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 research and development"

    4 publications with a total of 10 open recommendations
    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: Joseph Kirschbaum
    Phone: (202) 512-9971

    3 open recommendations
    Recommendation: To improve the identification, alignment, and management of DOD's chemical and biological defense infrastructure and to fully institutionalize the use of risk assessments to support future investment decisions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to update the roles and responsibilities guidance in DOD Directive 5160.05E to identify which organizations are responsible for conducting and participating in CBDP Enterprise risk assessments.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not yet completed actions to implement it. As of August 2017, DOD was still waiting to release the final version of DOO Directive 5160.05E.
    Recommendation: To improve the identification, alignment, and management of DOD's chemical and biological defense infrastructure and to fully institutionalize the use of risk assessments to support future investment decisions, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to update the CBDP Enterprise's portfolio planning process, to include when risk assessments will be conducted.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not yet completed actions to implement it. On 6/8/16, DOD reported that the risk assessment process was initially piloted in 2014 to determine its utility for informing CBDP Enterprise portfolio planning and guidance. Moving forward, the CBDP Enterprise plans to conduct risk assessments annually to support portfolio planning and guidance. As of August 2017, DOD reported that the department was beginning an approximately 12-month process to revise the CBDP Business Plan, which would likely be published as a DOD Instruction. This plan should address the risk assessment recommendation.
    Recommendation: To improve the identification, alignment, and management of DOD's chemical and biological defense infrastructure and to enhance PAIO's ongoing analysis of potential infrastructure duplication in the CBDP Enterprise and gain potential efficiencies, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to identify, request, and consider any information from existing infrastructure studies from other federal agencies with chemical and biological research and development and test and evaluation infrastructure.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation but has not yet completed actions to implement it. As of July 2017, DOD has requested, but not received, such studies from other federal agencies. However, DOD is currently engaged in phase two of a three-phase effort regarding its chemical and biological defense infrastructure program (CBDP), which includes a review of the department's interagency roles and responsibilities for its chemical and biological defense Infrastructure Manager. Targeted completion for this phase is December 2017, at which time, DOD may have obtained relevant information from other federal agencies.
    Director: Michele Mackin
    Phone: (202) 512-4841

    1 open recommendations
    Recommendation: If Congress re-authorizes RIP then, to improve visibility and management of DOD's ability to transition technologies through the program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to establish an overall technology transition goal for RIP.

    Agency: Department of Defense
    Status: Open

    Comments: DOD has not established a technology transition goal for RIP. Although DOD non-concurred with the recommendation, it agreed there is a need to measure annually the transition rate for RIP. In 2016, DOD officials stated they were working on ways to measure and assess technology transitions in the program and, in 2017, DOD did not provide any further update on the status of these efforts, when GAO requested. Until DOD obtains better visibility on RIP technology transition performance, it does not have the data it needs to set an informed technology transition goal.
    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.