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: "Military capabilities"

    3 publications with a total of 4 open recommendations
    Director: Jennifer Grover
    Phone: (202) 512-7141

    2 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To better position the Coast Guard to effectively plan its Arctic operations, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should develop measures, as appropriate, for gauging how the agency's actions have helped to mitigate the Arctic capability gaps.

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

    Comments: In June 2016, we reviewed and reported on the U.S. Coast Guard's efforts in the Arctic. We found that the Coast Guard had taken actions to implement its Arctic strategy and conduct Arctic operations, which may help the Coast Guard to better understand and mitigate identified Arctic capability gaps. Further, we found that the Coast Guard was tracking, or had plans to track, its various activities in the Arctic, but that it had not developed measures to systematically assess how its actions have helped to mitigate Arctic capability gaps. We recommended that the Coast Guard develop measures, as appropriate, for gauging how the agency's actions have helped to mitigate the Arctic capability gaps. In response to our recommendation, in August 2016, the Coast Guard reported that specific measures for some activities would be developed and included as part of the Coast Guard's update to its implementation plan for its Arctic strategy. In March 2017, the Coast Guard reported that it completed an annual review of its implementation plan in January 2017. However, officials stated that technology updates and modifications to its tracking tool are required to better represent the completion percentage. To fully address this recommendation, the Coast Guard will need to finalize the development of its measures to gauge how its actions have helped to mitigate Arctic capability gaps.
    Recommendation: To better position the Coast Guard to effectively plan its Arctic operations, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should design and implement a process to systematically assess the extent to which actions taken agency-wide have helped mitigate the Arctic capability gaps for which it has responsibility.

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

    Comments: In June 2016, we reviewed and reported on the U.S. Coast Guard's efforts in the Arctic. We found that the Coast Guard had taken actions to implement its Arctic strategy and conduct Arctic operations, which may help the Coast Guard to better understand and mitigate identified Arctic capability gaps. Further, we found that the Coast Guard was tracking, or had plans to track, its various activities in the Arctic, but that it had not systematically assessed how its actions have helped to mitigate Arctic capability gaps. We recommended that the Coast Guard design and implement a process to systematically assess the extent to which actions taken agency-wide have helped mitigate the Arctic capability gaps for which it has responsibility, so that it will better understand the status of these gaps and be better positioned to effectively plan its Arctic operations. In August 2016, the Coast Guard reported that through its annual review of its implementation plan for its Arctic Strategy, that it will systematically assess how its actions have mitigated capability gaps for which it is the lead agency under the Implementation Framework for the National Strategy for the Arctic Region. In March 2017, the Coast Guard reported that it completed an annual review of its implementation plan in January 2017 which resulted in the consolidation, removal, and addition of Arctic initiatives. Further, officials stated that the Coast Guard will continue to work with the Arctic Executive Steering Committee to provide information for the tracking and measurement of national capabilities, needs and gaps, and impacts in the Arctic Region. To fully address this recommendation, the Coast Guard will need to assess how its actions have helped to mitigate Arctic capability gaps, and provide documentation that identifies the progress it has made in helping to mitigate Arctic capability gaps.
    Director: Michele Mackin
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To address different interpretations of cutter boat requirements, the Commandant of the Coast Guard should direct the NSC program office to clarify the NSC's key performance parameters for the cutter boat operations (specifically the launch and recovery of cutter boats).

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

    Comments: The Coast Guard is in the process of updating the operator's handbook for the Long Range Interceptor II cutter boat to clarify that it is capable of operating through sea state 5, which will meet the National Security Cutter's key performance parameter related to cutter boat operations. According to Coast Guard officials, the updated operator's handbook should be signed and approved between August and November 2017.
    Director: John Pendleton
    Phone: (202) 512-3489

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve subsequent joint reports to Congress on plans for sustaining and modernizing U.S nuclear weapons capabilities and to improve the transparency of the joint report's methodologies, thereby assisting Congress in understanding the basis for DOD's NC3 estimates in subsequent joint reports, the Secretary of Defense should direct the DOD Chief Information Officer to document in the report the methodological assumptions and limitations affecting the report's estimates for sustaining and modernizing the NC3 system.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: In its comments on our 2014 report, DOD stated that it concurred with our recommendation, and that it would include all key assumptions and potential limitations utilized in the nuclear command, control, and communications estimates in future joint reports. DOD included more information on the methodologies the Air Force, Navy, and DOD CIO used to develop their 5- and 10-year budget estimates for sustaining and modernizing nuclear delivery systems and nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) systems in the fiscal year 2016 joint report. However, DOD's methodology for the NC3 estimates was not fully transparent, because it did not document some of the assumptions and potential limitations of the methodology in the report. DOD CIO has continued to use the same methodology for preparing its NC3 estimates each year, but did not document any limitations of that methodology and the potential effect on the estimates. In the joint reports for fiscal years 2016 and 2017, DOD included some methodological information for its NC3 estimates but still did not identify or explain the assumptions or limitations of its methodology. We continue to believe the usefulness and transparency of the joint report could be further improved if DOD implemented this recommendation to document the methodological assumptions and limitations affecting the NC3 estimate.