ensure sites implement it.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, DOE had revised its fiscal year 2015 and 2016 improper payments guidance. The revised guidance directs field office sites with responsibility for non-M&O contractor risk assessments to address risk factors as they relate to those sites. The guidance further requires each site Chief Financial Officer to certify to the accuracy of improper payments and risk rating. We will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to ensure sites implement this new guidance.
    Recommendation: To help improve its ability to assess the risk of improper payments and make more effective use of DOE and contractor resources, the Secretary of Energy should direct the department's Chief Financial Officer to revise the department's IPERA guidance and clarify how payment sites are to address risk factors and document the basis for their risk rating determinations and take steps to ensure sites implement it.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, DOE had revised its fiscal years 2015 and 2016 improper payments guidance requiring sites to prepare risk assessments using a new risk assessment format. The guidance states that the new format was developed to improve consistency among the sites and improve documentation supporting the risk ratings. In the new format, each risk factor includes a description of the risk factor, rating criteria and/or questions to consider during the evaluation to assist sites in determining a risk rating by payment type. The guidance also requires all sites to maintain supporting documentation for their risk assessment. We will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to ensure sites implement this new guidance.
    Recommendation: To help improve its ability to assess the risk of improper payments and make more effective use of DOE and contractor resources, the Secretary of Energy should direct the department's Chief Financial Officer to revise the department's IPERA guidance and clarify who is responsible at DOE for reviewing and approving risk assessments for consistency across sites and take steps to ensure those entities implement it.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, DOE had revised its fiscal years 2015 and 2016 improper payments guidance to require site Chief Financial Officers and the Director of Risk Management of the Loan Programs Office to provide a signed certification to DOE's Director of the Office of Finance and Accounting certifying to the accuracy of improper payments and the risk assessment and rating submitted. The guidance provides templates for these certifications. We will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to ensure sites implement this new guidance.
    Recommendation: To help improve its ability to assess the risk of improper payments and make more effective use of DOE and contractor resources, the Secretary of Energy should direct the department's Chief Financial Officer to revise the department's IPERA guidance and provide specific examples of other risk factors that present inherent risks likely to contribute to significant improper payments, in addition to the eight risk factors, direct payment sites to consider those when performing their improper payment risk assessments, and take steps to ensure sites implement it.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, DOE had revised its fiscal year 2015 and 2016 improper payments guidance. In addition to the required OMB risk factors, the guidance added the following additional risk factors to be included in the risk assessments: (1) contractor payment processing oversight and (2) segregation of duties. The guidance states these factors have been added to ensure that inherently high-risk areas that can contribute to a site's susceptibility to significant improper payments are properly evaluated. We will continue to monitor DOE's efforts to ensure sites implement this new guidance.
    Recommendation: To provide better transparency regarding its total known improper payments reported under IPERA, the Secretary of Energy should direct the department's Chief Financial Officer to improve public reporting on the amount of total known improper payments by disclosing additional information regarding this amount and the extent to which improper payments could be occurring.

    Agency: Department of Energy
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of May 2017, DOE had added supplemental information to its fiscal year 2016 Agency Financial Report. We will continue to gather additional information from DOE to determine the extent to which this information addresses the amount of total known improper payments.
    Director: David Wise
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To enhance the transparency of the FRPP data and help GSA make more informed decisions regarding the planning, effective and efficient management, and disposal of civilian warehouse assets, in GSA's landlord role, which is performed by the Public Buildings Service, and as part of its efforts to address our 2012 recommendation to develop and publish a comprehensive 5-year capital plan, GSA should develop and implement a strategy specific to warehouses. This strategy should apply capital-planning leading practices, involving prioritization and long-term planning, to the warehouse portion of GSA's portfolio.

    Agency: General Services Administration
    Status: Open

    Comments: The General Services Administration (GSA) analyzed warehouse data and determined that the existing tools and processes are the most appropriate way to treat warehouses because these tools and processes consider warehouses within the context of local markets, client agencies, and GSA's short and long-term investment plans. However, GSA continues to lack a strategic approach to prioritize warehouses and make long-term, informed decisions about government warehouse space. Further, in light of GSA's aging warehouse inventory and agencies' modern-day storage needs, there is potentially a growing gap between what GSA can provide from the government's owned portfolio and what the tenant agencies require. Because the agency lacks a strategy focused on its warehouse portfolio, GSA may have limited ability to address this potentially growing gap as well as the unique challenges facing GSA's warehouse portfolio. Such a strategy would enable GSA and tenant agencies to prioritize their needs and take a long-term view of the warehouse inventory to support better informed decisions. We will follow-up with GSA regarding this recommendation, which is intended to enhance GSA's existing tools and processes, as they relate to warehouses.
    Director: Brian J. Lepore
    Phone: (202) 512-4523

