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: "Maintenance services contracts"

    1 publication with a total of 7 open recommendations
    Director: Clark, Cheryl E
    Phone: (202)512-3000

    7 open recommendations
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Commission should instruct the Director of Finance at Commission headquarters to monitor monthly cash reconciliations for all Fund Balance with Treasury accounts Commissionwide to ensure their completeness and accuracy.

    Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: During fiscal year 2012, the Commission contracted with the Interior Business Center (IBC) to perform its monthly cash reconciliations with Treasury. During our testing, we found that IBC effectively reconciled cash on hand to Treasury records. However, we found that ABMC did not effectively monitor IBC's reconciliations. Specifically, ABMC did not document its review of the FMS-224 and Fund Balance with Treasury reconciliations performed by IBC. To fully address this recommendation, ABMC needs to document its review of the IBC prepared reconciliations to ensure they are accurate and complete. During fiscal year 2017, the Commission informed us that they plan to develop and implement corrective actions to address our recommendation. Therefore, we will follow up on this open recommendation at a later date.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Commission should instruct the Director of Human Resources and Administration at Commission headquarters to maintain a consolidated Active Contracts List, or require the Paris Overseas Office to maintain a separate list, with information on each contract including the name of the contact person; the status of work completed; whether retainage amounts had been paid; and whether any amounts were pending due to disagreements on work performed.

    Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: During our fiscal year 2012 audit, although the Commission provided GAO with active contract lists, we determined that these lists were not consolidated nor were they adequately maintained by the director of Engineering. We also continued to find instances where the Commission did not properly close contracts and deobligate funds. In addition, the Commission could not identify any specific actions taken to address this recommendation. During our fiscal year 2017 follow-up, the Commission informed us that they plan to implement an automated procurement system that will meet the intent of our recommendation. Therefore, we will follow up on this open recommendation at a later date.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Commission should instruct the Director of Human Resources and Administration at Commission headquarters to ensure that the Active Contracts List is reconciled to contracts on the undelivered orders report produced by the Commission's accounting system.

    Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: During our fiscal year 2012 audit, we found that the Headquarters active contracts list had not been reconciled to the undelivered orders account. In addition, we concluded that these lists were not adequately maintained. We also continued to find instances where the Commission did not properly close contracts and deobligate funds. In addition, the Commission could not identify any specific actions taken to address this recommendation. During our fiscal year 2017 follow-up, the Commission informed us that they plan to develop and implement procurement-related standard operating procedures to address our recommendation. Therefore, we will follow-up on this recommendation at a later date.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Commission should instruct the Director of Finance at Commission headquarters to follow existing budgetary procedures to ensure that contracts are officially agreed to and executed as of or before the date of obligation.

    Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: During our fiscal year 2011 audit of the American Battle Monuments Commission's financial statements, the Commission informed us that this recommendation was implemented with FMS and that ABMC now follows commitment accounting which prevents contracts from being signed before funds are reserved. During our 2012 testing we continued to monitor and we found no related issues. However, the Commission was unable to provide documentation or support for the corrective action instituted with FMS. During our fiscal year 2017 follow-up, the Commission informed us that they plan to implement an automated procurement system that will meet the intent of our recommendation. Therefore, we will follow up on this open recommendation at a later date.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Commission should instruct the Director of Human Resources at the Commission's Paris Overseas Office to follow existing policy to prepare, approve, and file current forms to support pay changes in foreign employee's official personnel file.

    Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: During our fiscal year 2012 audit, we tested a sample of payroll transactions and found that not all personnel files contained accurate forms to support current payroll information. In one sample, the ABM-87 was not approved by a Director or designee. In another sample, the salary for the grade and step did not match that of the employee's local compensation plan. In a third sample, the employee's salary was not updated for a General Schedule step increase until almost a year later. During our fiscal year 2017 follow-up, the Commission informed us that they plan to implement an automated HR system that will meet the intent of our recommendation. Therefore, we will follow up on this open recommendation at a later date
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Commission should instruct the Director of Human Resources at the Commission's Paris Overseas Office to establish a consistent policy for Paris and Rome offices to support changes in employee's official personnel files by using an SF-50, Notification of Personnel Action, for all employees.

    Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: During fiscal year 2012, we determined that the Commission's policy is to use two forms for payroll actions. The headquarters office processes SF-50s for General Schedule (GS) employees and the Paris office uses SF-50s for GS employees and ABM-87s for foreign employees. We did not find any exception with this policy as the SF-50 is a required form for processing payroll actions for GS employees and the ABM 87 is a standard form for processing payroll actions for foreign employees. However, this policy is not documented. To clarify the intent of this recommendation, which is for the Commission to be consistent in processing payroll actions, we issued a subsequent recommendation that calls for the Commission to direct appropriate officials to establish written policies and procedures outlining the key tasks, roles, and responsibilities of both the Human Resources Directorate and the Finance Directorate, including a formal mechanism for communicating all decisions and actions related to processing payroll for foreign employees. This would include the processing of payroll actions. During our fiscal year 2017 follow-up, the Commission informed us that training was provided to employees in the proper production of personnel documentation, however, no policy was provided. Therefore, we will follow up on this open recommendation at a later date.
    Recommendation: The Secretary of the Commission should instruct the Finance Directorate's Finance Officer at the Commission's Paris Overseas Office to modify existing accounting procedures to instruct Finance Directorate personnel to enter the date on the invoice into the accounting system.

    Agency: American Battle Monuments Commission
    Status: Open

    Comments: During our audit of the American Battle Monuments Commission's (the Commission) fiscal year 2010 financial statements, we found that Commission controls were not always effective in ensuring that the receipt and acceptance of goods and services were properly authorized and that invoice dates were accounted for in a consistent manner. The Commission informed us that all Finance personnel were instructed to enter both the invoice receipt date and the invoice date when processing invoices for payment. However, during our fiscal year 2012 audit, we found that the date on the invoice was not consistently entered into the accounting system. For example, we found inconsistencies with the invoice receipt date being entered into the accounting system as either the date the goods were received, the date the invoice was received, or the date the invoice was being entered into the financial system. In addition, we could not verify whether current accounting procedures included this requirement. During our fiscal year 2017 follow-up, the Commission informed us that the invoice date entered in Oracle is taken directly from the invoice approval stamp, however, the Commission was not able to provide a policy, procedures, or statement of work supporting the actions taken. We contacted the agency to ask for further information but no response was received within the established deadline for us to conduct our follow up. Therefore, we will follow up on this recommendation at a later date.