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure DOD's approach to joint basing aligns with the intent of the 2005 BRAC recommendation and DOD's current position on the intent of joint basing, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment), in collaboration with the military services and joint bases, to evaluate the purpose of the program and determine whether DOD's current goals of achieving greater efficiencies and generating cost savings for the joint basing program, as stated in the 2005 BRAC Commission recommendation, are still appropriate or whether goals should be revised, and communicate these goals to the military services and joint bases and then adjust program activities accordingly.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD non-concurred with the recommendation and has not planned any further actions to address the recommendation. DOD stated that the department and GAO have fundamentally different approaches in viewing how DOD should manage joint bases, and noted that the recommendations imply that joint bases are OSD-run entities that should be addressed through new DOD policies. DOD stated that it believes that although joint bases involve added complexities from crossing traditional military service lines, they are ultimately service-run bases similar to all other installations. As such, DOD stated that its position is to continue to agree to disagree regarding this recommendation. As of October 2017 the department had not taken any action to address this recommendation, according to an official of OSD's basing office.
    Recommendation: To ensure DOD's approach to joint basing aligns with the intent of the 2005 BRAC recommendation and DOD's current position on the intent of joint basing, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment), in collaboration with the military services and joint bases, to, subsequent to the evaluation above, provide direction to joint bases on their requirements for meeting the joint base program's goals. DOD's leadership should work with the military services to determine what reporting requirements and milestones should be put in place to increase support and commitment for the program's goals.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD non-concurred with the recommendation and has not planned any further actions to address the recommendation. DOD stated that the department and GAO have fundamentally different approaches in viewing how DOD should manage joint bases, and noted that the recommendations imply that joint bases are OSD-run entities that should be addressed through new DOD policies. DOD stated that it believes that although joint bases involve added complexities from crossing traditional military service lines, they are ultimately service-run bases similar to all other installations. As such, DOD stated that its position is to continue to agree to disagree regarding this recommendation. As of October 2017, an OSD basing official stated that DOD has not taken any action to implement this recommendation.
    Recommendation: To help ensure DOD's approach to joint basing achieves the goals as outlined by DOD in its justification for the 2005 BRAC recommendation and leverages additional opportunities to reduce duplication of effort that could in turn generate cost savings and increased efficiencies, Congress should consider directing the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment), in collaboration with the military services and joint bases, to evaluate the purpose of the program and determine whether the current goals, as stated in the 2005 BRAC Commission recommendation, are still appropriate, or whether goals should be revised; communicate these goals to the military services and joint bases, and adjust program activities accordingly; provide direction to the joint bases on requirements for meeting program goals, including determining reporting requirements and milestones; and determine any next steps for joint basing, including whether to expand it to other installations.

    Agency: Congress
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of October 2017 there has been no legislation identified.
    Director: Daniel Garcia-Diaz
    Phone: (202) 512-8678

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: As FEMA determines the scope of its efforts to revise its existing guidance, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should direct the Administrator of FEMA to update existing guidance to include additional information on and options for mitigating the risk of flood damage to agricultural structures to reflect recent farming developments and structural needs in vast and deep floodplains.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: To obtain information for updating existing guidance, FEMA engaged a contractor in April 2016 to conduct Phase 1 of a study evaluating recent farming developments. The June 2016 report from the contractor provided FEMA with information on the types of flood damage agricultural buildings and contents can sustain, required mitigation measures under NFIP, and insurance that is currently available to farmers. Phase 2 of the study is underway. This phase will identify the number and types of agricultural structures and the legislation, regulations, and various agency programs affecting the management of these structures; analyze the feasibility of mitigation options for these structures across different types of floodplains; and explore rating guidelines and potential mitigation techniques that could result in reduced risk or rates for agricultural structures. FEMA expects to receive a draft of the Phase 2 study from the contractor in July 2017. GAO will continue to monitor FEMA's progress.
    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: Wise, David J
    Phone: (202) 512-2834

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To provide increased transparency about the funding amounts agencies are spending to maintain their assets and manage their backlogs, the Director of OMB should require the OMB Deputy Director for Management, as chair of the FRPC, in collaboration and consultation with FRPC member agencies, to collect information--through FRPP or other mechanisms--on funding agencies annually spent to address existing deferred maintenance and repair deficiencies and report summary level information in the FRPC's fiscal year report.

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

    Comments: As of December 2015, OMB had worked with the FRPC to develop a method to collect annual recurring maintenance and repair data in the FRPP. This effort includes (1) developing separate definitions for "operations" and "maintenance" costs, which are currently reported in the FRPP as a combined cost number, and (2) defining a methodology that agencies can use to consistently collect and report annual deferred maintenance and repair expenditures. OMB expects these actions to be completed by the fiscal year 2018 FRPP reporting cycle. As of March 28, 2017, OMB had not provided GAO with any additional updates regarding the status of this recommendation..
    Director: Cackley, Alicia P
    Phone: (202) 512-8678

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To establish full-risk rates for properties with previously subsidized rates that reflect their risk for flooding, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should direct the FEMA Administrator to develop and implement a plan, including a timeline, to obtain needed elevation information as soon as practicable.

    Agency: Department of Homeland Security
    Status: Open

    Comments: As we reported in February 2016 in GAO-16-190, FEMA has taken limited action to implement this recommendation. For example, FEMA noted that the agency would evaluate the appropriate approach for obtaining or requiring the submittal of information needed to determine full-risk rates for subsidized properties. FEMA also said it would explore technological advancements and engage with industry to determine the availability of technology, building information data, readily available elevation data, and current flood hazard data that could be used to implement the recommendation. However, FEMA officials also said that the agency faced a cost challenge with respect to elevation certificates and that obtaining these certificates could take considerable time and cost. They noted that requiring policyholders to incur the cost of obtaining elevation certificates would not be consistent with NFIP's policy objective to promote affordability. The officials added that the agency encourages subsidized policyholders who seek to ensure the appropriateness of their NFIP rates to voluntarily submit elevation documentation.
    Director: Woods, William T
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To ensure that DOD organizations fully comply with interagency acquisition regulations, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Office of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, as part of its ongoing interagency acquisition policy review, to ensure that its acquisition regulations, policies, and guidance on interagency contracting are updated to reflect new Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rules, including those related to a best procurement approach determination.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In September 2014, DOD revised its acquisition regulations to incorporate additional guidance to ensure awareness of the total cost of interagency acquisitions, including fees, as part of making a determination that use of another agency's contract is in the best interest of DOD. However, DOD's regulations and guidance still do not reflect all of the factors described in the FAR which should be considered in making these determinations. In particular, DOD's regulations still do not mention assessing whether the requesting agency has the expertise to place orders and administer them against the selected contract vehicle throughout the acquisition lifecycle. In September 2017, DOD policy officials drafted new guidance to ensure that contracting officers document these factors, but this draft guidance is in the process of being reviewed and is not yet final.
    Director: Martin, Belva M
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: Recognizing that there are widespread requirements to know what is militarily critical, the Secretary of Defense should determine the best approach to meeting users' needs for a technical reference, whether it be MCTL, other alternatives being used, or some combination thereof.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In commenting on this report, the agency concurred with this recommendation but has not yet implemented it. As of August 2017, multiple approaches to maintaining a technical reference are still being considered.
    Recommendation: Recognizing that there are widespread requirements to know what is militarily critical, the Secretary of Defense should ensure that resources are coordinated and efficiently devoted to sustain the approach chosen.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: As of August 2017, multiple approaches to maintaining a technical reference are still being considered.
    Director: Bertoni, Daniel
    Phone: (202) 512-7215

    1 open recommendations
    including 1 priority recommendation
    Recommendation: To help ensure that SSA's disability decisions are as equitable and consistent with modern views of disability as possible, the Commissioner of Social Security should conduct limited and focused studies on the availability and effects of considering more fully assistive devices and workplace accommodations in its disability determinations.

    Agency: Social Security Administration
    Status: Open
    Priority recommendation

    Comments: On September 30, 2015 a committee convened by the Health and Medicine Division (HMD) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine initiated a study on assistive technology and workplace accommodations. As of April, 2017, SSA reported that the committee held public sessions on May 16, 2016, July 18, 2016, and September 27, 2016 at which several experts presented on relevant topics. The committee will use the information from these presentations along with their own research and literature to review and provide findings and conclusions for their final report which is expected by July 31, 2017. In April 2017, SSA also indicated it has collected additional information on consideration of reasonable accommodations through the Idea Scale system--a crowd sourcing technology. Depending on the results of the HMD study, SSA may potentially collect additional information on work accommodations through the Bureau of Labor Statistics' OIS project. We will continue to monitor the status and results of the HMD analysis and SSA's actions based on the committee's results and recommendations.